Randall Wray-k langabeziaren arazoari erantzun zuzen eta zehatza eman dio: lanpostu gehiago behar dira1.
Afera ez da konpontzen opor gehiago ordainduz, Dean Baker-ek proposatzen duen moduan2.
Ideia hauxe izango litzateke: baldin eta enplegatu guztiek gutxiago lan egingo balute, enplegatzaileek langabetuak kontratatu beharko lituzkete jadanik enplegatuek produzituko ez luketena, ondartzean atsedena hartzen duten bitartean.
Gauza bat da lan aste laburragoak izatea, baina Joan Robinson ekonomialariak aipatu zuenez, esklabo alokairutan baino txarragoa den gauza bakarra langabetua izatea da.
Lan lekua humanizatzeko helburu aurrerakoi bat izan daiteke lan egun gutxiago lan egitea eta ordaindutako opor gehiago izatea3.
Baina horrek ez du suposatzen langabetuentzako lanpostu gehiago sortuko dituela neurri horrek4.
Arazo sozialak konpon daitezke, irtenbidea zuzena da. Kasurako:
Hunger? Food stamps.
Homelessness? Public housing.
Old age poverty? Social Security.
But Unemployment?
Zer gertatzen da langabeziarekin?
Sasi-irtenbideak:
More vacations. Pay the employed not to work.
Unemployment compensation. Pay the unemployed not to work.
Or, more ludicrously, BIG (basic income guarantee). Pay everyone not to work.
What is missing? Jobs. The unemployed want jobs.
Faltan botatzen dena lanpostuak dira.
Eta sasi-argudioa hauxe da: (AEBn) politikoki ezin daiteke egin.
Zergatik? Oso garestia izango litzatekeelako.
Hala ere, zenbait estimaziok diotenez, Job Guarantte (alegia, Lan Berme) delakoaren kostua, bizitzeko alokairu batekin, BPG-ren %1etik % 3rako tartean dago.
Kongresuaren bitartez, litekeena ote horren gastua gauzatzea?
Noski, baietz.
Wray-k dioenez, soilik Gobernu federalak BPG-ren % 3,4 gastatzen du pobreziaren aurkako programetan5.
Afera, behin eta berriz, lanpostu sortzean datza6.
Kolpe batez, bizitzeko alokairu batekiko Job Guarantee-k ondokoa baztertzen du:the need for most anti-poverty spending. Gainera hauxe segurtatzen du: private sector jobs will pay decent wages. Halaber, politika publiko batzuk baztertzen ditu: the myriad of public policies that impoverish our local governments as they give tax breaks and subsidies trying to bribe corporations to relocate their factories and warehouses.
Baker-ek Alemania aipatzen du7. Baina ez du aipatzen Alemaniaren benetako ‘arrakastaren’ zergatia8: Alemaniak bere langabezia guztia esportatu zuen.
Nora esportatuko luke AEB bere langabezia? Mexikora? Kanadara?9
Depreziazioa?10
R. Wray-k egindako galderak amerikar ekonomialari bati, Europako Konferentzia batean:
-
How many factory jobs do you think we could bring back from China if the RMB appreciated significantly?
-
3 million
-
We need about 25 million jobs
-
Yes but there will be a multiplier—the 3 million factory jobs will create demand for output of other sectors
-
Right, I said; so let us say the effect is double—we get 6 million jobs total. That leaves us 19 million short—give or take some millions. What about the rest?
-
Well, it is a start
-
What about providing a job for everyone who wants to work, at decent pay
-
That’s a nonstarter. With the Republican Congress coming in, you’ll never get that through
-
OK, wait a minute. So you are arguing that we have a better chance of getting the Chinese to appreciate their currency in order to destroy their own manufacturing sector to the benefit of American jobs?
-
Uhhmmm. Yes
-
You mean that the progressive position is that it is better to lobby Chinese politicians to act in the interest of the American people, than it is to attempt to lobby American politicians to act in the interest of their own voters?
-
Uhhmmmm
Hauxe da AEBko aurreratzaileen historia. Bistakoa baztertzen dute, arrakastarako zero aukera daukaten ‘soluzioak’ bilatuz.
Job guarantee, lan bermea, ez da irtenbide erraza. Gogorra da. Oso gogorra. Baina AEBko balioekin adosago dago.
Randall Wray George Lakoff-en zalea da11.
Lakoff aipatuz12, hona zer dioen Wray-k:
Ordaindutako opor gehiago?13
Zergatik ez langabetuek beren lana lortu?14
Ez dago pobreziaren aurkako programa hoberik lan egin nahi dutenentzako lanpostuak baino15.
AEB txinatar politikarien esku uztea ez da inongo soluziorik: Txina industria lanpostu pilo bat galtzen ari da16.
AEBko lan balioekiko ados dauden politikak behar dira17.
Bukatzeko, Wray-k Lakoff-en hitzak aipatzen ditu:
“Make truths matter. Wed truths to values.”
