[lbo-talk] "Labor Freedom" and Unemployment Rates

[tfast]

Anyone else on the list delight in the Irony that the Heritage Foundation
essentially uses Marx's notion of "Free" labour to contstruct their index?
____________________________________
Travis W Fast

>
> <http://stats.oecd.org/WBOS/Default.aspx?QueryName=253&QueryType=View>
> Unemployment Rate
>                      2004  2005  2006
> Iceland            3.1     2.6    2.9
> Norway           4.5(B) 4.6    3.5
> United States  5.5      5.1    4.6
>
> <http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Iceland>
> Labor Freedom  - 69.9%
>
> The labor market operates under relatively flexible employment
> regulations that could be improved to enhance employment and
> productivity growth. The non-salary cost of employing a worker is
> moderate, and dismissing a redundant employee is not difficult.
> Regulations on increasing or contracting the number of work hours are
> rigid.
>
> <http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Norway>
> Labor Freedom - 51.1%
>
> The labor market operates under restrictive employment regulations
> that hinder employment and productivity growth. The non-salary cost of
> employing a worker is moderate, but dismissing a redundant employee is
> relatively costly. A new Working Environment and Worker Protection
> Act, passed in late 2005, mainly maintains the basic principles of a
> 1977 Act and aims to meet the need for flexibility in employment
> contracts and working hour periods.
>
>
<http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=UnitedStates
>
> Labor Freedom - 92.1%
>
> The labor market operates under highly flexible employment regulations
> that enhance overall productivity growth. The non-salary cost of
> employing a worker is low, and dismissing a redundant employee is
> costless.
> --
> Yoshie
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk