No comments about The State of Working America, 2008-2009 (State of Working America).

5 comments about Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery.

1. First, I will be forthright and say that I am an unreconstructed Southerner. If that makes my review prejudiced, so be it. But I would be willing to wager that all those reviewers who critisize this work and give it only 1 or 2 starrs, while glowingly giving indirect 5 star recommendations to Gutman's works, are just as prejudiced the other way. The fact of the matter is that 'we' rate like we think and no volume of material is going to sway our preconceived or 'brainwashed' notions.
   
   I have read most of the Slave Narratives and I've make a lifelong (I'm 56) study of like in the Antebellum and post-war South, plus I can still remember life in rural Louisiana in the 50's as a small boy and have heard many stories from grandparents born before 1900. I have also read many many works (no longer in print) written right before and right after the war.
   
   First, anyone who believes the Civil War was fought over slavery is just plain foolish and definitely has an agenda and will NEVER learn anything. With that said, and based on all I have read, I believe that the real truth lies somewhere almost in the middle of what 'Time on the Cross' proposes and what Gutman's contradictory writing show.
   
   I believe that before ANY student or academician of this subject can even begin to form an opinion, they need to read the Slave Narratives to form a foundation. Afterall, these were real intereviews, real opinions, from the real people who lived through it. How can any modern author, through the tinted glasses of time, even hope to come close to evaluating this subject without reading these essential compilations? Whether they 'fit' into today's politically correct notions or not, they cannot be ignored (even though they have been suppressed for many years as if they never existed).
   
   Slavery was a terrible thing that happened all over the world, and, I believe that had it not been for the assassination of Lincoln (who believed all blacks should be returned to Africa!), that race relations in this country would have been much different than they were up until 1970. I believe that race relations were hurt terribly by the reconstruction of the South.
   
   Do I believe the United States would be better off today if it was an all-white society? Yes, I do. I believe this not because I don't believe two races can't co-exist (although this is naturally difficult), but because we have become so sensitive today and politically correct that not even Bill Cosby and address the real problems of the black community without being attacked, so how can I expect any better.
   
   I heard tonight on TV that it is 'unknown' why the illigitimacy rate is so high among black teenagers. Well, duh! Simply put, what has happened in this country is that whites and blacks were mixed in the 60's and 70's in order to provide more opportunity to blacks and to raise their standards. Well, this would have been difficult enough to do in the first place since it defies the laws of nature and physics. But, when political correctness and 'race sensitivity' is added to the equation, there was only one outcome.
   
   That outcome is a lowering of standards for blacks and whites alike - not only academically, but socially and morally as well. I know for a fact that in the first half of the 20th century, the moral level of blacks was much higher than it is overall today. Why?
   
   I believe that an environment was created (probably on purpose) where instead of the lower elements (blacks) being elevated to higher levels of morality and academics and socio-economics by whites, that the reverse happened. The standards were pulled down and now today (as evidenced by our high schools) the overall levels of both blacks and whites are lower than either were before integration was even started. It will continue to go lower, I guess, until the US is at the bottom of the list in educational level compared to other countries. Will we ever learn? If we care about all our children, both black and white, are we to sacrifice them on the altar of 'race relations'? Are they to become 3rd rate when compared to countries like China, India, Russia, Japan, and most of Europe on educational levels? Probably so. But, the government and the race panderers will have what they want.



2. Fascinating book! The comprehensive review of historical data will leave you wondering why so much of what you were taught and thought you knew about slavery was a myth. How could so much anecdotal evidence and political bias be mistaken for fact?



3. Fogel and Engerman's work turns to primary sources to figure out exactly what the economics of slavery in the American South were like. It turns out that the predominant views are wrong: slavery wasn't unprofitable, slaves were well-nourished and lived almost as long as free laborers, slave families were rarely split up, resistance to slave-owners was rare, and on and on. Farms worked by slaves were 1/3 more efficient that farms worked by free laborers, and slaves received on average more of that higher income than free laborers did. A small proportion of slaves worked as skilled workers in management, engineering, or various crafts. Some of these earned higher incomes than their free counterparts.
   
   Since this is only a book on the economics of slavery (as the book's subtitle says), it cannot examine the psychological or ethical damage that slavery caused, as the authors acknowledge. They do acknowledge that while slaves received a higher proportion of the pecuniary income they produced as wages, food, clothing, housing, and medical care than free laborers did, they also acknowledge that the non-pecuniary costs of slavery to the slaves themselves was enormous. The higher productivity of slave-worked farms was made possible, obviously enough, by forcing the slaves to do what free laborers could not be paid to do: work longer hours in a more regulated, larger farm. Interestingly enough, the gain in productivity this resulted in, while conveyed in small part to the slaves themselves in the form of higher income, did not accrue entirely or even in the most part to the planters. Rather, about half of it accrued to the consumers of cotton. Since most of cotton was exported (primarily to Britain, where most of the cotton was made into clothing), the primary beneficiaries of American slavery were people who bought cotton goods. This is because producing and selling cotton was a competitive industry, where real profits tend toward zero. Thus, while the planters exploited the slaves in reality by whipping them and forcing them to work in ways free laborers would not, the resultant pecuniary exploitation of slaves was accomplished by capitalism.
   
