Sunday, April 4, 2010

Full Employment

The active pursuit of full employment through varied government policies is associated with Keynesian economics and marked the former agenda of many Western nations, until neo-liberalism took hold.
Australia was the first country in the world in which full employment in a free society was made official policy by its government. On May 30, 1945, The Australian Labor Party Prime Minister John Curtin and his Employment Minister John Dedman proposed a white paper in the Australian House of Representatives titled Full Employment In Australia, the first time any government apart Communists had unequivocally committed itself to providing work for any person who was willing and able to work. Conditions of full employment lasted in Australia from 1941 to 1975. This had been preceded by the Harvester Judgment (1907), establishing a living wage; while this earlier case was overturned, it remained influential.
The Job Guarantee (JG) is an economic policy proposal aimed at providing a sustainable solution to the dual problems of inflation and unemployment. Its aim is to create full employment and price stability. It is also referred to as employer of last resort (ELR)
The economic policy stance currently dominant around the world uses unemployment as a policy tool to control inflation; when cost pressures rise, the standard monetary policy carried out by the banks) tightens interest rates, creating a buffer stock of unemployed people, which reduces wage demands, and ultimately inflation. When inflationary expectations subside, these people will get their jobs back. In Marxian terms, the unemployed serve as a reserve army of labor. By contrast, in a job guarantee program, a buffer stock of employed people (employed in the job guarantee program) provides the same protection against inflation without the social costs of unemployment, Fulfilling the dual mandate of full employment and price stability
full employability whereby governments engage in programs to prepare the unemployed for work without guaranteeing that work will be available towards a focus on creating enough work. The full employability agenda has come under fire from a number of sources in recent years
Wage slavery refers to a situation where a person is dependent for a livelihood on the wages earned, especially if the dependency is total and immediate. The term is used to draw an analogy between slavery and wage labor. Some uses of the term may refer only to a situation of inequality between labor and capital," particularly where workers are paid unreasonably low wages . More controversially, others equate it with a lack of workers' self-management or point to similarities between owning and employing a person, and extend the term to cover a wide range of employment relationships in a hierarchical social environment with limited job-related choices (e.g. working for a wage under threat of starvation, poverty or social relegation).
Working poor is a term used to describe individuals and families who maintain regular employment but remain in relative poverty due to low levels of pay and dependent expenses. The working poor are often distinguished from paupers, poor who are supported by government aid or charity.
Living wage is a term used to describe the minimum hourly wage necessary for shelter (housing and incidentals such as clothing and other basic needs) and nutrition for a person for an extended period of time (lifetime). In developed countries such as the United Kingdom or Switzerland, this standard generally means that a person working forty hours a week, with no additional income, should be able to afford a specified quality or quantity of housing, food, utilities, transport, health care, and recreation.
This concept differs from the minimum wage in that the latter is set by law and may fail to meet the requirements of a living wage. It differs somewhat from basic needs in that the basic needs model usually measures a minimum level of consumption, without regard for the source of the income.
basic income is granted independent of other income (including salaries) and wealth, with no other requirement than citizenship. This is a special case of BIG/UI, based on varied goals. While most modern countries have some form of guaranteed minimum income, a basic income is rare. Only the Alaska Dividend exists here, and pays $1000 a year. It is not very sufficient.
A basic income is a proposed system of social security, that periodically provides each citizen with a sum of money that is sufficient to live on. Except for citizenship, a Basic Income is entirely unconditional. There is no means test; the richest as well as the poorest citizens would receive it. In The USA it is possible to give each person $30,000
A basic income is often proposed in the form of a citizen's dividend (a transfer) or a negative income tax (a guarantee). A basic income less than the social minimum is referred to as a partial basic income. (there should be one for poor teens who have no access to a part time job.)
A worldwide basic income, typically including income redistribution between nations, is known as a global basic income.
In many ways a BIG or Universal Income would change social situations and circumstances so no one is stuck in an adverse situation. It would also help people create there own jobs and business thusly stimulating the economy.
In essence, a Living Wage, 32 hour work week. The end of mindless mind numbing jobs replacing with meaningful jobs should be the agenda of all political forces. These forces are being widely ignored even by liberal elements. In which case the Conservative elements of slave labor and wage slavery still exist. With a restructuring society for affordability rather than the corporate profits, only then can the world change


  1. Glad to hear. Thanks for sharing about full employment. I tried this. It gives the mentioned benefits.

  2. Very informative post. I must say that elements you put here look awesome. Keep up the good works.