response 75 of 199:

Mar 26 19:27 UTC 2002

If you increase the level of education in a society, you will often 
find that due to shortages of unskilled labor (which results in higher 
wages for unskilled labor) things do get automated. The more things get 
automated, the more technology replaces unskilled labor, the more 
*skilled* labor becomes necessary. What ends up happening is what HAS 
happened in this country in the past 100 years. There are many many 
fewer jobs for unskilled labor now than there were 100 years ago. But 
the unemployment rate isnt higher. In fact, I would be willing to bet 
that the percentage of the population that is employed is much higher 
than it was 100 years ago and that is due to technological advances. 

There is also an argument that people live better now, that rather than 
have fewer jobs, the increased production that has resulted from 
technology has instead resulted in an increase in what we all consume. 
It could have resulted in a decrease in the hours worked but Americans 
seem to choose to work longer hours and then have more to consume. 

response 77 of 199:

Mar 26 20:40 UTC 2002

A shorter work week might not be the solution to "surplus people" that 
you think it might, drew. Or at least that is what Kellogg's found out 
during the Great Depression. They cut workers down to a 6 hour day in 
order to keep more workers employed and found that when they did that, 
the average workers *production* remained almost the same. In other 
words, the marginal production of that extra 2 hours of work isnt very 
much. They kept the 6 hour days for decades after that. I am still not 
sure why exactly they went back to the 8 hour day. 

response 79 of 199:

Mar 26 22:14 UTC 2002

Chinese office workers clean their own offices. Why should someone have to
do nothing but boring dirty work?

response 81 of 199:

Mar 26 23:34 UTC 2002

Re #73: I've noticed, from observing people I know, that while there are a
lot of jobs that don't require a college education, employers are often VERY
reluctant to hire people who don't have one, even if they're skilled.

Re #78: I think part of the reason the work week keeps getting longer is the
Puritan work ethic Americans have inherited.  We also have the least
vacation time, on average, of any first-world country.  Yet the same people
who claim to feel burned out on their jobs often spend their vacations
calling into the office on their cell phones.  Of course, part of this is
probably also because people are afraid that if they don't appear to be
connected to what's going on and working non-stop, they'll be replaced.

Re #80: Actually, I don't see how that follows.  Russ and bdh generally
advocate free markets, which don't usually exist in dictatorships. 
Dictatorships *are* good at greasing the wheels of government for the
benefit of big corporations, but that just shows the difference between
being pro-market and pro-corporation.  The distinction between the two often
gets lost.

Incidentally, it wasn't Mussolini that made the trains run on time.  They
ran on time before he got in power.  That's one of those lies that's been
repeated so many times people assume it's true.

response 83 of 199:

Mar 27 01:47 UTC 2002

I told you, it's flowing towards authoritarian regimes because when you 
have absolute power vested in a few people, it makes it very easy for 
corporations to get things done.

response 85 of 199:

Mar 27 04:32 UTC 2002

Re #78:  Demand for unskilled labor is inelastic, *over the short
term*.  Ditto the demand for gasoline, which is why the OPEC oil
price shocks and the refinery and pipeline problems of 2000 had
such an effect.  Over the long term it is radically different.
Exactly how much labor is involved with reaping wheat these days,
compared to using scythes and flails?  How much in making hay?
How much labor to pick cherries by hand vs. by shaker?

More to the point, there are a host of competitors for the supply
of quick lunches.  Food can be packaged in Mexico, frozen and
sent to vending machines.  People can buy it and microwave it
using very little labor except their own.  If a hamburger cost
$7 instead of $3 because of mandated expensive labor, you'd see
a lot of the demand for that labor disappear.  It would take time
for people to move to the new business model, but I'd give it 3
years at the outside.

Re #80:  Social safety nets should be for transient conditions
or those caused by external factors.  Trying to fight economic
factors is like King Canute commanding the tide to stay out;
paying people for their personal failures is just plain stupid.

response 87 of 199:

Mar 27 05:22 UTC 2002

Re #71:  Unless the law has changed since 1987, you are wrong.  Take another
look at #22, s'il vous plait.  That will also answer the question in #72. 
(Short form: "Yes".)

