work time

Rahul Mahajan rahul at
Fri Apr 26 14:42:17 MDT 1996

>At 2:54 PM 4/26/96, Rahul Mahajan wrote:
>>Thanks for the stats, Doug. It would be nice to know what analysis they're
>>based on. Does she mention it in the book? In any case, I always want to
>>tear my hair out when I see stuff like this. I mean, you have to doubt the
>>analysis of anyone who seems to have no recognition of the limitations of
>>his/her work. 2309 hours in 1500? Not, say, 2308 or 2310? This kind of
>>thing is all too common these days, and most people don't think twice about


>Oh yeah, of course; I know that, and she knows that. Even the best social
>stats - e.g. those produced by the U.S. government agencies, which are
>generally close to if not the best in the world - are estimates. Schor's
>sources are all given in the footnotes to the table (on page 45). I'm too
>lazy to type them.

That's not my problem. The problem is trying to appear more exact than you
are. Either explicitly mention error bars, or just write 2300 instead of


     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list