(Pobreziaz eta job guarantee delakoaz, lan bermeaz, ikus, besteak beste, ondoko lana: Pobreziaren aurka, lan postuak, hots, lan bermea: https://www.unibertsitatea.net/blogak/heterodoxia/2014/10/22/pobreziaren-aurka-lan-postuak-hots-lan-bermea/. )
1 Ikus http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2014/12/02/the-answer-to-the-unemployment-problem-is-more-jobs/.
3 Ingelesez: “More time to enjoy one’s family, recreation, and the arts. More time for self-improvement and community involvement. More time for our wage slaves to enjoy the life of leisure long pursued by the leisure classes.”
4Ingelesez: ““Job sharing” as a cure for employment makes as much sense as “sandwich sharing” as a cure for the problem of hunger.”
5 Ingelesez: “… mostly to deal with poverty that is in large measure caused by unemployment, involuntary part-time unemployment, and poverty-level wages paid by the nation’s undertakers like Wal-Mart.”
6 Gainera, “… a job at a living wage would eliminate the need for most social spending plus huge subsidies and tax breaks already paid to businesses–trying to coax them to create a job or two.”
7 Ingelesez: “Baker points to Germany as an example of the successful use of work-sharing to prevent unemployment from rising. The government pushes firms to reduce hours worked by employees, and then makes up lost wages by essentially using funds that would have gone to pay unemployment benefits. As a result, Germany’s unemployment rate is only 5%–obviously very much lower than the average rate across all of its EMU neighbors.”
8 Ingelesez: “Nice story, but Baker ignores the real reason for Germany’s success. Germany has pursued the most ruthless “beggar thy neighbor” policy the world has ever seen. It has held its own wages constant since unification, destroying industrial production throughout the rest of the EMU. In other words, Germany simply exported all of its unemployment.”
9 Ingelesez: “This will be much harder since they have not joined a US Dollar Union. Germany’s advantage is that its neighbors cannot depreciate their currencies since they’ve adopted the same Euro.”
10 Ingelesez: “… in many of his pieces, Baker mentions dollar depreciation as a possible solution to America’s unemployment problems. The idea is that if the dollar fell against the Euro and the Chinese RMB, we could capture some of the prized manufacturing jobs.”
11 Ikus http://www.truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/27576-george-lakoff-progressives-cannot-succeed-without-expressing-respect-values.
12 Ingelesez: “Cognitive scientists study how people really think – how brains work, how we get ideas out of neurons, how framing and metaphorical thought work, the link between language and thought, and so on. But other academic fields have not been using these results, especially, political science, public policy, law, economics, in short, the main areas studied by progressives who go into politics. As a result, they teach an inadequate view of reason and “rationality.” They miss the fact that our brains are structured by hundreds of conceptual metaphors and frames early in life, that we can only understand what our brains allow, and that conservatives and progressives have acquired different brain circuitry with the consequence that their normal modes of reason are different. What progressives call “rational arguments” are not normal modes of real reason. What counts as a “rational argument” is not the same for progressives and conservatives.”
13 Ingelesez: “More paid vacations as a solution to our unemployment problem might seem “rational” to a progressive, but it violates “normal modes of reason”. How is taking more paid vacations contributing to our community? Why should government pay for your extra vacations?”
14 Ingelesez: “Why won’t the unemployed go out and get their own jobs, rather than forcing me to share mine? How do I know my employer won’t just make me do 40 hours of work in 25 hours? What if Congress reneges on the promise to make up my lost pay? And what if my employer likes you more than me, so that I get sacked and you get my full-time job?
So here’s my puzzlement. Why won’t progressives try to help develop the moral framing to support jobs-for-all? At decent wages.”
15 Ingelesez: “There is no better anti-poverty program than jobs for those who want to work. Offering a job is a hand-up not a hand-out. Working promotes community. It allows for shared prosperity. We all benefit when everyone works. It is consistent with American values.
We have a half-century of experience with hand-outs instead of hand-ups. Hand-outs have not reduced poverty. If anything, poverty is worse. Inequality is worse. Joblessness is worse.
Hand-outs are not consistent with American values. Hand-outs come with strings attached. Means testing. Drug tests. Sanctions on children. And hand-outs are always kept meagre, consistent with American values.”
16 Ingelesez: “Putting our nation’s fate in the hands of Chinese politicians is not an answer, either. Truthfully, I do not believe the manufacturing jobs will come back to the US, no matter how high the RMB goes. China is losing millions of manufacturing jobs, too. There will always be a lower cost producer. And it won’t be the USA. In any event, robots take away more jobs than Chinese ever will.”
17 Ingelesez: “We need policies consistent with American values of work, initiative, self-sufficiency, and productivity. We need policies that promote community-building. We need policies that are within the sovereign power of our own nation—which do not require other nations to operate against their own self-interest. We need policies that can be supported by progressives and conservatives alike. We need to find common ground.”
