[PEN-L:6561] Re: Why raise the minimum wage? (fwd)
Thanks to Tavis Barr and Rich Parkin! ajit sinha
[PEN-L:6562] Re: Why raise the minimum wage? (fwd)
Martin, I think I gave you a copy long time ago. Any way, I'll put another copy in your mail box. Your comments would be most appreciated. Thanks for asking. ajit At 01:39 PM 10/9/96 -0700, you wrote: Ajit, I think you mentioned this paper when you first came. Could I have a copy of it. Thanks. Martin Ajit Sinha wrote: However, the best empirical study of the minimum wage, by Card and Krueger, shows that minimum wages seem to have a positive employment effect. Tavis Some years ago I wrote a paper (6 pp. long) for a graduate level labor economics course. Since it was a totally neoclassical course, I developed a 100% neoclassical model by distinguishing two kinds of labor market: unskilled and skilled. I identified the real wages in unskilled market with minimum wage and made it the floor for the wage structure in the skilled labor market. The skilled labor market was developed in terms of demand for skills by the workers on the basis of maximizing the lifelong income; whereas the firms side was developed on the basis of demand for skilled labor due to its influence on productivity. The model developed two possible senario, and in both the cases the result was that a fall in minimum wages MAY lead to a fall in the demand for skilled workers, leading to a possible fall in total employment if the skilled labor market is large enough. My conservative professor was quite impressed. He did not only give me an A for this very short paper by any standard, but also asked me to send it for publication, which i thought was a silly idea at that time. But now I think, may be I should give it a thought. So could you give me the reference of Card and Krueger. Their evidence may support my model. Cheers, ajit sinha -- Martin Watts Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of EconomicsOffice: (61) 49 215069 (Phone) University of NewcastleOffice: (61) 49 216919 (Fax) New South Wales 2318, AustraliaHome: (61) 49 829611 (Phone/Fax)
[PEN-L:6563] Why raise the minimum wage
Good morning! With the time playing in my favour, I could put together some of the mailings of yesterday and constructed my own story to be ready when you wake up : ). I first introduce a different argument in between the debate over labour productivity mark-up over costs, and latter I go into Doug's last night question. (Relevant pieces of original messages are reproduced in between). * Jim: Tavis writes I really don't get this. A rise in wages would be inflationary if (1) it caused firms to raise mark-ups over labor costs; (2) it created a rise in prices from a rise in consumer demand. The second makes sense, but not the first. With _constant_ mark-ups over unit labor costs and constant labor productivity, a rise in the minimum wage would spur price inflation (unless the over-all wage structure compressed, so that the economy-wide average wage stayed constant or fell). Tavis: Sorry y'all. Jim's right. Cheers, Jim: As Tavis notes, labor productivity isn't constant, so this inflationary scenario doesn't wash. In fact, as others have noted, higher wages may stimulate technological change and more capital-intensive production, so that labor productivity growth would accelerate. This, as Tavis notes, also helps with the demand-side scenario (case 2). *** I do not _completely_ buy this. It can be, but it is not necessary for *our argument* ( "minimum wage increases do not necessarily lead to inflation"). Let me put it in this way. First, assume excess capacity and free the Keynesian multiplier: A wage increase will lead to higher income and higher consumption, in the same period (therefore more rapid than any increase in productivity due to technical change). Then you have that *at an aggregate level* firms will sell more *with the same installed capacity*. Or I am getting wrong the Keynesian perspective here?? Second, there is a certain degree of business concentration, and oligopolies are capable to charge a mark-up over production costs. But, why the mark-up needs to be a *fixed* mark-up over production costs??? One need not bite here... In the Post-Kaleckian -Structuralist (Post-Keynesian? ) literature, that seems to be still under discussion. Lance Taylor, for example, develops most of his models by assuming that the oligopolistic firm seeks to assure a fixed `profit rate', while the mark-up may vary...; his point, which I find quite sensible, is that capitalists maximize the remuneration on their own factor of production (i.e. capital); if I am right, this is quite Marxian as well. In practice, what matters at the end is that despite cost fluctuations and mark-up variations, the profit obtained over any unit of capital must be fixed. To get that, true, prices can move up, but it can also be that you get your profits by increasing sales for the same amount of invested capacity... Putting it into a couple of equations: P.X_o = C_o.( 1 + m_o ) P is price, C nominal costs, m mark-up rate. A `_o' as a suffix means initial values As to my first point, even if m_o is "fixed", an increase of C_o because of wages will only indicate that the product P.X_o will be higher. Now, the price level can be fixed if the cost increase was matched by an increase of the real (ex-post) product X (from X_o to X_1 ). One possibility is the mentioned increase of productivity through technological change; but another one is the increase of sales by a higher ex-ante demand, with the same technology, just taking advantage of the excess capacity. In analytical terms, X = f(C) so that P.X_1 = C_1.( 1 + m_o ). In aggregate terms, using Doug's statistics, it looks quite possible that an increase of 1US$ per hour allows for an increase of 0.1% in GDP... But still, we can question whether m_o will stay being "m_o" (i.e. whether the mark-up over costs is kept fixed from a capitalist point of view). My point is that this is not necessary; if capitalists are concerned with their rate of profits over their factor of production (capital), an increase of labour costs can very well live together with an `deterioration' of the mark-up rate, and they will still `accumulate' as much as they wanted!. From above, capitalist profits are = m_o.C_o and the profit rate, defined as profits over capital stock, is R = m_o.C_o / K (K is fixed because there is excess capacity) Now, if R is to be kept constant, an increase of costs can allow a decrease of the mark-up (i.e. m = f(C) ) so that: R = m_1. C_1 / K; and moreover, there is no inflation... and every body is happy!: capitalists, workers, and the Central bank!! (well not..., there are still those in the developing world, whose salaries, social services, and employment possibilites are sharply declining while prices keep rising..., but that has more to do with the `confusion' in the IMF/WB, the story of yesterday...) At 7:47 PM 10/9/96, Gerald Levy wrote: Did anyone yet mention
