Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
1–10 of 41 posts
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#2Sure, politicians are going to be happy with less economic power, and as a result less political and military power. Seems exactly like something politicians would go for. /s
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#3They have name for “Less work for same pay” : inflation.
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#4They have name for “Less work for same pay” : inflation.
Seems like today's more-work-less-pay model also leads to inflation, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#5Four-day week trials, for example, keep showing productivity holds or improves — Iceland ran the biggest pilot, the UK had 61 companies in their trial, Microsoft Japan saw a 40% boost. The data is there.
Yet I know a CEO who suggested implementing a four-day week if the least productive 10% of workers came in an extra day instead. Just bonkers.
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#6Decreasing working hours increases labor availability (=> so you'd expect people to get paid less as a result), but higher headcount for comparable output is also totally undesirable for an employer: The only potential benefit is some limited redundancy (bus factor), but this comes at the cost of communication overhead (meetings), decreased software design coherence, no "single source of truth" (person), all of which cost money/time to mitigate.
I don't like it, but I understand why we ended up here...
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#7Decreasing working hours increases labor availability (=> so you'd expect people to get paid less as a result), but higher headcount for comparable output is also totally undesirable for an employer: The only potential benefit is some limited redundancy (bus factor), but this comes at the cost of communication overhead (meetings), decreased software design coherence, no "single source of truth" (person), all of which…
For software maybe, but that’s just one industry.
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#8They have name for “Less work for same pay” : inflation.
That's less productivity for same pay. We can have less work without impacting productivity much.
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#9Decreasing working hours increases labor availability (=> so you'd expect people to get paid less as a result), but higher headcount for comparable output is also totally undesirable for an employer: The only potential benefit is some limited redundancy (bus factor), but this comes at the cost of communication overhead (meetings), decreased software design coherence, no "single source of truth" (person), all of which…
For software maybe, but that’s just one industry.
You have very similar mechanics elsewhere though. More people => invariably more communication/HR/information management overhead pretty much regardless of what they do, and you grow the labor supply also (=> more people willing to work shorter hours).
Re: Economists Are Obsessed with "Job Creation." How about Less Work? (2017)
#10Decreasing working hours increases labor availability (=> so you'd expect people to get paid less as a result), but higher headcount for comparable output is also totally undesirable for an employer: The only potential benefit is some limited redundancy (bus factor), but this comes at the cost of communication overhead (meetings), decreased software design coherence, no "single source of truth" (person), all of which…
And the link between health insurance and work that we have in the US makes that math even uglier.