Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

3 day work weeks will arrive only when mandated by law. We’re long overdue in that regard [1].

Fixing housing through mandating remote work also would go a long way, so you’re not held hostage to a job through geographic requirements. Kudos to remote first/remote only Orgs contributing in this regard. We can always use more flexible/remote roles ("mostly" remote, flexible enough to still have reasonable amounts of face to face time with colleagues or others in the industry).

[1] https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/15558/producti...

View on HN

On a practical level how would you prevent people from seeking a second job in order to pay their inflated rent?

Fixing the housing supply problem appears to be critical here. Without increasing supply, folks might find ways to work around the "mandate" out of sheer necessity.

Also I think the OP should broaden the question to read "lifelong contributors." The learning is a very important component of this, but broadly construed, that learning should include the practical experience gained from contributing to all sorts endeavors that produce social value. One of the critical problems with today's workforce is that so much of the work revolves around what social anthropologist David Graeber calls "Bullshit Jobs."

There's often very little to learn in these environments except how to play office politics more astutely ... the next time around.

The aggressive support and prioritization of remote work (using economic incentives and public policy) and the deflation of housing must go hand in hand. It's okay if some people want to work more than the regulated work week. We allow this today, but I don't notice many people working six or seven days a week voluntarily, only if they're economically forced to. This bodes well for a reduction in the definition of a work week.

To your point about bullshit jobs, they must be destroyed using policy as part of these efforts, while still providing a stable safety net for life long learners to have the opportunity to generate value society can't yet predict. Everyone who wants a job should be able to have one they want; those who don't want a job are cheap to provide for (automated ag, cheap/clean energy, etc) with properly architected public good systems. Some of these issues are societal ("puritanical work ethic", "suffering is good for the soul", etc) and will take time to recalibrate (I have seen this first hand in conversations with people, and I'm sure others have as well).

Apply force in the desired direction of progress and don't let up.

In order to change policy (in the US for instance), you'll need the cooperation of politicians. What candidate running for president right now is truly prepared to challenge the status quo? Those of us who have been around for more than a few elections know the answer to this question all too well; hence the low voter turnout.

We need to shift more in the direction of a direct democracy, using the blockchain perhaps as a next generation digital ballot box. Not holding my breath though that this will happen within the lifetime of any one reading hacker news right now. There's just too much at stake for our corporate overlords.

I intend to run for office. It is a thankless, unpleasant, but necessary schlep. I’d encourage you to consider the same.

No blockchain!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com