2 ms·

"If a nation works 6 days a week, 12 hours a shift then obviously they will outcompete any nation where people work 5 days a week for 8 hours." - This is not ob

by neaden 1mo ago

"If a nation works 6 days a week, 12 hours a shift then obviously they will outcompete any nation where people work 5 days a week for 8 hours." - This is not obviously true to me, can you explain why it is for you?

budman1 1mo ago
Although it is not a law of nature, and it is not linear across the hours.. In general if I work M-F more work will be done that if I just work on Monday morning.
- MeetingsBrowser 1mo ago
  It is clear that more work is done if you go from 1 day to 5 or 1 hour to 8, but that still includes plenty of time for rest. Does the same hold for going from 5 days to 7 days or 8 hours to 16 hours? A reasonable person should agree at some point adding more time will make people less productive due to lack of breaks, rest, etc. Is it obvious where the line is? if so, where?
- kennywinker 1mo ago
  So you’re saying if I work at mcdonalds 60 hours a week i’ll make more than an investment banker working 40 hours a week? Awesome, i’m filling out a job application now!
- upboundspiral 1mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-day_workweek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-day_workweek "As of July 2022, more than 80 UK companies and organisations are recognised as having permanently implemented a four-day working week" "As 50% of workers claim improved productivity during the period, the Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC) announced it will permanently provide a four-day workweek to its 820 employees"
apexalpha 1mo ago
Imagine a factory line where each worker makes 10 items per hour. In, say, China a worker doing 996 will make 720 items. Te average working hours in the Netherlands are 36 hours or so per week. Making 360 items. As long as there is free trade the Chinese factory will simply outproduce the Dutch one since they utilise their capex better. Obviously European workers can't be reasonably asked to compete in an open market when labour laws, salary, health inspection etc... in China are at a 1920 Dutch level.
- kemayo 1mo ago
  You seem to be assuming that productivity scales linearly with time spent working, which doesn't seem to inherently be true. If your factory workers spend twice as long working, it's likely that more widgets will get made. I'm not certain you can generalize too far from that, though.
- neaden 1mo ago
  So this is just not correct. First off a factory can run 24/7 regardless of the shift length, which is what will determine the total productivity. Second off it assumes there are no trade offs in terms of more errors or anything else by having longer shifts. Third off it assumes that factories in different countries are going to be equally effective with each other, instead of different nations/areas within nations specializing in certain areas. It also ignores the economic benefits that come with having people in your nation having more leisure time, higher education, more time with children, etc. It's a very simplistic model that is also very incorrect.
  - apexalpha 1mo ago
    It's not a perfect example of course but the gist that tariffs do and should protect workers is true. Tariffs aren't inherently bad, they're a tool.
    - Kim_Bruning 1mo ago
      Eh, I think every industrial society has independently arrived at something like 36-44 hours of factory time per week (plus overtime up to a max of something like 55 hours) , simply because that's the actual optimum[1]. While tariffs might work for other stuff [2], I think you're right that they can be a narrowly applicable scalpel, but plausibly you accidentally picked a bad example. [1] Caveats apply. For example more advanced machinery with higher stress may necessitate shorter shifts; while highly motivated creative work might permit longer shifts at times. [2] Adam Smith -for instance- was mostly against tariffs, though he identified certain exceptions such as national defense reasons.
    - 1mo ago
edgyquant 1mo ago
This is an example of “person pretends to not understand a simple thing thus naming conversation impossible”

by neaden 1mo ago

budman1 1mo ago

Although it is not a law of nature, and it is not linear across the hours.. In general if I work M-F more work will be done that if I just work on Monday morning.

MeetingsBrowser 1mo ago
It is clear that more work is done if you go from 1 day to 5 or 1 hour to 8, but that still includes plenty of time for rest. Does the same hold for going from 5 days to 7 days or 8 hours to 16 hours? A reasonable person should agree at some point adding more time will make people less productive due to lack of breaks, rest, etc. Is it obvious where the line is? if so, where?
kennywinker 1mo ago
So you’re saying if I work at mcdonalds 60 hours a week i’ll make more than an investment banker working 40 hours a week? Awesome, i’m filling out a job application now!
upboundspiral 1mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-day_workweek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-day_workweek "As of July 2022, more than 80 UK companies and organisations are recognised as having permanently implemented a four-day working week" "As 50% of workers claim improved productivity during the period, the Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC) announced it will permanently provide a four-day workweek to its 820 employees"

apexalpha 1mo ago

Imagine a factory line where each worker makes 10 items per hour. In, say, China a worker doing 996 will make 720 items. Te average working hours in the Netherlands are 36 hours or so per week. Making 360 items. As long as there is free trade the Chinese factory will simply outproduce the Dutch one since they utilise their capex better. Obviously European workers can't be reasonably asked to compete in an open market when labour laws, salary, health inspection etc... in China are at a 1920 Dutch level.

kemayo 1mo ago
You seem to be assuming that productivity scales linearly with time spent working, which doesn't seem to inherently be true. If your factory workers spend twice as long working, it's likely that more widgets will get made. I'm not certain you can generalize too far from that, though.
neaden 1mo ago
So this is just not correct. First off a factory can run 24/7 regardless of the shift length, which is what will determine the total productivity. Second off it assumes there are no trade offs in terms of more errors or anything else by having longer shifts. Third off it assumes that factories in different countries are going to be equally effective with each other, instead of different nations/areas within nations specializing in certain areas. It also ignores the economic benefits that come with having people in your nation having more leisure time, higher education, more time with children, etc. It's a very simplistic model that is also very incorrect.
- apexalpha 1mo ago
  It's not a perfect example of course but the gist that tariffs do and should protect workers is true. Tariffs aren't inherently bad, they're a tool.
  - Kim_Bruning 1mo ago
    Eh, I think every industrial society has independently arrived at something like 36-44 hours of factory time per week (plus overtime up to a max of something like 55 hours) , simply because that's the actual optimum[1]. While tariffs might work for other stuff [2], I think you're right that they can be a narrowly applicable scalpel, but plausibly you accidentally picked a bad example. [1] Caveats apply. For example more advanced machinery with higher stress may necessitate shorter shifts; while highly motivated creative work might permit longer shifts at times. [2] Adam Smith -for instance- was mostly against tariffs, though he identified certain exceptions such as national defense reasons.
  - 1mo ago

edgyquant 1mo ago

This is an example of “person pretends to not understand a simple thing thus naming conversation impossible”