If the last I found it wholly convincing, the penultimate essay of Prof. Carlo Antonio ("Crisis in the work and setting of capitalism"), which appeared in your magazine, has caused me some concern. I agree with all the talk
unreliability of official methods of statistical measurement of unemployment (and beyond). I might add that in the U.S., these, with the wind, have suffered in recent decades, continuous updates, just to hide the reality, often relying on "scientific" system for telephone calls to the samples, under which those who worked in a given period, for example if only for a week, is among the working population ... I agree also all that is said about the spread of temporary work, etc..
I also agree that in the capitalist system in the long run, fewer workers are able to produce as many did in the past, such as agriculture docet.
fact remains, that this prospect (also supported by the German sociologist pluricitato Rifkin or group of Krisis, a Robert Kurz of all) does not explain, in my opinion, the current phenomenon adequately. E 'technology in the last quarter of the last century and until now has taken away work? This should have led to a series of productive investments which the capitalist world in general does not record for decades now, decades in which, however, when there was some momentary recovery, was determined by a greater exploitation of labor and old machinery. Elsewhere
Prof. Charles spoke about the lack of productive investment (accumulation), but here it does not and the whole argument seems to depend on unemployment, however, if I understand, from the assumption that the machines are to exclude workers from the world of work.
Rather than invest in production technology, facilities, etc., the tendency, in my opinion, now distant from the post-war boom was rather to relocate factories overseas, where labor is cheap, and / or channel flood of speculative capital into the sector. In the U.S. domestic de-industrialization of the last Forty years is a massive transfer of production abroad (first in Canada and then in Europe, Asia ...); not to mention just speculation and financial policy aimed at forcing foreign holders of dollars to invest in the U.S. market .
Post-Fordism, the microelectronics revolution, is another of the myths of our time that as the concept of globalization should be clarified and properly scaled. Only, while on the subject of globalization Prof. Charles has made clarifications effective, with regard to technological innovations seem to me that it emphasizes the role in the current phase of history. Sincerely, Alex Cocuzza
