4 ms·

Just imagine what we'll do to the labor supply if we can figure out a way to keep the poors working 24/7 and have them not suffer any ill effects from it!

codekansas 6y ago
Read the abstract...
alfiedotwtf 6y ago
Britain’s Factory Laws were created to prevent 8 year olds from working 16 hours per day with only a single break, but weren’t really enforced until automation made child labour obsolete. If we had the technology to force people to work 24/7 but proved to it was detrimental to people’s health, somehow I know deep down that society would just bite the bullet and people would burn the midnight oil for a few more dollars.
- astrange 6y ago
  It probably wouldn't be a good idea because demand would collapse, and there's no work without customers. This is actually why economics is called the "dismal science", it's not because everyone hates economists, a slave-owner gave it that name because he was mad economists didn't like slavery.
  - alfiedotwtf 6y ago
    Weird... maybe he was also mad at economists because they proved again and again that slavery was more expensive than paying people a wage!
    - tpxl 6y ago
      That sounds counter-intuitive? Have you any literature that backs this up?
      - Rompect 6y ago
        Adding to the previous comment, slaves also work much less effectively than employees because slaves have no incentive to try hard, since either way they will stay slaves.
        alfiedotwtf 6y ago
        Pretty much this... incentives matter. But if you’re a slave, what’s your incentive to work harder? As for literature backing this up, Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations talks in detail about slavery in the American colonies. He gives examples where slavery was only viable in the southern states where they grew tobacco. Maybe one of the reasons why the South were so opposed to the end of slavery vs the North where slavery was expensive
  - djbebs 6y ago
    Given the low income/wealth of the people doing the work, that's not a convincing argument. There's a reason why overall income didn't really go down in 2020 (and even increased in some places), and thats because poor people don't actually make that much money, nor do they provide any significant value.
    - astrange 6y ago
      Poor people’s income went up in the US, and the poverty level decreased, because we actually did a proper economic stimulus for once instead of an undersized one like in 2010.
    - aiisjustanif 6y ago
      > because poor people don't actually make that much money, nor do they provide any significant value. I’d love to see this reasoning or study behind this, and the context of “poor people”.
  - fingerlocks 6y ago
    I’m sorry, but is this a joke? It’s well known the “dismal science” came from Malthus’s incorrect prediction of society’s collapse.
    - astrange 6y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science
Guthur 6y ago
This sort of inflammatory mind set is not helpful, and in this case the abstract describes they are actually getting adequate time in bed, just having interrupted sleep. The causes of the interruptions could be manifold but i would hazard a guess that the primary cause would be interruption from young children in small domiciles and lack of could social responsibility within the neighbourhood. I've experienced both having a young family and currently living in relatively low social economic neighbourhood. Just last night I was disrupted by someone deciding to burn something rather noxious at 0100 in the morning.
- movedx 6y ago
  > This sort of inflammatory mind set is not helpful Although not completely relevant to the topic, it's not outside the realm of possibility for what was stated to become a reality. And it's very much an important idea to explore, because to not do so would help those willing to exploit such "zombie workers" actually go through with it.
  - Guthur 6y ago
    It has been the reality for some sets of society during particularly terrible periods within humanities history. Gulags, concentration camps, work gangs and any other element of human exploitation. For these to work most often one needs to denigrate the peoples concern to the point where they are no longer even perceived as the same level of human. Sure all of that is possible but we wont have useful conversations or strategies if we're constantly elevating every instance of stratified to a slave like scenario. I'm not convinced that there is really any other make up of society. The only way would be for us all to live as isolated self sufficient hermits.
    - movedx 6y ago
      That's why the idea presented - the idea that we can keep people awake 24/7 without negative consequences (or at least not enough of them to warrant alarm) - is so insidious. It doesn't require anyone to subjugate or enslave anyone else. Nor think of them as "sub-human" or try to convince a larger population that their exploitation is warranted. All it takes is for the substance or technology that allows for this 24/7 waking state to become legal and you're done. The moment it's legal, warehouses, factories, the service industry, will start looking for people who can pull 10 hour shifts. If you can't do that then you can't have a job (or you lose an existing one.) Then it goes from 10 to 15 hours. If you can't keep up, perhaps be cause you refuse to "augment" yourself, then you're unable to find work or loose your existing one. This really isn't that far stretched. Do you really think Bezos and his lot wouldn't be willing to invest in technologies that allowed an already underpaid workforce to go from 8 hour shifts to 15, 18 or 24 hours? Of course they would.