[PEN-L:6564] Re: Why raise the minimum wage
Doug Henwood wrote: After reading this paragraph, I sat down for a late-night reading of the Wall Street Journal. snip Now I suspect Jerry will greet this as rank empiricism, when so much theorizing about Okishio remains to be done. But Jerry's quoted posting is pretty standard left-wing economic thought, and the Wall Street Journal story pretty standard business journalism. My impression is that the business journalists are closer to the truth - that competition today is more intense than it was 20 or 30 years ago, the days of price leadership and polite cartels. But monopolistic/oligopolistic theories still prevail on what's left of the left these days. Who's right? (1) As you have presented the issue, Doug: yes, it is an example of rank empiricism. Highly-selective rank empiricism as well! Well... if it's written in the _WSJ_, then it must be true! If it's the case for McDonalds, then it must be the case for other firms as well. Jeez -- if a student handed-in a term paper using sources and reasoning as above, I'd hand-it back to her/him and ask that it be done over (or just give an "F"). (2) The degree of concentration in markets is not some "leftist" idea -- although Marx was certainly aware of the process of concentration and centralization that happens alongside the accumulation of capital. If the fast food industry isn't oligopolistic, what would you call it? Perfect competition? The process of competition isn't *eliminated* in oligopolistic markets, but becomes transformed... (3) Economics isn't based on "impressions." Still less should one base one's impressions on a single article from a pro-business newsrag. (3) Why am I going on like this? Why don't you brush-up on some theory, Doug? You need it. I'm already quite familiar with some of the empirical facts involved. Jerry
[PEN-L:6565] union listserve
Question for the list: Is there a listserve that focuses on union/labor issues?
[PEN-L:6566] Re: why raise the minimum wage (fwd)
The posting below didn't seem to get on the list for I repeat it. P.Z. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:49:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul Zarembka [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L:6550] Re: why raise the minimum wage But, Doug, last Winter you opposed raising the minimum wage to $10/hour, i.e., some 1% or 2% of GDP (staying by your calculating methods below). Have you changed your mind or is that small fraction of GDP too much for those workers? I'm not being sarcastic, but really would like to know where you stand. Paul Z. On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Doug Henwood wrote: If I remember right, about 8 million U.S. workers earn the minimum wage. And I'm guessing they work on average 30 hours a week (which may be high). Boosting their wage $1/hr would amount to less than 0.2% of GDP; $0.50, 0.1%. If you assume that maybe another 8-10 million workers earn near enough the minimum to have their wages boosted along with it, then we're talking 0.2-0.4% of GDP. And this rise only restores the real 1991 value. So, in other words, in macro terms, a nonevent. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer
[PEN-L:6567] FW: BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1996 The three major federal economic data agencies face continued constraints and, in the case of the Census Bureau, deep spending cuts from what was requested for the new fiscal year. Officials at the three agencies -- Census, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics -- say they are running out of room to cut economic data programs without affecting data quality. There are also major worries, these officials said, when one of the agencies must cut programs or postpone the collection of data that are used by all of the agencies Census and BEA were treated quite differently in the omnibus spending bill. The new budget for Census is much lower than requested, while BEA was funded at virtually the same level as last year. BLS came out with a modest increase, most of which will go toward completion of the revision of the CPI. Also, BLS officials say there could be spending cuts this year related to a rescission that applies across the entire Labor Department BLS received a 5.5 percent increase in funding, which amounts to an $18.7 million rise to a total of $361.7 million for fiscal 1997, according to Katharine Newman, BLS financial manager. Newman said that $16 million of the increase is earmarked for the next phase of the CPI revision Also this year, BLS will continue with its part of the government-wide effort to complete and implement the North American Industrial Classification system. Newman said that agency officials are still working out how they will fund BLS's part of the NAIC and continue spending on other programs with the roughly $2.7 million in new money appropriated for this year that is not needed for the CPI revision (by Pam Ginsbach, Daily Labor Report, pages 2,A-5). The Labor Department says women tend to suffer more from corporate downsizing than men. It takes them longer to find new work, and the jobs they get are often part time with less