[prajeshbhat]

Just one more reason to move your business to China.

Novus - China is a communist dictatorship. China tells people how many children they can have,
and he better not be a girl. Oops.....girls grow up and have children........maybe we need some
girl children???? Their air is unbreatheable, rampant electricity shortages, water shortages. Did
I mention they don't innovate they only pirate intellectual property. China is the product of central
government planning. Just sit back and watch them fail.

Where would a disgruntled Chinese businessman move to? Africa? I doubt it.

You seem to contradict yourself. First you said excessive government in USA is forcing rich people to move their jobs outside. So why are they moving these same jobs to a communist dictatorship. Kindly explain. Shouldn't they be moving those jobs to some free market utopia?

The entire concept of government management of the economy is the province of narcissistic people with delusions of grandeur; they think they are smarter about where money should be invested, how businesses should be run, what should be produced and what people want than the collective judgement of people acting freely to make economic decisions. For you collectivists that believe in collective action, I would think you would love the free market because it is the ultimate mechanism for the collective decisions of millions of people; it is unfortunate that you don't see the current economic system for what it is, fascism, the collusion of government and corporations to rig the markets against the average man in favor of the elite.

Thanks for the enlightenment. I know what I want for Christmas. A free market.

We don't have free markets, but rather controlled markets. The solution to our economic disaster is to restore free markets, not more government control or management. The question is not what the work week should be, but should government at all have the power to set the work week. It is not that free markets can solve the unsolvable problem of overpopulation and of economic contraction driven by resource scarcity, but it can mitigate the human suffering by eliminating the additional burden of slavery for the majority, and give people an equal chance of survival.

The question is, who is will tell the government what to do and what not to do? Jesus?

[Fishman]

And Timo that justifies a 35 hour week how? Aaahh, altering reality, thats called propaganda wether right or left.

[Newfie]

I wholly support the 35 hour work week idea.

And..................

Lower retirement to 55...........................but do away with unemployment. Use the unemployment money to pay for the early retirement.

This is not a new idea and, believe it or not, it has a lot of merit.

http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html

[Oakley]

The question is, who is will to tell the government what to do and what not to do? Jesus?

In the USA the Constitution tells the federal government what to do and not do at the federal level, and each State has its own Constitution which does the same thing. Only problem is that there is a tendency for power hungry sociopaths to seek political power and for those who have concentrations of wealth to buy their favor. This is why every time people revolt against their oppressive government and institute freedom, eventually freedom is eroded and eventually we reach slavery, just like the history of the USA shows.

Ultimately the only effective restraint on government tyranny is revolt, and we are approaching that point, as the abuses progressively create increasing human suffering, of course amplified this time with the force of resource scarcity driven economic contraction. The revolution point is reached when the pain from continuing with the system of plunder and control noticeably exceeds any pain that could come from revolution; then nature takes her course.

I am glad I can continue to enlighten you.

[Sixstrings]

35 hours is a typical non-sense proposel from people who never operated a business and in general have no idea. Loss of productivity is significant.

You're wrong. They do it in France. Their productivity is actually higher, even though the work fewer hours. They also have more vacation time, and eat better food. Their TV however sucks.

Anyhow don't say something can't be done when it's being done right now in France. Have you never traveled?

You want to make it CHEAPER to hire people, not more expensive.

Uhm, no we don't. That road leads to China.

[prajeshbhat]

In the USA the Constitution tells the federal government what to do and not do at the federal level, and each State has its own Constitution which does the same thing. Only problem is that there is a tendency for power hungry sociopaths to seek political power and for those who have concentrations of wealth to buy their favor. This is why every time people revolt against their oppressive government and institute freedom, eventually freedom is eroded and eventually we reach slavery, just like the history of the USA shows.

This brings us back to my question. Let me rephrase it. Who will read the constitution to the government?

Ultimately the only effective restraint on government tyranny is revolt, and we are approaching that point, as the abuses progressively create increasing human suffering, of course amplified this time with the force of resource scarcity driven economic contraction. The revolution point is reached when the pain from continuing with the system of plunder and control noticeably exceeds any pain that could come from revolution; then nature takes her course.

You sound like a 5 year old whose candy was stolen by some big bully. So now you spend your days fantasising about some glorious revolution. American Revolution 2.0.
It's not coming dude. The way things are going , it seems like people in America will just blame the mexicans for all their problems. Soon they will elect some nutjobs who will pay lip service to the same BS. Most people will continue with their day to day business. The rest will indulge in violence. Not towards the government. But mostly towards the minorities and defenseless people. Nothing new there. Just a typical non progressive nation.

