The Republican theory of unemployment is classic Marx

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Many Republican-controlled states are freaking out about the working class. Business owners, particularly of restaurants, are complaining they can't find anyone to fill job openings, and conservative legislatures are leaping into action. At time of writing, Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Wyoming, and Utah have announced they will begin refusing the federal $300 supplement to unemployment benefits in the next few weeks, and more may follow. Utah has to "roll those back, to get more people into the workforce to get those jobs, to get back to employment," said Governor Brian Cox.

It is amusing to consider this development in light of the ongoing conservative panic attack over President Biden's supposed "American Marxism" agenda, in the words of prominent right-wing radio host Mark Levin. Ironically, what Republicans are doing to the unemployed actually is explained by classic Marxism.

Let me explain. In his magnum opus Capital, Marx argued that a capitalist system will more-or-less automatically produce a population of surplus workers. Businesses become more productive through greater capital investment, which will require more workers in some areas but far fewer in others, and hence this process will always tend to to create an "industrial reserve army" of surplus labor — that is, the unemployed.

This reserve army is very important for classical capitalism. It "becomes … the lever of capitalistic accumulation, nay, a condition of existence of the capitalist mode of production." The reason is that businesses are constantly changing the way they operate, and so always need a large supply of idle workers to fling into new projects on a moment's notice.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/the-republican-theory-of-unemployment-is-classic-marx/ar-BB1gGKMv

[elleng]

1. 'this process will always tend to to create an "industrial reserve army" of surplus labor

— that is, the unemployed.

This reserve army is very important for classical capitalism. It "becomes … the lever of capitalistic accumulation, nay, a condition of existence of the capitalist mode of production." The reason is that businesses are constantly changing the way they operate, and so always need a large supply of idle workers to fling into new projects on a moment's notice.'

[underpants]

2. Excellent article

I saw another article today about how a massive number of retirements and resignations of and when people are expected back in the office. It said that there’s been a huge lull in both because people are riding it out at home - getting an extra year without going in.

Lots of factors. I do think a lot of people really reassessed their lives and situations.

[Midnight Writer]

3. I think you are right. There are a lot of factors at work here.

People have had their lives disrupted and they have made adjustments.

Many of these adjustments will outlast the crisis.

[Claustrum]

4. My parents are a good example of it. They weren't retirement eligible for another few years.

But since my dad was laid off at age 60, it's near impossible for him to find a comparable job. So he decided to take "early retirement" and use savings to bridge the gap before he can take social security. My mom used to work full time and as they figure out my dad's retirement, her income puts them over the limit for government subsidized health care plan. And it would cost them more if she works rather than taking early retirement. At the end, it makes more financial sense for them both to take "early retirement".

I think healthcare is a big part of the decision and hence I much prefer a governmental healthcare plan that takes a certain % in taxes, rather than paying healthcare individually. 1) It lets people to try other things more freely without worrying about healthcare (going back to school full time, or starting a business) 2) for lower income or people that can survive with a part time job, they still get healthcare that's proportional to their salary, rather than a fix amount that would eat up most of a smaller salary.

If healthcare cost isn't the way it currently is, I have no doubt that my dad might take a part time job or my mom would have stayed with hers. But now, it makes more financial sense for them both to take "early retirement".