pay, the Women's Bureau says. The agency found in a study that about 76 percent of women who lost full-time jobs in 1993 and 1994 had been re-employed by February 1996, compared with nearly 82 percent of men (Oct. 8, Wall Street Journal, "Work Week," page A1). Workplace fires last year claimed 200 lives, caused 5,000 injuries, and cost businesses $2.3 billion, says the Labor Department (Oct. 8, Wall Street Journal, "Work Week," page A1)_Employers must protect workers from fires and explosions, which kill some 200 workers and injure another 5,000 each year, Labor Secretary Reich says in recognition of National Fire Prevention Week (Daily Labor Report, page A-10). Spot labor shortages and fewer merger-related layoffs helped make September the second lowest month for workforce reductions so far this year, according to a survey released by Challenger, Gray Christmas Inc. Announced job cuts totaled 29,632 in September. While this was a 46 percent increase compared with August, it amounted to fewer planned layoffs than any other month in 1996 and was 10.7 percent less than in September 1995. Workforce reductions announced in August were the lowest since April 1995. Despite the relatively few job cuts announced in August and September, the number of workforce reductions for the year to date is 362,297, a 20 percent increase from the first nine months of 1995 (Oct. 8 editions: Daily Labor Report, pages 2,A-8;Washington Post, page D2). A U.S. and a British economist won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science for research about transactions in the real world, where not all players have the same information about costs and benefits of a deal. The winners were American William S. Vickrey, a professor emeritus at Columbia University, and Briton James A. Mirrlees of Cambridge University (Wall Street Journal, page A2,A22; Washington Post, page B11; New York Times, page D1). DUE OUT TOMORROW: Employer Costs for Employee Compensation -- March 1996
[PEN-L:6568] 51st Anniversary Of The Workers' Party Of Korea
Fifty-one years ago today, October 10, 1945 the Great Leader of the Korean people, Comrade Kim Il Sung, founded the Workers' Party of Korea. The history of the WPK is unthinkable without recalling his brilliant revolutionary exploits which give the WPK its strength, guarantee its unity and embody its prestige. Comrade Kim Il Sung laid down the ideological and organizational basis for the Workers' Party during the throes of the struggle against Japanese imperialism, creating the Down-with- Imperialism Union (DIU) in 1926 as a powerful vanguard organization to lead the nascent revolution of the Korean people. In the 1920s the early communist movement in Korea was engaged in a confused scramble for hegemony, divorced from the masses and infected with flunkeyism and dogmatism. The formation of the DIU was thus a historical event of epochal significance in the revolutionary struggle of the Korean people. It set the Korean people on a new road of development, based on the principle of independence, and provided the soil in which the Workers' Party of Korea was to later grow its roots. Since its founding, the WPK has continued to build on these revolutionary traditions, scoring one victory after another. Kim Il Sung created the Juche idea, the world outlook of the Korean people that reflects both the popular masses' desire for independence and the requirements of the times. Guided by the Juche idea, the WPK lays emphasis on working with people, and fulfils its lines and policies by enlisting the conscious enthusiasm and creative energies of the people. The WPK is a mass-based political party that regards the steady improvement of the people's material and cultural lives as the supreme principle in all its activities. In every respect, the WPK symbolizes the lofty, victorious history of the Korean people, their pride and unity. Guided by Kim Jong Il, the Party leads the people to strengthen their preparedness and constantly update their techniques and culture to comply with the progress of the current age, characterized by the rapid tempo with which old ideas and technologies progress and evolve into modern ones. The improvement and strengthening of the Party's ideological work and the reinforcement of the ranks of its leadership are aimed at elevating the role of the Party bodies in general. This strengthens the leading role of the Party in accordance with the demands of those world events which are likely to influence the DPRK. It increases the capacity of the Party to subordinate these events to the interests of the popular masses. Based on these fundamentals, the beloved leader and inspirer of the Korean people, Comrade Kim Jong Il, takes the people confidently along the road of innovation and progress, defending the sovereignty of the Korean nation. On the auspicious occasion of the 51st anniversary of the WPK, thinking people express their congratulations to all Korean communists and the leadership of Comrade Kim Jong Il, and wish the WPK ever greater success in its work. Shawgi Tell University at Buffalo Graduate School of Education [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6569] Zimbabwe Labour Party tour (fwd)
