If so many people are unemployed, why aren't we extending work hours & using Sundays

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by niuniu, Aug 12, 2010.

  1. niuniu macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #1
    Surely that would account for a lot of jobs. Not just Sundays - but Saturdays too. The amount of business services that aren't available on Saturday is staggering. Everything slows down or stops around Friday lunchtime - you can't get anything done.

    Retail and food industries are using Sundays - why isn't the business, and financial services sector too?
     
  2. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #2
    Because the m-f employees are getting the work done, and there is no reason to hire anyone to work the weekends. Businesses don't just hire people out of the goodness of their hearts.

    Which is why it's silly to argue for tax cuts to stimulate hiring. If I was a business owner, and you gave me a big tax break, I'd invest that money somewhere. But I wouldn't hire anyone until demand for my services ramped up.

    That's why the focus needs to be on stimulating spending, not cutting taxes.
     
  3. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #3
    Retail and food industries are using Sundays because.....wait for it......that's when business people have off and can use their services! These places do more business on weekends. Shocking, I know.

    As for extending hours and days...this is a terrible idea. My experiences overseas are that you can't get ANYTHING done after hours or on weekends. Because they know how to take time off...something the US could learn how to do better.

    I realize your position is to create more jobs, but unless the entire country adopts this, there wouldn't be enough demand to keep the few places that did do it up and running. I assume you mean that the weekday people would take off and the weekend people would do their jobs over the weekend? For a lot of businesses, this would be pretty disjointed. But, if you're just talking about things like bank tellers or something, I could go for that!
     
  4. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #4
    What company is going to spend on man hours and production if there isn't demand to justify it?
     
  5. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #5
    Who has the better standard of living? The guy in country X who has to work 7 days per week, 80-90 hours per week, never sees his family, but makes $100,000 per year, or the other guy who works 5 days per week, 30-40 hours per week, sees his kids, gets plenty of vacation, and can afford his house, vacations, etc...

    The American dream is NOT about amassing wealth, it's about lifestyle. We have all lost sight of what matters. I know I did.
     
  6. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #6

    I found one nice thing about working late or going in on a weekend to be a good time to get those things done that do not require working with someone else. General I found doing some of the paper work was good but the big stuff would have to be done during the week.

    Now for me I would like to work 4 10 hour days and have off every Friday. They have found that more work gets done in those 40 hours than 5- 8 hour days. Often times workers are happier because it is a 3 day weekend.

    As for working if you need to contact someone else I found that out side of the hours 9-11 and 1-4 it was was crap shoot if you could get a hold of the person.
    Honestly when I was working I hated being called before 9 am and after 4pm. Reason for it is the first 1 hour of my day was a lot of time used to switch in to work mode. I used that time to read email, do some paper work and get organized for the day. From 4-5 I often used that time to wrap what I was working on and get things set up for the next day.
     
  7. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #7
    I hate to break the news to you, mac, but spending trillions of dollars hasn't helped, so far. No reason for folks to think that adding more debt will do any better. That was tried in the 1930s; it didn't work then, either. We're back to Einstein's statement about repeating experiments.

    All that this spending is doing is setting the stage for much higher prices of goods. "Quantitative Easing" = monetizing the debt, which inevitably degrades the purchasing power of the currency. "No, it won't be different, this time."

    As prices rise, people buy less. So, less demand and thus more unemployment.

    One of our problems is that we need somewhere around 100,000 to 125,000 new jobs every month just to keep up with population growth. IOW, a gain in jobs of somewhere around 100K to 125K per month means no improvement whatsoever. So, looking at the numbers, we're maintaining a steady downhill slide.

    niuniu, what would you have these extra-hours and Sunday people do? A store won't hire if there are fewer customers coming in, nor will it stay open longer. If sales are down, stores will go to shorter hours and fewer days, more likely--with fewer people on the payroll.

    Many people who still have jobs are no longer piddling money away as entertainment; they're paying down debt and saving money as best they can. In a consumeritis economy, that translates into fewer customers in stores and less money spent on a per-customer basis. And that's why the commercial real estate market is declining "worster and faster" than the housing market. Hotel chains, restaurant chains, retail store chains: They're going bankrupt or are being taken over for not paying the debt service on time. And that's more lost jobs...

    I dunno. I'm a numbers guy, by inclination and by professional background. This isn't calculus; it's not even algebra. It's basic arithmetic about income and outgo. As a society and as a government, we've spent ourselves into a hole that looks like it's too deep to climb out of. Individuals are trying to pay down their debts. Unfortunately, the Idiots In Charge are adding debt.

    When the problem comes from accumulating debt, ya gotta be covered all over with stupid to think you can escape via more debt.

    Hayek 1, Keynes 0.
     
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    'Rat, can you point to any evidence that inflation is on the rise? We're pretty far into debt right now, y'all have been yowling about how we're basically socialists now.

