5 ms·

Krugman's trying to juggle two contradictory viewpoints: one (the Luddite view) holds that the purpose of work is to have something to do. The Luddite petition

by bcoates 13y ago

Krugman's trying to juggle two contradictory viewpoints: one (the Luddite view) holds that the purpose of work is to have something to do. The Luddite petition is arguing that allowing these people to fall into idleness simply because there is a more effective machine to do their job will be toxic to society. This is somewhat confused by the Luddites also throwing out a lot of half-baked economic arguments, but those can be safely ignored in hindsight. Krugman then proposes a solution from an entirely opposite viewpoint: that the purpose of work is to produce useful things, and if the constant disruption of jobs is the cost of efficiency, we should just give the affected a handout to provide for their needs. But because the guaranteed income doesn't solve the Luddite's complaint, it misses the point entirely.

guelo 13y ago
Where do you get that the Luddites' only complaint was having something to do? “How are those men, thus thrown out of employ to provide for their families?” asked the petitioners.
- bcoates 13y ago
  They answer their own question: with a retraining process that will leave their children behind as untrained bums. They semi-accurately predict a future where employment is sufficiently fluid that nobody is securely enough situated at a job that they can train their children into it.
dllthomas 13y ago
Tangentially, I'd like to note that giving affected people a handout is not only providing for their needs, it's also making sure there are people with the money to buy my products.
- marcosdumay 13y ago
  What good comes to you from "them buying your goods" if you just gave them the money they are paying you? Of course, the good comes from not making them suffer, keeping things calm, having a sfety, getting an overall civilized society out of the deal. But that's not the kind of benefit implicit on your phrase (or in the Ford's original). Oh, and yes, there is one benefit that is not dependent on the price you pay for it. It'll make it possible for lots of people - that otherwise would just starve - to work into making the world a better place (for profit or not). But again, it's at least not obvious that you mean this, and it's obvious that the original didn't.
  - dllthomas 13y ago
    If I have already been successful and paying a disproportionate chunk of the taxes that are going to these people, then it perhaps doesn't do me a tremendous amount of good (directly). If I'm starting a business, it does me a tremendous amount of good for my customers to have money enough.

by bcoates 13y ago

guelo 13y ago

Where do you get that the Luddites' only complaint was having something to do? “How are those men, thus thrown out of employ to provide for their families?” asked the petitioners.

bcoates 13y ago
They answer their own question: with a retraining process that will leave their children behind as untrained bums. They semi-accurately predict a future where employment is sufficiently fluid that nobody is securely enough situated at a job that they can train their children into it.

dllthomas 13y ago

Tangentially, I'd like to note that giving affected people a handout is not only providing for their needs, it's also making sure there are people with the money to buy my products.

marcosdumay 13y ago
What good comes to you from "them buying your goods" if you just gave them the money they are paying you? Of course, the good comes from not making them suffer, keeping things calm, having a sfety, getting an overall civilized society out of the deal. But that's not the kind of benefit implicit on your phrase (or in the Ford's original). Oh, and yes, there is one benefit that is not dependent on the price you pay for it. It'll make it possible for lots of people - that otherwise would just starve - to work into making the world a better place (for profit or not). But again, it's at least not obvious that you mean this, and it's obvious that the original didn't.
- dllthomas 13y ago
  If I have already been successful and paying a disproportionate chunk of the taxes that are going to these people, then it perhaps doesn't do me a tremendous amount of good (directly). If I'm starting a business, it does me a tremendous amount of good for my customers to have money enough.