• yarr@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I used those figures for ease of understanding and easy math. At no point did I believe there was a factory somewhere selling widgets, or that a person named Joe was salaried as he built them. My overall point is that for all economics to remain the same, average productivity per worker per hour must remain the same, otherwise there will be price increases or other economic effects.

    • Kayday@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I used those figures for ease of understanding and easy math.
      Easy, but not accurate and therefore misleading.

      At no point did I believe there was a factory somewhere selling widgets, or that a person named Joe was salaried as he built them.
      No one thought you did… until now.

      My overall point is that for all economics to remain the same, average productivity per worker per hour must remain the same, otherwise there will be price increases or other economic effects.
      Correct, things will change. The point is that the system can handle those changes. Price increases will happen, sure. But if we take a look at the year prior to [current year], prices tend to go up. Rather than use this as an argument against working fewer hours, or not paying employees more, we should be using the systems we have in place to provide as much benefit to people as is reasonable. Since the 4 day work week does work, (many examples of companies increasing productivity this way) this is a reasonable benefit to push for.