From: andrew kliman [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've been asked to forward the following letter from the president of the Zimbabwe Labour Party. Others interested in helping call attention to the issues and promote the tour are asked to post it on additional lists and boards. Andrew Kliman ** Zimbabwe Labour Party P.O. Box BE 814 Belvedere Harare, Zimbabwe October 9, 1996 Dear friend, The struggle in Zimbabwe continues! Organizations such as mine, the Zimbabwe Labour Party (ZLP) are rising to challenge the situation in our country whereby sixteen years after the first free elections in a liberated Zimbabwe, political power has slipped from the hands of the common people. I am in the U.S to talk about what is being done to correct this reversal of liberation, and to find out how we can build solidarity between ourselves and like-minded organizations and individuals in your country. Our primary goal is to raise funds to start a newspaper. Rampant corruption and a widened gap between the rich and poor has been the result of a lack of real democracy in Zimbabwe. If these problems are not addressed, a violent and bloody change is regrettably inevitable. Our economy is in shambles mainly because of greed, corruption and nepotism on the part of the elite of the ruling party, the ZANU (PF). State-run companies are bleeding the nation to death as they are run on partisan lines and unbelievably huge losses have been incurred. This means that the IMF/World Bank-sponsored Structural Adjustment Programme is doomed to failure as there is no political competition for contracts. That has not stopped the SAP from bringing untold suffering resulting in an increase in street kids, prostitution and crime. Opposition is stifled as the ruling ZANU (PF) controls state radio, television and daily newspapers. The Political Parties Finance Act gives $40 million in campaign finances only to the ruling party. The ruling party uses state resources during election times. Opposition supporters are victimised by setting their houses and property on fire. The minority whites, gays/lesbians and Ndebele people are often used as scapegoats for the economic ills of the country. The Zimbabwe Labour Party is committed to correcting these anomalies and we kindly ask for financial donations. I am here in the U.S. on a lecture and fundraising tour and I am available to meet with you and your membership. Please contact me at: News and Letters, 59 E. Van Buren St., Room 707, Chicago, IL 60605; TEL (312) 663 0839, FAX (312) 663 9069; Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yours faithfully, Langton Machoko President, Zimbabwe Labour Party
[PEN-L:6570] big mac attack?
On a lighter note, in response to Doug Henwood's comment on McDonalds... They are suffering sales because they microwave their burgers these days! blech! (I won't tell you how I know.) Susan Fleck
[PEN-L:6571] Re: Why raise the minimum wage
At 2:16 AM 10/10/96, Gerald Levy wrote: (1) As you have presented the issue, Doug: yes, it is an example of rank empiricism. Highly-selective rank empiricism as well! Well... if it's written in the _WSJ_, then it must be true! If it's the case for McDonalds, then it must be the case for other firms as well. Jeez -- if a student handed-in a term paper using sources and reasoning as above, I'd hand-it back to her/him and ask that it be done over (or just give an "F"). (2) The degree of concentration in markets is not some "leftist" idea -- although Marx was certainly aware of the process of concentration and centralization that happens alongside the accumulation of capital. If the fast food industry isn't oligopolistic, what would you call it? Perfect competition? The process of competition isn't *eliminated* in oligopolistic markets, but becomes transformed... (3) Economics isn't based on "impressions." Still less should one base one's impressions on a single article from a pro-business newsrag. (3) Why am I going on like this? Why don't you brush-up on some theory, Doug? You need it. I'm already quite familiar with some of the empirical facts involved. You've responded with lots of attitude and zero evidence. Describing the WSJ as "a pro-business newsrag" is pretty damn inappropriate. (Maybe you forgot all those parts of Capital where Marx quoted from the pro-biz newsrags of his day.) I said that the WSJ article from which I quoted was quite representative of business reporting - the consensus is, among people who both practice business and report on it, that things are a lot more competitive today than 20-30 years ago. Now it's possible that these practitioners and chroniclers are deluded victims of false consciousness. But it's also quite possible that they're not, and that the real v.'s of f.c. are academics who prefer to work out the transformation problem for the millionth time rather than study the world around them. You may be familiar with "some of the empirical facts involved," but I don't see any evidence that they've been incorporated into theorizing. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:6574] Paper for Conference at Laurier University
I have a draft of a paper "The New Capitalism: Leaner, Meaner and Untouchable?" that I will be presenting at a conference at Wilfrid Laurier university later this month. The conference is on Ethics and Restructuring. The paper is to be published in January so I will be able to revise it after presentation and based upon comments from other sources. The paper is close to 100 blocks (whatever that means). It is 20 pages long double-spaced but I have saved it in a file with just text and line breaks so that it will transmit with no problem. I would be happy to send the paper by e-mail to anyone who is interested and would appreciate any comments. The paper looks specifically at debt management policies and privatization as new social structures of accumulation and at the negative consequences of these policies in terms of welfare and worker rights. Cheers, Ken Hanly
[PEN-L:6572] RE: quote o' the day -- CORRECTED
Michael More, in an interview of USC's Market Place, said the 2 candidates had "vulcanized", called their party the "Republicrats" and named the party's candidate "Billy-Bob Clinton-Dole." Incidently, I think the joke is funny ...in a dour way. Nancy Breen -- From: pen-l Subject: [PEN-L:6521] quote o' the day -- CORRECTED Date: Tuesday, October 08, 1996 1:34PM "how many hungry people does Bill Clinton have to throw off of food stamps before Bob DOLE stops calling him a 'liberal'?" -- Bob Sheer, L.A. TIMES 8 Oct. 1996 (paraphrased from memory). My error arose either from the time of the morning (7:50 a.m.) and my severe cold or from the fact that there are so few differences between Tweedle-dole and Tweedle-dum. (I remember that I almost typed "Bill Dole" when I first submitted this gem.) in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 74267,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed.
