Sandwichman,
It's not often I get requests, so this deserves my concentration. Sorry for the delay in responding.
Your question involves the relationship (if any) between the lump of labor theory or as we like to say fallacy and the Jubilee principle from Leviticus. Also, the comment cited that the passage of the 1868 law for federal employees to work an 8 hour day, and if this could be a "Jubilee of Labor".
First, I should say that from the look of your blog (and your obsession with lump of labor"), that you probably are smarter than I, and certainly more engaged with "the lump". I am sure you will find this post disappointing.
Regarding the "lump". I find discussion of the lump in economic circles to be a bit obtuse. I think it better discussed in business theory and management. My way of thinking has "lump" as something to be defeated by clever managers like say...moral hazard. If we were to use a restaurant as a testing ground. The bus boy could assume that he will enjoy x number of tables per day to bus, and if paid by the hour should stretch out his time, as x is all he is going to produce. The clever manager, should show him that if table turnover is increased and the demand for dinning there variable, he can both produce more bussed tables, work more hours and contribute to the greater good of the restaurant and his co-workers financial well-being. Now if the table turnover rate is not variable, and the demand not variable (as in the case of an office building where the firm enjoys 100% market share and no one becomes impatient and leaves before seating), than the bus mans "lump" assumption is correct and his work is fixed.
My view of the economics in Leviticus is that God's (or the author's) view of a just society is one where every citizen is guaranteed a certain level subsistence and income by virtue of the continuance the land ownership his ancestors acquired in the past. The Jubilee just "resets" the beginning land title (as best it can) every so often, so that no single bad event (bad crop, poor debt service decision etc) can cause more than one generation to suffer. It should be noted that this principle was seldom followed, and the Jews were both scolded by profits and punished by God for their "greed" in not following both the Sabbath and Jubilee principles to the fullest extent.
I admit my understanding of the 8 hour day movement to be very limited, and my frailty hurts my ability to respond correctly (if there is a right answer). It appeared to me that the 8 hour movement was motivated by a desire both to have a better home life and to start the process of increasing wages. In fact much of the debate over the movement was whether or not the wage for 8 should be the same as the wage for 12 hours of labor. What we think about "lump" is largely irrelevant as it was not our motivation that fed the movement.
The comment cited that some said the success of the 8 hour movement would be a "Jubilee of labor" seems to point to a difference in understanding about the motivation and effect of a properly executed Jubilee between myself and the speaker cited. If he believed that the laborer would raise his standard of living closer to the robber barron's of the day with the adoption of the 8 hour day, we both know that that could'nt and didn't happen. The 8 hour Day did not change (appreciably) the capital accumulation of the working class, so there was not real gain made in class differentiation. Did the 8 hour day "reset" the class and wealth differences that the author(s) of Leviticus sought? I say no. So the "Jubilee of Labor" comment was way off, in my view.
My view of the 8 hour day movement is that it was the beginning of a more just view of the working class, and perhaps the start of a burgeoning middle class. This middle class, has its own importance in our History.
I would like to know your thoughts on these issues.
My Best,
Tom
About Me
- Tom Grant
- I am a second generation drycleaning businessman. I love my family, economics, and distance running; not always in that order.
2 comments:
Hi Tom,
Thank you for your thoughtful response. Your reply is not at all disappointing. I agree with you that the lump of labor fallacy is primarily about stinting or "stretching out" a given amount of work to make it last. That was the sense that D.F. Schloss had in mind when he coined the term. The problem with the subsequent usage in economics is that economists themselves kept stretching out the concept to apply it to items where it didn't belong. Perhaps those economists were committing a lump-of-fallacies fallacy!
The fallacy claim especially doesn't apply to the question of the shortening of the hours of work. Technology makes each hour of work more productive but it also paradoxically makes a shorter working day more productive than a long one. That is because the more intensive the work, the more fatiguing it is and workers need more time off to be at their best. Economists have had a hard time acknowledging this relationship because it's hard to express in a mathematical formula.
The relationship between this and the Jubilee principle, in my view, resides in the notion of Providence. A certain proportion of someone's prosperity is due to hard work, thrift and foresight. But another part of it is providence -- the inherent abundance of the earth. The traditional view, expressed in Leviticus, was that in accepting the gifts of providence, it was sinful (avarice) to take too much. A portion always had to be returned to the earth to lie fallow. Thus it is also called the "sabbath of the land".
In addition to any moral strictures against greed, there is also an obvious practical benefit to letting the land lie fallow periodically and even to releasing indentured servants and returning their former land to them. The land will be more fruitful after lying fallow and the servants are likely to be more diligent in their upkeep of the land if they know it will be theirs again eventually.
At least in theory. I believe you are correct in saying the the Jubilee year was not followed.
As for the 8-hour day, eight hours was set as the initial goal but the idea was that as technology advanced and prosperity expanded that more and more time would be devoted to leisure -- not just to amusement and recreation but to cultural enrichment and education. I'm afraid that the latter notion has been corrupted to the extent that education has devolved into a competitive race for credentials that limit access to higher status careers.
So I think that the eight-hour movement and the Jubilee principle both shared the central vision that rest and regeneration offered both a moral and a practical advantage. I think there is a second similarity is the way that subsequent generations have failed to appreciate the subtle wisdom of the ideas and abandoned them as practices.
videos viagra viagra facts generic viagra india where to buy viagra viagra england buy viagra on line viagra herb alternative low cost viagra natural herbs used as viagra viagra uk cost pill viagra over the counter buy generic viagra does viagra really work purchase viagra
Post a Comment