Bologna, Sergio. Crisis de la clase media y posfordismo. Madrid. Ediciones Alkal, 2006
Resulta superficial quien considera la precariedad y la flexibilidad del trabajo como dos condiciones dadas y no se interroga acerca de cómo se han producido, a partir de qué transformaciones de la economía, de qué cambios en la naturaleza y la organización del Estado, de qué nuevas tecnologías. La revolución posfordista ha sido una auténtica revolución, ha cambiado el modo de vida y de comunicación entre las personas, ha sido una revoluciónm del modo de producción capitalista (como aquellas que la habían precedido) que ha redefinido los confines de las clases, ha creado perdedores pero también muchas oportunidades de trabajo y vida para quienes han sido capaces de utilizar de la mejor manera sus propias competencias. Resulta superficial quien considera la precariedad y la flexibilidad comos dos condiciones impuestas, cuando, por el contrario, pueden ser condiciones elegidas por el sujeto, que prefiereun trabajo discontinuo a un trabajo fijo, que debe conciliar trabajo e hijos (muchas mujeres sólo pueden gestionar lo uno y lo otro gracias a la flexibilidad de horarios y de lugares de trabajo). Resulta superficial quien olvida que, en la década de 1970, hubo una fuerte tendencia espontánea por parte de los jóvenes a huir de la condición del trabajo "fijo", a evitar las rígidas jerarquías empresariales, a rechazar una jornada de trabajo con horarios predeterminados. El trabajo temporal y el trabajo flexible fueron también para la fuerza de trabajo una elección, algo que se buscaba, del mismo modo que el éxodo del campo fue un movimiento espontáneo durante determinados periodos del industrialismo de los siglos XXI y XX, y no sólo un éxodo obligado. Resulta ingenuoi quien cree que es posible una vuelta generalizada a los contratos de trabajo de tiempo indefinido o quien cre que este objetivo se puede alcanzar con medidas administrativas.
Le Grand Julian, Propper Carol & Smith Sarah. The Economics of Social Problems. Fourth Edition. New York. Palgrave Macmillan, 2008
The basic aim of the book is to introduce students to some key economic concepts and methods of analysis throught the study of a range of contemporary social problems. It is our deliberate intention to move away from abstract theoretical approach that is a feature of many introductory economics textbooks and instead try to provide a book that emphasises "learning-by-doing". This is done throught the simultaneous development of the relevant theory and its application to particular social issues.
All the relevant concepts and theories are explained in the text, and so no prior training in economics is required. The book is well-suited to first-year economics undergraduates studying applied economics or public policy. Many of the suggestions for further reading take the analysis to a more technical level than that book is valuable to students who are studying social policy, sociology and politics, and who want to understand the rationale behind much of the policy intervention in their field, which es often heavily influenced by economic analysis. More broadly, the book should be useful to anyone interested in public policy without economics training, who would like to discover the contribution that the discipline can make towards understanding some of the pressing social problems that confront us today.
The basic aim of the book is to introduce students to some key economic concepts and methods of analysis throught the study of a range of contemporary social problems. It is our deliberate intention to move away from abstract theoretical approach that is a feature of many introductory economics textbooks and instead try to provide a book that emphasises "learning-by-doing". This is done throught the simultaneous development of the relevant theory and its application to particular social issues.
All the relevant concepts and theories are explained in the text, and so no prior training in economics is required. The book is well-suited to first-year economics undergraduates studying applied economics or public policy. Many of the suggestions for further reading take the analysis to a more technical level than that book is valuable to students who are studying social policy, sociology and politics, and who want to understand the rationale behind much of the policy intervention in their field, which es often heavily influenced by economic analysis. More broadly, the book should be useful to anyone interested in public policy without economics training, who would like to discover the contribution that the discipline can make towards understanding some of the pressing social problems that confront us today.
Glennerster Howard. British Social Policy 1945 to the Present.Thrid Edition.Blackwell Publishing, 2007
The very term "Welfare State" has an uncertain paternity. It was probably not even English! The term Wohfahrsstaat was used by right-wing critics to describe the German social democratic Weimar Republic in the 1920s (Flora and Heidenheimer, 1981). It was a term of abuse. It meant a soft society over-concerned with social benefits, not with Germany´s pride in itself and its military power.
Just how the term came to be translated into English and given a positive image is not etirely clear but Hennessy (1992: 121) attributes the original translation to Professor Zimmer of Oxford University, and to an economist Sir George Schuster, whom Hennessy quotes as saying, "The best way for that I term "welfare" states to undermine the influence of dictators in "power" states is to show that they themselves produce welfare for their people".
It was this central idea that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop Temple, picked up and popularized in his book Citizen and Churchaman, written in 1941. It captures the feeling of the time in which whole state systems were in competition for their very survival, not just throught military contest but in winning the allegiance of their peoples. The competing systems, of course, included that of the Soviet Union, not just Hitler's Germany. Russian communism was appealing to many bright young people at university and members of an older generation too, such as Sydney and Beatrice Webb, Fabian socialists and founders of the London School of Economics. The massive unemployment of the thirties caused many to question the principles on which British capitalist society was based.
The very term "Welfare State" has an uncertain paternity. It was probably not even English! The term Wohfahrsstaat was used by right-wing critics to describe the German social democratic Weimar Republic in the 1920s (Flora and Heidenheimer, 1981). It was a term of abuse. It meant a soft society over-concerned with social benefits, not with Germany´s pride in itself and its military power.
Just how the term came to be translated into English and given a positive image is not etirely clear but Hennessy (1992: 121) attributes the original translation to Professor Zimmer of Oxford University, and to an economist Sir George Schuster, whom Hennessy quotes as saying, "The best way for that I term "welfare" states to undermine the influence of dictators in "power" states is to show that they themselves produce welfare for their people".
It was this central idea that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop Temple, picked up and popularized in his book Citizen and Churchaman, written in 1941. It captures the feeling of the time in which whole state systems were in competition for their very survival, not just throught military contest but in winning the allegiance of their peoples. The competing systems, of course, included that of the Soviet Union, not just Hitler's Germany. Russian communism was appealing to many bright young people at university and members of an older generation too, such as Sydney and Beatrice Webb, Fabian socialists and founders of the London School of Economics. The massive unemployment of the thirties caused many to question the principles on which British capitalist society was based.
posted by Juan Arroyo Laguna- Perú @ 9:14 PM
0 comments