[PEN-L:6576] Re: big mac attack?
Susan Fleck wrote: On a lighter note, in response to Doug Henwood's comment on McDonalds... They are suffering sales because they microwave their burgers these days! blech! (I won't tell you how I know.) On a more serious note, let me answer Doug's recent comments. *Why* are sales decreasing at McDonalds? In an oligopolistic market, a large amount of money capital per firm is "invested" in product differentiation, especially advertising and marketing. The recent decline in sales at McDonalds can be explained in this context -- not in the context of continuous technical change or increasing labor plus capital (fixed and circulating) costs. It is well-known that McDonalds strategy of promoting the adult burger is a colossal failure, for instance. Oligopolies gamble big on advertising and marketing -- and sometimes lose (to the advantage of other oligopolies in the market). Now, it would be very easy to conclude based on the _WSJ_ article that there is a profitability problem in the market as a whole rather than for individual firms. It would be very easy to conclude that *if* one assumes that what is happening at McDonalds is also happening to other firms in the market *and* if one doesn't consider the specific nature of competition in that market. Jerry
[PEN-L:6577] World Bank again
Ecumenical News International ENI News Service 9 October 1996 World Bank to invite religious leaders to values summit ENI-96-0581 By Edmund Doogue Washington, DC, 9 October (ENI)--The World Bank will invite leaders of the world's main religions to Washington next year to discuss spiritual and cultural issues with bank officials. The meeting, which will be coordinated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr George Carey, is part of efforts by the bank to improve its image and to engage in dialogue with its critics, including the churches, church-related aid agencies and non-government organisations (NGOs). The bank, which lends US$ 20 billion every year for development projects world-wide, is frequently criticised for imposing its own economic principles on developing countries, which, critics claim, means that rich rather than poor countries benefit from the aid. The World Bank - along with the International Monetary Fund - was set up by the allied powers in the 1940s to prevent further economic and currency collapses such as those which led to World War II. Now 180 states are members of the bank, though critics accuse the G-7 group of leading industrial nations of dominating the bank and its policies. Leading bank officials this week denied many of the criticisms and called for churches and NGOs to learn more about the World Bank's policies. "Some of it [criticism by NGOs] is valid," Andrew Steer, director of the bank's environment department, told ENI. "We could have done a better job in the past on a number of issues." But the criticism, he said, failed to take into account changes in bank methods and was often ill-informed. "Quite frankly, I think most of the religious groups should educate themselves. The issues are too serious to allow sloppiness and laziness which is the case in some of the religious papers I read," he said. Steer also said that ideological differences were often at the heart of the problem. But, he said, the bank - "while continuing to do our work of alleviating poverty and child mortality" - wanted to deepen its understanding of spiritual and cultural issues in relation to development. Brian V. Wilson, bank vice-president for financial policy and institutional strategy, told ENI: "A lot of the angst [among NGOs] is about structural adjustment." (Through "structural adjustment programmes", the bank requires some borrowing nations to implement basic reforms of their economy.) "But we are not saying: 'You must have a free-market society'," Wilson said. "We are trying to allow civil society to operate. And we try to ensure that the loans get to where they're directed, not swallowed up by government administration." Steer said that in some countries, before structural adjustment was implemented, central government structures controlled by "cronies" of the government were subsidised by heavily-taxed, rural farmers. "Do you really think poor farmers should be taxed to subsidise rich, inefficient cronies of governments?" Steer asked. "Structural adjustment has helped remove this discrimination against farmers in rural areas who make up two-thirds of the world's poor. "I think the point is not whether conditionality is good or bad, it's which conditions should be applied. If you asked people at the World Council of Churches whether or not they wanted conditions to protect the environment or to reduce criminality, they would say 'yes'." Both Steer and Wilson pointed out that many aspects of bank loans are forgotten or ignored by critical NGOs. Wilson stressed that loans to the world's poorest countries, through the bank's International Development Association, were at extremely low interest rates (0.5 to 1 per cent) and repayable over 40 years. According to Steer, the bank is the world's biggest financier of a range of important services from AIDS prevention to literacy programmes for girls. Speaking of the attitudes of World Bank staff, Wilson said: "What strikes me about the bank is that it's highly values-driven. There are people from many different backgrounds and there is a bigger purpose than self-aggrandisement. Without having to agree on the nature of God or even if there is one, there is this strong sense of values. How much more constructive it would be," he said of NGOs and churches, "if we were working together." Steer said many people at the bank had religious beliefs and that 20 different staff Bible-study groups met every week. But until recently there had been no official attempts to question whether this fact had implications for the bank's work. However, with the growing realisation in recent years that purely technical solutions did not work, the World Bank was exploring new possibilities, including organising a conference on "Ethics and Spiritual Values - Promoting Environmentally Sustainable Development" which was held in October 1995.
