May as well rock the boat a bit.
Dedicated to frequent commenter Laura.
In an extremely important and prescient paper, published in 1943 titled "Political aspects of full employment" Kalecki displayed skepticism about the political possibility of maintaining full employment. He argued that full employment was incompatible with the institutions of capitalism, and that, unless there were some fundamental institutional changes, then, although the system could reach full employment through the appropriate economic policies, it could not maintain adequate levels of employment for long periods.
This paper evaluates the buffer stock employment model in the light of Kalecki's observations. According to this model, the government acts as an employer of the last resort absorbing cyclical variations in unemployment. This has been suggested as a long term solution to the problem of unemployment. However, we argue that the proposed solution does not lead to the sorts of institutional changes which will allow the maintenance of full employment. It does nothing to change the underlying class relations which are at the heart of the incompatibility of full employment with capitalism. Rather, it acts as a bandage, attempting to treat the symptoms, namely unemployment. However, because the proposal in no way effects the underlying antagonisms, it is unlikely to provide an acceptable solution to the problem of unemployment by itself.Political Aspects of Buffer Stock Employment
Peter Kriesler and Joseph Halevi
8 comments:
This was interesting.
We have considered the political reasons for the opposition to the policy of creating
employment by government spending. But even if this opposition were overcome-as
it may well be under the pressure of the masses-the maintenance of full employment
would cause social and political changes which would give a new impetus to the
opposition of the business leaders. Indeed, under a regime of permanent full
employment, the 'sack' would cease to play its role as a disciplinary measure. The
social position of the boss would be undermined, and the self-assurance and classconsciousness of the working, class would grow. Strikes for wage. increases and
improvements in conditions of work would create political tension. It is true that
profits would be higher under a regime of full employment than they are on the
average under laissez-faire; and even the rise in wage rates resulting from the stronger
bargaining power of the workers is less likely to reduce profits than to increase prices.
and thus adversely affects only the rentier interests. But 'discipline in the factories and
'political stability' are more appreciated than profits by business leaders. Their class
instinct tells them that lasting full employment is unsound from their point of view,
and that unemployment is an integral part of the 'normal' capitalist system.
So to achieve lasting change, then institutional change will also be necessary. Sounds obvious to me, it is not like the current system is democractic. Remember it is only one binary vote, every 4 years, that's the problem. Fix that and implementation of the JG won't be an issue. Popular averages...
Kalecki's right it's the control over institutions needs to be completely redefined. The PTB will just turn labor against labor to achieve removal of the JG. Can see it now, the fact that the merit of the JG is even being questioned. Ahh, the power of the superstructure.
I will read this if only because it was co-wrote by Peter Kriesler and that piques my interest.
Based on the summary alone, those opposed to JG have other ideas but want to take an incremental step towards the JG and stop & this paper seems to recognise the JG is an incremental step towards true full employment rather than loose full employment which has no doubt been noted in the MMT academic literature but also more recently in a Billy Blog post.
The 'captains of industry' are rolling back social gains and eroding the bargaining power of labour as we speak. They control the narrative. Kalecki would be appalled.
Not sure that they still completely control the narrative. Occupy has had an effect, and the narrative is now in flux and will develop depending on how things go economically. I don't think they are as favorably positioned as they believe. The demographics are shifting beneath their feet, and time is not on their side.
BTW, it is now pretty much over for white people demographically. They have essentially stopped reproducing, and it is going to be only a couple of generations before they are consigned to the dustbin of history. It sure was glorious while it lasted though. So if you are white, enjoy it while you can. Your children won't be as lucky, and your grandchildren are toast.
Tom, what prompted your comments wrt white people?
Senexx, Joe Halevi is one of the good guys, too, even though he may have some disagreements with MMT. He was the person who first introduced me to Kalecki (and also Sweezy and the Monthly Review "school") when I was an undergrad.
Laura, it is a huge democraphic trend and developing issue that the elite is aware of and grabbing what they can while they can, whereas most ordinary folks in the West presume that the status quo with the them in charge is going to last forever.
While the elite is carving a place for itself and its off-spring in the future, the big news among ordinary folks is that brown people are everywhere and we need to close out borders. The resentment, and often actual fear, is building.
Well, guess what, that demographic is already operative in the US. Birth is the most populous state in the state recently shifted to majority non-white.
Right-wing populists like Pat Buchanan have been warning about this impending transition for years, and it underlies a lot of the racism that one sees among the far right. They would not exactly think of themselves as white supremacists in the neo-Nazi fashion as much as defenders of traditional values and the original America, which they "want back."
Same dynamic is happening in Europe, and in some ways more so, where nations are still based on blood ties. Complicating the situation in Europe, the immigrants, who reproduce more than whites, are not only brown, but also Muslims who do not share European values and culture and are not interested in acquiring them. This is seeming to Europeans like a new Muslim invasion from the south.
This is an emerging trend that is not political correct to talk about in polite society, but it is one of the chief shapers of the future due to the role that whites have payed over recent centuries. White almost universally believe that there was no real culture or progress before them.
And the laughable thing is that Jesus is virtually always represented as an Aryan than than the a Palestinian Jew, i.e., a descendant of Abraham, who was an Arab reputedly from the Ur in lower Mesopotamia, a coastal city near the mouth of the Euphrates on the Persian Gulf. The cultural myth of an Aryan Jesus not only fantasy, it is denial.
+1 Tom, well said.
Post a Comment