« Immigration & irrationalism | Main | Miliband's message »

March 27, 2013

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451cbef69e2017d4253e490970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Why is the middle squeezed?:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Luis Enrique

Sam Bowles' textbook Microeconomics has some very good chapters on the technology of worker control and its implications.

Andrew

Sam Bowles' textbook looks like a total abandonment of classical microeconomics, which has to be a good thing. Is this a fair impression?

FromArseToElbow

Labour's treatment of the "squeezed middle" as a political rather than an industrial issue is the correlate of the lack of union militancy.

To shift the debate from the spectral form of rhetoric to the concrete realm of real jobs would risk either inflaming militancy and/or alienating some of the self-identifying squeezed middle.

Labour's problem isn't a conceptual failure to situate the middle, but a cynical attempt to construct a media trope.

Greg vP

Why is the middle squeezed? Most of the discussion about this issue ignores the role of demand. (Richard Florida is a rare exception with his recent piece in the Chronicle of Higher Education.)

Over the last several decades the demand for leisure and hospitality services and for healthcare, particularly low-paid healthcare such as care in the home, has increased steadily. The demand for manufactured goods has decreased in relative terms.

Given the increase in demand for low-productivity services and the corresponding decline in demand for high-productivity manufactured goods, it's hardly surprising that both productivity and wages are stagnating.

To be sure, employers in other industries are exploiting their market power. But the root of the problem is this change in demand. I recommend reading Florida's piece: http://chronicle.com/article/Robots-Arent-the-Problem-/138007/

Luis Enrique

Andrew,

yes and no. In chapter 1, available here

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/p7610.pdf

he discusses where his approach departs from what he calls the Walrasian paradigm, but also says he "retains many of [its] fundamental tenets"

www.aquaristhub.com

This site definitely has all the information I wanted about
this subject and didn't know who to ask.

Anonymous

Am afraid I have nothing of value to add to this particular theme.

However, I would like to say that the photograph of the bonny looking lass gladdens my old and jaundiced heart.

click here

i don't understand it

product technology

I will be looking for advice on the best way to boost the amount of remarks on my own blog, how would you reach your goals in doing this?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad