2 ms·

>if demand increases but producers don't need to hire people to produce more, employment does not increase. If fishes rode bicycles... but they don't. Product

>if demand increases but producers don't need to hire people to produce more, employment does not increase. If fishes rode bicycles... but they don't. Productivity growth doesn't change that much year over year: http://www.bls.gov/lpc/prodybar.htm http://www.bls.gov/lpc/prodybar.htm And recessions are generally times of low change, since it doesn't make sense to invest in labor-saving technology when labor is cheap. > production need not be correlated with employment. In a speculative robot-filled future, that could be true. On Earth in 2012, if you want something done, you hire a human to do it.

yummyfajitas 14y ago
If fishes rode bicycles... but they don't. Nonsense. Should I post the graphs again? The graphs clearly demonstrate increased production without a corresponding increase in employment. This is the "jobless recovery" that many columnists lament. Some graphs again: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PAYEMS http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PAYEMS http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/INDPRO http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/INDPRO http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPC1 http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPC1 http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MANEMP http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MANEMP http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/IPMAN http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/IPMAN And recessions are generally times of low change, since it doesn't make sense to invest in labor-saving technology when labor is cheap. Labor is more expensive than ever before. Another graph for you to ignore: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ECIWAG http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ECIWAG According to Keynesians (e.g. Krugman), recessions are caused by labor not becoming cheap in response to exogenous shocks (due to sticky nominal wages). Do you disagree with this theory?

yummyfajitas 14y ago

If fishes rode bicycles... but they don't. Nonsense. Should I post the graphs again? The graphs clearly demonstrate increased production without a corresponding increase in employment. This is the "jobless recovery" that many columnists lament. Some graphs again: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PAYEMS http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PAYEMS http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/INDPRO http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/INDPRO http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPC1 http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPC1 http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MANEMP http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MANEMP http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/IPMAN http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/IPMAN And recessions are generally times of low change, since it doesn't make sense to invest in labor-saving technology when labor is cheap. Labor is more expensive than ever before. Another graph for you to ignore: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ECIWAG http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ECIWAG According to Keynesians (e.g. Krugman), recessions are caused by labor not becoming cheap in response to exogenous shocks (due to sticky nominal wages). Do you disagree with this theory?