- cross-posted to:
- mop@quokk.au
- cross-posted to:
- mop@quokk.au
You must log in or # to comment.
Believe it or not a 4 day work week would boost the economy. What do you think people do on their day off? SPEND MONEY. Chores, lunch, home/car repairs, you name it.
It’s fantastic for local economies. It’s HORRIBLE for big capital though.
The average American drives up to 3000 miles a year just commuting back and forth to and from work. That’s tires and gasoline and oil changes and engine work. It’s also new cars every few years so the vehicle stays reliable. It’s a massive chunk of corporate revenue.
And that worker also needs to eat out, usually settling on fast food, that worker also needs work clothes and supplies, and the offices they work in require massive investment in cleaning, upkeep, computer networking, air conditioning, and so on.
Most of this is done through major corporate companies and that money goes overseas or into huge mega-companies which send it all to some central financial institution that doesn’t pay taxes.
Meanwhile, in Work From home environments, you save money and put that money back into your immediate surroundings, which are usually nearby stores. You drive less, and less cars on the road mean less pollution, less wear on the roads and less expenditures from the state. Lower insurance premiums with less driving, and people are generally healthier because they have more time to do things like daily walks before the sun goes down, or cook healthier meals from local markets, leading to healthier people less medical expenses in the long run.
8 really rich guys who, collectively, work 2-3 days a week? 🤔
“work”
collectively. so i’d give them that.
Work being asking a bunch of people for ideas, and pointing a finger and saying “Do that.”
I can handle that gig. Make me a Billionaire.
Hey, they might do some extremely cushy paperwork related labor on 2 different days in a week. You know, for like half an hour at a time.
No no no, when you ask them, they work 200 hours a week. Each of them. At the very least!
Hours.
cant have well rested workers with more time to think, question, and organise.
I’ve got a job where I work 4 one week and 3 the other. It’s 12 hour shifts though.
Unfortunately I still need a part time job to cover bills… But if I didn’t it would be amazing
I have a 35-hour week with flexible hours so I could put it in 3 days if I wished. That seems awful to me though, I can’t really focus on my work anymore after 6 hours. All a matter of perspective I guess.
I can’t really focus on my work anymore after 6 hours.
Who cares, that’s the company’s problem. Do what works for YOU. The company made this policy, you should exploit the shit out of it. That’s what any corporation would do.
I’d get my hours in during the first three days of the week, then spend my free time making MY life better.
Well, you do you, but I prefer to actually get work done when I’m at work. If I don’t like my work anymore (well, it’s not my hobby, but still not that bad), I’ll go work somewhere else.
Valid.
Also more economically productive. But the ultra-wealthy are aristocrats cosplaying as managers, and reducing the workweek of the filthy poors reduces how entertaining their cosplay is to them.
It also gives people more time to organize, work a side gig to pull themselves out of poverty, or go to school for the same reason. Can’t have any of that
Gotta have your wage slaves and debt slaves.
work a side gig
so you want to make the work week shorter so the work week can become longer? pls explain
I want people to have more flexibility in their lives to make choices for themselves rather than having it dictated to them by their employer, that’s all. If someone wants to make the choice that they want another gig with their additional free time this change would give them then I don’t see an issue with that.
Wondering how much would 8 guillotine cost
They are reusable.
But you never know where the really rich guys might go. We may have to camp out beside a number of bunkers across the world. Like a spare key, it’s better to have an extra one and not use it than to not have one when you need it.
Yeah. I guess I’m just partial to the imagery of waiting until they’re all together and having an angry mob… Give them all a haircut… At the same time.
If they’re hiding in bunkers, you can just seal it up from the outside.
You don’t really need a device. If the guillotine breaks down, you can do just as effective a job with a random rock.
You only need one. Make them wait in line and watch their colleagues go before them.
And give it a dull blade, so it takes 3 or 4 chops to finish the job.
Same thing with that proposed billionaire tax in CA.
Bunch of assholes.
policy favors money always always will
They are more like 8 little kings
8 malignant narcissist pedofiles who we’ve allowed to destroy the world.
As the world evolves (supposedly), productivity rockets skywards.
And we have gone from a…
- 3 hour work day… to a…
- 6 hour work day… to a…
- 12 hour work day… to a…
- 7 hour work day… (or 8 or 9 or more if you’re in the US or China or a factory- or fascist country)
And of course this is pitiful. We should be working a couple days a week at most.
The very idea that we have to work when we have so much automation is ludicrous. Why do we have to make our owners richer? Why can’t we turn them into fertiliser instead? And why can’t we make them really, and I mean really aware of the possibility.That cartoon “there’s so many of them, why don’t they just eat the lesser class?” (ok, I don’t remember how it was formulated), is something the billionaires (and politicians) ought to have pinned in each of their rooms.
Still, right now we should be at two days or 2 hour work days.
But thanks to AI, work days ought to be longer. You’ll have to catch up for all the people that got laid off/
Of course people want a four-day workweek. That part is obvious and frankly irrelevant.
The real question is: who actually benefits without losing income? The answer is: a minority. Roughly 25–35% of workers, mostly salaried, white-collar, outcome-based roles, can compress or rearrange work without taking a pay hit. For them, four days is mostly a scheduling change.
The other 65–70% of workers, trades, service, healthcare, retail, logistics, commission, flat-rate, piece-work, are paid by volume, not vibes. Fewer days means fewer billable units, fewer closes, fewer shifts, or longer days just to break even.
I work flat-rate. I close work orders. If I work four days, I make less money. There is no efficiency fairy that replaces raw volume.
The four-day workweek isn’t a universal labor reform. It’s a white-collar benefit marketed as moral progress, and it collapses the moment you apply it to people who actually produce, fix, transport, or serve things.
This is not true at all. No one calling for the reduced hours is calling for reduced pay.
Of course no one is doing that. I work on throughput, not salary. A lot of people are in the same position, whether they are flat-rate or hourly. If I cut my schedule down to four days, I simply will not make enough money to sustain myself. There is a hard limit to how much work I can complete in a single day, and I cannot compress six days of output into four. That is the point I was making, a four-day workweek does not benefit workers whose income is tied to throughput or hours worked. It primarily benefits salaried employees whose pay is disconnected from daily output
Did you actually read what I wrote?
The real question is: who actually benefits without losing income? The answer is: a minority. Roughly 25-35% of workers, mostly salaried, white-collar, outcome-based roles, can compress or rearrange work without taking a pay hit. For them, four days is mostly a scheduling change.
and I cannot compress six days of output into four
the point here is that you shouldn’t need to work 6 days to be able to afford a life.
you are literally fighting for people stealing from you.
https://media.theunderstatement.com/005_B_us_wealth_distribution.png
That is the work I do. I am paid per job completion because I am in the repair industry. My income is entirely self-generated; I make my own salary based on output. That is how this business functions, and there is no alternative model that actually works. To remain competitive, I have to work six days a week. We cannot raise prices beyond a minimum threshold without losing work.
It sounds great to say people should work less and live more. Unfortunately, in certain sectors of the economy, that idea is completely disconnected from reality. In industries driven by throughput and competition, working less directly means earning less, and for many of us, that is simply not an option
You’re not charging enough. You need to reevaluate your costs with your own labor cost included. Don’t ignore yourself just because you’re doing gig work.
Does anybody read anything that I actually write?
We have competition in the business. We have to offer lower prices to stay in business to be competitive. You can’t just charge more… People are going to use cheaper services than expensive ones. That’s basic economics.
Does anybody read anything that I actually write?
yes, we do. you are talking about how it works now, and we are talking about how it needs to change.
if no one will provide the kind of cheap labour that can only provide living for you if you do it 6 days per week, then your customers will not run away from you, because the others will do the same. also, your customers also work somewhere, and they will be in the same position.
the solution is not to work seven days a week, the solution is to take back the wealth they are stealing from us.
I suppose that’s also the reason their account is suspended.
You’ll never get it when the ones in charge want 8/28 workhours.
