How Would You Fix Things?

[Plains-Cow]

I think a huge amount would change if we simply shortened the workday. So not all at once so that shenanigan of hiring one person double wouldn’t ensue, but a drawdown to 16 hours over 4 days a week, 10 weeks vacation.

I think that would drive most of the other positive changes we seek.

I actually remember early socialist thinkers expounding on the idea that production would free the worker, and technology would allow people to have more downtime than ever before. Tragically, their dreams were never realized due to the seemingly obvious (in retrospect) fact that workers will simply be asked to do more within the same time window rather than lower their working hours due to output being expedited.

Hence why modern tech seems to have only made peoples' lives more hectic as you're expected to purchase, learn about, maintain, and upgrade the machine that the world is slowly being designed around: computers. You aren't going to spend less time sending "electronic mail;" you'll now be demanded to send 1000x the mail as if it was paper and pen for the same wage.

 

[Narz]

As distracted as people are I think shortening the work day would just see people would wasting more time and money.

Maybe shorted the workday and build more public works. Or give people tax credit for community service.

More community engagement > more idle time

 

[El_Machinae]

I do think that an outright (legislative) shortening would have an impact. One mistake we made was thinking that increasing the amount of commodified labor would increase household wealth. But it doesn't seem to have been true. Increasing commodified labor (without a proper taxation rate at the top) just increased total wealth that was then captured at the top.
Won't disagree that there's a huge risk of more people just wasting more time. We could debate that, but I think that I'd not be surprised at all if the prediction was correct.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I think one has to identify the key problems before one can even think about solutions.

 

[Hygro]

I think one has to identify the key problems before one can even think about solutions.

I think we have.

As distracted as people are I think shortening the work day would just see people would wasting more time and money.

Maybe shorted the workday and build more public works. Or give people tax credit for community service.

More community engagement > more idle time

I’m all for incentivizing pro social things and encouraging people to get up and go do cool things.

But I don’t share your concerns about less work leading to more waste. This is on a few levels.

1) the status quo is bs. Saving people from themselves with “work” is a double evil, first who decides that imposition and why, and second the work itself is bad past a certain point. Enough hours will put your head on straight which will make your life better than the cost, and the product beneficial to others. However, more hours than that are demanded. Always more absent legislative limits.

Ultimately my freedom is valuable for it’s own sake and I don’t need a “system” to save me from my idleness.

2) not everyone is going to replace work with online shopping. But those who do will shop better… but more important most will be rested to have energy to do other things, or simply time to rest more, exercise, or just hang out with their kids, or upskill for better work, but it doesn’t really matter, all of it is better than the kind of “hrrrrrg I only have energy for forums/netflix after 9 hours and little sleep”

3) with everyone working fewer hours I would expect our social norms to adjust and what people would want to do or feel comfortable doing wouldn’t be the same.

 

[Farm Boy]

I do think that an outright (legislative) shortening would have an impact. One mistake we made was thinking that increasing the amount of commodified labor would increase household wealth. But it doesn't seem to have been true. Increasing commodified labor (without a proper taxation rate at the top) just increased total wealth that was then captured at the top.
Won't disagree that there's a huge risk of more people just wasting more time. We could debate that, but I think that I'd not be surprised at all if the prediction was correct.

People not needing political fiat compensation with more of their day spend more of their day on themselves. Only a few will seem to spend it on others. That's a calling. But either way, it's a life not a profit margin(as Hygs, says(but economic thinkers with ever more and ever more data will remove more and more life from the equations)). If all your time is spoken for making somebody else money and no recourse is available, you're a slave.

 

[Narz]

I’m all for incentivizing pro social things and encouraging people to get up and go do cool things.

But I don’t share your concerns about less work leading to more waste. This is on a few levels.

In my experience when I'm really busy I crave idle time but when I get it I usually waste it.

But maybe you're right that if society changed wholesale peoples behavior might also change altho I lack the confidence you have that it definitely would.

 

[Samson]

In my experience when I'm really busy I crave idle time but when I get it I usually waste it.

Most of my time I spent on sex, drugs, rock and roll, and civ. The rest I wasted.

 

[Narz]

Ultimately my freedom is valuable for it’s own sake and I don’t need a “system” to save me from my idleness.

I think everyone does (need a system to manage their free time). Trust fund kids who don't have to work are usually pretty lost in life.

Some people are naturally auto-didadcts who use their free time productively and creately and of course everyone wishes they were that but 99% aren't. People need stuff to do and if they're un or underemployed they're not gonna feel happy and free they're gonna feel depressed and self destructive (in general).

I'm not arguing working to avoid the void or ones feelings is good or that most jobs aren't nonsense.

