|
Author
|
Topic: How the Race to the Bottom Works
|
|
|
VoiceofTreason
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5852
|
posted 07 July 2004 12:13 PM
Reefer,
I couldn't get into the article but Niall Ferguson's book Colussuscompares average number of hours spent at work between the EU and the US. Now I don't agree with him but his argument was that the EU would never be able to compete with the US as a potential hegemon providing EU workers spent an average of 20% less time at work than their US counterparts. Apparently the theory goes that longer working hours determines economic dominance. Didn't really do much to help the Japanese viz. the US did it? As a rejoinder to this post I'm wondering if anyone has hard economic data or can provide a theoretical model that demonstrates the relationship between time worked versus productivity? I'm not conviced that the US is necessarily more 'productive.' Yes the average US worker spends more time at work and may have a higher disposable income, but is she a) more efficient and b) does the argument presented by Ferguson consider the consumer debt burden that must eat into those earnings reducing their purchasing power? VoT
From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195
|
posted 07 July 2004 12:41 PM
I just wanted to point out that if you don't want to register to read the New York Times, you can do one of two things:1. Use the Rabble pass: username: babblers8
password: audrarules 2. Go to www.bugmenot.com
From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
