Federal Capital (Paco Urondo Agency. Published by the Buenos Aires Economico 30/07/2010)
unemployment levels that have occurred in our country destroyed any economic theory or policy in this respect: from neoclassical to whom he was beginning to seem too surprising that many workers do not want to work and, therefore, that the system is not as balanced as they thought, to proposals of the orthodox left, who considered the mass of unemployed as a lumpen-proletariat, removing and the essence of class, working class, completely forgetting the concept of the industrial reserve army. Both conceptions
generate the same result: more workers are unemployed. The number of workers are less. Weaker, less power. Either because they choose not to work at wages that are offered, either because they are actually common criminals without class consciousness. It is clear that this latter view was widely held by leftist parties, who now base their construction on the hard picketers. However, the two fundamental conceptions of why hide what this mass of unemployed guaranteed an ever smaller share of employees the product of our country. These are the economic and political implications of unemployment levels of 12% as recorded in early 2003.
is when the discussion about the character of the unemployed take a fundamental role: consider unemployed workers is not the same to be considered common criminals or vagrants. Considered unemployed workers involves political actors consider that affect the capital-labor ratio, which can compete in the distribution of wealth.
This discussion is presented as totally away from measures such as universal child allocation, pension increases, introduction of new retirees in the pension system, recovery of the administrators. Better to show them as isolated as container measures, care and / or promoters of social vices. It should cover its potential. It should cover your total binding.
From a theoretical and ideological position clear, the recovery of pension funds by the State involves the recovery of the Argentine workers' savings, which is not the same as saying the "silver of the Argentineans, the money of all" . On the other hand, the incorporation of retirees who did not have sufficient contributions to retire means that the State pays for this worker can not retire it can not or because he was denied the right to work, or worked without, because the state was not present there. In this regard it is similar to the Universal and Son, as it implies that the State recognizes that the millions of children who do not get this assignment is because their parents have not yet been incorporated in the work. In all cases we are talking about the rights of workers.
On Wednesday announced an increase in both the Universal and son of a 22.22% and for the pensions of 16.9%. Was raised from government, from the address by the President, as a step in the institutionalization of policies of State designed to ensure that there are few who take ownership of income, while a social investment (not cost) towards strengthening the domestic market. This pose
highlights two points: first, the need to strengthen the demand to ensure economic activity, which is diametrically opposed to theories about the need to cool the economy to avoid inflation. This means, therefore, an infusion of cash in the lowest income sectors, the State assumes injection, which would not be expressed in a price increase because wage increases have already been agreed and announced increases the private Wednesday will not impact on any cost. If you want to raise prices is because they want to appropriate more rent to be appropriate, say from the government, exposing the nature of distributive struggle that has our inflation. This would be the second question: the redistributive nature of these increases.
Why do we say this? Because many do not believe in redistributive. When we talk about distribution of wealth comes to the participation of workers on the product, ie the capital-labor ratio. It seems that these unemployed workers who receive the Universal for not participating Son in this relationship, because, as we have seen, it is assumed that outside the working class. In this sense, it determined assuming that the only way to increase the participation of the workers are wage increases.
Obviously, this does not explain the distribution of wealth in an economy with features like ours, in which high levels of unemployment and exclusion cause that much of the leading political actor in this dispute is excluded from the traditional system wage-labor-participation.
Thus, both the Universal and Son as the inclusion of retirees who were unable retirement involves a step in the process of higher levels of worker involvement in relation to the capital. First, because both policies are based on the recovery, by the State, workers' savings, which means that it is being distributed among the workers money for workers, the same money a year ago was in the hands of Financial timba. Second, because by assuming both unemployed workers and retirees who have been unemployed or poorly employed and could not retire as workers, we are assuming that an injection of resources in this sector, as well as motorized demand and consumption implies not only a dignified economic sphere but also opens the door for greater empowerment of workers in general in this dispute.
There is a clear dialectical relationship: the higher the levels of injection of funds to those who are still excluded from work, the greater the possibility of real contention of the workers included in the system in relation to its share of GDP, well as the more recent progress in this regard, the greater the opportunities for marginalized groups can not only continue to receive state financial resources, but to succeed in achieving its inclusion on decent work, which is the only possibility real to eliminate poverty.
To understand this it is essential that we do not win the postures that are fragmenting the working class: it is one and the progress or setbacks affect them as a whole. To further the national project is vital to progress into higher levels of work. To advance to higher levels of work is essential to dignify with unemployed workers and retirement allowance and employed with wage increases agreed in the joint. Both policies and increasing levels of organization of the working class will make us realize a dream that now seems so far: up to 50% -50%.
unemployment levels that have occurred in our country destroyed any economic theory or policy in this respect: from neoclassical to whom he was beginning to seem too surprising that many workers do not want to work and, therefore, that the system is not as balanced as they thought, to proposals of the orthodox left, who considered the mass of unemployed as a lumpen-proletariat, removing and the essence of class, working class, completely forgetting the concept of the industrial reserve army. Both conceptions
generate the same result: more workers are unemployed. The number of workers are less. Weaker, less power. Either because they choose not to work at wages that are offered, either because they are actually common criminals without class consciousness. It is clear that this latter view was widely held by leftist parties, who now base their construction on the hard picketers. However, the two fundamental conceptions of why hide what this mass of unemployed guaranteed an ever smaller share of employees the product of our country. These are the economic and political implications of unemployment levels of 12% as recorded in early 2003.
is when the discussion about the character of the unemployed take a fundamental role: consider unemployed workers is not the same to be considered common criminals or vagrants. Considered unemployed workers involves political actors consider that affect the capital-labor ratio, which can compete in the distribution of wealth.
This discussion is presented as totally away from measures such as universal child allocation, pension increases, introduction of new retirees in the pension system, recovery of the administrators. Better to show them as isolated as container measures, care and / or promoters of social vices. It should cover its potential. It should cover your total binding.
From a theoretical and ideological position clear, the recovery of pension funds by the State involves the recovery of the Argentine workers' savings, which is not the same as saying the "silver of the Argentineans, the money of all" . On the other hand, the incorporation of retirees who did not have sufficient contributions to retire means that the State pays for this worker can not retire it can not or because he was denied the right to work, or worked without, because the state was not present there. In this regard it is similar to the Universal and Son, as it implies that the State recognizes that the millions of children who do not get this assignment is because their parents have not yet been incorporated in the work. In all cases we are talking about the rights of workers.
On Wednesday announced an increase in both the Universal and son of a 22.22% and for the pensions of 16.9%. Was raised from government, from the address by the President, as a step in the institutionalization of policies of State designed to ensure that there are few who take ownership of income, while a social investment (not cost) towards strengthening the domestic market. This pose
highlights two points: first, the need to strengthen the demand to ensure economic activity, which is diametrically opposed to theories about the need to cool the economy to avoid inflation. This means, therefore, an infusion of cash in the lowest income sectors, the State assumes injection, which would not be expressed in a price increase because wage increases have already been agreed and announced increases the private Wednesday will not impact on any cost. If you want to raise prices is because they want to appropriate more rent to be appropriate, say from the government, exposing the nature of distributive struggle that has our inflation. This would be the second question: the redistributive nature of these increases.
Why do we say this? Because many do not believe in redistributive. When we talk about distribution of wealth comes to the participation of workers on the product, ie the capital-labor ratio. It seems that these unemployed workers who receive the Universal for not participating Son in this relationship, because, as we have seen, it is assumed that outside the working class. In this sense, it determined assuming that the only way to increase the participation of the workers are wage increases.
Obviously, this does not explain the distribution of wealth in an economy with features like ours, in which high levels of unemployment and exclusion cause that much of the leading political actor in this dispute is excluded from the traditional system wage-labor-participation.
Thus, both the Universal and Son as the inclusion of retirees who were unable retirement involves a step in the process of higher levels of worker involvement in relation to the capital. First, because both policies are based on the recovery, by the State, workers' savings, which means that it is being distributed among the workers money for workers, the same money a year ago was in the hands of Financial timba. Second, because by assuming both unemployed workers and retirees who have been unemployed or poorly employed and could not retire as workers, we are assuming that an injection of resources in this sector, as well as motorized demand and consumption implies not only a dignified economic sphere but also opens the door for greater empowerment of workers in general in this dispute.
There is a clear dialectical relationship: the higher the levels of injection of funds to those who are still excluded from work, the greater the possibility of real contention of the workers included in the system in relation to its share of GDP, well as the more recent progress in this regard, the greater the opportunities for marginalized groups can not only continue to receive state financial resources, but to succeed in achieving its inclusion on decent work, which is the only possibility real to eliminate poverty.
To understand this it is essential that we do not win the postures that are fragmenting the working class: it is one and the progress or setbacks affect them as a whole. To further the national project is vital to progress into higher levels of work. To advance to higher levels of work is essential to dignify with unemployed workers and retirement allowance and employed with wage increases agreed in the joint. Both policies and increasing levels of organization of the working class will make us realize a dream that now seems so far: up to 50% -50%.
The author is a member of the Research Group National Economy and Popular (GEENaP) www.geenap.com.ar (Paco Agency Urondo)
0 comments:
Post a Comment