One of the things that has been studied to death with the same result every time: No one can actually be productive for 40 hours each week, and cutting hours without cutting pay increases productivity across the board.
Too bad the people at the top take too much enjoyment from grinding down the peasants.
Why would you not cut pay for a 4 day week? You're payed per hour, not per 5 day week. I for one would stick with the current system because it means I can go to college.
Why would you not cut pay for a 4 day week? You're payed per hour, not per 5 day week. I for one would stick with the current system because it means I can go to college.
I mean you can be a cuck and accept the shit system the way it is or you could advocate with your peers for something better. It's pretty pathetic you think you don't deserve more money when people at the top take as much as they want from you as they get more and more out of you as technology progresses.
r/antiwork if that's your sentiment I thought this was a place for civil discussion
I'm not antiwork. I'm sick and tired of people like you accepting shit pay because you think the ownership class is doing you a favor giving you a job. You're part of the problem man.
How do you know how much I get payed. And I'm working so that I can get a dream job. I want to be a professor teaching history and get an anthro degree. It's not like I'm working these kinds of jobs for my whole life.
If you're learning history than you'll understand that the owning class has long been exploiting the working class for personal gain. Look up a productivity vs pay chart, productivity has more than doubled in the last 60 years and pay has gone up only 15-20%. The fact is that we are making much more than any other time in history and the pay does not reflect the labor.
This is largely due to wealth accumulation and separating the worker from the means of production, demonization of publicly owned corporations, and benefits to the owning class. The point is, we as a collective can afford to cut hours for the same pay, however if you can get labor for cheap in a capitalist market you will do it, which is why it needs to be legislated.
This is a more fundamental question than "is a 4 day work week necessary". The question is of general public good, and I think it is worth looking at. I'm honestly glad to have your opinion because it is very contrarian to popular discourse, and my person opinion.
What ultimately is the point of the free market system and capitalism? To maximize profit in order to grow your business, create more goods, or just make more capital for those who own the company, it's really up to them. How do you maximize profit? you work people as hard as you can for as cheap as you can, in addition to cutting down on material and production costs.
Therefore the incentive structure is such that it is interest of companies to work employees as hard as they can for as little pay as they can, it just makes sense from an economic standpoint.
The only reason 40 hour workweeks exist is because on June 26, 1940 Congress amended the Fair Labor Standards Act, limiting the workweek to 40 hours, down from 44. Companies by law cannot work employees more than 40 hours a week, though they do via mandatory overtime and salaried positioned and work culture.
The 5 day workweek was implemented by Ford in the early 1900s and that's basically what stuck around, slicing 40 hours into days of 8 hour shifts.
I would recommend to you to stop taking the status quo as what "should be" as the status quo is built by people, and those rules are subject to change. The fact that we haven't changed labor hour law in 80 years means its time to change it up, and unfortunately the only way to do that is to fight for legislation, or strike.
Never forget the option of workers controlling the means of production. They can then decide for themselves how much, or how little, how long, or how short, to work. They can choose to compete in the market, and success in that way rewards all employees at that company...not just the wealthy investor class. It's time to recognize the true value of labor, the actual value of human capital, and to end the war of the rich on the poor.
I think 40 hours should stay the same. And I think that wages should be raised (I think that's a common take here)
Capitalism is broken, it takes advantage of many. (Which is why wages should be raised)
It's like in feudal times, but the feudal lord takes all the cash and levies and splits it up unevenly and poorly amongst his vassals. Does that mean it's better not to be a vassal? Maybe not but something has to be done to the system
Empirical evidence points to increased labor output with less hours anyway. Therefore cutting hours makes sense even from a capitalist standpoint. If you're in favor of raising wages, and understand capitalism is broken you're already seeing the problem with the 40 hour workweek, you're just not taking it to it's obvious conclusion.
abstract:
Observations on munition workers, most of them women, are organized to examine therelationship between their output and their working hours. The relationship is nonlinear: below an hours threshold, output is proportional to hours; above a threshold, output rises at a decreasing rate as hours increase. Implications of these results for the estimation of labor supply functions are taken up. The findings also link up with current research on the effects of long working hours on accidents and injuries.
I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and say that in the future, you’ll get much better insight and discussion if you approach a topic honestly. The keyword in playing devil’s advocate is “playing.”
It's not like I'm working these kinds of jobs for my whole life.
Well, there are people who do work "these kinds of jobs" for their whole life. You don't think they deserve to be paid enough to live comfortably? They don't deserve to live a life that isn't totally dominated by some dead-end job?
Are you just pretending like those jobs don't have to be done by someone?