 

[Joij21]

Teach social skills and psychology to kids instead

If you teach young boys psychology they'll use it to manipulate women for sex and cause emotional damage when they go through puberty. Probably not a good idea. Same threat could arise if you teach the girls, they might grow up to be more manipulative and psychotic.

Would be better if such power was given to adults who are no longer hormone addled adolescents. So like twenty something year olds in college. That way enough rationality has been built up in their brain tissue so as not to abuse or harm people. Now they still could but I would say with adults the risk is greatly diminished.

 

[El_Machinae]

People not needing political fiat compensation with more of their day spend more of their day on themselves. Only a few will seem to spend it on others. That's a calling. But either way, it's a life not a profit margin(as Hygs, says(but economic thinkers with ever more and ever more data will remove more and more life from the equations)). If all your time is spoken for making somebody else money and no recourse is available, you're a slave.

With food insecurity rising, looming infrastructure costs, and an aging population - we definitely need more productivity than less. The next question is how best to tap that productivity. Yeah, only some people use non-commodified time in ways that a synergistically beneficial. I think it's an open question if enough people do. But I also suspect that increasing commodifed workloads won't be of net benefit without a major rearrangement of how we spend the profits.

 

[Farm Boy]

I don't know that productivity is the problem. I do think the allocation of that productivity is a problem. And with that, as in all things, status.

 

[Gorbles]

If you teach young boys psychology they'll use it to manipulate women for sex and cause emotional damage when they go through puberty. Probably not a good idea. Same threat could arise if you teach the girls, they might grow up to be more manipulative and psychotic.

I don't have an expression of "what" that is striking enough for the application of "what" I want to post.

What?

 

[Joij21]

I don't have an expression of "what" that is striking enough for the application of "what" I want to post.

What?

Young men are excessively horny. This is a biological fact. They also are not old enough to have greater rationality from experience.

Psychology can be used as a weapon to manipulate and control people, this is also an objective fact.

If you teach young and horny male youths they will use such manipulative power to get laid easier by emotionally manipulating the females and damaging them to do so. Especially since young females are quite emotionally fragile when teenagers.

 

[Gorbles]

Psychology can be used as a weapon to manipulate and control people, this is also an objective fact.

So can the Internet, kitchenware, education of any degree of effectiveness, and so on, and so forth. This entire theory of yours is completely asinine and I can only imagine is rooted in your head because of <reasons>.

Also, here's a thought that must've just skipped the proofreading process. If children are taught whatever level of psychology is being suggested, that means all kids are being taught this. Not just the boys.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Kids learn all about manipulating others from living in a family and going to school.

 

[Joij21]

So can the Internet, kitchenware, education of any degree of effectiveness, and so on, and so forth. This entire theory of yours is completely asinine and I can only imagine is rooted in your head because of <reasons>.

Psychology can be more damaging if taught to the wrong individuals.

Also, here's a thought that must've just skipped the proofreading process. If children are taught whatever level of psychology is being suggested, that means all kids are being taught this. Not just the boys.

I mentioned this in my previous post. It would only create more manipulative women as they grow older. Taking advantage of men and whatnot. Destroying careers and reputations.

 

[stfoskey12]

I don't think throwing money at things helps that much.

Grew up poor after parents divorce. Money was tight.

But rent was dirt cheap. They've increased wages, benefits etc since then but rent and mortgages are huge now.

Here I think building a new city of medium density housing with rent controls. Nimbyism is to string in existing cities.

Center it around things we need anyway eg a unverity, teachers college, new army base, hospital.

Tax incentives, cheap rent and free university education (that location only) to attract the punters.

Does New Zealand have a yimby movement? In the US there seems to be a nascent one that is starting to counter the prevailing nimby views of past decades, but I have no idea if it's spread internationally.

 

[Gorbles]

Psychology can be more damaging if taught to the wrong individuals.

Who decides "wrong" aside, anything can. This is a really silly argument.

I mentioned this in my previous post. It would only create more manipulative women as they grow older. Taking advantage of men and whatnot. Destroying careers and reputations.

And again, you don't seem to comprehend that if everyone was taught about it, less people would be able to exploit it.

 

[Zardnaar]

Does New Zealand have a yimby movement? In the US there seems to be a nascent one that is starting to counter the prevailing nimby views of past decades, but I have no idea if it's spread internationally.

Kind of but they've recently taken a beating in local body elections with Nimby candidates.

Current government passed some yimby type intitiatives but are currently down in the pols and local body blowback has a lot of mayor and councilors electing wanting to oppose central government.

Of course the right wing parties are nimbyism and are ahead in the polls.

Local government uses stv national proportional. Similar problems to overseas.