MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971650560 · doi:10.1108/03068290010354063

Labor rights and labor power and welfare maximization in a market economy ‐ Revising the conventional wisdom

2000· article· en· W1971650560 on OpenAlexaff
Morris Altman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Social Economics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsProsperityProductivityPower (physics)WelfareMarket powerLabour economicsMaximizationMarket economyMicroeconomicsMacroeconomicsMonopoly

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standard neoclassical theory argues that an economy is negatively affected by increased labor rights and power since it is assumed that economic agents are always x‐efficient; performing at the height of efficiency. However, a behavioral model of the firm suggests that more rights and power, with its positive impact on labor standards, need not produce the deleterious results predicted by conventional economic wisdom, due to their productivity‐efficiency enhancing impact on the firm. This suggests that we should not assess the impact of enhanced labor power and control in terms of a zero sum game. It is possible to have both equilibrium improvements in working conditions and economic prosperity, with the former contributing to the latter.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Social EconomicsSame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207