[PEN-L:6578] Steering the World Bank towards God
Peter: Thanks for forwarding this stuff to PEN-L. The following are my favorite parts./Jerry Andrew Steer, director of the World Bank's environment department, told ENI: "Quite frankly, I think most of the religious groups should educate themselves. The issues are too serious to allow sloppiness and laziness which is the case in some of the religious papers I read," he said. Steer said many people at the bank had religious beliefs and that 20 different staff Bible-study groups met every week. All articles (c) Ecumenical News International Reproduction permitted only by media subscribers and provided ENI is acknowledged as the source
[PEN-L:6579] Is labour getting serious?
The Boston Globe Wednesday October 9, 1996 RICHMARK PROTEST YIELDS 13 ARRESTS Workers: Union organizing led to layoffs at Everett curtain factory By Diane Lewis, Globe Staff EVERETT --Thirteen persons were arrested yesterday after refusing to leave the main office of a curtain factory here until the company's president agreed to recognize a union an reinstate 10 laid-off workers. The workers say they were let go after trying to organize stitchers at the factory. Police from Everett and Chelsea handcuffed the protestors and escorted them out a rear door and into police cars parked several hundred feet from a crowd of chanting workers -- union leaders and organizers who had marched from city hall to Richmark International Inc. "The employer invited us in, but then he asked us to leave," said Elaine Bernard, director of the Harvard Trade Union Project, shortly after her arrest. "We chose to stay. Essentially we want it understood that people are losing jobs because they've exercised their right to organize. We decided to stand up for that right." Those arrested for trespassing included: James Green, director of labor studies at UMass Boston; Heather Gonzales of Jobs With Justice; Howard Zinn, a retired Boston University professor; Jeff Crosby, president of the North Shore Labor Council; Tito Meza, a member of the Centra Hispano board of directors in Chelsea; and Manny Weiner, president of the Massachusetts Senior Action Council. The demonstrators were released on bail late yesterday afternoon, and were scheduled to be arraigned in Malden District Court today. John Levanchy, president of Richmark, said his lawyers were meeting with an attorney from the Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees in an attempt to iron out an agreement. "We are willing to allow our workers to vote for a union, but we would like them to drop the labor charges they've filed against Richmark," Levanchy said. The protest and subsequent arrests capped more than a week of labor activity stemming from the layoffs last month of 10 employees, including six whose supervisors had warned them against getting involved with the union's organizing drive, labor leaders said. Glenda Figueroa, 25, of Chelsea, said she and her sister were laid off last month after Figueroa asked several coworkers to sign union cards. She Said workers were given three minutes to use the bathroom, threatened with layoff if they went over the time limit, and were paid as little as $1.50 per pound or $2.50 per hour for work stitched at home, in violation of state labor laws. Levanchy denied the allegations. "We've tried to provide good working conditions for our employees," he said. "We laid off 10 workers, but we laid them off because we didn't have the work. This had nothing to do with involvement in a union."
[PEN-L:6581] Re: big mac attack?
At 8:45 AM 10/10/96, Gerald Levy wrote: In an oligopolistic market, a large amount of money capital per firm is "invested" in product differentiation, especially advertising and marketing. The recent decline in sales at McDonalds can be explained in this context -- not in the context of continuous technical change or increasing labor plus capital (fixed and circulating) costs. Dropped into my local BK the other day for lunch and was shocked to see Whoppers selling for $0.99. (Remember this is Manhattan, where fast food prices are about 40% higher than in the Real America.) Is price competition coming to fast food? And if so, what does that say about theories of oligpolistic competition? Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:6583] ORGANIZING ALERT--IBM (fwd)
/* -- "ORGANIZING ALERT--IBM" -- */ UNION CAMPAIGN TO BEGIN! IBM WORKERS UNITED AND THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRONICS WORKERS (AFL/CIO) JOIN FORCES TO ORGANIZE IBM WORKERS! For the past few months, members of IBM Workers United and representatives of the International Union of Electronics Workers (IUE), have been holding meetings and visiting other IBM workers at the Endicott, NY plant. It is clear that the situation for IBM workers has reached a critical stage with the decline in wages; benefits; working conditions; and job security. Recent actions by the company have convinced many employees of the need to unionize. --the buyout plan that gives only 6 months pay and puts workers with over 25 years service under the gun. These workers are facing a choice of taking the buyout, under extreme pressure by management looking to "get their numbers", or face getting fired. This is an insult. --The threat of mass firings if enough people don't take the buyout. --the attempt to destroy the facilities maintenance group through job cuts and vendorization. (as this goes to press we are pleased to hear that through solidarity and the threat of a job action, the facilities group has temporarily saved their jobs.) --the recent flurry of hiring new regular employees at $7.50 per hour, substantially less that employees in the same classification who have more service time. This has resulted in concern and anger as long time employees are targeted for firings as lower paid new hires and temporary workers remain. --forced overtime among manufacturing and engineering support that is disrupting family and personal life. --take aways in benefits ( and increases in co-payments while wages stagnate), that affect employees and retirees. All this and more has brought us to this point. It has become painfully clear that the recovery of our company has not resulted in rewards for the vast majority of IBM workers who had (so they thought) survived years of turmoil. It is also clear that senior management, all the way to CEO Lou Gerstner, have repeatedly taken advantage of IBMers and have enriched themselves at our expense. IBM Workers United and the IUE have come to this day with excitement and hope. Hope for a better future for IBM workers, from temps and the newest hired, to the almost retired. Excitement at the possibilities and challenges that lay ahead. It's time for a new direction! JOIN US! For more information contact: Lee Conrad--Organizer/IBM Workers United--PO box 634, Johnson City, NY 13790, phone--(607) 7664423, internet-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ed Young Assistant Director of Organization/ I.U.E, phone-(716)4264520 -
[PEN-L:6584] info request: cba of NAFTA or GATT or...