[Pretorian]

When one can only use the straw man is means you have no argument or no refuting the logic. It is like the person who says raise the minimum wage to $1 million every time the workers dare to ask for 50 cents. It is mindless rytoric and nothing more.


Those with no solutions can spout nonsense all they want but the Math doesn't lie.

30 million 40 hour jobs becomes 34.28 million 35 hour jobs. That is a gain 4,280,000 jobs just by changing this one law.


The MATH doesn't lie.

Are you suggesting that those 30 million people take a 15% pay cut so 4 280 000 people who had no chance of getting employed whatsoever have a shot at it? Or what? What about their benefits? Should they be decreased by 15% also? Should they get cheaper healthcare plans?

[Sixstrings]

Are you suggesting that those 30 million people take a 15% pay cut so 4 280 000 people who had no chance of getting employed whatsoever have a shot at it? Or what? What about their benefits? Should they be decreased by 15% also? Should they get cheaper healthcare plans?

Yeah the way Novus explained it, it's a paycut -- not acceptable, works out to the same thing as a 12.5% regressive tax hike on working people.

He's right overall though, it's just that the 35 hour week must be for what is currently full time 40 hour pay. Another wrinkle here is in the US we have a lot who work salary, companies like it that way just so they can work you 60 hours and more with no overtime. So our whole point of view about work and life balance would need to change, which ain't gonna happen -- we're closer to China than our first world peers.

But if we did adopt a European model, wages would need to go up as well corresponding to European pay.

[prajeshbhat]

I wholly support the 35 hour work week idea.

And..................

Lower retirement to 55...........................but do away with unemployment. Use the unemployment money to pay for the early retirement.

This is not a new idea and, believe it or not, it has a lot of merit.

http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html

Excellent Article.

[Sixstrings]

It only has merit if it's 35 hours for full time pay, if it's a pay cut then NO. If we're gonna tax somebody, let's hit the rich with another 12.5% tax not working folks.

[Pretorian]

I wholly support the 35 hour work week idea.

And..................

Lower retirement to 55...........................but do away with unemployment. Use the unemployment money to pay for the early retirement.

This is not a new idea and, believe it or not, it has a lot of merit.

http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html

I can swing either way with working hours , 2 hours as dsula wants it or 35 or 60-70-80 as cog would like it, but retirement age should be lowered to about 18. At 8% a year interest it costs $250-270 K per head to drag some butt-head through high school anyway,not counting health insurance cost young person does not need anyway, better fund his retirement with this. Should come to about $1800 per month or so , at 8%.

[Pops]

I think it's a good idea and I was gonna post about it except Novus beat me to it. I hadn't thought about changing the work rules but that is a good idea.

A shorter workweek is a good idea for one simple reason, there are not enough jobs to go around because of ever increasing automation and global labor arbitrage.

Our current doldrums aren't because businesses aren't profitable or owners aren't making money, they are making piles, so no supply side giveaways like tax breaks or elimination of regulations on employers is going to make any difference to jobs in the US. Business is bad because demand is down and nothing else, more jobs would mean more demand would mean more jobs - at least for a little while longer.

5, 7-hour days is a bad idea because it takes a while to get rolling each morning and a while to wind up at night and a while to do both around lunch and breaks and that won't change no matter how long the day is - IOW the lost hour would be lost from 'productive' time. For that reason maybe 4-9's would be a better solution. Most small business would probably not hire another worker but larger business might.

We are all just itching to make it to the world of George Jetson and if you'll remember, George's job was to push one button, over and over, one hour a day, one day a week.

[Oakley]

This brings us back to my question. Let me rephrase it. Who will read the constitution to the government?

The answer is nobody. To work effectively, the men who occupy the seats of power must honor the oath they take to uphold the Constitution; obviously most of the politicians lack moral fiber, and ignore the Constitution.

This is what John Adams, the Second President of the US had to say on this subject:

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

While I don't think religion is a necessary precursor to morality, I think you get the idea.

You sound like a 5 year old whose candy was stolen by some big bully. So now you spend your days fantasising about some glorious revolution. American Revolution 2.0.
It's not coming dude. The way things are going , it seems like people in America will just blame the mexicans for all their problems. Soon they will elect some nutjobs who will pay lip service to the same BS. Most people will continue with their day to day business. The rest will indulge in violence. Not towards the government. But mostly towards the minorities and defenseless people. Nothing new there. Just a typical non progressive nation.

