aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
dann said:Why do you reply a question about how little the rate of unemployment is with data about the rate of employment (both words seem to mean the same to you)? And when you finally get it (in your ETA), why did you use non governmental sources? Just because it favoured the vision you like to promote? Just because of your epistemological hedonism?
That depends:
You can look at the employment rate as the rate of people looking for work who are actually working. In that case, the employment rate is 75 percent of working age population in Denmark. However, since most of the 25 percent aren’t actually avaible for the job market because they are students, retired early, ill (whatever), it makes more sense to look at the number of people who either have jobs or are trying to find a job.
You're avoiding the point: don't talk of unemployment by speaking of employment, and even less by adding those people who could work but don't want, don't have to or cannot.
It was easier to say you just made a mistake.
dann said:Your question is based on the idea that supply and demand is what determines the price of labour. I wouldn't go to the extreme to claim that it doesn't have anything to do with wages, but it's obviously not true even though it may disturb you, which is why I answered your question the way I did: "Your question is easily answered: Because they can!"
That you don't like my answer doesn't make it any less true.
No, you didn't understand at all. My question is open, and includes the notion that once near employment is reached the unions take advantage of it by pushing salaries up. I'm asking if unions are weak in the States, but it seems you are alien to the Usaian way of doing things but still you have a compulsion to reply.
And as for economic theory, supply and demand of work exists, though it's not the determinant factor. "Because they can" is not economic theory, nor social theory nor anything with the shape of a serious thought. It's just "because of the evil factor" present in wars and totalitarian dialectics (which is about the same).