Retirement RE: Re: Fwd: A (hostile) review of Michael Perelman's latest

bruce.rob at mail.btinternet.com bruce.rob at mail.btinternet.com
Sun Jun 18 15:17:00 PDT 2000


I am in the happy position of having been able to take early retirement from academe aged 41 (the downside being that I have a chronic illness. I don't have any trouble filling my time (perhaps political activism and LBO-list should be recommended for all retirees!).

the Blair government has recently talked about RAISING the retiremnt age to 70 and applying coercive measures to keep 60-70 year olds in the job market. I can't think of any good economic reason for this even from a capitalist viewpoint, except perhaps cuttoing the social security budget If people that age want to work, fine. They shpu;d not be discriminated against, but forcing them to at that age...

Bruce Robinson

----Original Message-----

>From: "Carl Remick" <carlremick at hotmail.com>

>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com

>Subject: Re: Fwd: A (hostile) review of Michael Perelman's latest

>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com

>Date: 16 June 2000 16:07

>

>>>Michael Perelman. _The Natural Instability of Markets:

>>>Expectations, Increasing Returns, and the Collapse of Capitalism_.

>>>New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999. xiv + 188 pp. $39.95 (cloth),

>>>ISBN 0-312-22121-5.

>>>

>>>Reviewed for EH.NET by Thomas E. Hall <HALLTE at muohio.edu>,

>>>Department of Economics, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio

>

>[snip]

>

>>>Yes, the competitive process

>>>can cause wrenching changes in society, but what about the lower

>>>prices we pay, the wider variety of goods and services we choose

>>>among, the improved quality of products...?

>

>This seems to be my day for reading mindless book reviews. I went from

>groaning over this ridiculous piece to flinching over the Economist’s

>current roundup review of three books examining America’s "puzzling

>spectacle of discontent amid plenty." One of these books sounded really

>interesting, though: _The Working Life_, by Joanne Ciulla. The Economist

>

>notes: "... Ms Ciulla is struck by the way that wealth has not brought

>happiness. People have not been freed from the need -- or the desire -- t

>o

>earn a living. Even when people have enough to live on, many of them

>continue to want to work. 'I am perplexed,' she admits, 'at the dominatio

>n

>of life by paid employment at a time when life itself should be getting

>easier.' Her persuasive answer is that work 'offers instant discipline,

>identity and worth. It structures our time and imposes a rhythm on our

>lives. It gets us organised into various kinds of communities and social

>groups. And perhaps most important, work tells us what to do each day.'

>Maybe the best way to give people a larger share of … badly distributed

>

>spiritual resources is to get them into work and keep them there. If the

>youthful poor had jobs, they would be less poor, and if the old could wor

>k

>for longer, they would be far less lonely."

>

>I myself find what passes for social life in a corporate setting

>psychologically taxing in a way that idling around the house by myself ne

>ver

>is. I've never been able to fathom people who say they dread retirement,

>

>and I'm always confounded by those septuagenarian fellow commuters who do

>

>indeed appear to remain in the workforce for reasons of social contact

>rather than economic necessity.

>

>At any rate, has anyone here read Ciulla's book and have any opinions he/

>she

>would like to share?

>

>Carl

>

>

>

>________________________________________________________________________

>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

>

>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list