Michigan exempts military pay (and retirement?) from income tax.  The Feds
do not.

response 89 of 199:

Mar 27 08:57 UTC 2002

Just to add fuel to the fire here are some statistics that show the U.S.
has among the lowest standard of living in the western world terms of
health care, teen pregnancies, infant mortality, murder, pollution, etc
Figures are from 1991, the income gap has only grown in that period of
time:

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/8Comparison.htm

response 91 of 199:

Mar 27 15:40 UTC 2002

Re#86 That could have something to do with it. Our standard of living 
also could have something to do with the large amounts of natural 
resources this country has been blessed with, that we have used to 
build an economy that can provide us with a very good standard of 
living. 

re#87 Ok, I have taken another look at #22 and see that at least in 
1987 you were paying taxes. It also gave me a frame of reference 
because in 1987 I was working and living on my own for the first time. 
I was working in a minimum wage job. In 1987 minimum wage was $3.35 an 
hour. You had a net take home pay of $1,076. I had a gross pay of $580 
a month. I dont remember what my take home pay was but I think it was 
around $400+ The military pay included health insurance, **housing**, 
etc. My pay did not include any of those things. Clearly, in 1987 
dollars, people in the military were making pretty good money! Sure, no 
one was getting rich or anything but it doesnt sound too bad to me. 

response 93 of 199:

Mar 27 18:57 UTC 2002

Re 81.  Presumably the Puritan work ethic (usually called the Protestant
work ethic) is a constant, and hence doesn't explain the change in work
hours over the last 50 years.  Workers in (say) 1955 were closer in time
to the Puritans, and indeed, were more likely to be Protestants than
workers today.  Yet the average worker today is doing something like 120
more hours a year than the average 1955 worker. 

Re 85.  Agreed that in the long term, automation does tend to replace
labor -- and thank goodness we don't have to have millions of people
picking cotton any more.  But a lot of the reason for the inelastic demand
for minwage workers these days is that actual wages are usually a small
percentage of costs for minwage employers, given the costs of hiring,
training, and supervising high-turnover low-skill workers, not to mention
the capital costs and licensing fees necessary to build and maintain the
physical plant and equipment that utilizes their labor. 

In many settings such as hospital cafeterias, office buildings and
universities, you can ALREADY buy a frozen lunch out of a vending machine
and heat it in a microwave -- and pay significantly less than you would at
McDonald's.  However, it is obvious that most people don't consider those
two goods to be perfect substitutes for one another.

response 95 of 199:

Mar 28 00:06 UTC 2002

Way back there:  According to what little I was able to find today,
Sweden has a literacy rate of 99%, or an illiteracy rate of 1%.

According to the same reference, the USA has a literacy rate of 97%,
or an illiteracy rate of 3%.  I'm sure that this is a very loose
definition of "literacy", and the actual illiteracy rate is much
higher.  However, even if both numbers use a consistent definition,
the USA has easily 3 times the resulting costs as Sweden does.

response 97 of 199:

Mar 28 02:29 UTC 2002

The US has an illiteracty rate of 3% of what?  The population of the 
world?

response 99 of 199:

Mar 28 04:11 UTC 2002

Re #93:  So, if recruiting, training and whatnot cost so much,
why isn't it worth it to pay more to increase retention?  I'm
certain that *somebody* has tried this since Henry Ford.  I'm
equally certain that most such experiments fail, else we'd be
seeing lots of them around.  If they fail they were obviously
based on a premise which is wrong, or on circumstances which
cannot be duplicated easily.

There are a number of forces at work in society.  Profit motive
and education tend to foster change and flexibility.  Tradition
and habit tend to foster stability, even ossification.  If you
look at the situation in places like West Virginia and Flint, I
think you'll find that the offering of high wages for unskilled
work led to an expectation that such jobs would always be
available and thus a tradition which valued being just like your
parents.  When the coal mines played out and strip mining and
longwall replaced most of the labor on the ones which remained,
West Virginia was left with whole towns of people who had no
skills on which to base a new living; they had never prepared
themselves for anything else.  The same thing happened in Flint
when the auto companies changed the way they built cars, to
improve quality and reduce costs to meet the Japanese.  The
traditions held by the labor force left them flat-footed,
and they are *still* not up to meeting the challenge head-on.

Over-rewarding people for unskilled work is what creates these
problems; the pressure on business to change increases, while
the pressure on people to change decreases.  The reckoning can
be delayed, but not denied; when it hits, it leaves the people
(and their culture/traditions) in the dust wondering what
happened.  It creates dead cities like Flint.  I'd rather not.
The evidence of my eyes tells me that it's lousy public policy.

I'd much rather have a situation where people have the option
of unskilled labor, but they have to accept the drawbacks.
After the necessity of making a living forces people to get
skills (starting with literacy), they will pass the new ethos
on to their cohort and their children.  *We need this*.