Does anyone know of any cost-benefit analyses of NAFTA, or GATT/WTO, or other trade agreements, or of capital controls or rules on capital mobility? Or of living wage/minimum wage policies? ___ Robert Naiman 1821 W. Cullerton Chicago Il 60608-2716 (h) 312-421-1776 Urban Planning and Policy (M/C 348) 1007 W. Harrison Room 1180 Chicago, Il 60607-7137 (o) 312-996-2126 (voice mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://icarus.uic.edu/~rnaima1/
[PEN-L:6586] Republican cite needed
some time during the primaries (i think), some Republican operative (maybe with the RNC) was quoted as having said something like, "The good news is that a Republican will be elected president in 1996. The bad news is that it will probably be Bill Clinton." Does anyone remember the exact quote, the source, and the context? ___ Robert Naiman 1821 W. Cullerton Chicago Il 60608-2716 (h) 312-421-1776 Urban Planning and Policy (M/C 348) 1007 W. Harrison Room 1180 Chicago, Il 60607-7137 (o) 312-996-2126 (voice mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://icarus.uic.edu/~rnaima1/
[PEN-L:6588] Re: Republican cite needed
At 1:37 PM 10/10/96, Robert R Naiman wrote: some time during the primaries (i think), some Republican operative (maybe with the RNC) was quoted as having said something like, "The good news is that a Republican will be elected president in 1996. The bad news is that it will probably be Bill Clinton." Does anyone remember the exact quote, the source, and the context? That may have been me, quoting New York Press columnist Christopher Caldwell. Unfortunately I don't have the exact quote anymore. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:6587] Re: info request: cba of NAFTA or GATT or...
At 1:18 PM 10/10/96, Robert R Naiman wrote: Does anyone know of any cost-benefit analyses of NAFTA, or GATT/WTO, or other trade agreements, or of capital controls or rules on capital mobility? Or of living wage/minimum wage policies? I just got a press release from the Preamble Foundation about a new study of living wage legislation, co-written by PEN-Ler Mark Weisbrot (Mark, you still here?). Haven't seen the study yet, but you can contact Preamble at [EMAIL PROTECTED], or call 202-265-3263. According the the release, the study shows "no measurable negative effects" from Baltimore's living wage legislation. Rank empiricism marches on... Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:6590] Demonstration Against Anti-Social Offensive In Budapest
Thousands of Hungarians marched through the streets of Budapest on October 5, to voice their opposition to the anti-social offensive. The Hungarian people are reported to be dismayed that the monopoly capitalists continue to withdraw large sums of money from social programs. Social welfare has been severely curtailed; money has been taken from the healthcare system and pensions; maternity leave has been cut, and the government has begun to charge a monthly fee for post-secondary education. Hungarians are also upset with the revelations of widespread corruption involving the privatization of government property. Various capitalists, who are closely allied with the government, have made millions of dollars through purchasing and selling government assets. Shawgi Tell University at Buffalo Graduate School of Education [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6591] Re: Republican cite needed
At 01:37 PM 10/10/96 -0700, you wrote: some time during the primaries (i think), some Republican operative (maybe with the RNC) was quoted as having said something like, "The good news is that a Republican will be elected president in 1996. The bad news is that it will probably be Bill Clinton." Does anyone remember the exact quote, the source, and the context? This was quoted in the most recent Lumpen and was not attributed to a specific person. You could email Lumpen from their webpage (www.lumpen.com; which unfortunately does not have recent issues) and maybe someone could help. I highly recommend the latest issue (and no I do not know where Chairman Thar is). Jim Westrich Institute on Disability and Human Development University of Illinois at Chicago "Why shouldn't the American people take half my money from me? I took all of it from them." Edward Albert Filene (1869-1937)
[PEN-L:6592] Re: info request: cba of NAFTA or GATT or...
