The unemployed collaborate unwittingly, in controlling inflation.
You could say that "Indifference is profitable" if he could substantiate.
Could you say that "The need takes away bargaining power" if he could substantiate.
An example of each case:
- If you buy or not to buy a certain item gives me the same, (indifference), I will not be willing to make any effort just to have it. I will get it only if it is very cheap or if I give it away.
- If I'm desperate for some object (need) maybe willing to pay more expensive than it's worth.
For several centuries, economists have failed to reduce poverty but working with her know when they suggest that to avoid inflation needs to be unemployed workers.
How does this work?
If work is not easy to get unemployed people will drop their claims to earn lots of money because, as I said above, "The need takes away bargaining power".
Conversely, if the unemployment rate is very low, are entrepreneurs who suffer from the need for workers and, therefore, will be the entrepreneurs who suffer "The need removing them bargaining power". Since employers can not occur if not make a profit, there will be an inflationary phenomenon because the costs will be larger employers having to pay higher wages.
Indifference is equivalent to satiety and hunger equates need.
If employers offer jobs they coveted job for many unemployed will feel like kings, but if they need workers and are not those same kings will feel like beggars.
Hunger and satiety determine all the phenomena of the economy. The governing body of this science is not the brain but the stomach.
Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google): La economía es una ciencia estomacal.
(Este es el Artículo Nº 2.114)