   But perhaps the most interesting thing the book discusses is how the myth of unproductive slaves has contributed to contemporary racism. According to the contemporary racist view, blacks are lazy, morally degenerate, and immature. Fogel and Engerman show that, under slavery, blacks were none of these things. In fact, the evidence shows that they were harder working and more sexually circumspect on average than their free white counterparts.
   
   What the authors point out as a reason there were not more slave revolts is that, given the fact that both Northerners and Southerners were racists, free blacks had little economic, social, or political opportunity. Free blacks in the North were not permitted to do all kinds of things. It would seem that many blacks rationally decided they were better off as slaves. The slave artisans and engineers, however, who commanded the highest wages, were the ones best able to make a living in the economy of the free North and were therefore those most likely to escape.
   
   The book's last chapter deals with the implications of the findings for contemporary race relations. The book shows, of course, that blacks are not biologically inferior to whites. And, in economic terms, blacks were worse off in 1890 than they were in 1860. This isn't because slavery is always economically better than being free, but because the U.S. abolished slavery without abolishing racism. Blacks remained second-class citizens without the power to better their lot economically or politically. At least under slavery their racist owners had an economic interest in their economic well-being. That is the one thing the book drives home in a thoroughly researched and completely convincing way.



4. Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman's Time on the Cross is an extensive thorough examination of slavery in the antebellum era of the United States using the tools of cliometrics and economics to rethink previous interpretations of the slavery system. Fogel and Engerman took on the monumental task of proving ten points they believed to be true in light of new data compiled and analyzed by cliometric research. The book set out to prove that slavery was profitable and just as profitable as manufacturing operations in the North. The system of slavery was not on death's door and was still economically sound by the beginning of the Civil War. Slave owners had a positive outlook on the future of their slave economy. Slave agriculture was efficient when compared to free agriculture. Slaves were more hard-working and efficient than white agricultural workers and compared evenly to white workers in industry. The demand for slaves was increasing not only in agriculture but industry as well. Most slaves lived in close family units and slave owners mostly kept the family unit together in sales of slaves because it was in their best economic interest to do so. The standard of living in the material form was comparable to free workers of the time period. Slaves were able to keep ninety percent of their income they generated. Lastly, The South's economic growth was increasing and the South had a high level of per capita income compared to not only the rest of United States but also the rest of the world during the time period. The authors mainly used mathematics and statistics which they referred to as systematic data to analyze the records from the time period to prove these ten points they proposed as correct. The authors admittedly attempted to stay away from what they called fragmentary evidence which they defined as "is based on unverifiable impressions of individuals whose primary aim was the defense of an ideological position." (p. 10) However they did acknowledge that sometimes they used this fragmentary evidence when as they stated, "to illustrate and make more vivid results that have been established by more precise methods, and to fill in gaps in evidence where it has not been possible thus far to obtain systematic data." (p. 11) This book was published in 1974 so both authors were approximately in a decade of their professional academic careers when the book came out and apparently they succeeded in achieving through this book a "wide-ranging and radical reinterpretation of American slavery." (p. 8) Both authors have the academic background and experience to write a book about this subject, but never the less it was a bold to attempt to reshape the entire previous thought and interpretations of the subject of slavery.
   
   Fogel and Engerman both have had successful careers in the academic world. As Robert Fogel stated in his autobiography, "My professional training began at Cornell University (BA 1948) and continued at Columbia University where I obtained my MA (1960), and at Johns Hopkins University, where I obtained my Ph.D. (1963). It was at Cornell that my scientific interests shifted from physics and chemistry to economics and history. The switch in focus was precipitated by the widespread pessimism about the future of the economy during the second half of the 1940s, when forecasts about the imminent return to the massive unemployment of the Great Depression were rife." Engerman graduated from John Hopkins University as well and has been a professor at Rochester University since 1963. Both authors have collaborated on many other works together in addition to Time on the Cross.
   
   Time on the Cross does a superb job in analyzing the data for the reader although at some points in the book it starts reading like a math book, but for the most part the authors were successful in not inundating the reader with technical math formulas. Time on the Cross calculatedly focused on issues of economics and did not delve into the moral ramifications of slavery. According to Fogel and Engerman some people in the academic community were outraged or at least very confused by the lack of treatment by the book on the moral implications of slavery. Fogel and Engerman noted that when they went to conferences some of their colleagues would come up to them afterward and ask, "What are you guys trying to do? Sell Slavery?" (p.258) They answered no to that question because that was the truth, however, the authors themselves seemed to have felt a tad guilty about not addressing the issue of the morality of slavery in the book. They stated, "Perhaps the most serious deficiencies in Time on the Cross is its failure to provide a new moral indictment of slavery that is more consistent with the new empirical knowledge on the actual operation of the slave system, as we understood it in 1973." (p.273) From the perspective of this reader, the best course was to stay away from the moral issues surrounding slavery as Time on the Cross did because moral issues are emotionally charged. The emotional nature of the morality of slavery would have detracted from and clouded the strength of the book that used non-emotional mathematics and statistics to prove the ten points. Time on the Cross was about the economics of slavery and analyzing the relevant data with regards to illuminating the economic picture of that time and place and it accomplished this task very well.



5. You really need to read Herbert Gutman's Slavery & The Numbers Game (1975; republished 2003) alongside this work. Gutman undoes virtually all of Fogel and Engerman's data and claims regarding the social aspects of slavery (violence, punishments, family separation, etc.). Fogel & Engerman's data, in many cases, was extremely thin, as was their logic in interpreting much of the data, as Gutman demonstrated. None of Fogel and Engerman's social claims (minimal punishments, minimal separations) stand up, though many of their economic claims (profitability, flexibility) still do. Fogel revised some of their work in Without Consent or Contract. Time on the Cross should be read as a first draft attempt at quantitative history, not the final word.

1 comments about Servants of Globalization: Women, Migration, and Domestic Work.

1. Parreñas, a scholar admired by many whose academic training, coupled with her linguistic skills, draws inquiring minds into the largely untapped world of Filipino international migration. The book critically situates the migration from a historical-structural perspective and yet focuses on the family as the unit of analysis which must negotiate between the state regulations of both sending and receiving countries, the financial realities of citizens from poor countries of the world, and the emotional hardships faced by family members. The study, in general, is an extremely important one because it taps into what is a "female" international labor migration, bound by related expectations of gender roles, thereby encouraging readers to rethink our gendered perspective of all labor migrations. In addition, the book offers an effective assessment of the critical role of the family to young children (the focus of her subsequent book), the challenges faced by poor populations of the world, and how the global economy is structured to benefit wealthy nations of the world. I highly recommend the book and have only a small criticism: though she has carefully helped us to see the gendered inequalities faced by female international migrants, at times in the book Parreñas herself seems quite unnecessarily judgemental of the very women whose predicaments she details.

No comments about The Economics of Labor Markets (with Economic Applications and InfoTrac Printed Access Card).

5 comments about Now What Do I Do?: The Woman's Guide to a New Career (Capital Ideas for Business & Personal Development).

1. Too often the older woman is passed over in the competitive workforce or senses age discrimination. This upbeat, positive book helps that woman oversome self-made issues and attitudes of others that may be out there working against her goal of self-staining or career enhancing employment. Written in an easy-to-read style, this book makes the experience positive by giving guidelines, exercises, and wonderful recommendations. We all need our own thirty-second commercial.



2. If you or a woman you know needs to understand how to move forward through the dynamics of change and career, Now What Do I Do is the right place to start.
   
   I recommend Chapter 10, devoted to working for yourself and starting your own business, to my interior redesign students. Good business basics and ideas, worthy of frequent review.



3. "Now What Do I Do?" is an easy to read guide for those looking for a fresh start. The book's primary audience is middle-aged women who have decided to reenter the workforce or to take a new direction in their careers. It walks the reader through many hands-on exercises, all the options for work (working for someone, working for yourself, or volunteering), and is sensitive about the subject of how to manage ageism (age discrimination).
   
   While I am not part of the book's intended audience, I, as a young woman, found the book very useful. It is rich in advice, resources, and thorough exercises that would help anyone uncover her skills, interests, and passions. The handful of comments about age were the only few points in the book that I did not find immediately relevant.
   
   Several of the exercises (e.g., writing a future autobiography) and ideas (e.g., importance of networking, thinking positively, creating a support group for change) were not new in that I've come across them in other books, but this is advantageous because Cannon compiles a comprehensive set of exercises in one easy to access reference.
   
   The bottom-line of Cannon's book is that we have to do our homework in preparing for a life transition. She hits this point so hard with all her assignments that at times, the book feels a little overwhelming and preachy. It would have been nice if she balanced out some assignments and advice with more stories or alternative approaches. She shares some very inspiring anecdotes about herself, famous people, and her clients, which left me thirsty for more.
   
   I also think the book would flow better had she brought some of her finishing points to the beginning of the book because I found myself "getting sidetracked" already during the initial chapters. However, all the information is there to help one get started, and she who takes full advantage of Cannon's book no doubt will enjoy much success in her new career.
   
   The career coach who has "Now What Do I Do?" on his/her shelf also has a great library of materials to help clients find their direction. Members of women's professional organizations (e.g., Society of Women Engineers) can benefit in particular because they can tap into their membership pool to buddy up with someone or create the much-needed "success team" as they embark in a new direction or into the world of work for the first time in a while.



4. Reviewed by Tammy Petty Conrad for Reader Views (10/06)
   
   Today we look at employment differently than our parents did. We change jobs more often and know we'll work longer before retirement. Jan Cannon, president of her own career counseling firm, smashes the concept that career changes must be made prior to mid-life. In fact she helps her readers embrace changes after forty, and even fifty. She focuses on women of this age group because this population has been previously ignored by career planners. "Now What Do I Do?" is for people considering changing jobs or those who have to. It is even helpful to those who want to start their own business or just want to do volunteer work. "The right job...is one that meets psychological, emotional, and financial needs as much as one that uses your skills."
   
