Popular reality is an object; material or subjective, that satisfies the test of traditional senses. These material aspects serve as objective purposes in the stability of organisation. And their social values bind relations in the formation of society.
If you look at the definition, reality is a dynamic complex spanning from the linear material to social diverse of objective existence. If you focus on the material object you are likely to miss the social; hence, trees for the forest.
In the current state of affairs, society is blaming Unemployment for crime and violence in society. It follows that the Unemployed have found themselves with no money and plenty of time. They cannot afford to buy and satisfy the objects of their desires, so they engage in creative and alternative means of making ends meet.
Having said that, I think it is not Unemployment that results with violence and crime rather it is addiction.
So we know that society is bound by social values at the same time material objects serve as means of maintaining the same social values or binding society. If employers are bound by the same social values of society, why then are they not promoting employment for the Unemployed such as increasing wages and improving the conditions at work? Instead, Employers join in the chorus to lament the social shame of the Unemployed.;p>
Clearly, the above reality demonstrates separate systems at work. Employers are governed by one system; the material system while the Unemployed is governed by another system; the social system; a dichotomy at work. This I have made reference to the tendency of missing the trees for the forest.
The whole affair could be easily interpreted as the failure of one group is burdened by the availability of another. This is usually typical in the case of ethnic or gender discrimination. It explains the need for an available group to be blamed for the failure of another. That relieves the blame and stigma from Employers to add further shine to their product. And there you go, the availability of the Unemployed adds value to the product.
Further, the Unemployed is deployed by Employers as a bargaining tool to keep wages low. Those Unemployed are used as a 'reserve army of unemployed' to take over low paid jobs that are rejected by smart New Zealanders. In this case, the refusal of the Unemployed New Zealanders to take up low paid jobs have Planters and Farmers opt to hirer third world workers on low pay and at the same time keeping their profit margins high.
However, it makes sense for the case of the Unemployed by refusing low paid menial jobs as a form of protest to influence the Planter and Farmer to raise the standards for local workers. But Employers are one step ahead by establishing an army of unemployed and thus keeping the standards for workers static.
This alone can have major social consequences when goods and services are priced in first world rates while manufactured from third world labour. The consumer makes up the difference in the cost of living.
At the same time, global consumer links have raised awareness of goods and services that produce toxic waste and environmental pollution. Also on the sensitive list of ethical production are child and slave labour and the rise of diversity of labour.
Further down the spiral follows claims that the Unemployed is mainly the result of those who have left schools without qualification. But there is a valid debate that not all employed have qualifications and even those who own successful businesses do not. At the same time, thousands of graduates have opt to work overseas for reasons of wages and debts.
Among other blames for Unemployment is Education that is not in sync with society's work industry but I think this one is truly buried in the political debate.
Employers are known to have made workers redundant in order to increase profits. Moreover, it is fair to say that Employers can manipulate his/her resources including investments and stock to produce a favourable outcome suitable for his/her business.
I have written earlier on somewhere how labour relations have changed in the modern work force. You wouldn't believe that Education and qualification have little to do with Employment. Instead, it has a lot to do with diversity of social relations.
You might be a top qualified worker, but if the management among like workmates don't like you, then that's just too bad. It is your word against them. But just how long is this development can continue without obvious effects on production therefore the economy is a matter of time.
The emerging relations of the modern work force is replacing the middle management layer with a political culture of diversity. Relations of this culture is somewhat personal as opposed to the previous regime of impersonal animation.
It maintains the status quo particularly the Underclass and stereotypes are reinforced in decision-making. And this is a fortuitous event for labour relations with the Pacific. The personal and stereotypical approach maintains the Underclass in the reserve army of Unemployment. But for as long as low income is maintained, labour demands the third world labour not only to keep wages at static level but also to increase profit margin.
And developments at the bottom of the structure has always being and related in economic cycles. It could be foster to maintain relevant relations with the third worlds. It also makes sense of the inevitable economic wellbeing in the emerging green economy of diversity and universalism.
While this development remains the target of macho tribalism, it is checked in the management level of labour relations. But the momentous labour relations can develop further into trade relations with reviews to other developmental goals.