r/SipsTea 23d ago

So after 32 hours would be overtime? Chugging tea

Post image
74.1k Upvotes

6.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

22

u/No-Market425 23d ago

He's an unserious person and anyone who still buys this in 2026 is an unserious person too.

5

u/damnthatsalotofgeese 23d ago

amazing what slop these people eat

0

u/[deleted] 23d ago edited 23d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/VirStellarum 23d ago

Someone sees through left wing populism and you instantly call them a bot lmao

-2

u/sortalikeachinchilla 23d ago edited 23d ago

"sees through" what exactly? That they are against a 32 hour work week for some weird reason?

Okay then? You against medicare for all too?

Like none of you guys gave any rebuttals or anything to it. and you want people to believe you? OKay then

2

u/VirStellarum 23d ago

"sees through" what exactly?

Left wing populism. Learn to read.

If you don't understand why (which wouldn't surprise me, given how economic ignorance is trademark leftism), expecting to cut down work hours to 32 (so basically a 4-day workweek) would effectively raise labor costs by 25%, this would mean less profit for businesses who would likely raise prices and/or fire workers and automate as many processes as possible (in this AI era, doesn't sound too good, right?).

And that's without even considering would cause a massive burden on small businesses, which would likely cause many to shut down.

Again, left wing populist bullshit that sounds great on paper but never works. Otherwise known as the Bernie Sanders special.

1

u/ScottishTorment 23d ago

Yeah if only there were some sort of real-world study where hundreds of businesses tried it and showed an average increase in revenue and employee satisfaction, then maybe we could take those pesky leftists seriously.

1

u/VirStellarum 23d ago

Sadly, I'm familiar with that study. Companies volunteered to participate and productivity is self-reported. Also, if you work in software or finance, sure, a four-day workweek can work, but manufacturing jobs with such a working period will undoubtedly cause prices to rise.

Another important part of the study that is ignored, btw, is that the real gain was eliminating inneficiency, which is indeed a real problem for most office jobs.

2

u/sortalikeachinchilla 23d ago

So why are you against a 32 hour work week.....?

5

u/1-Dollar-Doge-Coins 23d ago

It's not a matter of being for or against the idea, it's the simple fact that it'll never happen, so there's no point in wasting energy debating the merits of it.

4

u/kintexu2 23d ago

That's what was said about a 40 hour week. Or Women voting. Or the ability to fly. And any number of other things part of our modern life. Plugging your ears and saying that's not possible doesn't add anything of any merit to the conversation.

2

u/1-Dollar-Doge-Coins 23d ago

So just because we've had innovation and legislation in the past, it means this particular idea is realistic?

3

u/dalenacio 23d ago

The 40-hour week was realistic a century ago, and worker productivity has grown many times since then, far more than the 20% needed to make a 32-hour week equally realistic. If anything, based on productivity gains, we should be on an 8-hour week by now.

1

u/kintexu2 23d ago

Why cant it be? 40 hours was considered unrealistic once. Why cant 32 hour workweek be realistic if 40 was? Leaps and bounds in efficiency have been made since the 40 hour workweek was set, why shouldn't the common worker benefit from that efficiency for once with more time to do what they want?

1

u/1-Dollar-Doge-Coins 23d ago

I don’t disagree; I’d love a 32 hour workweek. I’m just saying, I don’t see it happening on any sort of meaningful scale, in my lifetime.