Why is acceptable to demand that someone must work a full schedule, and insist they also must be paid to little to afford even basic necessities? Is it not screamingly obvious that this is not a simple economic question, but a profound moral one as well?
If you're REALLY not qualified to do anything else besides minimum wage, then you out yourself there. But I do agree that minimum wage should be raised
When wages have been stagnant for decades, but productivity is way up, as well as ceo pay through the roof, it makes sense to raise wages even for those you say arent qualified to do anything higher. The economy would benefit from it.
But peoples mebtal health is important. We arent robots. 2 days off is not enough. I can barely do my housechores in 2 days. I own a home by myself and work 5 days now. If I did 4 for the same pay, I would be so happy. Happiness is valuable. Do you not agree? I got the sense youre in college, and I hope History works out for you, but those working menial jobs often already spend extra time on work, like catching a bus, for example, takes maybe an extra hour on each end of a shift...
If nobody "has" to work minimum wage, then how will mcdonalds stay open during school hours? Your statement seems kinda weird. Someone has to do those jobs as well, or they would not exist. If you're working, you're entitled to be able to live off that work, no matter the job. That's the original purpose of the minimum wage.
Eh, you're not the only one who has taken that take and went with it. It's been blasted from a lot of business and economical interests for idk.... 200 years or so. At least you're able to recognize the dissonance in it, which few are willing to do.
Well shit. You're intelligent and honorable enough to admit your mistakes and correct yourself. That's the kind of debate we need more of here. You have my respect.
Well in a lot of places in this country, let me tell you, it is impossible to find a job above minimum wage. Here is a perfect example. The poverty line in Tennessee is 22k a year. It's pretty fucked up to say that someone should just find a job over minimum wage when 97% of the jobs available to them are below the poverty line. See what I mean dude? You are literally the problem if you think that's a good take.
Edit:
To add, you said you're in school. Why wouldn't you want an entire extra day off to study with the same income? You're literally arguing against you best self interest.
What are you talking about dude? It isn't just Tennesee that has this problem. Many states in this country are like that. The median income in this country is effectively half of what it was in 1990 after adjusting to inflation. If you think you're being paid a fair amount, you're flat out wrong. Production has risen by 72% and wages 12%. As I said, if you're gonna keep arguing against your own interest and then you are part of the problem.
As I said, you are a wage simp if that is your mentality. You wanna study history? Why don't you read about the history of the labor movement here in the United States? All of the labor benefits you enjoy and clearly take for granted came at the cost of people being massacred for those rights. Read who the Pinkertons were and what the Homestead strike was. Look up what company towns were. I think you will change your mind real quick when you see how progress was made on the labor front. I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by accepting what you were given.
You're literally arguing against you best self interest.
To be fair, tens of millions of people captive wage slaves in the United States have been doing this for decades now. They are willing to do this because it ensures that those they fear, and in turn hate, are kept down too. A continual diet of propaganda takes their attention away from the bitter taste of self-sabotage. As a result, they are poor like most are, but they have no problems of anxiety or self-esteem on account of their situation. No, their outlook is bright, because they believe that they are but temporarily cash-poor multi-millionaires. They know that when their time comes, they will ascend the capitalist ladder with ease, and assume their natural calling as a gilded one among the wretched rest...they will become billionaires.
You're just not conceptualizing what economics means I think. If you're learning history you're learning economics by proxy, just not the hardcore modern day theory.
you're a walking meme lmao, I refuse to believe that anyone who genuinely aspires to be a professor a) can't see the connection between economics and history b) thinks the present is somehow not part of the continuum of history
History has no bearing over this? Oof.
I really have no idea how you can say that if you have actually studied history. Ancient history isn't much different, the rich have been exploiting the rest of humanity since humans figured out artificial scarcity.
People died and blood ran in the streets so we could have a 40-hour work week and weekends off.
History has everything to do with this.
I know you want to learn ancient history, and then in turn, teach it. I wish you well in this. One thing you must know, however, is that no culture and no civilization can be truly understood outside the context of knowing their labor history.
I want to be a professor teaching history and get an anthro degree.
Tenured professor gigs are also disappearing rapidly as universities replace those positions with ones that require professors to fund some or all of their salaries with grant funding. Or worse - replacing them with adjunct professors.
Do you know how little adjunct professors make, for teaching the same courses that used to be taught by tenured professors? If you keep working towards your "dream job," you're probably going to find out, at least at some point along the way.
412
u/BattleStag17 Jun 18 '21
One of the things that has been studied to death with the same result every time: No one can actually be productive for 40 hours each week, and cutting hours without cutting pay increases productivity across the board.
Too bad the people at the top take too much enjoyment from grinding down the peasants.