   The author goes through the mechanics required in searching for work, but also helps readers get to know themselves, their skills and their preferences. The book reads quickly, but it is also a workbook full of assessments which allow the reader to ponder their attributes and desires so they don't settle for the first available job, but instead find where they are meant to be. Rather than being too late to realize our dreams, "Mid-life is a time for exploration and self-expression, not resignation." Being closer to mid-life than my twenties, I find this very reassuring!
   
   I especially liked the "Exploring the Want Ads" exercise. Previously I only circled the jobs I knew I could get. But the author suggests circling anything that interests you, whether you are qualified or not, because you're not looking for a specific job in this case, but what interests you, and therefore motivates you. This exercise includes other steps to make it as valuable as possible.
   
   Jan Cannon suggests many types of support tools, one of which is your own "Success Team." This is a group of people you select who will support you during your job search. We have support groups for everything else, why not job hunting? Lastly the resource section overflows with websites, books and associations to benefit your search.
   
   Even if you don't think you want a change, read "Now What Do I Do?" It will give you the confidence to step out of the box. After all, there's plenty of time left.



5. This book is primarily written for the women who are experiencing mid-life choices.
   The author leads the reader through many self-evaluation lists on how you are doing at mid-life and what direction you want to go in the next phase of your life. There are self-assessments that help you decide if you prefer a job, start a business, go back to school or become a volunteer.
   Ms. Cannon provides resource lists for finding or creating a support group to help you with your decision. There are also resource lists for company directories, non-traditional jobs, volunteer organizations, non-profit groups, as well as a section on how to start your own business.
   "What Do I Do Now?" is a well-written, thoughtful, informative book full of ideas and information that can guide women, who are looking for a change, in their life the direction they need to go. Dr. Cannon's book is a must read for all women.

5 comments about Why Men Earn More: The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap -- and What Women Can Do About It.

1. The controversy surrounding this book is not only in its very existence in the gender-political climate of today but also the author's weak choice of his target market. The material is unsettling for the female reader searching for yet another sympathetic ear in the mire of self-help books, an industry with synthetic reality for sale. It's totally ok for a handful male-oriented books to exist amongst the shelves of female self-help "porn." Do universities even offer male-oriented social study ? Oh, wait, that's engineering.
   
   The author systematically discusses the reasons behind the perceived in equality in the inappropriately concocted but very real pay gap. When multiplied by years worked, the "total earnings" difference is a canyon.
   
   The author makes a great point that the workplace has largely changed to accomodate females. Diversity training is about altering male behavior rather than training women to enter the culture of the existing workplace. There is no equivalent training of women to accept men in female-dominated industries, such as teaching, retail clothing sales, medical practice/nursing, childcare, etc. On the contrary, men are increasingly demonized as potential rapists and child molesters.
   
   Men have always been pressured to earn more because they NEED to. Males compete with one another for desirable characteristics that are still in vogue. Just search the on-line dating listings to see that women prefer men that are physically larger (taller), are older (can demonstrate a track record of holding a job and accumulating assets) and , well, make more money. When these selective pressures are reduced, the pay gap may narrow. The gap won't disappear until the advantage of leveraged feminity disappears with it.



2. If I did not see in author's biography that he is the father of two girls, I would have difficult time accepting some of his statements and explanations as to why is it that men make more money than women do. Advice to women that they should be courageous and enter the male dominated fields is something I have tried many years ago myself. Being willing to travel, relocate, enter the professions traditionally held by men and dedicate life to a career is the path I have followed. While I have had good professional success so far, I still do not find it to ring true that will necesarily generate more money in salary than what people working for me (all men incidentally) do. As a matter of fact, my employees make the same, or more money in salaries and benefits than I do.
   What I have found interesting is the notion of the social order that author is trying to break. He is suggesting that women need to be accepting of having "stay at home husband" or what author is also referring to as "wife". Traditionally all women, even the successful ones according to today's standards have always been looking into ways to marry well (i.e. marry up). That made their own professional careers limited, since they always had to consider their own husbands careers too before making their own professional mark. Successful men on the other hand always had stay at home wives that followed them around country or world every time a new career opportunity for their man came along. Women need to free themselves up from the notion that they must have successful professional husbands in order to be successful themselves. I still find it difficult to buy as an idea, since I have a "wife" myself, and yet - money is not as good as it should be. There must be some other answers out there, only this book is not providing me with ones I was hoping for....



3. Farrell contends that women make less due to the fact that they pick "easier" or more pleasant jobs than men. This may be the case in some instances, but I picked up this book because I thought it was about the wage imbalance, not what an average man makes compared to the avg woman. The wage imbalance is for the SAME jobs, not different ones.
   
   Farrell says things like women make less because they choose to be day care providers instead of accountants. Again, I'm not saying this is not the case, but that does NOT address why women accountants make LESS than male accountants (with the same education, years of experience, etc). THAT is the real wage imbalance and Farrell just tells one common sense (like that a liberal arts degree gets you less money than a technology degree). I hope this "researcher" didn't get any money for his "research" on this. It's COMMON SENSE, not research!
   
   Don't waste your money on this book!!!



4. According to New York Times,
   women who have no children
   make 98% of a man's salary,
   but women all together (including
   the childless women) make
   about 76% of what men earn.
   