I suggest you read "The Fourth Turning" by William Strauss and Neil Howe for historical support for violent resolution of crisis periods similar to that which we are now enduring. The authors in 1997 predicted the current crisis period to begin about when it did, 2006-2007. Similar crises preceded the 1775 American Revolution, the 1861 Civil War, and WWII (1941). The regularity of these crisis periods followed by violent resolution is one of the phenomenon they reveal in their analysis of history, and the effect of generational attitudes. I am sure that the majority of people were taken by surprise when these periods of violence erupted; it is just human nature to expect tomorrow to be like today, especially when long term forces are at work, and the pressure slowly builds until there is a sudden perceptible event which even the most unaware notice.

You might also want to read "Civil War Two, The Coming Breakup of America", by Thomas W. Chittum, who addresses the ethnic divisions in the US and predicts civil war based on the changing ethnic demographics which will create the conditions that historically worldwide lead to race wars. He suggests that the Southwest will break away to become part of Mexico and the South will break away to become a new Black nation, leaving the Northwest, Midwest, and Northeast as a Caucasian enclave. Because there seems to be a taboo about discussion of racial division, some people discredit this book as racist; I think his analysis is credible and any racial motives he may have are overshadowed by the analysis itself.

To my mind the convergence of cyclical forces described in the Fourth Turning, the changing ethic demographics, and the massive economic contraction that energy scarcity will bring (is bringing) falls into the category of a perfect storm, and I can easily see civil war / revolution over the next decade or two. This is hardly a fantasy of mine.

[Pops]

I think we are a little off topic.

[dsula]

In the light of peakoil you can expect to have to work MUCH MUCH more to be able to feed yourself. Not less.

Why? The market will then value food higher due to the increased work required for production, which will create employment opportunities wherein those in the food industry will earn great wages. Just like 500 years ago.

Yay for 'the market'. Who needs government involvement or any collective planning for the future?

Brian

Not in a overpopulated world where you need to work every piece of marginal land, hunt every rat in town, pick every berry in the woods just to be able to survive.

[Oakley]

Would a 35 hour work week create more jobs, or just share existing jobs between multiple people. And would those with employment now need to take a pay cut because they are working fewer hours? Plenty of people are paid by the hour, are they not. You don't really think a salaried person would keep getting the same salary for fewer hours, do you.

The overall effect might give some out of work people employment, but would subtract employment from those who now have jobs. You don't really think that businesses, many of which are marginal in today's poor economic environment, could afford to compensate two people to do one job more than they pay one person to do that job.

I looks to me like this proposal does not decrease unemployment, it just spreads its negative effect around over more people.

[dsula]

35 hours is a typical non-sense proposel from people who never operated a business and in general have no idea. Loss of productivity is significant.

You're wrong. They do it in France. Their productivity is actually higher, even though the work fewer hours.

Maybe the productivity per hour, but not the total output. I guess you can achieve the highest productivity if you work 10min/week. For those 10min you give it all.

They also have more vacation time,

and eat better food.

better quality? no it's the same generic industrial crap you get everywhere else. Better tasting? Ugh, french food. No thanks. You get good quality everywhere if you pay the price.

You want to make it CHEAPER to hire people, not more expensive.

Uhm, no we don't. That road leads to China.

Responsability is the key. You're supposed to be responsible for your action, reap the rewards, pay the price. Instead of blaming everybody else. If somebody wants to work 100h/week. Let him, and also let him keep the spoils. If sombody wants to work 10h/week. Let him, but don't make the guy who works 100h/wk pay for him.

[basil_hayden]

A 35 hour work week won't do squat, a slow week for me is already 55 hours with 15 for free and 40 underpaid.

What would make a difference is a 4 day 10 hour workweek to save 20% on auto fuel.

[Pops]

Would a 35 hour work week create more jobs, or just share existing jobs between multiple people.

Who knows for sure.

My guess is working people create more demand for stuff than unemployed people so the greater the number of workers the greater the demand for stuff and more overall jobs. Besides, the new workers are adding to instead of a draining from the economy.

Either way society pays to keep those people from starving whether they are working or not - it's exactly like medical care, the sign at the emergency room says they can't turn anyone away so the ER room is used for treating an earache at $3k/hr at society's expense - instead of simply providing a $100/hr clinic.

[Pretorian]

[the sign at the emergency room says they can't turn anyone away so the ER room is used for treating an earache at $3k/hr at society's expense - instead of simply providing a $100/hr clinic.

Are you suggesting that they'd rather cough up $100 than to handle a $3000 bill to the society? Now that is what i call a bold thought..