Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Signs of Imminent Doom

How to get to know your new Nobel laureate? Try this article. I accept quite readily Oliver Williamson’s theories on vertical integration, which can often be the efficient solution. Ward Bowman actually once said that it is the only path of leadership under certain circumstances. I have no bias against voluntary associations, especially if it closes adverse competition and loss of Profitability. Elinor Ostrom’s Work remains a little harder to pin down and prove, at least to my satisfaction. Voluntary associations without interior discipline seem hard, the latter accomplishable only when alternatives are equally difficult; so that the Participants will not bolt. I might be missing some element of her work which I should really read, but I can agree with her methodology of conflict resolution under voluntary association. Her preclusion of Top-Down solutions may be my only bone of contention, as I estimate that such solutions possess not greater failure rate than any other; there being successful resolutions in observed cases.

Nancy Folbre goes far to show that federal employment consists in a hard search and reward system to acquire skilled labor within an very competitive labor market. I have some problems with the analysis, knowing that federal and State employment have sufficient share of the labor market as to be Trend-setters. The full Cost of employment has to accept the fact that federal employees de facto constitute the largest union in the country. One has to ask who is the dog, and which is the tail which is wagging. I find the lack of representative alternate bids for labor abandons the field to a hidden union–at both the federal and State levels. The larger the size of Private sector labor associations, the more normalized is the labor employment pattern with federal and State employees.

Read this thing, and ask if voluntary associations have effective draft. The G20 probably exhibits as close an approximation to a voluntary association as can be found, and there is clearly not defensible network for association discipline. Punishing individual members for failure of compliance simply worsens a poorly-assessed framework of operation. The member government structures are separated from the membership cadre concerned with the G20 associations, the latter of whom have no disciplinary power within their own country. Conformance to G20 decisions are unenforceable, unless they are so draconian that no single member of the G20 would accept the stricture. Here you will find common failure of the voluntary association structure. Such is life. lgl

No comments: