zlacker

>>tysone+(OP)
If there are only 19 bones for every 20 dogs, then it doesn't matter how good a bone hunter they all are there will always be one dog disappointed and the other 19 will be grateful for the bone no matter how thin and weedy it is. Systemically the 'interest rate targeting' approach starts to tighten up policy when unemployment gets below 5% - which they consider 'full employment' even though 1 in 20 haven't got jobs.

Interest rate targeting uses an unemployment buffer to keep wages and therefore prices under control. Poverty for those in work is entirely part of the plan. To fix the poverty problem you need to fix the structural viewpoint and return to the Beveridge condition - everybody must have an alternative living wage job offer available to them so that job competition works properly in favour of people. There must always be more jobs available than people that want them, not slightly fewer.

But that then runs into what Kalecki called "The Political Aspects of Full Employment" - a recommended read if you haven't already: https://mronline.org/2010/05/22/political-aspects-of-full-em...

Truly a 'wicked problem' - tied up with the concept of power

>>neilwi+1X
The maximum entropy situation is one dog with 6+ bones and lots with none. It is structurally broken at a statistical mechanics level if you are concerned about fairness.

>>salty_+h21
It's not easy to imagine somebody having 6+ full time jobs. Just because the time of the worker is the limiting resource.

>>spytho+d71
It is however easy to imagine "royalty employment": 1 executive employing 20 "clergymen" who don't work a lot but keep the executive happy, and who's needs are then maintained by 200 "peasants".