Robert R Naiman wrote: Does anyone know of any cost-benefit analyses of NAFTA, or GATT/WTO, or other trade agreements, or of capital controls or rules on capital mobility? Or of living wage/minimum wage policies? Yes on one and no on two. Regarding NAFTA/GATT etc., Dean Baker, Thea Lee, and Rob Scott at EPI have dealt with the issue of efficiency gains. Regarding minimum wages, see the book by Card and Krueger for an up-to-date, liberal treatment. MS Max B. Sawicky 202-775-8810 (voice) Economic Policy Institute 202-775-0819 (fax) 1660 L Street, NW [EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20036
[PEN-L:6594] Re: Why raise the minimum wage
At 2:48 PM 10/10/96, Tavis Barr wrote: Doug, do you think that increased "competitiveness" is responsible for declining standards of living? Yes I do. Michael P., are you here? Isn't this one of your areas? Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:6596] Re: Why raise the minimum wage
Thanks Doug. I have discussed this matter in The Pathology of the U.S. Economy and in The End of Economics. Does this idea really require much elaboration? I used to hear an analogue of this idea all the time as an undergraduate. I was frequently told that the "high" wages of union workers was a reflection of the monopolistic position of their employers. At 2:48 PM 10/10/96, Tavis Barr wrote: Doug, do you think that increased "competitiveness" is responsible for declining standards of living? Yes I do. Michael P., are you here? Isn't this one of your areas? Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6597] competitiveness
Tavis writes: Doug, do you think thatincreased "competitiveness" is responsible for declining standards of living? Doug responds Yes I do. Michael P., are you here? Isn't this one of your areas? but increased competition among capitalists also hurts profits, no? and profits are up, yup? So maybe the problem is increased competition amongst workers. -- Jim Devine
[PEN-L:6598] Re: competitiveness
Jim Devine saith: but increased competition among capitalists also hurts profits, no? and profits are up, yup? So maybe the problem is increased competition amongst workers. COMMENT: But increased profits means more to invest and more jobs and thus more to trickle down to the workers; and so it follows, ceteris paribus, that they must be better off too ;-) Cheers, Ken Hanly
[PEN-L:6599] re: Big Mac Attack
On most occassions I agree with Doug. But now I am confused. Within the last couple of weeks two empty blocks at the end of my block have been cleared and new construction begun. One, is to construct a new McDonalds outlet -- the other to construct a new Wendy's" outlet. Now I shouldn't let personal preferences dictate but I have never ever liked any McDonalds product. (When I visit my grandchildren I always give them the option, any restaurant except McDonalds) But I realize as an economist that they are the market leader. (God knows why). Now Doug is arguing that they are competitive? I find this quite ludicrous. There is oligopistic competition ( go read Galbraith) but it should probably be better described as rivalry rather than competition which,for better or worse, has become typified in neoclassical economics. Once one accepts a non-comptetive product model (and labour model), the whole edifice of neoclassical minimum wage analysis becomes a crock of ... Why are we even bothering?
[PEN-L:6600] Re: why raise the minimum wage (fwd)
Doug, in the prior post you wrote, that for 8 million minimum wage workers, "Boosting their wage $1/hr would amount to less than 0.2% of GDP". In this posting you are arguing somehow for very rapidly increasing marginal cost to capital of increasing the minimum successively by $1 increments. As I said last December, if a $7.20 minimum wage was existent in 1968 (in real terms at today's prices), a $10 minimum wage was doable both then and NOW--without revolution. It's not that I'm opposing revolution; I'm simply arguing not to be to tramatized by a $10 minimum. Capital, if they had only the choice of $10 minimum wage or revolution, would easily choose $10 and still live a pretty life and still accumulate capital. In sum, $10 minimum wages is not the functional equivalent of demanding revolution. And that is my "honest" statement (see your last sentence). Paul Z. On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, Doug Henwood wrote: At 5:59 AM 10/10/96, Paul Zarembka wrote: But, Doug, last Winter you opposed raising the minimum wage to $10/hour, i.e., some 1% or 2% of GDP (staying by your calculating methods below). Have you changed your mind or is that small fraction of GDP too much for those workers? I'm not being sarcastic, but really would like to know where you stand. I didn't oppose it; I said the demand was structurally incompatible with capitalism. Raising the minimum wage to 84% the present mean would involve a lot more than 1-2% of GDP. In 1995, the hourly wage at the 10th percentile was $5.06 (i.e., well above the minimum wage); at the 20th, $6.19; at the 40th, $8.70; at the 50th, $10.13 [figures from The State of Working America, 1996-97 edition; sorry for breaking your embargo, EPI]. Boosting the wages of the bottom 50% of workers simply could not be financed without the functional equivalent of revolution. Which I'm all for, but please be honest about what you're demanding. Doug
[PEN-L:6601] Re: competitiveness
Yes. Of course, when profits start to fall, business takes it out on the workers. That is the underlying mechanism. Tom Batsis wrote: Tavis writes: Doug, do you think thatincreased "competitiveness" is responsible for declining standards of living? Doug responds Yes I do. Michael P., are you here? Isn't this one of your areas? but increased competition among capitalists also hurts profits, no? and profits are up, yup? So maybe the problem is increased competition amongst workers. -- Jim Devine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
