Draft:Labor

We could work less

It's been viable for decades already

The old 40-hour work week has been the standard since around 1940(...)( or in some cases, even earlier - see Wikipedia's page on it ). Since then, despite all the technological advancement - despite all the machines that are supposed to make things more efficient - we're still working just as many hours. What happened? To put it simply:

Instead of working less, the economy has been geared towards producing morei.e. more goods & services. Economists call this "growth".

Of course in moderation, economic growth can improve quality of life(...)( albeit inefficiently and unequally ), but in most countries, this has already plateaued decades ago, all the while using more and more resources, harming the environment, raising the cost of living, and keeping people overworked.

We can do better. Considering how much technology has evolved since 1940, it should be completely reasonable to have a 20-hour work week, even a 10-hour work week.

It has to be done in a way that lowers the cost of living

Or even better, make basic housing free.

How much labor does society really need?

Obviously if no one worked, no food would be produced and we'd all starve. But seriously, how much work does it actually take, per capita, to generate enough food for everyone? Not a lot.

• In developed countries(...)( including net-exporters of food, such as Canada ): farming + food processing factories + food transportation = less than 5% of all jobs.
  • That amount of labor would be even less if we ate more plant-based and didn't waste as much food (i.e. we wouldn't have to produce as many crops)
  • While it's true there are a lot more jobs in food service (restaurants etc), a non-capitalist system could phase out most of those jobs completely(...)( maybe there would still be some soup kitchen workers (treated fairly of course, allowed to sit, etc), or maybe soup kitchens would be completely DIY, anyone could serve themselves and other people, if it's properly designed for that ), and everyone would still eat.

As for housing, of course it takes labor to build homes & infrastructure, but once it's built, it doesn't have to be much labor to maintain.

And of course, someone's gotta work factory jobs if we want technology and other cool stuff. But if we stop planned obsolescence, stop home waste, etc., then we could easily cut total production in half, without losing any quality of life whatsoever. Or cut production even more if people learn to hold on to older possessions and not buy so much new stuff in general. It would be a lot better for the planet as well.

We can also phase out bullshit jobs once people's livelihoods don't depend on them.

So of the remaining labor, some of it could be shared among more people, to allow for a truly shorter work week. Farming & construction are pretty specialized, but maybe there's a way to make parts of it more entry-level? 💬 discussion I'd imagine there's enough people out there who would naturally want to learn it anyway if they had more free time and access to land. So maybe all it would take is a few tax-funded courses to get the ball rolling until people start teaching each other (a DIY-voluntaryist kind of approach maybe, idk). Also it could be taught in schools maybe. Leave a comment if you have any ideas.

Jobs shouldn't suck

To the extent that people do still work, jobs shouldn't be destroying people's bodies and souls.

• Factories could be made more ergonomic for workers
• Retail/service workers could be allowed chairs instead of having to stand all day
• Office workers could be allowed to get up anytime instead of having to sit all day
• Think of all the ways your job could be improved if we weren't bound by status-quo politics / Leave a comment...