   This fact was cited in The Expanded Family Life Cycle,
   a book with a clearly feminist agenda, and rated here on Amazon accordingly.



5. This is the message from Warren Farrell's intelligent and objective work on the truth behind salary discrepancies. The sinister male conspiracy insinuated by feminism that keeps women's wages low is revealed to be a fantasy, as what we are looking at is simply a case of economic cause and effect. Don't study those fun and fulfilling courses like History of Art or French Lit. Everyone would love to do a 'hobby degree', especially if you have a partner to pay the bills, but you'll never get one of those jobs which require a real degree, like in Engineering, Science, Architecture or Medicine, which men don't do more often because they enjoy it, but because they know they're not going to find a woman to fund their needs if they do a hobby degree. Work as much overtime as a man. Commute as far as he does. Do a job as dirty, stressful, or dangerous. Do a job with uncomfortable working conditions, preferably working 12 hour shifts outside in winter. Be prepared to face mutilation and permanent disfigurement on a daily basis. Work 84 hour weeks. Then you'll be earning 98% of a man's salary. Now let's all try to close off those remaining 2% without getting distracted by this childish misrepresentation from feminist groups as to the true extent of this problem (76% - what a joke!).
   
   The free market always causes jobs to gravitate towards those who can be paid less. This is why in most Western countries without a minumum wage, foreign men can be found on the construction sites, with foreign women often as cleaners. Here in Germany it was traditionally Poles and other East Europeans, in the States probably Mexicans. German and American men and women had priced themselves out of the market, and thus lost out to those willing to work for lower pay. If any sensible person was starting a company in a fantasy world where female workers, equally good as the male ones, could be got for a fraction of the salary, men would struggle to find work. Companies would ONLY hire women, unless there was no alternative but to pay the higher salaries demanded by men in such a fantasy world. That is the world where feminists live. They believe that this is the one area of economic activity which breaks all known rules of the free market and economic activity. Please, any feminist who reads this and rates me low, answer me that question, or I have zero respect for your intelligence, or the ideology you promote. By lying like this, you are making people sceptical of other genuine discrimination against women.
   
   Sometime in April we can expect those dim-witted Mastodon's of dinosaur feminism to remind us all of how many extra days women have to work to get a man's wage. What a load of bilge! How anyone in their right mind can think they deserve something for nothing beats me, almost as much as the last line of the review Amazon so kindly chose for this book - they're not famous for choosing complimentary reviews of books that conflict in any way with the matriarchy, and this is another typical case:
   
   'Ostensibly a road-map to workplace equality, Farrell's portrait of pampered, ungrateful women and stoic, self-sacrificing men may strike some readers as an unhelpful caricature.'
   
   ...but only those readers accustomed to decades of books and proaganda on brave self-sacrificing women and ungrateful deadbeat dads. For the rest of us, it's wonderful to see the other side represented, although this book is a drop in the ocean. I trust 'Publisher's Weekly', who produced the above review, have criticized in a similar way all the feminist books which present men as described above. If they haven't, shame on them for their hypocrisy and prejudiced reviewing, and let us pray that some day such biased journals will go the way of the dinosaurs too.
   
   To sum up, this book is a must-get, if only to be able to argue effectively against those who still believe in feminism's wage fantasies.
   Be careful though - the truth hurts, and more than one feminist has blown up in my face on having her delusions revealed...

2 comments about Organizing to Win: New Research on Union Strategies (ILR Press books).

1. This is another labor community insider book directed toward labor union leaders and their strategists and written by the same. The motivation is the reversal of the sagging fortunes of labor unions. Many of the articles focus on the need for grassroots activity by existing union members and community supporters. Several union campaigns utilizing members are examined in detail. Union support organizations such as the Garment Women Justice Center are described. Serveral articles examine subtleties of the motivations of non-unionists to vote for a union. An interesting observation is that white collar and technical workers are turned off by the potential for conflict when joining a union, which is interesting in light of the fact that unions have always relied on confrontation as their tool of last resort. The main point of the editors is that union tactics and actions make a large difference in organizing success. The second point is that unions must remake themselves into organizing bodies and avail themselves of the wisdom contained in these articles. But for non-union insiders reading this book, many chinks appear when looking at the articles in totality. For example, one article shows that belonging to two community organiztions lowers the desire to join a union, yet many articles tout labor-community coalitions. In one case where community connections were leveraged to the fullest to win a union contract, it is admitted that may have been a one-time occurrence. A large and confusing point that leaps out from these articles is, just what is a union. Is it a centralized business that collects fees from subsidiaries, demands adherence to policies from the CEO, and provides services? Or is a union a legally recognized association of workers at a locale that affiliates with a national body but retains sovereignty? Statements that workers "are" the union hide more than they reveal. If workers are the union, can they insist that national unions remain committed to a servicing model? If workers are the union, how can some national unions literally require local unions to focus on recruitment? Claiming that workers are the union can be a demotivator for joining a union. After all, it is workers who have unsuccessfully dealt with employers on their own that want to join unions; now they want support, not abandonment. The editors and authors may complain that this book is not about "what is a union," but is only about subtle strategy. If so, they need to put a "Nonunionists need not read" label on the cover. Actually the book is worth reading by all interested in the situation of labor not only on its educational merits but also for the questions that it can engender for non-insiders. Who knows, maybe their next book can be "What is a Union."



