[lbo-talk] OWS Demands working group: jobs for all!

shag carpet bomb shag at cleandraws.com
Tue Oct 25 14:47:37 PDT 2011


I think you're right. At least when I think about how happy I was not working when I had an income and a social role considering meaningful - plus plenty of work to be done. You could study whether women and men in Sweden who take child care leave for a year or two are unhappy because they are unable to work all day long *and* go home and cook, clean, do laundry.

In other words, when the role they take on is considered an acceptable social alternative and their income doesn't decline and their power in a relationship doesn't suffer, I'm guessing health effects are the same, maybe better? At the very least I imagine people's health doesn't suffer that much in Sweden when they take off a year or two to raise children.


> I said I hoped that somebody would tell me something I didn't know.
> You guys
> aren't.
>
> It makes perfect sense that unemployment would have these effects in a
> North
> American or European society infested with a bourgie morality of labor
> (a
> "Protestant ethic," Weber said, although I have my doubts about that).
> Indeed, it could hardly be otherwise. Such false consciousness is
> obviously
> part of both our specific equations here and the problems we're
> discussing
> more broadly. I'm inclined to think there's no way out except through
> it,
> but won't argue the point now.
>
> Find those same effects in a society without that particular bourgie
> morality and I'll be more impressed. It isn't as if such societies are
> difficult to locate (*cough* office hours in Arab countries *cough*).
> You
> may very well be able to; I'm not arguing for a thesis here, but
> rather
> pointing out that your thesis is far from established.
>
> I wouldn't lean too heavily on my own experience - anecdotal
> impressions are
> generally crap - but I'm currently living in a territory with a 45.2%
> unemployment rate, and I simply don't see your claims at work here.
> But
> prove that the effects of unemployment you describe are inherent to
> the
> situation itself, rather than its cultural context, and I'll admit you
> were
> right.
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 2:52 PM, SA <s11131978 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/25/2011 8:38 AM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>>
>> NEW MEASURES OF THE COSTS OF UNEMPLOYMENT: EVIDENCE FROM THE
>> SUBJECTIVE
>>> WELL-BEING OF 2.3 MILLION AMERICANS John F. Helliwell Haifang Huang
>>> Working
>>> Paper 16829
>>> http://www.nber.org/papers/**w16829<http://www.nber.org/papers/w16829>,,,
>>>
>>
>> Or, if you just want a factoid:
>>
>>
>> https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/econ/Durlauf/networkweb1/London/frustratedachievers.pdf
>>
>
> --
> "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure
> mægen
> lytlað."
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>

-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list