3 ms·

Yes, that's more or less the lump of labor fallacy. I'm still not sure why it's relevant here. Here's the full quote from the nytimes article: "Some countrie

by geebee 12y ago

Yes, that's more or less the lump of labor fallacy. I'm still not sure why it's relevant here. Here's the full quote from the nytimes article: "Some countries have developed policies that encourage older people to leave the labor force, so they do not “crowd out” younger workers. But studies across countries and time suggest that crowding-out may not actually be a problem. Economies do not appear to have a fixed number of jobs. When more older people are working, they are earning money that they will then spend in ways that may create more jobs for young people, for example." So in this case, I don't disagree with you, but it seems that the times article identifies the lump of labor fallacy immediately after the quote you provided.

IndianAstronaut 12y ago
>still not sure why it's relevant here. I think it is important to point out because so few people still know about it. If few people know about it, they are likely to support harmful policies that they think will help the economy or job creation, but will not.
- geebee 12y ago
  Oh, I agree, I'm just not sure why you felt it was necessary to point it out when the article had already done just that. I don't really see what your comment ads. Were you worried that people had only read the first sentence in the middle of the article and stopped there, not reading the next sentence? In the other case - our previous discussion, I explained how I though you had misapplied the lump of labor fallacy. You claimed that notion that H1B workers could displace local workers commits the lump of labor fallacy. I made an argument that very specific, targeted immigration programs designed to increase workforce in a narrow sector of the economy can in fact cause market distortions that lead to displacement and deterrence. This is a pretty common objection to these sorts of visas. Many people who support free markets and free immigration see a real problem when the government starts creating programs where a worker is allowed to come to the US only under certain employment conditions (in this case, related to working as an employee to a high tech company). Even Milton Friedman chimed in: "There is no doubt," he says, "that the [H-1B] program is a benefit to their employers, enabling them to get workers at a lower wage, and to that extent, it is a subsidy." I assure you that Milton Friedman was aware of the lump of labor fallacy. It's a bit more complicated than just citing a fallacy.

by geebee 12y ago

IndianAstronaut 12y ago

>still not sure why it's relevant here. I think it is important to point out because so few people still know about it. If few people know about it, they are likely to support harmful policies that they think will help the economy or job creation, but will not.

geebee 12y ago
Oh, I agree, I'm just not sure why you felt it was necessary to point it out when the article had already done just that. I don't really see what your comment ads. Were you worried that people had only read the first sentence in the middle of the article and stopped there, not reading the next sentence? In the other case - our previous discussion, I explained how I though you had misapplied the lump of labor fallacy. You claimed that notion that H1B workers could displace local workers commits the lump of labor fallacy. I made an argument that very specific, targeted immigration programs designed to increase workforce in a narrow sector of the economy can in fact cause market distortions that lead to displacement and deterrence. This is a pretty common objection to these sorts of visas. Many people who support free markets and free immigration see a real problem when the government starts creating programs where a worker is allowed to come to the US only under certain employment conditions (in this case, related to working as an employee to a high tech company). Even Milton Friedman chimed in: "There is no doubt," he says, "that the [H-1B] program is a benefit to their employers, enabling them to get workers at a lower wage, and to that extent, it is a subsidy." I assure you that Milton Friedman was aware of the lump of labor fallacy. It's a bit more complicated than just citing a fallacy.