{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019031857674803476, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011170872983036822, 'mean_word_length': 5.346456692913386, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Ellis Goldberg, Tinker, Tailor, and Textile Worker: Class and Politics in Egypt, 1930–1952 . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. 234 pp.

Ledoux, whose mass demonstrations both heightened public awareness of the problem and helped fix attention on the role of government after the 1890s. By the opening decades of the twentieth century, Progressive reformers, organized in the American Association for Labor Legislation, assembled a legislative package that listed such familiar measures as expanding public labor exchanges and increasing levels of countercyclical public spending, along with a bolder initiative for unemployment insurance. In 1916, Massachusetts legislators debated the nation's first unemployment insurance act but bowed to stiff opposition from business groups, now more enamored of corporate welfarism, and from organized labor, still devoted to voluntarism and more inclined to seek such contractual remedies as the closed shop. Fifty years after Bay Staters first recognized modern unemployment, Massachusetts still had no explicit policy to cushion the bumps. The state's officials had no more sophisticated an understanding of unemployment than their favorite son who entered the White House in 1923. This otherwise comprehensive and compelling anlaysis falls short in two respects. Keyssar paints a static picture of worker strategies for coping with unemployment; he assumes that nothing much changed at the private level in the five decades embraced by his study. Such a conclusion seems unlikely on its face and inconsistent with smatterings of evidence on the workings of the household economy in the Progressive years. In any event, it is difficult and perhaps impossible to tell how working people grappled with periodic spells of idleness without exposing the interior of domestic life. More controversial perhaps is Keyssar's support for the Perlman thesis. Chronic unemployment may have forged job consciousness and all it implies, but one should be wary of such a claim without benefit of a comparative perspective. If studies of English and German workers, who turned more easily to industrial unionism, reveal comparable rates and frequencies of unemployment, there would be reason to believe forces other than (or in addition to) scarcity shaped the scope of trade unionism. Until we have such an analysis, the impact of unemployment on union forms will remain open.