Sythesis, as stated in our book, is just a "combination of two tings that presents them anew". They are not quite compare and contrast but come close. In sythesis you are forced to have the ability to make "leaps from differences/similarities to critical claims in both texts".
In "Roger & Me", Micheal Moore expresses how devistating unemployment was in his home town Flint, Michigan, through a documentary. Most unemployment occurs because the company does not have sufficient amount of money to pay all of the workers, and still maintain their output, as we can see in the film "Roger & Me". The author of the article "Model of Keynesian Depression, Involuntary Unemployment" states that "reducing supple eliminates the excess supply of commodities by throwing the burden of excess supply back on the labor market. Thus output and employment give way before proces do". This is why, firtst off, that so many people got laid off from General Moters, and second why it took so long for the town of Flint to get itself back on the map after the closing of GM. Once the people are laid off they are in such demand for money to get out of unemployment, but their expectations are too high when they try to get back into the force, they ultimatly fail agian. "One major problem is the level of money income is too low to provide for full employment".
Companies are too consumed with maintaining their output at a high level and make more money than having to spend in employee wages. This is ultimatly why General Motors started laying off workers in "Roger & Me". Its a shame, but it is the harsh reality.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Brittany, the "Keynesian" article seems, in some ways, the perfect complement to the Michael Moore documentary. It provides an explanation of the economics behind the Flint plant closings, while also demonstrating how this is not a rare phenomenon. There are a lot of things you can do, as you demonstrated, with combining these two source materials to come up with a fresh discussion of the issue at hand. Well done!
I find it interesting that so many companies find laying off mass amount workers as a the best solution to make up for a loss in output. Maybe the companies should look into the structure of their business or their products and see if they can improve upon those things before they lay off workers. Without enough workers how are they going to make quality products that people are going to want to buy?
Post a Comment