Warren Mosler, beste zenbait arlotan bezalaxe, aspaldian hasi zen lan bermeaz eta ELR-z (Employer of Last Resort) idazten[1].
Eztabaida ere egon da lan bermeaz[2] (Job Guarantee, JB delakoaz).
Interesgarriena, alta, DTM-koek berek esaten dutena dateke.
Hona zer dioen Stephanie Kelton[3]:
(i) JB-k ez du eskaintzen betiko gobernu lanpostu bat, lanpostua behin-behinekoa da.
(ii) Aukera bat da oinarrizko errenta baten truke, naiz eta sektore pribatuan ez egon zerbitzu horretarako inongo eskaintzarik[4].
Warren Mosler-ek dioena[5]:
(a) ‘Estatu monetarekin’ beti egon da, da, eta egongo da stock politika indargetzaile bat.
(b) ‘Employed/jg/elr’ aukeratzen dut, zeren hobe funtzionatzen baitu stock indargetzaile gisa.
(c) Beraz, JG delakoa aukera bat da.
Are gehiago[6]:
(d) DTM-k erakusten du nola halabeharrez nolabaiteko stock indargetzaile batek funtzionatzen duela estatuak, zergak gidaturiko monetarekin.
(e) DTM-k erakusten du nola stock indargetzaile batek edo beste batek ondorioak aldatzen dituen[7].
(f) DTM-k erakusten du nola ‘employed buffer stock/jg/elr’ delako batek helburu publikoa zerbitzatzen duen, enplegu osoko eta prezio egonkortasuneko helburu gisa definituz, beste stock indargetzaileek egiten ez dutena.
(g) Gehiago, hori guztia ezagututa, nahi duzun stock indargetzailea aukera dezakezu, bakoitzak bere ondorioekin: hori ere DTM-k erakusten du.
Gehiago hemen[8]:
(h) JG-k helburu publikoa lortzen du langabetutako stock indargetzaile batek baino.
(i) Trikimailua honelako da: eskari agregatua nahiko altua edukitzea JG nahikoa izateko.
Zehaztuz[9]:
(j) Nik proposaturiko 8 dolar/orduko JG alokairua gutxi gorabehera egungo langabeziaren diru-laguntzaren bezalakoa da edo are gutxiagokoa.
(k) Nahiz eta langabeziaren diru-laguntzarik gabe, JG-rekin norberak bere denbora saldu behar du ordaindua izateko. JG-ren eta sektore pribatuko enpleguaren hedaduraren merkatuaren finkapenak segurtatzen du eta egokituko du segitzeko aseguratzen jaitsiera nahiko negatiboa dela jendeak serioski bere lana mantentzen gordetzeko. Beste aldetik, JG gordailuaren existentziak enplegatzaileak lasai mantenduko ditu eta afera beharrezko gisa ordezkatu dezakete ‘hedadura’ ordaintzen ere[10].
(l) Gainera, enpresarentzat ere garrantzitsua da, gai izateko langileak kontratatzeko, berak horrela handitu nahi duenean alokairuak gorantz bultzatu gabe.
(m) Datuei buruz, ikus Argentinako JEFES programa[11].
Gehiago link honetan[12] eta motibazioari buruz hemen[13] gehiago.
Eta bukatzeko[14]:
(n) Langabetuak sektore publikoan daude, beraz, % 5 langabeziatik, demagun, % 3 langabeziara joanez, JG-k sektore publikoaren tamaina murrizten du.
Hori gutxi balitz, Mosler-ek elkarrizketa batean[15] argi uzten du Mosler-ek lan bermea DTM-ren muinean dagoela.
Hona hemen elkarrizketa horren punturik garrantzitsuenak:
(1) Ez dago irtenbiderik onenik prezio egonkortasun eta enplegu osorako.
(2) JG-k ‘produktibitate osoa’ eta bizitza estandarrak bultzatzen ditu askoz hobeto langabeziak baino.
(3) JG stock indargetzailea finantzatzeko gobernu gastuak ez du murrizten beste lekuetan gastatzeko gaitasuna. Izatez, gaitasun hori handitzen du.
(4) Beldur erreala etortzen da eskari agregatuaren gabeziako denboran, eta ebidentzia langabeziaren igoera da.
(5) JG-k enplegagarritasuna gordetzen du, eta beraz, sektore pribatuko hazkundea sustatzen du askoz hobeto langabeziak baino, ‘azken baliabideko enplegu agentzia’ moduan arituz.
[1] Ikus http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/full-employment-and-price-stability/. Halaber, ikus http://www.epicoalition.org/docs/exchange_rate_policy_and_full_em.htm.
