“If you’ve got to subsidize something, subsidize people’s ability to respond effectively to price signals (e.g., provide them vouchers for job training). Don’t create subsidies, like wage supports, that cut people off from the information they need so that they can invest in themselves wisely and find a good fit in a dynamic market.”
So, the advice doled out in your conclusion assumes the existence of a “dynamic market”, correct? But what’s so dynamic about the after market for displaced “low skill[ed] workers” anyway? Or is “dynamic” just an euphamism for tough luck you uneducated fool?
“If you’ve got to subsidize something, subsidize people’s ability to respond effectively to price signals (e.g., provide them vouchers for job training). Don’t create subsidies, like wage supports, that cut people off from the information they need so that they can invest in themselves wisely and find a good fit in a dynamic market.”
So, the advice doled out in your conclusion assumes the existence of a “dynamic market”, correct? But what’s so dynamic about the after market for displaced “low skill[ed] workers” anyway? Or is “dynamic” just an euphamism for tough luck you uneducated fool?
By dynamic I mean that the market value of different skills is constantly changing.
By dynamic I mean that the market value of different skills is constantly changing.
OK, thanks. I would have posted the comment at the cato liberty place but I couldn’t figure it out.
OK, thanks. I would have posted the comment at the cato liberty place but I couldn’t figure it out.
“If you’ve got to subsidize something, subsidize people’s ability to respond effectively to price signals (e.g., provide them vouchers for job training). Don’t create subsidies, like wage supports, that cut people off from the information they need so that they can invest in themselves wisely and find a good fit in a dynamic market.”
So, the advice doled out in your conclusion assumes the existence of a “dynamic market”, correct? But what’s so dynamic about the after market for displaced “low skill[ed] workers” anyway? Or is “dynamic” just an euphamism for tough luck you uneducated fool?
“If you’ve got to subsidize something, subsidize people’s ability to respond effectively to price signals (e.g., provide them vouchers for job training). Don’t create subsidies, like wage supports, that cut people off from the information they need so that they can invest in themselves wisely and find a good fit in a dynamic market.”
So, the advice doled out in your conclusion assumes the existence of a “dynamic market”, correct? But what’s so dynamic about the after market for displaced “low skill[ed] workers” anyway? Or is “dynamic” just an euphamism for tough luck you uneducated fool?
By dynamic I mean that the market value of different skills is constantly changing.
By dynamic I mean that the market value of different skills is constantly changing.
OK, thanks. I would have posted the comment at the cato liberty place but I couldn’t figure it out.
OK, thanks. I would have posted the comment at the cato liberty place but I couldn’t figure it out.
Pingback: fnhxadhhce