Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
September LC Thread **Survivor White House Edition** September LC Thread **Survivor White House Edition**
View Poll Results: Who will NOT survive the month of September?
Jefferson Beleaguered Sessions III
7 19.44%
John Kelly
3 8.33%
Kjrstyn Njielessen
0 0%
Wilbur Ross
0 0%
Ben Carson
0 0%
Rudy Giuliani
10 27.78%
Sarah Huckabee Sanders
4 11.11%
Kellyanne Conway
2 5.56%
Rod Rosenstein
3 8.33%
Write-in
7 19.44%

09-01-2018 , 10:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
Someone's got a hot trigger finger on the August LC thread.

But anyway.



This is what I keep telling you guys and no one ever listens because it's not a popular current talking point. We should ALL be working like 20 hours a week by now. **** UBI - just make any hours over 20 = double time, for everyone, and watch the magic happen.





Seriously - there's a reason why no one ever brings this up from either side of the aisle. Their donor overlords would revolt.
You don’t have to imagine the consequences of reducing working hours. You can just look at a country like France, which has taken steps in the direction you’re talking about (35 hour workweek, lots of vacation). The ruling class is fine, GDP is 2/3 what it is in the US, and people have lots of free time. And people actually do have fewer iPhones.
09-01-2018 , 10:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
not to get too 'woke man' about it, but this is the kind of thing men do to women all the ****ing time and they get away with it because there's just enough plausible deniability to throw it back on the woman as 'overreacting', 'hysterical', 'sensitive' etc. this one has gained traction because he did it with a ton of cameras and millions of people watching.

imagine a man with power doing this to a woman without power without any cameras around. it happens constantly. what can the woman do in that situation? almost certainly, nothing. this guy should is rightfully getting hung out to dry, but this behavior isn't created in a vacuum, there are thousands of him.
09-01-2018 , 10:50 AM
What a ****ing creep

The whole part where she was performing was super weird, I watched a bit of it without sound, she is singing at a frickin funeral and Bill C is right behind her cheesing the entire time, talking to his left and right, just a big ass smile on his face. Its a funeral??!
09-01-2018 , 10:59 AM
Picking Sanders if McGahn isn't allowed.
09-01-2018 , 11:18 AM
I doubt anyone else gets the boot until after the midterms.
09-01-2018 , 11:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
To me it's just common sense. If worker productivity is increasing so much, then either pay should be going up, or hours worked going down. Since neither is happening, for a long time now, it's time for some legislative nudging. Increasing min. wage is a good step - but you can't go too crazy with that. Reducing hours is the next obvious step.
Everyone gets like $200/mo UBI, overtime starts at 35, min wage goes up to like $12/hr nationally tied to cost of living. Wait a few years and analyze the results.
09-01-2018 , 11:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bakes
she is singing at a frickin funeral and Bill C is right behind her cheesing the entire time, talking to his left and right, just a big ass smile on his face. Its a funeral??!
You'd nearly think the vast majority of people making public statements about McCain's passing are being completely insincere or something.
09-01-2018 , 11:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
You don’t have to imagine the consequences of reducing working hours. You can just look at a country like France, which has taken steps in the direction you’re talking about (35 hour workweek, lots of vacation). The ruling class is fine, GDP is 2/3 what it is in the US, and people have lots of free time. And people actually do have fewer iPhones.
Not a very scientific analysis. Historical GDP per capita chart for France looks pretty much exactly the same as for the UK and Germany.
09-01-2018 , 11:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
BUT WE CAN STILL HAVE IT

The .01% just have to live with only being obscenely wealthy instead of surreally wealthy. Maybe only 1 or 2 yachts instead of a fleet? Maybe only one of the yachts has a helipad? Maybe only a G6 instead of tricked out gold-plated 747? Maybe they have to sell one of their Manhattan penthouses that they never set foot in?

Yeah even the .1% might have to think twice about that 3rd vacation home.

Sacrifices.

Just go back to like the 60s when the wealthy were still grateful to millions of working class young men who died to protect their giant pile of gold coins. The average CEO made what 5-10x that of the average worker? Now it's what 500x? Hell just go part of the way there and we can all share the wealth instead of heads rolling down the street - which is where this is headed.

Why is this so hard to grasp and why are you carrying water for these ****s? "I must work 40 hours/week to have my iPhone and yearly trip to Cancun. It is an economic law." No.

Even at 20 hours/week you're probably contributing multiples more to your company's bottom line than your father did at 40 hrs/week. My last company made $33k a minute or something, some of it on software I built. I deserve a tiny finger in that pie.

You might accurately say "deserve's got nothing to do with it" - which I will remind myself when the job creators are dragged through the streets. The enduring lesson of history is if you don't share the wealth at least some - at some point something's got to give.

