Thursday, July 30, 2020

Bill Mitchell — Setting things straight about the Job Guarantee

 We need to get a few things straight. And this is partly for those out there who seem to think that the extent of literature on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) or the Job Guarantee within MMT is confined to collections of Tweets that allow 280 characters or Unicode glyphs. One doesn’t become an expert on ‘full employment’ or ‘political economy’ because they have suddenly realised there is a major crisis in the labour market and have decided to strategically place their organisations for self-serving purposes to be champions of full employment. There is an enormous literature on the Job Guarantee and I have been a major contributor along with my valued colleagues. This is a crucial time in history and one of the glaring deficiencies in the current crisis and economic management in general is the lack of an employment safety net. This is what MMT has to say about that safety net and stabilisation framework.…

Bill Mitchell – billy blog
Setting things straight about the Job Guarantee
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia


Ralph Musgrave said...

Bill says in that article, “Compare that with the Job Guarantee that I have consistently advocated over my career, which could not be conceived of being a more elaborate form of Workfare.”

Not true. In 2013 at the link below he said

“The existing unemployment benefits scheme could be maintained alongside the JG program, depending on the government’s preference and conception of mutual responsibility.

My personal preference is to abandon the unemployment benefits scheme and free the associated administrative infrastructure for JG operations.”

Well the latter arrangement equals Workfare according to most peoples’ understanding of the word, doesn’t it? Not, incidentally, that I’m strongly opposed to Workfare: JG can come in a relatively harsh form amounting to Workfare, or it can be more generous and relaxed. My personal preference is something half way in between.

NeilW said...

"Well the latter arrangement equals Workfare according to most peoples’ understanding of the word, doesn’t it?"

For most people it is just "work". If you decide not to work, you don't get paid. For most people that would be expected.

It's expecting to society to keep you when you conscientiously object to contributing to society that is the odd belief.

Peter Pan said...

Universal workfare may be just the kind of job guarantee Australian owners prefer. It will come with its own minimum wage (i.e. lower).

Matt Franko said...

Would rioting and looting be part of a left wing job guarantee?

Burning down courthouses?

Asking for a friend....