It is not about one single model of labour markets or working life, it concerns those who are economically inactive as well as those in work, requiring cost effective allocation of resources, and a climate of trust, apparently. It also claims to support gender equality but I really do have to wonder if flexibility to suit the employer will over-ride the concept of flexibility to meet the needs of the workers.
I think the invisible pink unicorn has been visiting again.
It's a rising tide which lifts all boats. It supports gender equality. It promotes social inclusion. It's cost-effective. It kills 99% of all known germs dead, washes whiter than white, makes you healthier and your life more exciting and fulfilled, and gives you a free widescreen plasma TV. (Offer void where prohibited by law.)
This looks like transparent spin to me - taking The Needs of the Market [tm] and sugar-frosting them with a layer of progressive cliches to make them look sort of left-ish. (Look! Over there!)
Perhaps a more interesting question - what would a truly progressive economy look like?
"what would a truly progressive economy look like?"
What a very good question. Does it need to go along with; "what kind of Government would we trust to deliver a 'truly progressive economy' that doesn't end up shafting everybody except the rich?"
There are some aspects of flexicurity that could be worth consideration, but I don't trust my Government (or any of the alternatives in the UK) to deliver that fairly, with the required investment. Ad astra per aspera
In the real world that probably has an infinite number of answers.
In my not so humble opinion, social-democratic parties are backing this idea due to their highly dogmatic doctrine of full employment, which they can't let go of.
Full employment is just not a viable proposition in any capitalist system (whether French, Anglo-Saxon, or Rhine 'model'). Unless you dump your long-term jobless into the sick/disabled category and increase temp work, as the Dutch and British are wont to.
Your last question is, like, the mother of all questions. Let's have a debate.
Full employment is just not a viable proposition in any capitalist system
I'd like to read what you have to say about that. Diary?
