Those seem incompatible to me.

(UBI means Universal Basic Income, giving everyone a basic income, for free)

  • Atin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    11 months ago

    If I could afford to only work 4 days a week, those 4 days would most likely be a lot more productive as I would have time to get treatment for my chronic illnesses.

    • Chee_Koala@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      I can manage financially with 2 days of work a week, and I’m now at a point where I would not want to scale back because my work would become of lower quality. Every Monday would be like coming back from a vacation, and I think I’d lose touch and feel with the job.

      Those 5 days weekend sure give me time for personally enriching hobbies!

      • ZahzenEclipse@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        Society couldn’t function if most people worked like you. I’m happy for you and it’s the exact place I want to be but I think its only possible in our current framework.

          • ZahzenEclipse@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            We’re still a far way away from the level of automation necessary to make working only 2 days a week feasible imo

          • spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Also, a fair bit of work is work for the sake of work. It doesn’t enrich society, just the capitalism machine. So if UBI were enacted on a large scale, there is plenty of unnecessary work that can go by the wayside.

        • moriquende@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          It actually could. Imagine if salary had increased in accordance to the productivity boosts that automation has brought. Then you could have 3 people, working 2 days a week, sharing a job and being able to live from it. After all, it used to take more than 3 people to do the work a single person does nowadays.

          • ZahzenEclipse@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Why would a business pay for these things that make their workers more efficient and then relinquish all of the profit that came from making things more efficient?

            • DeadlineX@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              11 months ago

              There’s a difference between “society couldn’t function” and “companies are too greedy”. One of them is wrong and the other needs to change.

    • rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      11 months ago

      I have been told by HR last year to use my surplus vacation days somewhere. I used them on every Monday for half a year. I got not only more productive, but also less stressed. It works.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah as an industrial/human factors engineer it’s our profession’s dirty little secret. It doesn’t apply to every job, but improvement to work quality does. Reducing shift length also does. Hours 7-8 are rarely very productive for thinky workers.

        Unfortunately nobody has managed to successfully explain the concept of mathematics or empirical evidence to businesspeople. Sometimes I wonder if they have thoughts beyond gut instinct.