Tuesday, 12 September 2023

Chile: Scenes from a Capital Strike

quote [ Who could question that corporations and banks had the right to make decisions that could cause unemployment? Foreign direct investment was a privilege, not a right. ]

Oh wow, and here I thought Coca Cola was bad
[SFW] [dystopian violence] [+2]
[by Paracetamol@7:18pmGMT]


steele said @ 7:38pm GMT on 13th Sep [Score:1 Interesting]
CEO calls for more unemployment to give companies upper hand over workers

Tim Gurner, who once blamed avocado toast for home-buying challenges, said workers became more “arrogant” after the covid pandemic reshaped the labor market.

Reminder the Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell has been openly saying that they were raising interest rates with the goal of increasing unemployment.
The Reserve Bank wants unemployment to rise. It should be careful what it wishes for | Greg Jericho

We had all better hope the coming slowdown doesn’t happen before the full effect of rate rises is felt

Anyway, here's a totally unrelated quote from The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century by Walter Scheidel:

Employers lost no time pressuring the authorities to curb the rising cost of labor. Less than a year after the arrival of the Black Death in England, in June 1349, the crown passed the Ordinance of Laborers:

Since a great part of the population, and especially workers and employees (“servants”), has now died in this pestilence many people, observing the needs of masters and the shortage of employees, are refusing to work unless they are paid an excessive salary. . . . We have ordained that every man or woman in our realm of England, whether free or unfree, who is physically fit and below the age of sixty, not living by trade and exercising a particular craft, and not having private means of land of their own upon which they need to work, and not working for someone else, shall, if offered employment consonant with their status, be obliged to accept the employment offered, and they should be paid only the fees, liveries, payments or salaries which were usually paid in the part of the country where they are working in the twentieth year of our reign [1346] or in some other appropriate year five or six years ago. . . . No one should pay or promise wages, liveries, payments or salaries greater than those defined above under pain of paying twice whatever he paid or promised to anyone who feels himself harmed by it. . . . Artisans and labourers ought not to receive for their labour and craft more money than they could have expected to receive in the said twentieth year or other appropriate year, in the place where they happen to be working; and if anyone takes more, let him be committed to gaol.

The actual effect of these ordinances appears to have been modest. Just two years later, another decree, the Statute of Labourers of 1351, complained that said employees, having no regard to the said ordinance but rather to their own ease and exceptional greed, withdraw themselves to work for great men and others, unless they are paid livery and wages double or treble what they were accustomed to receive in the said twentieth year and earlier, to the great damage of the great men and the impoverishing of all the Commons and sought to remedy this failure with ever more detailed restrictions and penalties. Within a generation, however, these measures had failed.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.

Posts of Import
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings