[ / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / m / madchan / mde / newbrit / pdfs / roze / strek ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 12 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


WARNING! Free Speech Zone - all local trashcans will be targeted for destruction by Antifa.

File: 28be060801297dc⋯.png (246.49 KB, 551x421, 551:421, libertyman.png)

 No.66229

What's your opinion on this article, /liberty/?

http://www.businessinsider.com/gig-economy-milton-friedman-full-employment-wage-growth-2017-8

I don't see how Friedman's "assumption" is disproved in this article. It appears that dotcom businesses are able to respond more quickly to wage adjustments than other employers due to flexible wage contracts.

 No.66233

>gig-economy

stopped reading right there

simple propaganda piece, don't waste your time with it


 No.66235

>>66233

>But that explanation fails to explain current conditions: low inflation, low unemployment, and nonexistent wage increases

>low inflation

Does this guy make any distinction between inflation and inflation rate? Nor does he specify how much inflation is too much according to him.

>low unemployment

Employment by itself is meaningless without the conditions it's set in and he will not elaborate further. He either can't or doesn't want to.

>nonexistent wage increases

Wage increases WHERE? In what sector? How much is "nonexistent"? How am I supposed to argue against something that has no definition?

>Yet the UK flirted with deflation in 2015. Instead, of rising wages, we've got the lowest real wage growth rate in 40 years:

Where does he manage to connect those two exactly?

This is propaganda.


 No.66238

>>66233

>almost half of new jobs are in the gig-economy but this totally doesn't affect anything

>>66235

>haha you have to extensively define all these common terms for me in your short essay or i will completely ignore it


 No.66239

>>66235

>Where does he manage to connect those two exactly?

Low unemployment is supposed to cause wage increases. Basically the entire first half of the essay describes this.


 No.66241

>>66238

<almost half of new jobs are florghanastrons but it totally doesn't affect anything

<LOL defining terms? Fuck that!

Fuck off, retard.


 No.66252

>>66238

>>haha you have to extensively define all these common terms for me in your short essay or i will completely ignore it

He didn't define anything. He made statements with no argumentative connections at all to his reasoning. You don't have to write an essay. You have to have any arguments at all.


 No.66253

>>66252

Do I have to make a disclaimer that I don't support Friedman's monetary theory or his loose employment predictions?




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / m / madchan / mde / newbrit / pdfs / roze / strek ]