2. This is a good reference tool for Union Organizers, a bit outdated, but a lot of the info is still current. So I would definatly recommend this book!

5 comments about Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939.

1. A well-researched and original book describing the shifting allegiances of Chicago workers from ethnic help societies to their welfare capitalist employers to finally the US government. In addition to the subject of the growing labor movement, the book is also a great survey of the various ethnic/racial groups of 1920s Chicago and their differing experiences with Americanization.

   There is a book I would like to recommend as a virtual "sequel" to this one. The Origins of the Urban Crisis by Thomas Sugrue. While Cohen's book is about the creation of the New Deal coalition in the factory neighborhoods and towns of Chicago, Sugrue's book is about the disappearance of the factories and the departure from the Democratic coalition in the 1960s of the same groups who joined it in the 30s. Sugrue's book also won a Bancroft prize and if you like one you will surely like the other.




2. Making a New Deal is an absolutely incredible look at workers during the Interwar period in Chicago. Cohen has crafted a monumental work that not only covers workers political and union organization but also covers the changes in their lives resulting from societal changes such as the advent of radio and the chain store.
   What's particularly appealing and interesting about this book is also what it says about modern times. Cohen discusses that due to the advent of radio and national networks, fewer workers got their local and world news from ethnic newspapers or other papers in Chicago. As can be seen from this, the current lement concerning the consolidation of newspapers, TV and radio stations isn't new, it began even in the 1930s. Also interesting is how many immigrant parents worried about their children becoming influenced by American culture that they did not understand, particularly clubs, dance halls and radio music.
   Cohen's work is profoundly important and most of the book is a great read.



3. Cohen's work based on her Ph.D. Dissertation at UC-Berkeley proves to be a comprehensive, engaging, and insightful look into popular culture in 1920s and 1930s Chicago. She moves seamlessly from labor history to cultural history to ethnic history without losing the reader by including helpful charts, figures, and photographs. Her section on the nature of mass media and mass consumption undoubtedly provides evidence of her writing style in The American Pageant.

   Cohen does not create a delineation between immigrants that came to the area and natives of the Chicago area, which goes a long way in terms of bias. She covers African-Americans, Polish, Italians, and Jews without being critical one way or the other. Each chapter seems to be able to live by itself, which gives the book a flavor of being a compendium of papers instead of a conjoined work. All in all, Cohen does a wonderful job examining Chicago and Chicagoans whatever their ethnicity may be.




4. Cohen presents a seemingly broad and well-supported thesis to explain the success of unionism in the 1930s. However, while all persuasive, some of her major arguments seem only tangentially relevant to either each other or her main thesis. While she provides a strong, coherent explanation as to why Chicago workers' political loyalties and attitudes shifted so dramatically during the depression, it is frankly nothing new. Yes, workers felt entitled to aid and came to favor a strong, interventionist federal government, but the connections she draws between this and the unionization of Chicago factories remain tenuous. Correlation, as they say, is not causation; but Cohen argues, both implicitly and explicitly, that workers' preference for government intervention was a major factor in the labor struggles of the 1930s. If Cohen had acknowledged that labor solidarity and preference for big-government welfare programs were but two symptoms of worker's frustration, and accordingly broadened and adjusted her thesis, her chapter about Chicagoans attitudes vis-à-vis big government could have provided excellent support for her final argument. In the context of her overarching thesis, however, the chapter seems almost like a square peg in a round hole. Instead of letting her explanations-albeit insightful-of the working class's political consciousness reflect back on the people who hold them, she advances the somewhat further-fetched notion that worker's political experiences led directly to the later growth of unionization. None of this, however, detracts from her excellent account of the organizations and institutions that were shared between the too. Cohen primarily fails by not supporting her argument that these interrelations were anything more than marriages of political expediency forged in desperate times. That the Communists dabbled in both the labor movement and various forms of political activism does not mean that both were one and the same. Cohen rejects the simple explanation that they were both separate outlets for the collective rage of the underemployed.
   
   Ask many American historians for a short answer why the CIO was so successful in the 30s, and they may answer: because of the NLRA, hesitance of local, state, and federal governments to take the politically inexpedient step of supporting industry, and, most importantly, a mass of desperate workers imbued with a newfound distrust for the system that had betrayed them. This is essentially the answer Lizabeth Cohen arrives at; she simply takes a circuitous-if enjoyable-path to reach it. She provides a complex, nuanced answer in a place where a simple answer might do. Perhaps she's asking a different question than it appears she is. The title of her book, Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939, implies that she's looking at a topic broader than the unionization of Chicago factories, but by bookending her many salient and though-provoking claims with the tales of 1919's failed strike and the CIO's ascendancy in the 1930s, she is limiting the scope of her book far too narrowly. Nonetheless, nothing is intrinsically wrong with any of Cohen's arguments and she provides a fascinating window into the mind of America's urban, industrial workforce during the depression.



