Re: Full Employment is what?

[Sven R Larson <larson@xxxxxx>]

Bruce McFarling wrote:
>
> Workfare is: "We have the right to withhold welfare payments,
> so we are going to demand that you do some work"  "We" are
> the "get tough on welfare bludgers" politicos.
>
> ELR is: "We cannot find a job and we demand that you fulfill
> your guarantee and provide one."  "We" are people who do
> not find a job available in the private sector.
>
> Under workfare, they aren't jobs at wages, but just an
> additional requirement to hold onto existing welfare
> entitlements.
>
> Under ELR, a new entitlement is created.
>
> Where workfare is tied to *unemployment* benefits, then
> ELR eliminates the workfare by eliminating the need for
> the unemployment benefits.  At least wherever unemployment
> benefits are tied to looking for an failing to find a job,
> the "failing to find a job" part would be eliminated.

I have no problem with this. What I'm trying to say is that every time a
job guarantee program is proposed it has to be combined with a strong
advocacy of preserved welfare programs. Otherwise you end up in true
workfare since politicians see they can get cheap labor for the public
sector by preserving welfare payments at their current - or perhaps
lower - level and forcing recipients to work.

To be politically tactical, I think job guarantee programs should not be
on a Keynesian agenda. The reason is that there are too many
budget-balancing politicians around to make sure ELR etc. isn't
converted into workfare. It is better to spend time and media space on
fighting budget balancing. Once that battle is won the job guarantee
will have a healthier life.

/srl

--
Sven R Larson
PhD; Assistant professor of economics
Department of Social Sciences, Bldg. 22.2
Roskilde University
Pb 260
DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
Phone: (+45) 4674 2910