The DeVos/Mercers/Muchins of the world actually believe the opposite. That if you give the proles too much leisure time, they'll just want more. You have to keep their noses to the grindstone. You're literally helping them by perpetuating this baseless argument that we must always work 40 hours to have ever cheapening basic leisure items.
So where we live capitalism and productivity are thriving and have left a lot of people with a lot of money. So what do we do? We bid up the price of housing until we spend so much money there that we need to get back on the treadmill.

Maybe changing overtime and minimum wage can change things, but I dunno if you can possibly a world where the standard of living is pretty high and people don't have to work much with all the competition people are in with each other for resources and to lower their own wages.
09-01-2018 , 12:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Not a very scientific analysis. Historical GDP per capita chart for France looks pretty much exactly the same as for the UK and Germany.
It’s more scientific than just making stuff up, but I agree it doesn’t truly prove anything. Worth noting though that GDP/c is higher in both UK and France by a meaningful amount.
09-01-2018 , 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mendicant loafer
+1
kelly
09-01-2018 , 12:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
It’s more scientific than just making stuff up, but I agree it doesn’t truly prove anything. Worth noting though that GDP/c is higher in both UK and France by a meaningful amount.
? Higher in UK and France than what? You mean higher in the US than UK and France?

Aside from this, I don't think GDP is a good measure to gauge this. Not all economic activity is equal. BS jobs isn't a very detailed look at this, and it wasn't meant to be, but what it questions is a lot of "productivity" that I think does get measured as part of the GDP.

France does have more mobile phones per capita than the US. Apple has a smaller market share though.
09-01-2018 , 12:52 PM
Housing (in California anyway) and private higher education are interesting markets. The amount people will pay is pretty much every single cent they can get their hands on. Like if interest rates drop, housing prices immediately increase to compensate. Medical care is similar I think but insurance companies, doctors, and hospitals are part of the decision.
09-01-2018 , 01:24 PM
How many holidays does one get in the USA?

UK is around 28 days for first year of service, probably a bit higher in the round.
09-01-2018 , 01:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
How many holidays does one get in the USA?

UK is around 28 days for first year of service, probably a bit higher in the round.
By law, 0. "Good" jobs give you 10 days a year.
09-01-2018 , 01:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosdef
This presumes bargaining power for the workers though. When worker productivity increases, profits increase but things like wages and benefits don't just go up because profits go up. The shareholders aren't giving up their share of the increased profits without explicit or implicit threats of action from the workers.
Yeah and I'm saying outnumbering the owner class 1000-1 is the ultimate bargaining power of the workers. Eventually that majority can only get pushed so far before they revolt - either bloodily or bloodless.
09-01-2018 , 01:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
You don’t have to imagine the consequences of reducing working hours. You can just look at a country like France, which has taken steps in the direction you’re talking about (35 hour workweek, lots of vacation). The ruling class is fine, GDP is 2/3 what it is in the US, and people have lots of free time. And people actually do have fewer iPhones.
Maybe the French aren't that into iPhones? Also maybe the guillotines are still a fresher memory in France.
09-01-2018 , 01:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
How many holidays does one get in the USA?

UK is around 28 days for first year of service, probably a bit higher in the round.
Apparently if the US did this our GDP would plummet or something. Because science. Now get back to work hippie.
09-01-2018 , 01:52 PM
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how if workers are twice as productive as 30 years ago and make pretty much the same money, but we cut their hours by 5-10 a week, that somehow tanks the economy.
09-01-2018 , 01:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Housing (in California anyway) and private higher education are interesting markets. The amount people will pay is pretty much every single cent they can get their hands on. Like if interest rates drop, housing prices immediately increase to compensate. Medical care is similar I think but insurance companies, doctors, and hospitals are part of the decision.
All this would still be true if they raised OT to 45 hours a week and everyone started working 9 hours a day by convention. Same as it would still be true at 35.
09-01-2018 , 02:17 PM
I bet if we started executing 1 random billionaire per month we'd see some pretty spectacular progress on all sorts of fronts. No need for us plebes to get down in the weeds with specific policy details. Let them do the heavy lifting, or they get to play The Lottery 21st century-style.
09-01-2018 , 02:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zikzak
I bet if we started executing 1 random billionaire per month we'd see some pretty spectacular progress on all sorts of fronts. No need for us plebes to get down in the weeds with specific policy details. Let them do the heavy lifting, or they get to play The Lottery 21st century-style.
They decided it was better to hire a million police officers, give them military equipment and build 6000 prisons and jails.
09-01-2018 , 02:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how if workers are twice as productive as 30 years ago and make pretty much the same money, but we cut their hours by 5-10 a week, that somehow tanks the economy.
I know high school reading has been brought up in recent LC threads but we read nickel and dimed by Ehrenreich in Jr High. Probably the best thing I read for lasting impact.
09-01-2018 , 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by otatop
By law, 0. "Good" jobs give you 10 days a year.
10 days, the humanity.
09-01-2018 , 02:28 PM
Seriously.

10 days is Dickensian.

      
m