5. In Making a New Deal Lizabeth Cohen has produced the sort of cultural history many historians only dream of writing. It is both meticulously researched, witness the 140 pages of end notes, and beautifully written. She employs quantitative analysis, material culture interpretations, and oral histories to recover the world of Chicago industrial workers, particularly steelworkers, tractor assemblers, and meatpackers, between 1919 and 1939. As would be expected from the Thompsonish title, Cohen argues that these workers were active participants in the creation of the New Deal. She demonstrates that workers' response to the Depression was shaped by the reconfiguration in the 1920s of both ethnicity and work place relationships, and the growth of mass culture. Workers made the New Deal as part of a process whereby diverse cultural experiences were replaced by homogeneous ones. How did this happen?
   
   Cohen begins her book with the defeat of labour's efforts to maintain the wages and conditions they won during the First World War. She argues that after 1919 'localisms' of 'race, ethnicity, job, and neighborhood' undercut the ability of workers to resist 'employers insisting on the open shop, government engaged in Red Scare tactics, and craft unions resistant to organizing industrial workers' (p. 38). Suffice to say that although her argument here is not groundbreaking Cohen takes the time to delineate how these 'localisms' separated workers even as they fought for similar
   goals. Her focus on the local nature of workers' experiences shows that although the 1920s was a stagnant period for union activism, workers' cultures were politically charged. For instance, ethnic identities were reshaped in those years as mutual benefit societies and community based 'banks' expanded their base from regional to national origin communities and adopted more commercial methods of business. Likewise the struggle of immigrant Italian catholics against the American church hierarchy transformed patron saint festivals from village or Chicago neighbourhood traditions into an Italian-American tradition. As Cohen writes, 'ethnic organizations introduced workers to the world outside their neighborhoods while ensuring that it was still an ethnic one' (p. 95).
   
   Workers' encounters with mass culture in the 1920s were also mediated by ethnic and neighbourhood identities. The purchase of a standardised mass produced item, such as a phonograph, did not automatically draw workers into a homogeneous American middle class culture. Rather it helped keep ethnic cultures alive as major American record companies re-pressed European recordings and recruited immigrant entertainers for original releases. Chicago was also an important centre of 'race records' and independent producers who catered to ethnic audiences. Cohen argues that a commodity could help a person retain or lose a cultural identity. 'What mattered were the experiences and expectations that the consumer brought to the object' (p.106). Workers were less inclined to buy standardised brand name products from cash and carry chain
   stores that blossomed in the 1920s, such as A & P, because neighbourhood grocers provided credit and were more convenient. Nonetheless the pressure of competition forced independent grocers to organise co-operative wholesale purchases and stock brand name goods. Movies and radio were also first consumed in local and ethnic variants before being subjected to chain ownership. Mass culture was not simply imposed from the top but rather shaped through the interaction of consumers predilections and the methods of distribution. Cohen points to jazz as an example of how one folk culture made it in the mainstream.
   
   Workers' identities were also shaped in the workplace where employers sought to create loyalty, increase productivity, and head off militancy, through various welfare schemes. In an effort to ensure individual loyalty employers broke up ethnic and race work groups. They thought this would erase group solidarity and produce a more docile workforce. Instead it promoted worker solidarity. Cohen shows that workers acted together to resist speed ups and other attempts to increase their productivity. The experiments conducted at the Chicago area's largest employer, the Hawthorne Works of Western Electric, by Australian born Elton Mayo receive a mention, as does the fact that these workers dubbed rate breakers 'Phar Lap', but Cohen does not make the obvious connection. Although workers did not give employers their unmitigated loyalty, they came to expect employers to meet some of their welfare needs. Workers noticed when the boss did not deliver on these expectations and this widened the gap between them and employers.
   
   In the 1920s workers forged peer communities that existed side by side with traditional institutions that shaped worker and ethnic identities. When the Depression swept these institutions away workers turned to each other for support and mobilized to demand intervention by the federal government. Cohen's final chapters chronicle the pressure workers applied to the Democratic administration, which it had elected, for laws that protected their right to organise unions and for the equitable distribution of welfare. She also devotes a chapter to the rise of the CIO in Chicago. Cohen shows that Chicago's industrial workers invested their future in a centralised national welfare state and a centralised national union of factory workers. She notes that although these institutions were no safeguard of workers liberty, and in some ways came to imprison them, it is important to understand what rank and file workers accomplished.
   
   This book established Cohen as one of the great historians of her generation.

5 comments about Survival Jobs: 154 Ways To Make Money While Pursuing Your Dreams.

1. It's definitely a must read book for people who would like to build a "portfolio career". If you are not for the 9-5 office culture and you'd rather do a more interesting and unconventional job.

   This book will guide you through a series of weird, fun and unusual jobs. As the titled reveals, they will probably be only for survival, so forget the big bucks if you want to work as a personal shopper, a focus group participant or a food demonstrator.

   A good and well written reference book. Keep in mind that it would be easier to get those jobs if you live in a big city.

   By Thei Zervaki, a career and business coach




2. This is a silly little book. The ideas are a poorly written patchwork with little real guidance. It is the equivalent of many of the "spam" mail scams that we constantly receive offering "work at home opportunities"

   I believe the writer takes advantage of people looking for solid advice. It is difficult enough for people trying to survive, be it as an actor, musician or whatever without shelling out money for such a mis-guided and simple minded product.

