Hard News: Is that it?
327 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 14 Newer→ Last
-
Islander, in reply to
Almost as bad as, say, coercing the top physicists and mathematicians of a generation to invent more and more effective and brutal ways of killing more and more people.
O! This could never happen here.
Eh? -
BenWilson, in reply to
The question is why does the market place its value as "fuck all", while society places its value somewhat higher (as revealed by the minimum wage)?
They don't think the same way, thankfully. Society has compassion. The market has only the supply-demand tensions.
A lot of us might agree, for instance, that teachers and social workers are underpaid; this is hardly down to oversupply, or the work being "unskilled" - the work is simply so far along the value chain from "capital" that it's too difficult for the market to measure quantitatively what it's "worth". The quantifiability of value has become a proxy for value itself.
I'm not sure teaching isn't oversupplied for the demand. It's not unskilled, but it doesn't have particularly high barriers to entry. Lots of tertiary degrees are sufficient qualification. With training college? I don't know exactly how it works.
Again, supply and demand doesn't take into account how hard teaching is, in the sense of being exhausting. It's not relevant to the price, any more than the exhaustion involved in digging ditches is (oh yeah, I did a fair bit of that as a student too...jeez I forget how many shit jobs I've had. Hell, I did teaching too. But the school went bankrupt). All that matters is "how many people can do this, and want to do it" and "how many people do we need doing it". As the first goes up, the price comes down. As the second goes up, the price goes up.
Yes, the true utility of school and teachers are very poorly reflected by market forces, because the kids have got no money, and the parents might not either.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
you have an eidetic memory, eh?
Only for books I've read more than 3 times. The Dispossessed is an old favourite. I liked it even more than A Wizard of Earthsea, which was remorselessly ripped off by J K Rowling.
-
Danielle, in reply to
Also, "if ladies do it in large numbers, it is worth less".
-
James Butler, in reply to
“The Left Hand of Darkness” is also a plus/minus look at bi/ambisexuality
Or a study of how our culture is shaped by our perception of gender.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
It certainly does not seem like an intellectually stimulating job, but there is no reason to sneer at those who do it for a living.
Who's sneering?
-
Islander, in reply to
Can I say, "Totally!"
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Almost as bad as, say, coercing the top physicists and mathematicians of a generation to invent more and more effective and brutal ways of killing more and more people.
Nowhere near as bad as that. I loved Le Guin's insight that "Ainsetain" from Terra (I presume she was referring to Einstein) had a very peculiar refusal to allow mathematics and mysticism to cross, whereas the Cetians didn't see any difference. Considering the influence of Pythagoreanism on Western thought, I think she's on the money - the boundaries of science are always going to sit in ontology land, and it's odd just how uniform the ontology of science is, considering the possibilities.
Of course, she was writing Sci Fi, not doing science, and the idea of mystical insights in science is one of the oldest memes of the genre. Science is magic - the rest of most Sci Fi storylines follow Fantasy paths constantly. Speculative fiction is a continuum from science to magic.
-
Islander, in reply to
I liked it even more than A Wizard of Earthsea, which was remorselessly ripped off by J K Rowling.
One day, some brave scholar is going to go through the Rowling opus-empire
and pick out all the 'borrowings'... -
BenWilson, in reply to
Also, "if ladies do it in large numbers, it is worth less".
I'm not sure if that's the cause or the effect, though. It could be "that as the price came down, men deserted it", rather than "as the number of women rose, the price went down". Correlation is a bastard like that, distinguishing cause and effect is problematic.
-
James Butler, in reply to
All that matters is “how many people can do this, and want to do it” and “how many people do we need doing it”. As the first goes up, the price comes down. As the second goes up, the price goes up.
You see I don't think that really holds. I am by no means highly paid for a software developer, but I think I would still do my job for significantly less - provided other people in comparable roles were also paid comparably. But my contribution to my customer's profits is easy to measure.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
some brave scholar
Heh, I bet it's been done already on some fan site. And nothing will ever top Terry Brooks for the most famous total fantasy book ripoff.
-
Sacha, in reply to
It's not unskilled, but it doesn't have particularly high barriers to entry. Lots of tertiary degrees are sufficient qualification.
So is law. Let's just accept that pricing of labour is not a rational market.
-
When I was teaching political theory, I used to recommend The Dispossessed to my students, as a way of visualising what an anarchic society might look like. Shevek to me is someone who goes his own way, radically so, the ultimate anarchist rejected by his conformist anarchist society. But he is admirable because he connects with people. He lives at a creative point of tension, between individual and community. It's a theme that Le Guin uses over and over again, the conflict and joy in being one's own person, in a community.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
But my contribution to my customer's profits is easy to measure.
Right, but that goes to demand for your services. The higher they can sell your services/products, the higher your demand is. What would lower it would be many other people willing and capable of doing the same job as you. It doesn't matter how clear the connection is. There's an easily measured value of the toilet cleaner to the contracting company too. But there's millions of people who can clean a toilet in this country.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
But there’s millions of people who can clean a toilet in this country.
Whether they will be persuaded to do it or not is the issue. You know the line about immigrants “doing the jobs that we don’t want to do”? There is some truth in that. Which is why the Tories want to make it compulsory for the unemployed to accept job offers in order to stay on the benefit. But more importantly, it is also why a guaranteed pool of unemployed people keeps the cost of labour down.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Yes, it could look that way, although how to get to that is a mystery. Le Guin depicts it as a mass exodus from Urras, to Anarres, which is effectively Terra Nullus, and has virtually no resources. This is the Urrasti response to massive scale civil unrest coming from the Odonian cult. This isn't an option for us Terrans.
