Talk:Labour economics

message: In writing/editing this article I have tried to present the basic concepts of LE to both non-economists and undergrad economics students. There may be one or two places near the end of the article that the non-economist will have difficulty with, and there will be some places near the beginning that the economics undergrad will find simplistic, but I hope I've acheived a reasonable balance.
This article just skims the surface of LE. I have deliberately omitted such LE concepts as: 
*labour markets and fiscal policy
*labour markets and general equilibrium
*aggregate supply derivation 
*employment and inflation
*minimum wage laws
*human capital theory
*unions and collective bargaining
*discrimination
*unemployment insurance
*income tax
*payroll tax 
I think all of these are better handled as separate articles. Firstly, because they are not central to LE fundamentals, and secondly the article is already 9 computer screens long (which is 3 screens longer than my usual self imposed limit). mydogategodshat 23:59, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Shaun, Thanks for the insights, I have added some of your comments to the article. Feel free to add more. mydogategodshat 04:41, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: older entries

message: The first sentence states this: "Labour economics seeks to understand the functioning of the market and dynamics for labour."  I am not sure market in this sense has an ambiguous meaning (what kind of market? is labour economics always about markets?).  Eg, would a work like this fit into the above description: Stone Age Economics by Marshall Sahlins  ?  Or Kautsky's Agrarian Question  (specifically am thinking of the analysis of self-exploitation by peasants)? A potential revision for this sentence might be: "Labour economics seeks to understand the functioning, cost and dynamics of labour."--Goldsztajn (talk) 23:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment,question on first sentence? 

message: "Wage is a basic compensation for labour" should this not be qualified as ""Wage is a basic compensation for *paid* labour"?  Unfree labour or unpaid labour does not produce wages, but surely concepts within the rubric of labour economics?--Goldsztajn (talk) 23:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed.--Goldsztajn (talk) 11:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment, question on Compensation and measurement 

message: The section on microeconomics of labor asserts:
:The labour market also acts as a non-clearing market. Whereas most markets have a point of equilibrium without excess surplus or demand, the labour market is expected to have a persistent level of unemployment. Contrasting the labour market to other markets also reveals persistent compensating differentials among similar workers.
:The competitive assumption leads to clear conclusions — workers earn their marginal product of labour.
These assertions are misleading. The way they are written makes it sound as if 'non-clearing' means supply>demand. But what's emphasized instead in the modern search and matching theory that won this year's Nobel is the simultaneous existence of unemployed workers and unfilled vacancies. That is, the modern approach emphasizes frictions that prevent all transactions from occurring instantaneously. It does not claim insufficient demand for labor. 
So the dubious assertions should either be deleted, or they should be rewritten in a way that emphasizes frictions (and directs the reader to the later section on search and matching theory. Rinconsoleao (talk) 08:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  dubious assertions 

message: Does anyone know why this page is in this category?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.37.11 (talk) 17:01, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Core Issues in Ethics" Category? 

message: A respondent to my request for peer review of Motivation crowding theory suggested that I ask for comments and article improvement ideas here. I am most interested in ideas for expansion. Please respond at Talk:Motivation crowding theory. Thank you! Selery (talk) 16:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please review [[Motivation crowding theory]] 

message: Why is "Labor Economics," a major field of economics, "part of a series on Organized Labor"? Although organized labor is explored in labor economics, it is a scholarly discipline with a wide scope.  I think this article would be better off as part of a series on Economics, as its current categorization suggests the Labor Economics has an ideological slant towards organized labor. Mr.glegg (talk) 14:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: Why is this article still in British English after it was obviously started in American English, and was changed without any consent? Shouldn't it still be at Labor economics as it was started in 2002?  ~~ipuser 94.14.212.141 (talk) 06:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: people are as well to ignore the above comment as it's posted by a well-known anti-british troll  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.99.189.241 (talk) 11:27, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert to original spelling please 

message: Dr. Stancanelli has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:
We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.
We believe Dr. Stancanelli has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:
*Reference : Elena Stancanelli & Arthur Van Soest, 2012. "Joint Leisure Before and After Retirement : a double Regression Discontinuity Approach," Universite Paris1 Pantheon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00768901, HAL.
ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 16:39, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dr. Stancanelli's comment on this article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Labour economics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120406233830/http://www.soc.washington.edu/users/brines/cain.pdf to http://www.soc.washington.edu/users/brines/cain.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080217040912/http://labour.ceps.lu/ to http://labour.ceps.lu/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:26, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why are there no citations for this section? The information in this section is easily verifiable by any macroeconomics textbook. Would anyone oppose me using Mankiw's Principles of Macroeconomics text in order to rephrase and add citations to this section?
Morganrasco0315 (talk) 16:48, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Macroecnomics of Labor Section 

message: Would anyone be opposed to changing the title of the section to "Asymmetric Information"? I was thoroughly confused by the title of the section and how it linked to the information provided in the section. Actually, would anyone mind if I included more information from Managerial Economics written by Froeb (and others) in order to more explain how adverse selection and its role in work?
Morganrasco0315 (talk) 16:56, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information Approaches section 

message: “The labour market in macroeconomic theory shows that the supply of labour exceeds demand, which has been proven by salary growth that lags productivity growth. When labour supply exceeds demand, salary faces downward pressure due to an employer's ability to pick from a labour pool that exceeds the jobs pool. However, if the demand for labour is larger than the supply, salary increases, as employee have more bargaining power while employers have to compete for scarce labour.“ 50.93.222.59 (talk) 02:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammatical errors / non-native speaker contribution