[4] S. Kelton-ek dioenez, “Warren used to tell the story of the dog and the bones to make the point: Burry 95 bones in a field and send 100 dogs out to look for them. The best possible outcome is that 95 dogs return with bones. The more likely outcome is that some of the dogs (because they are more skilled or just luckier) return with more than one bone. The dogs without bones are like workers without jobs. No matter how much training they receive or how much discipline you impose upon them, you will never succeed in bringing all 100 dogs home with a bone. Like jobs, there just aren’t enough of them.”
[7] ikus http://www.moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/full-employment-and-price-stability/ eta http://moslereconomics.com/2010/10/04/exchange-rate-policy-and-full-employment/.
[10] Ingelesez: “… and the existence of a shovel ready jg pool will keep employers confident that they can replace as necessary by paying the ‘spread’ as well. That is, this is about a market solution for the right two way incentive.
And the fear factor goes both ways for workers. They may not fear the fall as much as if there was no JG, but at the same time there are shovel ready JG workers nipping at their heals for their job.”
[13] Ikus http://pragcap.com/the-evolution-of-mmt/comment-page-3#comment-94560.
Ingelesez: “ … motivation won’t be lost with a jg safety net/buffer stock vs unemployment as a buffer stock. (…)At the micro level anecdotal evidence is easy to find, but at the macro level that argument does’t make sense as anything but a kind of fallacy of composition.”
joseba says:
(in Britain continues to look like a failed state: http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=24367)
Remember my epithet – The unemployed cannot find jobs that are not there!.
And never forget the following Case Study.
Case study: the parable of 100 dogs and 92 bones
Imagine a small community comprising 100 dogs. Each morning they set off into the field to dig for bones. If there enough bones for all buried in the field then all the dogs would succeed in their search no matter how fast or dexterous they were.
Now imagine that one day the 100 dogs set off for the field as usual but this time they find there are only 92 bones buried.
Some dogs who were always very sharp dig up two bones as usual and others dig up the usual one bone. But, as a matter of accounting, at least 8 dogs will return homebone-less.
Now imagine that the government decides that this is unsustainable and decides that it is the skills and motivation of the bone-less dogs that is the problem. They are not skilled enough. They are idlers, bludgers and “bone-shy”.
So a range of dog psychologists and dog-trainers are called into to work on the attitudes and skills of the bone-less dogs. The dogs undergo assessment and are assigned case managers. They are told that unless they train they will miss out on their nightly bowl of food that the government provides to them while bone-less. They feel despondent.
Anyway, after running and digging skills are imparted to the bone-less dogs things start to change. Each day as the 100 dogs go in search of 92 bones, we start to observe different dogs coming back bone-less. The bone-less queue seems to become shuffled by the training programs.
However, on any particular day, there are still 100 dogs running into the field and only 92 bones are buried there!
You can find pictorial version of the parable here (for international readers this version was very geared to labour market policy under the previous federal regime in Australia and was written around 2001). I first screened this at a presentation that preceded a talk by Tony Abbot, the then Federal Employment Minister now Opposition leader gave at the University as my guest.
In the UK there are about 92 bones for every 100 dogs and in Spain 72 bones for every 100 dogs!
joseba says:
“The parable of 100 dogs and 92 bones” – Why the Work Programme can’t work
(https://alittleecon.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/the-parable-of-100-dogs-and-92-bones-why-the-work-programme-cant-work/)
Today’s Billy Blog is another must read, on the state of austerity-age Britain. In it he includes his ‘parable of 100 dogs and 92 bones’. I’ve used this before on this blog, but this is a better version of it, so it’s worth recounting, as it’s a perfect allusion to Governments’ obsession with ‘back-to-work’ schemes and why they can never succeed on their own. The Coalition’s failing Work Programme is a perfect example of this.
“Case study: the parable of 100 dogs and 92 bones
Imagine a small community comprising 100 dogs. Each morning they set off into the field to dig for bones. If there enough bones for all buried in the field then all the dogs would succeed in their search no matter how fast or dexterous they were.
Now imagine that one day the 100 dogs set off for the field as usual but this time they find there are only 92 bones buried.
Some dogs who were always very sharp dig up two bones as usual and others dig up the usual one bone. But, as a matter of accounting, at least 8 dogs will return home bone-less.
Now imagine that the government decides that this is unsustainable and decides that it is the skills and motivation of the bone-less dogs that is the problem. They are not skilled enough. They are idlers, bludgers and “bone-shy”.
