peace Jim Davis Ozark Bioregion, USA, Planet Gaia check out my books at:http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=141735
--- On Sun, 2/20/11, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
> From: Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Businesses are refusing to hire the unemployed,
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Sunday, February 20, 2011, 11:32 AM
> It seems to me that many (most?
> All?) economic analyses tend to be
> generalizations from somewhat arbitrarily selected data.
> And this not only
> fails to be "scientific" but is rather unconvincing as
> history. (I assume
> that what is misnamed "economics" is a subdivision of
> history, and one
> judges it by the standards of historiography, not
> "science." The premise of
> a special realm of study, "political economy" or
> "economics," is grounded in
> a failure to recognize the core premises of Ellen Meiksins
> Wood's work: the
> separation of "the economic" from "the state" in
> capitalism. That means, as
> someone on this list suggested some months ago, that
> capitalism and
> capitalist society are not identical: i.e., that capitalism
> is embedded in a
> thick ensemble of social relations, most of which (daily
> life, education,
> state power, war and war preparation) are not themselves
> capitalist. Hence
> the context of purely "economic" data is necessarily
> ignored by the
> economist.
>
> Carrol
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org
> [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
> On Behalf Of Jeffrey Fisher
> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 11:12 AM
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Businesses are refusing to hire the
> unemployed,
>
> Well, there's nothing scientific about it at all,
> unfortunately. It's just a
> survey of the people they happen to get, as far as I can
> tell.
>
> The hard truth is that there doesn't seem to be any hard
> data about the
> relative difficulty of landing a job for the employed and
> the unemployed.
> Admittedly, I haven't gone all out to find it, but I would
> expect that if
> there really were something substantive, it wouldn't be
> that hard to find.
> And of course, this period of steep unemployment is a
> particular case and
> wouldn't necessarily apply in a situation where
> unemployment was half or
> less what it is now, with fewer long-term unemployed.
>
> But if there was ever a time to study it, you'd think now
> would be that
> time, wouldn't you?
>
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Jim Farmelant <farmelantj at juno.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This study doesn't seem to control for the amount of
> time and
> > degree of effort that unemployed versus employed job
> seekers
> > put into job searching. Generally, the
> unemployed would seem
> > to have morespare time to devote to job
> searching. Unless,
> > this crucial variable is controlled for, I don't see
> how one
> > can make a meaninguly comparison between the fruits
> of
> > job search efforts by the employed versus those of
> the
> > unemployed.
> >
> > Jim Farmelant
> > http://independent.academia.edu/JimFarmelant
> > www.foxymath.com
> > Learn or Review Basic Math
> >
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>