4 ms·
By wishful thinking. (I.e. the theory is that people are so much happier with shorter working hours that they come up with the same productivity. However, with
by ptaipale 10y ago
By wishful thinking.
(I.e. the theory is that people are so much happier with shorter working hours that they come up with the same productivity. However, with a drop from 8 to 6 hours this doesn't really happen, although the productivity does not drop 25 % as it would without any dynamic effects).
- saurik 10y agoNo: you misunderstand this line of thinking, as the goal of this subthread is not to increase efficiency or health but to mitigate unemployment in the wake of automation. The argument is similar to a minumum wage increase, where we pay people more for the same work, and about which you can make the same backhanded complaint; only instead of helping only the people with jobs (as a minimum wage increase doesn't affect you if you do not already have a wage), it brings more people into the job force while having the same effect on the bottom line of businesses (that they are paying more for the same output, only instead of giving more money to one person they are giving that money to more people). The real issues are that it assumes work that scales well to having more people involved and that it breaks the market for low-value work; but the latter issue is the same core problem with mimumum wage increases, and the person who commented with this understands, saying this is only a way to transition a society which refuses to admit basic income as a better solution due to the "welfare state" argument (which is really the same reasonable defense of the minimum wage, as well).