The furore over a Peking University economist says as much about China’s precarious workers—and its battered faith in experts—as it does about one contentious phrase
It’s not really accurate to say that flexibility is a form of welfare when unemployment is so high. It’s only during low unemployment that flexibility is “welfare”, as there is no difficulty quitting and getting a new job. But the “flexibility” of part time workers is surely a form of oppression than welfare. Perhaps I misunderstand the claim about flexibility being a form of welfare, but that seems to wrong on its face.
Excellent series, thanks much. In a manner, the episode illustrates how mass involvement in social communication distorts everything into ideas absent context, and therefore meaning.
Love this writing. Very educational for a Westerner.
It’s not really accurate to say that flexibility is a form of welfare when unemployment is so high. It’s only during low unemployment that flexibility is “welfare”, as there is no difficulty quitting and getting a new job. But the “flexibility” of part time workers is surely a form of oppression than welfare. Perhaps I misunderstand the claim about flexibility being a form of welfare, but that seems to wrong on its face.
Excellent series, thanks much. In a manner, the episode illustrates how mass involvement in social communication distorts everything into ideas absent context, and therefore meaning.