At 03:34 PM 2/20/98 -0500, Thomas Lunde wrote:
>Tom Walker answered:
>
>If I can try and paraphrase your answer, it would be that we should change
because "a wage system is no longer appropriate to the way that a modern
economy works." And because of this, the cost of providing a worker is
borne
Thomas Lunde:
> I f I can paraphrase your answer Eva, I hear you saying that if there is =
> enough to give, that in itself should be the reason to give.
>
> How would you answer the current world paradigm that "you have to work =
> for what have"?
>
>
There is overproduction and more workers
On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Colin Stark wrote:
> At 03:34 PM 2/20/98 -0500, Thomas Lunde wrote:
> >Tom Walker answered:
> >
> >If I can try and paraphrase your answer, it would be that we should change
> because "a wage system is no longer appropriate to the way that a modern
> economy works." And beca
One practical reason for a basic income. Maintain effective demand in the
economy. Maintain purchasing power. Going to be hard to buy all that
output without access to purchasing power.
arthur cordell
On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Colin Stark wrote:
> At 03:34 PM 2/20/98 -0500, Thomas Lunde wrote:
Jim Dator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Separating "work" entirely from access to goods and services, and
>permitting/enabling people to live meaningful, satisfied lives without
>"working" seems one of the biggest challenges of the present, and
>foreseable future. Trying to create more jobs is fu
Tom Walker answered:
I'd have a look at John Maurice Clark's writing
on labour as an overheadcost (in his _Studies in the Economics of Overhead
Costs_). Thejustification is that a wage system is no longer appropriate to
the way thata modern economy works. The wage system is a form of contr
Brad McCormick answered:
Hasn't our society already answered this
question for all thosepersons who "come into" an annual income by
accident ofbirth rather than their accountable personal efforts? (This
is obvious,but surely not irrelevant.)\brad
mccormick
Thomas
If I can paraphrase
Eva Durant answered:
I thought this was easy. If there is enough to
give toeverybody, than you have to justify why youdon't. (I don't think
you can.)Eva
Thomas
I f I can paraphrase your answer Eva, I hear you
saying that if there is enough to give, that in itself should be the reason t
The last series of interchanges have been the main reason I joined (and
have remained lurking) on Futurework.
I just don't see that there are now enough needed jobs at sufficiently
high wages to give everyone (at least in the post-industrial world) a
living income. Many, perhaps most, people are
In Europe figures like Bauman and Offe are arguing that the contemporary
form of capitalist industrialization has rendered a large part of the
potentially employable population surplus, even as a reserve army of
labour. When confronted with the effective reality of full employment in
the US they a
Thomas Lunde wrote:
>
> Hi FWer's:
>
> Some of my recent reading has asked me to consider some serious
> questions, questions which need to be discussed and critiqued. I
> will pose some of these questions and see what kind of responses the
> questions evoke. For example:
>
> Given that the c
11 matches
Mail list logo
