Subject: [OPE-L:1876] Re: rising real wages
From: clyder (wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk)
Date: Thu Dec 09 1999 - 09:29:31 EST
Ajit wrote
> Patrick, the time period I'm considering is not 2 to 3 business cycles
but rather even
> more than that (say 7 to 10). I think there is no disagreement on the
issue that
> during a business cycle the real wages goes up and down in accordance with
the up and
> down of the cycle. However, from a secular point of view, an ever
increasing labor
> saving technical change slowly increases the burden of what you call
'joblessness' on
> the labor force which creates the downward pressure on real wages. You
talk about
> secular upswing, downswing or stagnation of the economy. Of course, Adam
Smith (and
> Ricardo as well) does the same. But all these authors agree that for a
developed
> capitalist countries a secular downswing is the only possible scenario;
and that is
> because in a developed capitalist countries the trend of the rate of
profit is to
> decline, and so a fall in the rate of accumulation must take place. Marx,
as you would
> recall, also believed in the fall in the rate of profit. So there is no
scope for a
> secular upswing in his long term scenario--it basically is a downswing
scenario. So
> from your own logic my argument should be correct.
Why should technical change have any bearing on the agregate level of
employment in the economy in the long run?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Sun Dec 12 1999 - 15:45:03 EST