4 ms·

It is solved. Everybody can choose a job where they works less hours or become a freelancer and work as many hours as they want. This doesn't work on a global s

It is solved. Everybody can choose a job where they works less hours or become a freelancer and work as many hours as they want. This doesn't work on a global scale, but as an individual, that choice is possible. The problem is that people want to buy more than they can afford from doing less work. There is no way to resolve this. As long as there are status goods like sneakers for $1000, people will have to work the hours needed to afford them. You can only have fewer hours if everything is standardized to the point that machines do all the work. But who wants to live in such a world of uniformity?

jeena 7y ago
I don't agree, humans worked for 80 hours a week and then together reduced to 40 hours a week. I don't see why they could not reduce it to 30 or 20 hours a week. Everyone worked on a Saturday then suddenly most of the people stopped working on the Saturday, I don't see why it would be impossible for most of the people in the society to stop working on Friday too.
- ianai 7y ago
  Exactly! Weekends only exist because workers unionized and forced them to be a thing. In the US, the government is supposed to create and reinforce individual liberties and property rights. That means creating a legal framework around personal property. It should be protective of peoples’ time as well.
- southerndrift 7y ago
  Because 40 hours a week are, if you remove vacations, holidays and sick leaves, on average roughly 4 hours per day. That's the amount tribal people work per day. There is no inherent human need to reduce that time further. As I said, people can already work for 30 or 20 hours per week. Why is it not enough for you if you stop working on Friday? Do you want 30 or 20 hours per week with equal pay? Then indeed you have to reduce the supply of work to rise hourly wages. But then, less is produced, the supply of goods is reduced and thus things cost more, most likely disproportionally more than the increase in wages.
  - jeena 7y ago
    > But then, less is produced That is obviously not true because of two things: 1. Machines take over and do work and create goods 2. Humans are more productive than they were before Here is a handy graph which I found googling https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-graphical-representation-showing-the-relationship-between-human-productivity-machine_fig2_228835037 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-graphical-representati...
    - southerndrift 7y ago
      Machines only compensate for humans to a certain extend because they are already used as much as possible. If humans work less then there is not the same output because there are no hidden opportunities where machines can do more work. I stick with my original point: If humans work less then there is less output. We are more productive now, but that surplus is used to put a supercomputer into the hand of every person and new clothes to wear every other month. If people wouldn't buy that, then the increase in productivity could lead to less working hours. Btw, as far as I understand your graph, it is not telling that we are more productive but that farms are more productive if they are bigger. As far as I know, Western workers are just more productive because they assemble pre-made parts and the final value of the product is ascribed to them when in reality, they just profit from wage differences. That's not sustainable. If that wage difference is ever closed then people will even get less for the same amount of work.
  - jedrek 7y ago
    > Because 40 hours a week are, if you remove vacations, holidays and sick leaves, on average roughly 4 hours per day. I'm sorry, but who told you this? The median amount of PTO in American companies is 10 days + 8 days of Federal holidays. That 18 days vs 260 weekdays, or 7% of the work year, meaning the average American works 7.5 hours a day, not 4.
    - southerndrift 7y ago
      Tribal people don't have weekends. It's 2*52 days + 18 days = 122 days out of 365. That's 5.3h per day. To me, that is close enough to 4 hours that people don't feel stressed to the point that there is a desire for change. In comparision, people spend 3 hours on average watching TV.
silveroriole 7y ago
> You can only have fewer hours if everything is standardized to the point that machines do all the work. But who wants to live in such a world of uniformity? Sounds great to me. I don’t want a choice in most things anyway. I hate it when I find myself dithering in a shop over whether to pick this brand or that when they probably come from the same factory anyway. Let me work less AND expend less effort making choices!

jeena 7y ago

I don't agree, humans worked for 80 hours a week and then together reduced to 40 hours a week. I don't see why they could not reduce it to 30 or 20 hours a week. Everyone worked on a Saturday then suddenly most of the people stopped working on the Saturday, I don't see why it would be impossible for most of the people in the society to stop working on Friday too.

ianai 7y ago
Exactly! Weekends only exist because workers unionized and forced them to be a thing. In the US, the government is supposed to create and reinforce individual liberties and property rights. That means creating a legal framework around personal property. It should be protective of peoples’ time as well.
southerndrift 7y ago
Because 40 hours a week are, if you remove vacations, holidays and sick leaves, on average roughly 4 hours per day. That's the amount tribal people work per day. There is no inherent human need to reduce that time further. As I said, people can already work for 30 or 20 hours per week. Why is it not enough for you if you stop working on Friday? Do you want 30 or 20 hours per week with equal pay? Then indeed you have to reduce the supply of work to rise hourly wages. But then, less is produced, the supply of goods is reduced and thus things cost more, most likely disproportionally more than the increase in wages.
- jeena 7y ago
  > But then, less is produced That is obviously not true because of two things: 1. Machines take over and do work and create goods 2. Humans are more productive than they were before Here is a handy graph which I found googling https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-graphical-representation-showing-the-relationship-between-human-productivity-machine_fig2_228835037 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-graphical-representati...
  - southerndrift 7y ago
    Machines only compensate for humans to a certain extend because they are already used as much as possible. If humans work less then there is not the same output because there are no hidden opportunities where machines can do more work. I stick with my original point: If humans work less then there is less output. We are more productive now, but that surplus is used to put a supercomputer into the hand of every person and new clothes to wear every other month. If people wouldn't buy that, then the increase in productivity could lead to less working hours. Btw, as far as I understand your graph, it is not telling that we are more productive but that farms are more productive if they are bigger. As far as I know, Western workers are just more productive because they assemble pre-made parts and the final value of the product is ascribed to them when in reality, they just profit from wage differences. That's not sustainable. If that wage difference is ever closed then people will even get less for the same amount of work.
- jedrek 7y ago
  > Because 40 hours a week are, if you remove vacations, holidays and sick leaves, on average roughly 4 hours per day. I'm sorry, but who told you this? The median amount of PTO in American companies is 10 days + 8 days of Federal holidays. That 18 days vs 260 weekdays, or 7% of the work year, meaning the average American works 7.5 hours a day, not 4.
  - southerndrift 7y ago
    Tribal people don't have weekends. It's 2*52 days + 18 days = 122 days out of 365. That's 5.3h per day. To me, that is close enough to 4 hours that people don't feel stressed to the point that there is a desire for change. In comparision, people spend 3 hours on average watching TV.

silveroriole 7y ago

> You can only have fewer hours if everything is standardized to the point that machines do all the work. But who wants to live in such a world of uniformity? Sounds great to me. I don’t want a choice in most things anyway. I hate it when I find myself dithering in a shop over whether to pick this brand or that when they probably come from the same factory anyway. Let me work less AND expend less effort making choices!