One of the things I predicted a long time ago is starting to take effect now, where for instance in Japan next week, there will be a concerted push toward four-day working weeks. The reasoning they are giving behind this is to combat the falling birth rate, which is at around 1.2 births per woman - where the replacement rate required for a population is at around 2.1 - so it makes sense that a better work-life situation could impact on the numbers. To some degree. However, I think it will have less impact than believed, because for instance in Finland where there is a support culture to a greater degree for families, there is still only a 1.25 birth rate.
But I don't think that a four-day week is going to impact on this, but that doesn't mean it won't have an impact on society. Because essentially what it means is that there are other employment options available, where the impact of technology is going to start taking more and more jobs. This means that there is less work, but with a potentially mandated four-day week, it essentially increases employment by twenty percent, as there is a 1-day "job share" rotation. Even as jobs are lost, four jobs become five jobs.
And, because technology is going to keep taking jobs to increase profits, there will have to be a change to the way corporate taxes work, as the social contract is broken. Essentially, the deal is that businesses pay less tax because they employ people and pay them to fuel economic consumption - but the less they do that, the more burden is put on those who are able to work. The taxes increase for workers, but less people are working. Taxpayers also fund the education systems that build the skills necessary for the companies to leverage, but when companies are hiring less, the system breaks down there too.
So, essentially the much touted "universal basic income" (UBI) comes into play at this point, where companies with soaring profits on the back of reduction in workforce, will be forced to fund the additional income - otherwise, they have no customers anyway. The universal basic income can support those who are not working at the lower end, but because it is universal nationally), it means those who are working have incentive to reduce their hours to s three- or four-day week without losing much, to give space to retrain, have families, or just enjoy life a bit more. This gives opportunity for those out of work to pick up employment for three or four days a week on top, as well as retrain also.
What I have sketched here is pretty bare bones as an idea and I have written in depth about some of these things before, but what should be clear for everyone by now, is that the economy as it is is untenable going forward. Sweeping changes need to be made to the entire system from the ground up, including how we value activity and human life. The concept of governance has to be changed from a support function for corporate profits under the assumption it leads to social wellbeing, to a wellbeing first model where corporations are mechanisms to build humanity. And this means the corporate tax systems have to be overhauled to this end, and that has to happen at the global level, due to the interdependencies of businesses around the world, including the banking systems.
The current governance, finance, business and society structures are completely misaligned for a thriving society, which is why we are seeing such a degradation in living standards, wealth gaps, birth rates and health outcomes. The profit first models are going to collapse, because they eat themselves as they consume endlessly until there is nothing left. If there is no one able to consume the products and services of the businesses, the businesses fail - but that doesn't mean the people concerned don't still have needs and demands.
I reckon the changes in Japan aren't going to have much of an impact to begin with, but I do believe that as more and more of the problems arise from aging populations and the services needs not being provided for, unemployment rising based on no suitable jobs, and a growing problem with conglomerates taking all resources to the point that entire countries are collapsing in the vacuum, things will change. But, whether those changes which are extreme by the standards of what we have now and how we think about a functioning society are enough early enough, is yet to be seen.
When people consider a four-day week, they are thinking about the extra free time they will get. But what we really should be thinking about is how valuable time is, and how we should be spending it in order to make personal lives better. Ultimately, our personal lives are heavily impacted by the social structures we operate in, and no matter how much money an individual might have, if society collapses, wellbeing is far from optimised.
Even though we have built a global economy, we keep acting as if we are independent.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Are they talking about a four day work week where the hours are reduced or are they talking about moving those hours to a different area? For example, in the summer we move to a four day work week, but instead of working 8 hours per day, you are supposed to be working 10 hours per day, then we close the district down on Friday. They call it "four tens"
As I understand it, it is a four day week with same hours, but the details of implementation that I have found were a bit sketchy.
That makes sense. It leads to some really long days. I usually get a bit burnt out when we do it because I am so tired through the week. The three day weekends are nice though and it frees up some of my PTO days for other uses.
I would be happy with 10h days I think. I used to do them every second week when in Australia for a job, and I quite liked the extra days off.
I think my problem was, I still liked to get home at the same time each day, so I would go in two hours earlier. Of course back then I wasn't getting up early to exercise either, so it's all kind of a wash now. All I remember was my wife wasn't very pleased with my attitude and demeanor during those times.
I don't hear any talk of a 4 day work week in USA 😀
That would seem really strange. Though I was under impression that Japanese culture was not compatible with the four day week idea. But here we are... Maybe the world is changing...
What is really interesting is that the US in many respects is actually quite a lot behind other countries. For instance in Europe, there is far more protection for workers than in the US, but the pay is lower. Which is better for society overall? Hard to say - but is the American dream really alive and kicking for the majority of people?
In Lithuania some people are saying that if this would happen employers would just pay less. So workers situation would be worse. I am happy working 7 days a week but I am privileged to be able to to do what I want so that doesn't really count.
They need to be taxed on what they produce, and how they produce it :)
The point about corporations needing to fund a universal basic income as they automate more jobs is something more people should be talking about. The current tax structure just won’t hold up, the math is too obvious
The math doesn't work on any of the current situation - yet here we are, breaking the numbers...
breaking the numbers indeed
I think that four-day working week would enchance the quality of a worker's life. This might somehow affect the birth rate. Some people around me prefer having only one child due to the hard life conditions.
Having a kid these days might be harder in some ways, but is it that much harder than twenty or thirty years ago?
I don't think so. I talked about it few days ago with a friend. Kids would somehow grow up then, but today they need speacial attention and.care.
The solution does not lie in redistributing labour or in patching up an unsustainable system; the real problem is overpopulation. As we search for ways to sustain more mouths, resources and demands, nature will inevitably impose its own balance. There is no ‘progress’ or ‘universal welfare’ that can withstand an ecological collapse caused by our inability to accept that the planet has limits. If we keep trying to feed an infinite economic machine in a finite world, sooner or later, famines, epidemics, or disasters will do what we have not had the courage to do: reduce the human burden on the earth. It is uncomfortable, but it is inevitable.
Overpopulation isn't a problem. We make it a problem of course. However, it isn't a problem because at the rate we are going, the majority of people will not be able to sustain themselves and will just die in the streets.
Exactly, it will die in the street, nature will decimate the population...