Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    So you believe in zero regulation on employment? This is the same logic as believing on no minimum wage. It would be entirely logically consistent with advocating pittance wages akin to slavery. Libertarianism has to sometimes step in to protect peoples liberties, just as tolerance needs to step in to protect people from intolerance. This is the basis of a sane society.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    People literately died
    They read themselves to death?

    :toofunny:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jake4198)
    I'd love to work six hours a day, speaking as someone who has to get up at 3:30 am each morning to work ten hours a day stacking shelves, but the introduction of government regulation is catastrophic for business investment and the failings of France are evidence that modern-day socialist economic principles should be ignored and abandoned.
    People literately died getting an 8 hour working day. Have fun working 10 hours for your overlords.

    Maybe you could work longer for the same pay with no breaks? Pull your socks up.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    They read themselves to death?

    :toofunny:
    I have dyslexia.

    That's it, laugh at the disabled person.
    :stickyman:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gora The Xplorer)
    Hire more nurses.
    That's the failure of the idea.133% the cost for no additional benefit.


    Which is why the mentality needs to change. The very notion that you should work for a living or that it's good to engage in some sort of drudgery needs to be abolished.
    this, as I say is the ultimate irony. A hard left leader proposing something that is realised via an existential attack on his core support.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    That's the failure of the idea.133% the cost for no additional benefit.



    this, as I say is the ultimate irony. A hard left leader proposing something that is realised via an existential attack on his core support.
    The idea is that as automation becomes more prevalent people will be put out of work, even as company profits further increase. The way to ensure the benefits of this trickle down to normal people is a mixture of basic income and reducing working hours for the same pay to ensure everyone can get jobs and live a life worthy of a human.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    guess this country going to be in even further debt that it is already
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamesthehustler)
    guess this country going to be in even further debt that it is already
    Well, it has opened my eyes. I assumed that TSR members, supposedly intelligent and educated, would instantly realise the impracticality of the policy. Clearly, people have a lower level of commonsense than one might expect.

    I wonder if anyone wants to buy my treasure map.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gora The Xplorer)
    The idea is that as automation becomes more prevalent people will be put out of work, even as company profits further increase. The way to ensure the benefits of this trickle down to normal people is a mixture of basic income and reducing working hours for the same pay to ensure everyone can get jobs and live a life worthy of a human.
    It's only going to work for a relatively small number of job types - and even then only for the employed rather than self-employed. It's totally unworkable on almost every level. A prime example of mindless pie-in-the-sky leftie thinking.

    In the acid-trip parallel universe where there is a Corbyn-led Labour government, how would this ever get off the ground without the unions? The unions would fight him to the death on it.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    It's only going to work for a relatively small number of job types - and even then only for the employed rather than self-employed. It's totally unworkable on almost every level. A prime example of mindless pie-in-the-sky leftie thinking.

    In the acid-trip parallel universe where there is a Corbyn-led Labour government, how would this ever get off the ground without the unions? The unions would fight him to the death on it.
    If workers received a basic income I doubt trade union would even exist.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gora The Xplorer)
    If workers received a basic income I doubt trade union would even exist.
    That won't be happening.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gora The Xplorer)
    If workers received a basic income I doubt trade union would even exist.
    Why would rail workers settle for a basic income, when they currently have a license to extort whatever they want whenever they want?Especially tube workers.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gora The Xplorer)
    If workers received a basic income I doubt trade union would even exist.
    Workers do receive a basic income. It is just unfortunate that every time there is an increase in wages, inflation acts to undo any gain. You could set the minimum wage at £1 million a year, but you can guarantee that within a couple of years, it would cost you £10,000 to buy a chicken dinner.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    So you believe in zero regulation on employment? This is the same logic as believing on no minimum wage. It would be entirely logically consistent with advocating pittance wages akin to slavery. Libertarianism has to sometimes step in to protect peoples liberties, just as tolerance needs to step in to protect people from intolerance. This is the basis of a sane society.
    As a general point, we didn't have a minimum wage until 1997. In many ways, it was the centrist or right-leaning alternative - and represented a failure of collective bargaining and trade unions to maintain wages outside of certain key industries.

    *It weakened the unions, but also stood as a testament to their existing weakness and inability to recreate themselves as relevant forces in modern workplaces. It was largely service sector jobs where the minimum wage made a key difference - areas where unions had failed or shown little interest in expansion.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    Simple question: would anybody, left or right, support this if it were to be trialled by MPs?

    Let's just say MPs were to claim they could do all their commons work, select committees, voting any ministerial work plus all their constituency work in 6 hours a day and get paid the same - would you be in favour, or would you disbelieve the claim that it's possible?
    Anything that reduces the number of days, weeks, hours or seconds that legislators are working during the year gets my approval. I generally believe that the country would work rather better if there was less legislating going on and fewer great plans from government ministers.*
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    It's only going to work for a relatively small number of job types - and even then only for the employed rather than self-employed. It's totally unworkable on almost every level. A prime example of mindless pie-in-the-sky leftie thinking.

    In the acid-trip parallel universe where there is a Corbyn-led Labour government, how would this ever get off the ground without the unions? The unions would fight him to the death on it.
    Unions should support it. It needs to be part of a large labour movement.

    This is a good book on it. Providing you are not allergic to leftist thought.

    http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...ing-the-future
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I was actually gonna make a snub comment but I thought let me have a look and wow, it's actually a great idea I hope Owen smith copies it
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I'm on the right myself but not entirely adverse to this if done properly since i think people who want the working time directive scrapped are a bit batty.

    If it's an actual 6 hour limit per day then i'd have to be very much against this on the basis that tasks do take time and it will reduce employment growth at the lower end of the labour market especially if firms have to pay overtime rates for standard shifts.

    Where this policy has merit is if its an amendment to the working time directive down to 30+ hours.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I'm on the right myself but not entirely adverse to this if done properly since i think people who want the working time directive scrapped are a bit batty.

    If it's an actual 6 hour limit per day then i'd have to be very much against this on the basis that tasks do take time and it will reduce employment growth at the lower end of the labour market especially if firms have to pay overtime rates for standard shifts.

    Where this policy has merit is if its an amendment to the working time directive down to 30+ hours.
    It seems like the idea has fairly broad support across the political spectrum. I too would like to see more details though.

    What's the point in being such a wealthy nation and making such huge technological advancements if we only have 2-3 hours a day free?

    Apparently workers in Germany could afford to take every Friday off and still produce as much and earn as much as British workers.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It seems like the idea has fairly broad support across the political spectrum. I too would like to see more details though.

    What's the point in being such a wealthy nation and making such huge technological advancements if we only have 2-3 hours a day free?

    Apparently workers in Germany could afford to take every Friday off and still produce as much and earn as much as British workers.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Regardless of technology people to chose to work a high number of hours rather than are forced to. Keynes back in the 30's thought that everybody would end up working part time however what he failed to account for was that while human needs are finite, human wants are endless and constantly expanded by the institution of marketing.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.