codekansas 6y ago

Read the abstract...

alfiedotwtf 6y ago

Britain’s Factory Laws were created to prevent 8 year olds from working 16 hours per day with only a single break, but weren’t really enforced until automation made child labour obsolete. If we had the technology to force people to work 24/7 but proved to it was detrimental to people’s health, somehow I know deep down that society would just bite the bullet and people would burn the midnight oil for a few more dollars.

astrange 6y ago
It probably wouldn't be a good idea because demand would collapse, and there's no work without customers. This is actually why economics is called the "dismal science", it's not because everyone hates economists, a slave-owner gave it that name because he was mad economists didn't like slavery.
- alfiedotwtf 6y ago
  Weird... maybe he was also mad at economists because they proved again and again that slavery was more expensive than paying people a wage!
  - tpxl 6y ago
    That sounds counter-intuitive? Have you any literature that backs this up?
    - Rompect 6y ago
      Adding to the previous comment, slaves also work much less effectively than employees because slaves have no incentive to try hard, since either way they will stay slaves.
      - alfiedotwtf 6y ago
        Pretty much this... incentives matter. But if you’re a slave, what’s your incentive to work harder? As for literature backing this up, Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations talks in detail about slavery in the American colonies. He gives examples where slavery was only viable in the southern states where they grew tobacco. Maybe one of the reasons why the South were so opposed to the end of slavery vs the North where slavery was expensive
- djbebs 6y ago
  Given the low income/wealth of the people doing the work, that's not a convincing argument. There's a reason why overall income didn't really go down in 2020 (and even increased in some places), and thats because poor people don't actually make that much money, nor do they provide any significant value.
  - astrange 6y ago
    Poor people’s income went up in the US, and the poverty level decreased, because we actually did a proper economic stimulus for once instead of an undersized one like in 2010.
  - aiisjustanif 6y ago
    > because poor people don't actually make that much money, nor do they provide any significant value. I’d love to see this reasoning or study behind this, and the context of “poor people”.
- fingerlocks 6y ago
  I’m sorry, but is this a joke? It’s well known the “dismal science” came from Malthus’s incorrect prediction of society’s collapse.
  - astrange 6y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science

Guthur 6y ago

This sort of inflammatory mind set is not helpful, and in this case the abstract describes they are actually getting adequate time in bed, just having interrupted sleep. The causes of the interruptions could be manifold but i would hazard a guess that the primary cause would be interruption from young children in small domiciles and lack of could social responsibility within the neighbourhood. I've experienced both having a young family and currently living in relatively low social economic neighbourhood. Just last night I was disrupted by someone deciding to burn something rather noxious at 0100 in the morning.

movedx 6y ago
> This sort of inflammatory mind set is not helpful Although not completely relevant to the topic, it's not outside the realm of possibility for what was stated to become a reality. And it's very much an important idea to explore, because to not do so would help those willing to exploit such "zombie workers" actually go through with it.
- Guthur 6y ago
  It has been the reality for some sets of society during particularly terrible periods within humanities history. Gulags, concentration camps, work gangs and any other element of human exploitation. For these to work most often one needs to denigrate the peoples concern to the point where they are no longer even perceived as the same level of human. Sure all of that is possible but we wont have useful conversations or strategies if we're constantly elevating every instance of stratified to a slave like scenario. I'm not convinced that there is really any other make up of society. The only way would be for us all to live as isolated self sufficient hermits.
  - movedx 6y ago
    That's why the idea presented - the idea that we can keep people awake 24/7 without negative consequences (or at least not enough of them to warrant alarm) - is so insidious. It doesn't require anyone to subjugate or enslave anyone else. Nor think of them as "sub-human" or try to convince a larger population that their exploitation is warranted. All it takes is for the substance or technology that allows for this 24/7 waking state to become legal and you're done. The moment it's legal, warehouses, factories, the service industry, will start looking for people who can pull 10 hour shifts. If you can't do that then you can't have a job (or you lose an existing one.) Then it goes from 10 to 15 hours. If you can't keep up, perhaps be cause you refuse to "augment" yourself, then you're unable to find work or loose your existing one. This really isn't that far stretched. Do you really think Bezos and his lot wouldn't be willing to invest in technologies that allowed an already underpaid workforce to go from 8 hour shifts to 15, 18 or 24 hours? Of course they would.