councilor.org
| Source | Tom Walker |
| Date | 04/03/29/13:58 |
| "While there are no hard local numbers, about 300,000 [sic] jobs nationwide have
been lost since 2000, according to Forrester Research Inc." Well, "while there are no hard numbers," about 10,000,000 jobs have been lost in the U.S. due to excessive hours of work (compared to Europe). Candidate Kerry says he'll create 10,000,000 jobs over 4 years by reducing corporate tax rates. Well, the same number of jobs could be created over the same time frame -- perhaps shorter -- by phasing in a reduction in the average annual hours of work from around 1815 to a more leisurely 1550. The rule of thumb is that about half of a reduction in hours per worker translates into job creation and about half into productivity gains. Imagine, though, the torrent of indignation, outrage and disdain that would issue forth from editorial pages and mainstream economist if a Democratic candidate had the temerity to make such a "ridiculous", "fallacious" and "utterly frivolous" proposal*. The fact that the editorialists and mainstreamers wouldn't know what they were talking about is beside the point -- their ignorance would be unanimous and their unanimity would surmount all uncertainty. *Not to mention "unprecedented." GOP 1932: "We favor the principle of the shorter work week and the shorter work day with its application to Government as well as to private employment, as rapidly and as constructively as conditions will warrant." DEM 1932: "We advocate the spread of employment by a substantial reduction in the hours of labor, the encouragement of the shorter week by applying that principle in government service, |
Copyright (c) 1998, Joongpil Cho