4 ms·

> Automation and technology should be reducing the need for most people to work. I think it does. Many people working office jobs are barely doing anything, es

by badpun 3y ago

> Automation and technology should be reducing the need for most people to work. I think it does. Many people working office jobs are barely doing anything, esp. compared to manual labor in hellish factories just 100 years ago. And, for that puny amount of office work, we live so much better than people 100 years ago. Also, it's currently possible to work less by just not buying top of the line consumer option. It's perhaps harder in the US, where such options does not exist, but other parts of the world have e.g. specific brands of cheap, crappy cars you could buy and work less in consequence.

hgs3 3y ago
> I think it does. Many people working office jobs are barely doing anything, esp. compared to manual labor in hellish factories just 100 years ago. And, for that puny amount of office work, we live so much better than people 100 years ago. We have those busy work office jobs because capitalism demands us to make capital. Ideally, as our basic needs are met (housing, plumbing, food, etc...) we wouldn't need busy work jobs. Even if we do need busy work jobs, then consider this: when I worked as a programmer I did so 5 days a week as a web developer. Given modern web frameworks and the abundance of open source packages, I could easily accomplish in a day what would have taken a web developer a week or more to accomplish ~20 years ago. So the question is, if I'm 5x more productive, then why am I working 5 days a week? Why not 1 day a week for the same pay? Ideally, we would not classify the work week in terms of hours worked, but rather by productivity.
- pfannkuchen 3y ago
  > if I'm 5x more productive, then why am I working 5 days a week? Why not 1 day a week for the same pay? Because your competitors have also become 5x more productive. If they hadn't you could work 1 day a week for the same pay.
- badpun 3y ago
  > Ideally, we would not classify the work week in terms of hours worked, but rather by productivity. This is exactly what is happening, but on a slower and more noisy timescale that you'd expect. That's why we work less than people 100 years ago, and yet make so much more money.

by badpun 3y ago

hgs3 3y ago

> I think it does. Many people working office jobs are barely doing anything, esp. compared to manual labor in hellish factories just 100 years ago. And, for that puny amount of office work, we live so much better than people 100 years ago. We have those busy work office jobs because capitalism demands us to make capital. Ideally, as our basic needs are met (housing, plumbing, food, etc...) we wouldn't need busy work jobs. Even if we do need busy work jobs, then consider this: when I worked as a programmer I did so 5 days a week as a web developer. Given modern web frameworks and the abundance of open source packages, I could easily accomplish in a day what would have taken a web developer a week or more to accomplish ~20 years ago. So the question is, if I'm 5x more productive, then why am I working 5 days a week? Why not 1 day a week for the same pay? Ideally, we would not classify the work week in terms of hours worked, but rather by productivity.

pfannkuchen 3y ago
> if I'm 5x more productive, then why am I working 5 days a week? Why not 1 day a week for the same pay? Because your competitors have also become 5x more productive. If they hadn't you could work 1 day a week for the same pay.
badpun 3y ago
> Ideally, we would not classify the work week in terms of hours worked, but rather by productivity. This is exactly what is happening, but on a slower and more noisy timescale that you'd expect. That's why we work less than people 100 years ago, and yet make so much more money.