>In short, false claims about a "lump-of-labor fallacy" are not merely
anti-trade unionist, they attack the full spectrum of socialist and
non-socialist progressive economic thought of the past century and a
half and insist on blind obedience to the peculiar early 19th century
economic dogmas of J.B. Say and Nassau Senior. And these false claims
circulate with ease at the IMF, the OECD, the ILO(!), finance
ministries, first tier economics departments and elite economics
journals everywhere.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't this trivially false? It's obvious to anyone who's ever been around a corporate environment that the work involved in hiring and managing ten half-time workers is considerably greater than hiring and managing five full-timers.
Or is that "obvious fact" another piece of false information?
John A