tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277215496195926573.post2400629277016387463..comments2024-01-01T07:41:51.347-08:00Comments on RALPHONOMICS: The inflationary and non-inflationary effects of Job Guarantee in the public and private sectors.Ralph Musgravehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09443857766263185665noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277215496195926573.post-16023581722957915382012-03-20T07:12:56.970-07:002012-03-20T07:12:56.970-07:00Neil,
In the first sentence of the paragraph you...Neil, <br /><br />In the first sentence of the paragraph you quote from I didn’t actually say the additional JG jobs would be at the expense of PRIVATE sector jobs. I said they would be at the expense of the “regular economy” – which includes both private and public sectors. <br /><br />However, I could have phrased that paragraph better. Instead of saying “So aggregate demand has to be reduced if the inflationary effect is….”, I should have said “So aggregate demand has to be reduced OR THE REGULAR PUBLIC SECTOR SHRUNK if the inflationary effect is….”.<br /><br />As regards the proportion of GDP devoted to the public and private sectors, that decision is taken by the democratic process, and I don’t think that the small band of people setting up JG schemes have a right to interfere with what the electorate have chosen there – unless it’s technically impossible to avoid such an interference.<br /><br />I’ve actually had an exchange of views with Joe Firestone on that point here:<br /><br />http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/03/mmp-blog-42-introduction-the-the-job-guarantee-or-employer-of-last-resort.html#comment-5520<br /><br />Joe says that the above “band” have a right to override the above democratic decision. I say they don’t.Ralph Musgravehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09443857766263185665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277215496195926573.post-82594261686441101632012-03-20T03:37:44.499-07:002012-03-20T03:37:44.499-07:00"To that extent, JG jobs are AT THE EXPENSE O..."To that extent, JG jobs are AT THE EXPENSE OF normal or regular jobs: hardly the object of the exercise."<br /><br />Says who?<br /><br />The object of the exercise is Full employment with price stability.<br /><br />There is no rule requiring the primacy of the private sector at all costs.NeilWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11565959939525324309noreply@blogger.com