My research, involving men and women who experience varying levels of job insecurity, suggests that the dampening expectations they have for employer commitment requires them to moderate the kinds of feelings they allow themselves to have in the event of a layoff. This is especially true for less-educated workers, who are most likely to say they could lose their jobs in the next year.…
So when we talk about work today, we have to talk about it in the context of an unrequited contract, our collective acquiescence to the notion that work can no longer be counted on....Wake-up from a sociologist. The psychological impact of job insecurity can be devastating, as is shown in health and suicide statistics such as cited by Anne Case and Angus Deaton.
JG to the rescue.
Harvard Business Review
What Happens at Home When People Can’t Depend on Stable Work
Allison J. Pugh is a sociologist at the University of Virginia and a 2016-17 Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, as well as a 2016-17 American Council of Learned Societies Fellow
JG to the rescue. Tom Hickey
ReplyDeleteThe endless conflation of work (good) with wage slavery (not so good). Sigh.
But I guess a JG is a lot simpler than justice, eh?
Wage slavery provides rations in the form of meager wages.
ReplyDeleteWage slavery has morphed into debt slavery.
ReplyDeleteTennessee Ernie Ford sings 16 Tons
Debt slavery is easily remedied as part of the abolition of government provided deposit insurance and other privileges for the banks.
ReplyDeleteBut MMT proponents are more about saving privileges for the banks than for saving their victims - so it seems.
Andrew Anderson: The endless denial that a huge proportion of work is and should be paid with money, in fact more money.
ReplyDeleteThe obtuse blindness to the obvious: that proposals for a money economy without a JG, that oppositions to a JG are obscenely, insanely, moronically unjust, and this is the primary injustice in monetary economies, dwarfing everything else put together. Sigh.
Your proposals, if they omit a JG, are crazily unjust.
The endless denial that a huge proportion of work is and should be paid with money, in fact more money. Calgacus
ReplyDeleteA Citizen's Dividend WOULD pay people to work and, along with other reforms, including land reform, allow people to do the work they consider useful, when and how they wish to do it.
But if some people desire to be bossed around they can work for others either for free or for additional income.
JG proposals are doomed anyway by advancing automation. Do you think people will long endure USELESS wage slavery? When robots are doing almost all needed work? Or will they soon consider those who would waste their time, energy and morale insane and/or criminal?
Besides a Citizen's Dividend is a moral necessity if we are to have ethical fiat creation beyond justifiable deficit spending by the monetary sovereign,
"A Citizen's Dividend WOULD pay people to work"
ReplyDeleteIt would also pay people not to work - those who take. That is a transfer from workers to the idle for nothing in return. It is pure inflation - workers have more money and receive less stuff than they otherwise would have.
The output of everything belongs to those that produce it. Why do you think it is morally just to take things from those that have produced it and give it to other for nothing in return? That is completely unethical. It is why people resent the rich.
There is no society in the world where people get stuff and then contribute if they feel like it with no sanction if they don't.
The only set of people that try to do that are the wealthy and they are rightly resented for it.
The Citizens Dividend is about allowing terribly middle class individuals, who think they are too good to have to work, live like the rich. The Job Guarantee is about closing our output gap and delivering the increased output exclusively to the poor and working class.
Only middle class twonks support Income Guarantees. Everybody else expects and requires you to earn a living if you want to live in society.
- those who take. Neil Wilson
ReplyDeleteSays the man who supports government privileges for the banks and, by extension, the richer at the expense of the poorer. Hypocrisy much?
A Citizen's Dividend would be a right of citizenship. People would resent it about as much as they resent someone who won a lottery.
ReplyDelete