Fw: An Article From Slate

Peter K. peterk at enteract.com
Thu Mar 30 18:09:56 PST 2000

>>Apparently the existence of low-paid work doesn't trouble her, just
>>its raced and gendered slotting.
>That's not fair to Barbara Bergmann. She would say that low-paid work
>is better than zero-paid unemployment, but that high-paid work is
>much much better than either...
>Brad DeLong

I don't know diddly about Bergmann, but I bet even George W. Bush could agree with that statement.

What would she think of propagandist extraordinaire Paul Krugman's most recent column (available at the New York Times website)? In it, he says: "For example, how do you feel about the "living wage" movement, which in effect wants a large increase in the minimum wage? That would certainly increase the incomes of the lowest-paid workers; but it would also surely have at least some adverse effect on the number of jobs available. You may think that a price worth paying -- but the equations say that the extra unemployment would be a very bad thing for those who lose their jobs, while a higher wage would make only a small difference to the happiness of those who remain employed."

Those damn equations again!


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list