Re: Reply to Nicolle

Kym Horsell (
23 Sep 1996 16:29:21 +1000

In article <>,
<> wrote:
>Now I will explain to you why! The crux of my posts are Economics.
>The reality of the situation which probably goes back to the beginning
>of time is that there is lower Economic demand for the services of
>women relative to men. You can tout the virtues, talents, and even
>superiority of women as much as you want, but you cannot dictate to
>a labor buyer what his perception of worth for women should be. The
>law of supply and demand simply does not work this way because only
>the buyer formulates his own concept of worth AND NO ONE ELSE DOES

One of the conclusions we can draw from what is estimated to represent
about 1/2 of a W country's GDP -- i.e. unpaid housework and childminding --
NOT being included in said GDP (along -- of course -- with all illegal
activities such as smuggling of various kinds) is that classical economics
does not correspond to reality.

To argue that "women's work" goes largely unrecognised in economic terms,
in relation to the "law of supply and demand", again simply points to
something "wrong" with said "law".

As for the last sentence "that no-one else does it for him [sic]" re
the concepts of worth -- I can only imagine they don't have advertising
(aka "monkey see -- monkey do") where you come from...

R. Kym Horsell
KHorsell@EE.Latrobe.EDU.AU kym@CS.Binghamton.EDU
http://WWW.EE.LaTrobe.EDU.AU/~khorsell http://CS.Binghamton.EDU/~kym