3 years ago our ship sank, me the only survivor.
I was washed up on the shore of a desert island with nothing
Fortunately the island was full of all I needed to survive
Question: What was the first thing I needed to do?
Answer: Find food and water
Question: What did I need to do to find the food?
Answer: Gather it. Do work. Exert myself. Labour
Question: Was that hard to do?
Answer: Not at all. The island had more than enough
Question: Was there anything stopping me?
Answer: No, the land was free to use
So why is it, in the 21st century, in the most wealthy countries in the world, 1 in 6 people who are willing and able to work, cannot find it?
Something must be very wrong at the heart of our social organisation.
Given, that no one has stopped wanting the things made by doing work, the demand for work. And everyone is willing and able to do the work to make those things, the supply of work, clearly JOBCREATION is not needed.
Jobcreationism is the most offensive economic idea I can imagine. It suggests that we need a paternal master to furnish us all with work. Like slaves.
So what is stopping all those people willing and able to work, from finding it? What is preventing the supply of labour from meeting its demand?
There must be something. It must be extremely powerful. Probably the most powerful thing. I'll leave you to go and figure that out.
Whenever you hear someone claiming they are doing "jobcreation", they are probably doing the opposite: Known as Jobcreationism. Using their power to either grant or deny free people the right to work.
These institutions exist both in the private and the welfare state, spanning all political classes. Running from the poorest to the wealthiest. Permeating all society.
Labour does not need protection. The unemployed do not need Jobcreation. Society must restore the equal right of all people to start or stop work by individual choice.
The people need freedom.
So what is holding the abundant fruits of planet earth out of reach of all these unemployed? Who is it that has taken exclusive rights to what nature gives freely to all? And how has the crime been allowed to persist and grow?
To find out, we must forget our petty politics. And go to the root.
15 comments:
haha, good one.
Job creation means taking money and employing labour in creative ways to make a return on the money. Job creation is a side effect of making money. Capital always trumps labour these days. A man cannot serve two masters.
Interesting point. Depends what you mean by capital. Until then I cannot be sure if I agree or disagree.
In other words, matslat, when you say capital do you mean financial capital (aka money) or industrial capital (aka productive assets)?
Or perhaps even -- perish the thought -- land (aka natural resources).
Unemployment is not caused by lack of work, there is always work to do.
It is caused by access to efficiently and cheeply made products and the people producing them paying unemployment benefit to those that are not.
Deniro
"Unemployment is not caused by lack of work, there is always work to do."
Yes this is the point of the post.
"It is caused by access to efficiently and cheeply made products"
This is quite a surprise. Please can you show me how so? Increasing the power to produce goods means the same wealth produced for less labour, a good thing. Or more wealth for the same labour, also a good thing. Can you show me how either prevent people from finding work though?
"and the people producing them paying unemployment benefit to those that are not."
This sounds like circular reasoning. You are stating unemployment as the cause of unemployment. Or have I misread you?
If unemployed people did not have access to food grown by others they would have to grow their own and thus become employed - would they not
if unemployed people did not receive unemployment benfit from those that are receiving cash from producing goods and food they would have to grow their own. and thus become employed - would they not
Deniro wrote: if unemployed people did not receive unemployment benfit from those that are receiving cash from producing goods and food they would have to grow their own. and thus become employed - would they not
And I am sure that all of us agree with that, Deniro. However there's more to it than that. Consider that the unemployed may be in the situation that all suitable land is already owned and used by others. Hence they may end up having to grow their own food and yet being unable to obtain the physical resources needed to do so.
Good point Deniro. Derek has clarified it. Do you see his point?
You are asking all the right questions. But do not stop when you have got so far. Keep going until you have traced the question all the way to the root.
I think by asking at all you are doing that. How can we help you go further and more easily? Just keep asking?
As far as I know agricultural land is cheap. If people want to form communes and buy some I think they can. What I was pointing out, and it is in my original comment, is that production gets concentrated in geographical areas of efficiency and specialisation, then people buy the lowest price goods and then the situation becomes entrenched by the circular transfer of unemployment benefit. Fundamentally People don't need to be unemployed there is no "lack of work." as the post says that is a horrible idea.
Deniro
True. The point we make goes deeper though. Are you willing to go there?
Buying land, excluding others from its use and keeping its increasing value is root of the problem. What if all the land is enclosed. To the city they must go. As slaves. ofrced to do work they do not want to. Or denied work. By the owners of the land. Their masters.
What is wrong with buying things more cheaply. Do you think prices should be higher than nature asks? Do you think that we should do more work than we need to to produce things. Should we make farmers carry sacks of spuds on their backs to make them do more work than they need to to produce food? You seem to be doing "jobcreation" And then saying there is plenty of work. this is a self contradiction if you don't mind me saying, no offence.
I don't quite understand where you are going. May I suggest you consider what it means to have exclusive possession to what nature puts there freely for all people?
Hi Robin my comment 11.20 was a reply to Derick. Didn't see your comment . Blogger Comments interface has been chucking comments and time stamps all over the shop recently. I'll give blogger a few minutes to straighten out.
Oops sorry. Understood.
Have a think abut what is happening to wages too. Why are they always getting depressed. With more productivity. Who is getting all the gain if not the producer?
I agree that Landlords insisting on renumeration in cash money is one factor that leads to the centralization of productivity that must exist before unemployment can exist.
Post a Comment