-
Islander, in reply to
But there’s millions of people who can clean a toilet in this country.
Yup. Every family person, including those who live by themselves.
However, most of us clean our loos because it's civilised to do so (for the next person using same.
-
Islander, in reply to
hich is why the Tories want to make it compulsory for the unemployed to accept job offers in order to stay on the benefit. But more importantly, it is also why a guaranteed pool of unemployed people keeps the cost of labour down.
Which is why rightwingers luurrrrve hard times.
All of us little hardscrabbling self-employed/unemployed people out there,
not gainfully employed cleaning up after the droppings of their fat capitalist arses. -
BenWilson, in reply to
Whether they will be persuaded to do it or not is the issue. You know the line about immigrants “doing the jobs that we don’t want to do”? There is some truth in that.
A lot of truth.
But more importantly, it is also why a guaranteed pool of unemployed people keeps the cost of labour down.
I guess. I don't think most of the other unemployed people are keeping the cost of my labour down at the moment. Except for people who happen to have my skills and are unemployed. But yes, the value of unskilled labor is most likely affected by the general pool of unemployment.
I'm not entirely convinced that the "Tories" are that clever, TBH. I think they'd rather keep unemployment down too (it looks bad), they just haven't got the first idea how to do that.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
I’m not entirely convinced that the “Tories” are that clever, TBH.
On which count? Because the bit you quoted is bipartisan – Labour and National have both bought into the idea that we should use interest rates to guarantee a quota of unemployment and control wage inflation and inflation more generally. This is not up for debate or a matter of opinion – it’s our rolling agreement with the Reserve Bank.
The Tory bit was the idea that beneficiaries should be forced to accept jobs that are offered to them. Coupled with pushing more people on the unemployment benefit (the disabled, women on the DPB) this is going to create a glut of, how shall I put this, highly motivated jobseekers going after a limited pool of low-wage jobs and of course it’s going to further limit the workers’ ability to improve their conditions and thus it will help keep wage inflation down. You’re not giving the government or its advisors in the various ministries much credit if you are suggesting that this has somehow not occurred to them.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
It would be interesting to see how the well-heeled would cope if all those in drudge jobs at the bottom of the social heap downed tools for even a week.
That was chronicled in A Day Without A Mexican. Nice concept, mediocre execution though.
And who can forget the telephone sanitisers of Golgafrincham?
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Because the bit you quoted is bipartisan – Labour and National have both bought into the idea that we should use interest rates to guarantee a quota of unemployment and control wage inflation and inflation more generally. This is not up for debate or a matter of opinion – it’s our rolling agreement with the Reserve Bank.
The Reserve Bank attempts to control price inflation, sure, that much is their brief. But they can't, because they don't control the price of anything outside this country, and their only lever within the country is interest rates. That is only very indirectly related to unemployment rates and, for that matter, prices. I do not accept that there is some grand union conspiracy to maintain unemployment to control inflation. Controlling inflation might, however, have led to stable levels of unemployment. Maybe. I think it's more a factor of expecting controlling interest rates to somehow make jobs, or create markets. It doesn't, and can't. It doesn't matter squat what the Reserve Bank does to interest rates, they can't stop the American and European economies imploding, drying up export earnings, nor can they do anything about the price of oil, or cars, or computers, or nearly everything that is available to us here other than things we make ourselves. Even then, in a globalized economy, we could just opt to buy foreign food. Hell huge amounts of our debt isn't even in this country, so what control do they have over that?
Just as financial markets and monetarism can't save us and don't work, they also aren't to blame for everything either. NZers have made lots of conscious choices about the kinds of things we invest in, some of which have paid off more than others. We invest heavily in agriculture, but not so much in manufacture. It's not the Reserve Bank making that choice. We keep making roads instead of rail - that's nothing to do with the Reserve Bank, and creates quite a large sensitivity to the price of oil. We don't drill for our own oil and gas so much - these are environmental choices that have impacted inflation in this country. We refuse GE, this impacts farming efficiency. We opted to make students take out debt for their education - that affects the availability of skilled labour, when labour itself can take the next plane out if all it has in NZ is a big fat bill. We allowed total deregulation of telecommunications, and hence still don't have a national fiber network 25 years after the technology was invented. We have virtually no military, so we're rather lucky not having to foot that particular bill. Our taxes are low so we can't afford much welfare.
There's way, way more to growth and inflation and unemployment than just interest rates, which is why I made my point that I really don't think the "tories" are that smart. I think they are actually scratching their heads about what to do with our economy, because what's happening now just doesn't fit into the monetarist playbook.
The obvious thing to do is throw away the stupid playbook, and come up with our own plans for how we can work our way out of the depression. There are so many real possibilities which actually could be bipartisan that it's just fucking horrible to hear how public debate goes these days, banging on about the same old shit my elders were talking about in the early 80s. Get with the second decade of the third millenium, things have changed. We're low wage, and we need to decide for ourselves what we will do about it, rather than desperately looking across the Tasman or the Pacific, or crapping our pants about China.
-
With all the debate one thing has been over looked and that is, "Working is for Chumps".
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
Who’s sneering?
Nobody here, necessarily, but society does value different work in different ways, and not just through pay rates. Immigrants do the jobs locals don't want because locals see those jobs as being somehow beneath them. It's amazing how essential those jobs often are, though. And then a lot of jobs that society probably wouldn't miss terribly much if the people doing them vanished offer huge salaries and a lot of social status completely disproportionate to their usefulness or necessity to society.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.