So a range of dog psychologists and dog-trainers are called into to work on the attitudes and skills of the bone-less dogs. The dogs undergo assessment and are assigned case managers. They are told that unless they train they will miss out on their nightly bowl of food that the government provides to them while bone-less. They feel despondent.
Anyway, after running and digging skills are imparted to the bone-less dogs things start to change. Each day as the 100 dogs go in search of 92 bones, we start to observe different dogs coming back bone-less. The bone-less queue seems to become shuffled by the training programs.
However, on any particular day, there are still 100 dogs running into the field and only 92 bones are buried there!”
Bill concludes with:
“In the UK there are about 92 bones for every 100 dogs and in Spain 72 bones for every 100 dogs!
The point is that fallacies of composition* are rife in mainstream macroeconomics reasoning and have led to very poor policy decisions in the past.
There are simply not enough jobs.”
* Fallacies of composition are very common in discussions of economics. It basically means – what’s true for an individual isn’t always true for a whole group of individuals. An example of this would be the argument that cutting the minimum wage will increase the number of jobs available. While for a single firm, if wages could be cut, that might enable the firm to hire more people, if they are cut across all firms, then workers will be able to buy less stuff, so less will be produced, meaning less workers are needed. David Cameron saying everyone should pay off their credit card bills is another example. Good for the individual, bad if everyone does it at the same time.
joseba says:
One hundred dogs and 94 bones
(http://e1.newcastle.edu.au/coffee/pubs/briefs/dogs/dogs_and_bones.cfm)
nce upon a time there was a small community comprising 100 dog bone-winners and their families. Each morning for as long as anyone can remember the 100 dogs set off into the field to dig for bones to bring back home to their families. The government’s bone policy was designed to ensure that there were always enough bones for all the bone-winners to succeed in their search and no dog families went without a bone. The community was secure, young dogs were happy and well prepared to take over the bone-winner’s role when the older dogs retired. There was no bone-stealing and all the bone-winners always had an incentive to get up each day to dig for the bones that were buried in the field each night.
Each morning, the bone-winners would groom themselves with pride and head off to the field. You could see how keen they were to get on the road and go and dig for bones (see picture to right). One day the 100 dog bone-winners set off for the field and when they arrived they found there were only 94 bones buried. Some dogs who were always very sharp dug up two bones as usual, others dug up the usual one bone. However, as a matter of accounting, at least 6 dog bone-winners returned home to their families that day bone-less. There was initial despair but because this had never happened before the bone-less families pulled together and ensured that their bone-winner maintained spirit and arose earlier than usual next morning and spent the extra time grooming and getting prepared for the day in the field.
But the pattern set in and the next day the 100 dogs set out to dig for 94 bones. They searched vigorously but only 94 bones were in the field. The situation started to get desperate and the government bone policy took a sharp turn and started to focus on the motivation of the bone-seekers who were bone-less.
Consultants were called in – dog psychologists and dog-trainers – to work on the attitudes of the bone-less dogs. Initially there was resistance because the dogs didn’t feel that they were to blame. 100 dogs but only 94 bones. The Bone Network was established by BoneCentre to provide various programs designed to help the bone-less dogs get back into bone-winning shape and organisations sprung up all over the small community to offer Bone Network services. The bone-less dogs began to hear new terms like bone-seekers and the staff in the Bone Network provider offices often called them clients. As time went by changes continued and each bone-less dog (and by now more than 25 per cent of them had been in that state for over 52 weeks) had to attend the nearest Bone Network office and be classified by the Bone Seeker Classification Instrument (BSCI). One dog was asked about the assessment process undertaken in the BSCI interview by the BoneCentre officer. The dog replied that the BoneCentre officer had a big sheet and put down numbers. Every time the dog fidgeted a bit a bad score under the heading “observable behaviours” was noted. The bone-less dog was considered a problem if they were “too quiet”, or “too loud”, or “talked over”, or used “inappropriate or aggressive language”, “talked incessantly”, showed a “lack of insight”, had “unusual dress”, “inappropriate make-up application”, and “shaked, paced, twitched, trembled” and almost any other sign of nervousness that accompanied their bone-less state.
The young dogs in the dog-school yards started using new words to describe the dog-parents who were bone-less. One bone-less dog heard his young pup using terminology like Bone Snobs in the back dog-yard one evening and the dog was filled with despair and self-hate. You could clearly observe the change in the grooming and bearing of the bone-less dogs. Once proud now forlorn. Some of them became ill while others found their families were no longer the happy places as they had previously been. The dog divorce rate increased. The typical vibrant nightly family discussions that came after the day’s bone digging were now marked with a sense of purposelessness and the whole bone-less dog-family was affected. BoneCentre also introduced a new scheme designed to ensure that the bone-less dogs earned the survival bones that were given to them. This became known as the very popular Dig For The Bone program and BoneCentre officials talked endlessly about compliance and mutual obligation. One bone-less dog muttered that mutual was like a tango – it needed two parties to be successful.
