Re:Why hasn't economic progress lowered work hours more? (20...
by fatwah on Monday December 25, 2017 @10:20AM
(#16004388)
80 years ago women could afford to stay at home.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why hasn't economic progress lowered work hours more? (20...
by sametmax on Monday December 25, 2017 @10:27AM
(#16004420)
Population increased also. And consumerism. And debt. And a lot of laws have been added.
But last year, 2 of my friends fire their 5 employees and started again, them alone. They made the calculation: there productivity ratio was better with only them 2, than with the 5 part time workers they had that they were paying full time + benefits. And their team was "good" in my book. Most teams I meet are not, and I travel from companies to companies all the time.
Re:Why hasn't economic progress lowered work hours more? (20...
by nnq on Monday December 25, 2017 @03:30PM
(#16005568)
> Population increased also
If this were really the problem, it would be pretty easy to solve... (HINT: this isn't really the problem!)
Re:Why hasn't economic progress lowered work hours more? (20...
by geezerjay on Monday December 25, 2017 @07:02PM
(#16006279)
> Population increased also. And consumerism. And debt. And a lot of laws have been added.
These factors are irrelevant when compared with the fact that the active population essentially doubled since WW2 with women entering the workforce.
Re:Why hasn't economic progress lowered work hours more? (20...
by watwut on Monday December 25, 2017 @04:31PM
(#16005795)
They also had to stay at home, at least middle class. Poorand blacks were in different situation anyway. And wen were completely dependent on men and f@cked when he died or got sick.