Ford Super Sunday Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 Government think tank in bad idea shocker The working week should be cut to 21 hours to help boost the economy and improve quality of life, a left-wing think tank has said.The New Economics Foundation claimed in a report the reduction in hours would help to ease unemployment and overwork. The think tank said people were working longer hours now than 30 years ago even though unemployment was at 2.5 million. The foundation admitted people would earn less, but said they would have more time to carry out worthy tasks. They would have better scope to look after children or other dependents, there would be more opportunity for civic duties, and older people could even delay retirement, it said. 'Better employees' Anna Coote, co-author of the 21 Hours report, said: "So many of us live to work, work to earn, and earn to consume, and our consumption habits are squandering the earth's natural resources. "Spending less time in paid work could help us to break this pattern. We'd have more time to be better parents, better citizens, better carers and better neighbours. "We could even become better employees - less stressed, more in control, happier in our jobs and more productive. "It is time to break the power of the old industrial clock, take back our lives and work for a sustainable future." The foundation's policy director Andrew Simms added: "A cultural shift will throw up real challenges, but there could also be massive benefits for our economy, our quality of life and our planet. "After all, hands up who wouldn't like a four day weekend?" This, for me, is a terrible idea. Can you imagine the chaos if it was implamented. The vast majority of people's quality of life would decrease with less money, and yet the same bills. In fact you coul argue some would be higher, the more time at home means more useage of Gas, Electric etc. Now, as i've said elsewhere, I know disgareeing with a left wing think tank might get me a spot in the 'BNP bad boys' notebook, but that would be a ridiculous policy. Thank god it'll never be enforced.
stez Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 employers i know of will for you to work like a twat to get the work done in the reduced hours, because they won't take anyone else on.
Jay Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 it never ceases to amaze me the stupid suggestions that these sort of groups come up with, do they actually have any good to offer? This is not even practical or workable it's just plain stupid
Matt Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 Another fantastic idea from some penpusher who has never done a proper days work in their life no doubt. It's one extreme to the other weren't they on about extending the weekly working hours a few years ago? Now they talk about reducing it, and then you hear about plans to make people work longer until they can retire...I've got a personal pension and saving going since the day I left school/started work - I ain't working till i'm an old man and the government say I can stop - That's even if there's still a state pension still availiable when I come to retirement age. Mind you overtime would be easy to come by if the hours were set to 21 hours a week - I'd be on overtime rate by Tuesday night/Wednesday morning easily
Guest Bilo Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 The sad thing is that taxpayers money has been wasted on this. I know it'll be about 0.000001p per head but that's not really the point, there must be better things to spend cash on than this research, where the conclusion is just about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
MPH Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 The working week should be cut to 21 hours to help boost the economy and improve quality of life, a left-wing think tank has said.The New Economics Foundation claimed in a report the reduction in hours would help to ease unemployment and overwork. The think tank said people were working longer hours now than 30 years ago even though unemployment was at 2.5 million. The foundation admitted people would earn less, but said they would have more time to carry out worthy tasks. They would have better scope to look after children or other dependents, there would be more opportunity for civic duties, and older people could even delay retirement, it said. 'Better employees' Anna Coote, co-author of the 21 Hours report, said: "So many of us live to work, work to earn, and earn to consume, and our consumption habits are squandering the earth's natural resources. "Spending less time in paid work could help us to break this pattern. We'd have more time to be better parents, better citizens, better carers and better neighbours. "We could even become better employees - less stressed, more in control, happier in our jobs and more productive. "It is time to break the power of the old industrial clock, take back our lives and work for a sustainable future." The foundation's policy director Andrew Simms added: "A cultural shift will throw up real challenges, but there could also be massive benefits for our economy, our quality of life and our planet. "After all, hands up who wouldn't like a four day weekend? This has to be a wind up.... surely? Yes, not only would they earn about half of what they do now, most people would lose their homes as they couldnt keep up with the repayments.. And if more people were looking after kids then this would put others out of a Job too. And we would all have so much money to spend on our 4 day week end. Thick idiots.
Webbo Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 Wasn't something like this tried in France about 10 years ago and it had to be abandoned a few years later because it was wrecking the economy?
Thracian Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 The moment I saw it was a Left-wing think tank idea I became sceptical. "Left-wing" and the word "think" never seem to equate to me. I know so many people who have shown themselves to have been good students with good memories but who seem to have no idea how to think to logical conclusions. How logical, for instance, is it to complain about the problem caused by so many people being out of work -and millions more than mentioned in the figures of the article - while comrade Left wingers are importing still more potential jobless through the open doors of our ports. Secondly during the period where it became the norm for women to take jobs as well as men I remember how everyone was told they'd enjoy a better standard of living because of the higher wages coming in. What actually happened was that governments and businesses soon worked out that there was surplus spending power and costs/taxes started to soar in such away that it now takes two wages to pay even "normal" bills and we are being taxed at the highest level ever. It's a typical Marxist brake on incentive. People want to work hard to achieve their ambitions. They might be happy working shorter hours if their pay at the end went further than their current pay. But some people want to work. They enjoy working. It gives them a sense of purpose. It's all right for politicians with their perks and expenses. But like the Labour housing minister John Healey who disgracefully declared that "it might be best for people to lose their houses" (having got £129,000 for his second home on expenses!) many of us do don't want politicians deciding how much we can earn and long we can work to earn it. We've all got minds of our own. As for the "do gooder" benefits what bullshit. Working hard doesn't stop you being a decent parent or a caring person. And though it might surprise some Left wing "thinkers" some people actually work to achieve things apart from their salaries. They like playing their part in making discoveries, improving treatments, perfecting new technologies, developing new products and so on. What this idea really says to me is that the first wave of Left wing thinking has fecked up. Having encouraged the idea of two working parents and doing so much to rubbish the idea of marriage and traditional family values, the thinking now is saying we'll still have both parents of a family working but part-time instead of full-time. In other words there will still be the equivalent of one week's wages coming in but two people will earn it. So having persuaded people to double their money they are now going to persuade them to half it. That says nothing if not that they haven't got a clue what is best. I just wish they'd stop trying to think - it's too hard for them - and let people get on with shaping their own lives through freedom of choice.
Head Honcho Posted 14 February 2010 Posted 14 February 2010 Local council employees stopped working over 21 hours a week years ago!
Shrenchel Posted 14 February 2010 Posted 14 February 2010 Wasn't something like this tried in France about 10 years ago and it had to be abandoned a few years later because it was wrecking the economy? They only reduced it to 35 hours. It did actually increase employment quite a lot and was generally very popular. It's still officially law no but Sarkozy just hit it with a load of amendments instead of sacking it off completely because of how popular it was.
Matt Posted 15 February 2010 Posted 15 February 2010 Just 10 hour's 45 minutes left to work tomorrow and my week is done based on this idea. Glad it's not reality, I'd be £££'s short.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.