   Apparently from what I read the author quit the entertainment industry and becam a Cantor (which was not listed as one of the 154 ways to make money), so apparently the advice in the book did not work for her!

   Save your hard earned money, don't waste your time on this book.




3. I cannot say enough good stuff about this book. Wow! It basically details amazingly innovative ideas for how to make money without having to take a 9 to 5 job in LA. This book reshaped the way I pursued income and is the best non-acting book for actors I can recommend. I currently have six freelance jobs (and have had as many as ten different ones at a time this year) and I love the flexibility, financial stability, and freedom to be creative that this lifestyle provides. Not for everyone, but if you're tired of the "golden handcuffs" that a full time job can be in this town, this book will open doors for you, big time!



4. I've referred back to this book several times during my life when I was between jobs. It's very useful. It has a lot of original ideas that I wouldn't have considered otherwise. Well worth the money.



5. I began reading this book as an actor hoping to find some alternatives to waiting tables. I didn't make it very far when the book lost most of it's credibility. The title of this thread references "the office" thanks to an episode where Michael, not knowing about pyramid schemes, introduces one to his employees. I was a bit shocked to find that the author of this book actually listed pyramid schemes or as they are called in the book and by the starters of these scams, "Multi-level marketing."
   Shortly thereafter she suggest starting a 900 number. Sadly, i'm not kidding. Then, Yardsales? Is this really a suggestion?
   Then I came across my current job, waiter. Apparently I will need to talk to my boss tomorrow, as here we are 10 years later and I'm still not making minimum wage plus tips. Try 2.13. Which brings me to my next complaint or point and that is a lack of research as most of the job write ups seem to be based on a lot of hearsay.
   
   Based on experience I can say that several jobs, like that of the "DJ" and "waiter", are suggested and talked about in this book with most of the information being "hearsay" and flat out false. There appears to be very little research in any of the jobs suggested in this book.
   
   I could go on and on about the flaws in this book. I can only venture that the bulk of the good reviews are friends or family of the author. That is the only way to explain it receiving anything that resembles a positive review. I only hope that Mrs Deborah Jacobson is through writing books or giving employment advice at least as this book is the equivalent of a overweight person giving out tips on dieting. Do yourself a favor and pass on this book.

5 comments about Discover What You're Best At.

1. This book is great for help in determing where your strengths are. A good book for anyone looking for a career path or vocation. The tests were very thorough.



2. If you feel like taking some assessment tests, to determine what career path is right for you, then you might enjoy this book, "Discover What Your Best At". This large paperback book was originally published in 1982, and it was then updated in 1990, and again in 1998. This book could be a useful tool for someone who is approaching the age where they need to choose a career, but are still undecided. It can also be helpful to those who have been established in the workforce for a long time, but feel that they are not properly utilizing their talents.
   
   This is comprised of questionnaires and self- tests designed to help identify your personal skill set.I found the tests to be fairly easy overall, but I admit that there were a few questions that did require a lot more thinking through than others. The results of my tests didn't surprise me at all, and neither did the lists of recommended career occupations. Before I even took the tests, I predicted that the order I would score, from highest to lowest, would be Business, Clerical, Logic, Numeric, Social, and then Mechanical. My actual finish was Clerical, Business, Numeric, Logic, Social, and Mechanical.
   
   This is not a book that gives advice and counseling to the interested party. It's just a book of self- tests, and a list of the occupations that match the results. The author doesn't really go into great detail about the selection of a career. This book is really meant as a starting point. Once you have an idea about the different career options that are compatible to your skill level, you can then conduct more research on those careers and decide if they are really best for you.
   
   Overall, this is a decent book, and I think it will be most valuable to high school graduates who are curious about their own skills and aptitudes. For established workers, it probably won't tell you anything that you don't already know about yourself. Because of this, I can only rate this an average book overall.



3. The tests in this book would probably work best for someone at the early college level. I say this because as an adult with a degree behind me, and years of work/life experience, I took all the tests . . . and found that I scored extremely high in every area. How does this help me? It doesn't. I believe the high scores are a result of life experience - I knew the answers - not because I am gifted in every area, but simply because I have lived long enough to learn the answers. So, in order for this test to measure a person's aptitude, they need to NOT have too much life experience. The only area in which a person may get acurate results even as an older adult is in Logic. Those questions did seem to test the way you think - can you think abstractly? That is an area that may be more difficult to "learn" - most of us are either abstract or concrete thinkers by nature.



4. I loved this book! It contains several timed tests for you to give yourself and then you figure your results and the book lists tons of carreer choices for your own specific abilities- according to how much formal education you have. I bought this book when I was an older teen, took it then-loved it, took it again as a thirty-something married mom and still found it helpful. I found it interesting that some of my abilities changed over time- some better, some not as good. I highly recommend this book to anyone- especially if you are searching for some direction or would like to know what you are fully capable of!



5. I needed help finding what i should do in the long run for a career, and this books tests you to see your strengths and weaknesses, and also what you would be best at progressing in. It also gives you lists of jobs and their descriptions that would suit you best.