Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

scienceaim.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 268 posts

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#151

Post by quantummagic »

runtime_terror wrote: post #65
azan_ wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should realise that they will be the ones paying for it. Prices will increase a lot. People need to be aware of that. Personally I'm okay with that trade-off. Also corporations - when checks and balances work properly, which is frequently not the case unfortunately - are great and net benefit for humanity.

I wonder what would happen to costs if we had a 90%+ tax rate on the ultra wealthy... maybe if all these record profits were instead funneled back into society everyone would be better off AND prices would drop... a system like this would be good for society it seems... we should come up with a good name for that system, tho...

You would get some version of the Soviet Union. Where all the rich people would be connected to government rather than industry. And industry would become enfeebled and unable to produce efficiently, and the average person would be much poorer than people currently are in the USA.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#152

Post by anakaine »

schappim wrote: post #98
oompydoompy74 wrote: post #20

Speaking as an American, I don’t give a shit if it increases productivity or not. Productivity has gone up exponentially with technological advancement since the advent of the 5 day work week. We, as a species, should be minimizing work to 3 or 4 days a week with equal overall pay. Corporations should be fined heavily for contacting an employee after working hours. On call should require corporations to pay hefty ove…

Speaking as an Australian, our productivity has been lagging[1] compared to the US, largely due to the availability of cheap labour (attributed by economists to foreign students)[2]. I heard one economist on the ABC give the example of carwashes[2]. From the 1990s to the early 2000s, car washes in Australia were largely automated and hand-wash car washes were relatively uncommon. However, the abundance of cheap labou…

As a fellow Australian, this is likely an early window on what the next 5 to 10 years will yield with our recent mass immigration. Economically speaking we could well see a race to the bottom in wages whilst we continue to experience exceptional housing pressure.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#153

Post by testing22321 »

schappim wrote: post #98
oompydoompy74 wrote: post #20

Speaking as an American, I don’t give a shit if it increases productivity or not. Productivity has gone up exponentially with technological advancement since the advent of the 5 day work week. We, as a species, should be minimizing work to 3 or 4 days a week with equal overall pay. Corporations should be fined heavily for contacting an employee after working hours. On call should require corporations to pay hefty ove…

Speaking as an Australian, our productivity has been lagging[1] compared to the US, largely due to the availability of cheap labour (attributed by economists to foreign students)[2]. I heard one economist on the ABC give the example of carwashes[2]. From the 1990s to the early 2000s, car washes in Australia were largely automated and hand-wash car washes were relatively uncommon. However, the abundance of cheap labou…

> Speaking as an Australian, our productivity has been lagging[1] compared to the US

Good.

Developed countries should not aim to emulate the US. To get the same productivity you’d have to lower the standard of living of all the employees to the same level as those in the US.

No. Don’t do it.

Quality of life matters much more than profits.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#154

Post by jfengel »

Avicebron wrote: post #107
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno. Consumers put up with a lot. Why can't I buy a cheap Chinese EV again?

Well the short version is that Robert Rubin and company sold our industries for parts years and years ago. And now we have to rebuild the industrial base from scratch

That should make it possible to buy a cheap Chinese EV.

You can't because they didn't sell out completely. In fact they still have some power to protect the companies from foreign products.

The result is a mishmash of protectionism and globalization.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#155

Post by jfengel »

youngNed wrote: post #94
anomaly_ wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're just going to Galapagos your economy. Consumers won't put up with high prices and inferior goods. Unless you want to restrict internet/information access so your consumers don't know what they are missing out on.

Nah, I live in the UK, prices are higher than eu, public service is much worse, but public are voting for the party with members that brought this about. Humans are weird.

Voting for someone else would mean admitting you were wrong.

Paying high prices and losing your job are bad, but not as bad as changing your mind.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#156

Post by FridgeSeal »

azan_ wrote: post #50
oompydoompy74 wrote: post #20

Speaking as an American, I don’t give a shit if it increases productivity or not. Productivity has gone up exponentially with technological advancement since the advent of the 5 day work week. We, as a species, should be minimizing work to 3 or 4 days a week with equal overall pay. Corporations should be fined heavily for contacting an employee after working hours. On call should require corporations to pay hefty ove…

People should realise that they will be the ones paying for it. Prices will increase a lot. People need to be aware of that. Personally I'm okay with that trade-off. Also corporations - when checks and balances work properly, which is frequently not the case unfortunately - are great and net benefit for humanity.

Prices are already obscene, and we’re all being ripped off.

I’d much rather pay the prices corrected-for-supporting-livelihoods, than the artificially inflated prices used to line the pockets of the rich.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#157

Post by azan_ »

thfuran wrote: post #128
azan_ wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its pretty naive to thing that it'd work this way. It's really bad idea. If someone has company that debuts on stock market, and stock price increases let's say 100x times, who is he funneling the funds from? I'd say it's not funneling but creation of wealth, economy is not zero-sum game.

If someone has a company doing an IPO, it’s extremely unlikely that the company was so small that one person did all the work. Why is it a given that one person should retain nearly all of the proceeds of the sale? To answer your question, that person is funneling funds from investors who are expecting returns derived from the labor provided by the undercompensated employees.

Ok, let's follow that logic. If IPO makes CEO much, much richer but generally also makes company and workers better off (but to smaller degree), does IPO make workers more undercompensated? Nobody lost anything for the CEO to gain. Also is "funneling" (that's an interesting choice of word) investors money into company stock a bad thing? Why would it be? I'd say it's a very, very good thing and it's in almost always 100% voluntary to buy stocks.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#158

Post by coredog64 »

stanac wrote: post #53
oompydoompy74 wrote: post #20

Speaking as an American, I don’t give a shit if it increases productivity or not. Productivity has gone up exponentially with technological advancement since the advent of the 5 day work week. We, as a species, should be minimizing work to 3 or 4 days a week with equal overall pay. Corporations should be fined heavily for contacting an employee after working hours. On call should require corporations to pay hefty ove…

> Employee owned co-ops are more humane Speaking as someone born in Yugoslavia. That's almost how it was in Yugoslavia. Companies where "owned by society", but workers had voting rights. Whenever there was a vote to decide whether extra profit should be used for capital investments and/or operational improvements or assigned to salaries budget, everyone voted to increase their salaries. Not every employ should be a c…

An employee-owned co-op results in extremely high risk concentration. If your co-op experiences a downturn, you are likely to lose your job and see the value of your share of the co-op decrease.

There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#159

Post by BLKNSLVR »

shell0x wrote: post #139
shitloadofbooks wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Australian with a family and 2 high-paying salaries paying a LOT of tax, none of those countries are remotely comparable to Australia. If you hate taxes and fees, Singapore has a 60% Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty on residential property applied to foreign buyers, on top of an already insane property market. There's huge fines and government intervention into _everything_ and a massive high-stress culture. Hong…

I can get PR in Singapore through my partner, so no 60%. Company paid medical and everything so expat life and no responsibilities. And if I were ever have to have kids, you can’t hire a maid here sleeping at your apartment and you have to clean yourself which is ridiculous. In Hk, SG, Dubai you can get domestic helpers cheaply and they take care of everything

> And if I were ever have to have kids, you can’t hire a maid here sleeping at your apartment and you have to clean yourself which is ridiculous.

Not sure if serious.

If serious: This is a really weird and almost sociopathic thing to say. I really don't get where you're coming from. It's certainly not the cultural direction I'd like to see Australia moving in.

Re: The four-day workweek in Australia: insights from early adopters of 100:80:100

#160

Post by [deleted] »

jfengel wrote: post #154
Avicebron wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the short version is that Robert Rubin and company sold our industries for parts years and years ago. And now we have to rebuild the industrial base from scratch

That should make it possible to buy a cheap Chinese EV. You can't because they didn't sell out completely. In fact they still have some power to protect the companies from foreign products. The result is a mishmash of protectionism and globalization.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN