3 ms·
I don't know why this is getting downvoted. This is exactly how the system works. Every productivity gain is only meant to make workers faster which earns prof
by nine_zeros 3y ago
I don't know why this is getting downvoted. This is exactly how the system works.
Every productivity gain is only meant to make workers faster which earns profits faster for the executives and shareholders.
With the prospect of faster work, execs and shareholders are salivating at the thought of grinding workers more in the same 40 hours/week but earn more profits for the same amount of hours.
If we want our children to live a better life than us, we need massive changes in laws (healthcare, exempt workers etc.).
- deprecative 3y agoWe were thought to work three days a week because of all the productivity gains we made. The time we'd be down to three days? The 1970s. Wealth always demands more wealth and the rest of us need to be good labor-piggies and do that work. Yeah, they can get away with doing more with less because AI but they'll keep on with the skeleton crew they can and carry on. Rinse repeat capitalism.
- im3w1l 3y agoYou speak as if execs are some depersonalized force of nature. But they are people and there aren't that many of them. JPMorgan CEO is one of them, and he seems to be saying he supports a shorter work week, but not a complete abolishment of work as some thinkers have proposed. If he says those are his views, do you have an argument for why we shouldn't take his word for it?
- nine_zeros 3y agoExecs are people. They are not uniformly the same. JPMorgan's billionaire CEO does not speak for the many decamillionaire CEOs who want to get into the billionaire club.
- quantified 3y agoHe's not going to accept a 3.5 hour workweek for JP Morgan and neither will his successor. Owners and managers will always squeeze hard. It's the nature of competition and he knows it.