BoneCentre also commissioned a major consultant’s report which identified eight bone seeker segments, which reflected the bone-seeker’s level of motivation towards the bone search activity. A complex diagram summarised the eight segments. Only one of these segments was focused on by the community’s media next day. It identified Cruising Bone Seekers who were described as being relaxed about being bone-less and didn’t really want to return to the field and had stopped going out to the field each day. The terminology quickly entered the kid’s dog-school yard jargon. Any dog walking down the street during the hours when they would normally be digging in the field were taunted with the term. But there were still 100 dogs willing to dig each day and only 94 bones. BoneCentre published a monthly Bone-Less rate and this became contentious because the definition of being bone-less excluded those who didn’t go out to the field each day. The same dogs had always gone out and would again but they understood the equation – 100 dogs 94 bones. BoneCentre said that the Bone-Less rate was around 3 per cent and would drop further once the benefits of the Bone Network were realised.
Some of the help given by the Bone Network helped make some individuals more motivated and aggressive and so subtle changes were noticed in the composition of the bone-less dogs at the end of each day. But no matter how many resources BoneCentre pumped into the Bone Network, there were still many dogs who remained bone-less day in day out. They steadily lost their pride and their appearance became increasingly worrying (see a typical Long-Term Bone-Less Dog to the right). The rate of bone theft rose dramatically and dog prisons started to grow at a faster rate than dog schools as the government rallied the community around law and order issues.
However, whichever way you counted the bone-less rate there were 100 dogs wanting to go to the field each day and only 94 bones were buried there.
100 dogs and 94 bones.
THE END
Thanks to Phillip Harvey for inspiration. Ideal for children as a bed-time story. It teaches them about their future.
joseba says:
Citizens’ Media TV ?? @citizensmediatv
(https://twitter.com/citizensmediatv/status/1081753781140885504)
This is a children’s story called “The 100 Dogs And the 94 Bones,” by @wbmosler. It’s parable of how our government used to guarantee a job for all Americans, but now chooses not to. The consequences of this decision are dire – for the people. http://e1.newcastle.edu.au/coffee/pubs/briefs/dogs/dogs_and_bones.cfm …
2019 urt. 5
Elkarrizketa berria
1. Citizens’ Media TV
?? @citizensmediatv urt. 6
Involuntary unemployment causes poverty, crime, drug use, sickness, and social exclusion. It “scars” the unemployed, who become less and less hire-able as time goes on.
Citizens’ Media TV
?? @citizensmediatv urt. 6
It also creates a “buffer stock of the unemployed,” which corporations use as a tool to threaten employees who attempt to stand up. “There are a thousand people waiting in line, ready to take your place. Keep trying to demand better. I dare you.”
Citizens’ Media TV
?? @citizensmediatv urt. 6
A little bit of employment causes a lot of pain for *all* the people. The government could employ everyone within a few months if they wanted, and it would not be inflationary or require any raised taxes.
Citizens’ Media TV
?? @citizensmediatv urt. 6
In fact, a Federal Job Guarantee would be one of the most powerful tools to guard AGAINST inflation and recessions (& poverty!). If a FJG we’re in place in 2008, the recession would have been maybe ten percent of what it was, & the recovery would have been months, not a *decade*.
Erantzun 1 Bertxio 1 Atsegin 1
Citizens’ Media TV
?? @citizensmediatv urt. 6
This story is good way to introduce macroeconomics, neoliberalism, and austerity to your kids. I just read it to, and talked about it with my 12 year old. #LearnMMT
Citizens’ Media TV
?? @citizensmediatv urt. 6
Citizens’ Media TV
??(e)k Bertxiotua Citizens’ Media TV ?
?
Citizens’ Media TV
?
?(e)k gehitu du,
Citizens’ Media TV
?
? @citizensmediatv
If you want to learn how the economy ACTUALLY works, as opposed to what our corrupt politicians, media, and “experts” want you to believe, here’s a full lesson, Twitter tutorial (with many expert sources at the end), and a recent interview on the subject. https://twitter.com/citizensmediatv/status/1053973840605396992?s=21 …
Citizens’ Media TV
?? @citizensmediatv urt. 6
(Search terms for this thread: MMT dogs bones unemployment problem Warren Mosler)