3 ms·
The comments on this seem trapped by conventional thinking and pessimism. At a time, the 40 hour work week was seen as a fantasy that, if inacted, would destroy
by gdubs 7y ago
The comments on this seem trapped by conventional thinking and pessimism. At a time, the 40 hour work week was seen as a fantasy that, if inacted, would destroy the economy. Instead, we saw rising productivity due to lower rates of illness and injury, among other factors. [1]
People aren’t robots, and there’s nothing magical about the current number of days and hours considered “normal”. There’s plenty to suggest that such a move would be a net benefit for society and the economy.
1: Robert Gordon, “The Rise and Fall of American Growth.”
- chasd00 7y agoif 5 days worked (down from 7) and 4 days will work (down from 5) then why not just go straight to zero days?
- internet_user 7y agoUBI?
- rorykoehler 7y agobell curve
- krageon 7y agoFor the same reason that we want cars to drive slower but not stop driving at all. This is the poster child for reducing an argument to ridiculousness. What is proposed is what is proposed, not an extrapolation pulled so far out of context that it becomes unthinkable.
- amiga_500 7y agoAlso most of the work we do is to bid against each other for land. If we all worked 45 hours a week the extra 5 would go into land costs, we'd all have the same house, and land speculators and usurers would have slightly bigger yachts. Given the huge ramp in productivity on necessary work, we could easily slack off some and see our living standards unaffected.