    I know your economic theory says we *should* be seeing signs of rising inflation, but where is it? I'm just not seeing it. Prices seems to be pretty flat right now.
     
  9. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #9
    If we continue to send more of our money overseas to buy fuel and electricity, debt and goods, we are going to have a hard time improving our situation. On the other hand, if we make a concerted effort to take the lead in an industry, be it cars, electricity, alternative energy, whatever, then maybe we can make headway
     
  10. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #10
    I would also submit that one would have to be "covered all over with stupid" to believe that tax cuts can reduce the deficit. But I guess that's just because I'm a numbers guy by inclination and professional background.
     
  11. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #11
    I would support longer banking hrs

    Nothing is more aggravating than needing to go to the bank and went you work 7-5....just like the bank hrs
     
  12. Jaro65 macrumors 68040

    Jaro65

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #12
    A nice synopsis of your message. The government was hoping that by stimulating the economy they can create more jobs (which would eventually increase their taxation base). The money spent and the net job growth makes it uncertain what we have really achieved. Still...we're a long way off from losing 600k+ jobs every month (which is good) but we're not really creating any new jobs (which is bad). What were we really thinking when we were outsourcing all these jobs to Asia? Those jobs are very unlikely to come back. Now every trip to Wal-Mart is financing the boom over there, though we're happy because we can buy all kinds of cheap junk.

    We're in for a rude awakening, and the sooner the better. I actually hope that the Tea Party momentum grows so as to enable a substantial change in the way the government operates, as the government's fiscal behavior over the last number of years is akin to what I would expect from a teenager who just got hold of his/her first credit card. One would hope that our government would be intelligent and effective enough to enable economic policies that would result in positive (or at least even) trade balances. The way it is now, we have developed our economy so that we're a shining example of what to do if one tries to maximize the exportation of one country's wealth. This is a sad state of affairs.
     
  13. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #13
    Ah, but are you willing to pay higher banking fees in order to have this?

    Or would you rather just find ways to go to the bank on your lunch hour, or put in an extra hour and leave early one day, or some other "free" way to achieve the same thing?
     
  14. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #14
    Lol well how about the bank shift hrs to like 10-7 during the week, at least on some days

    But yes, your point is taken and that is what I do. Just don't particularly like it
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    Actually, there are banks that do this. And it sounds like there is definitely a market for more banks to do so, if it's financially advantageous to do so.

    Yeah, there's a lot of things out there that I don't particularly like. But there's always a cost associated with changing them to the way I do like. So for the most part, that's just the way it is.

    Of course if it truly bothered you that badly, you always have the option of finding a line of work in which you are off during at least some of the week. But then, of course, you'd want concert times to change if you have to work evenings, etc.

    TANSTAAFL....
     
  16. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #16
    Do you realize that the tea party movement is basically an offshoot/rebranding of the Republican party? It is their economic policies that got us into this mess, and exactly the same policies that the tea party is pushing for. Less regulation - check. Less taxes on the wealthy - check. You can go down the list, but the tea party is nothing more than the far right of the right.

    (edit) Seriously though, if there is a policy or plan that the tea party has that is different and might work, I'd support it. Unfortunately, they are about as original as the Wiz was compared to the Wizard of Oz (or Guess Who compared to Guess Who's Coming to Dinner or any other number of remakes).
     
  17. Jaro65 macrumors 68040

    Jaro65

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #17
    There was an interesting article in USA Today this weekend about the Tea Party. What I read there was a fundamental focus on fiscal responsibility and accountability of the elected officials, which was listed as the main guiding principle. And I wholeheartedly agree with that. Now, I am very much a Democrat at heart and so I may have issues with their other policies (if they in any way resemble those of the Republican party). Unfortunately, I'm not sure if either the Democrats or the Republicans can effectively get us out of the mess we're in due to the vested interests.

    Perhaps a new grassroots movement that would be yet uncorrupted by the interests of the lobbying bodies and that would focus only on the common interests of the general populace could succeed. Utopian thinking? Perhaps. The current main party divisions along the non-deterministic issues (abortion, religion, etc.) are simply not constructive and can not be solved, thus hampering the agenda of whatever party seems to be in power. But what if we managed to have a political body that would focus only on the common and clear interests of the electorate as a whole? We most likely all agree that we want to eliminate our national deficits and debt, simplify the taxation system, implement the policies that will result in a new job creation, etc. I suggest that these are deterministic issues that we all associate with and support. Perhaps a political entity built around these common principles could be effective in uniting us all, and then, drawing on the broad support of the electorate, could actually be effective in executing the policies designed to implement its principal ideas. Is this a long shot? Heck yeah. But somehow we need to find a better way to govern ourselves. For our own sake, and for the sake of our children, I very much hope that we will be successful in that regard.
     
  18. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #18
    Be that as it may, the Tea Party is definitely not the way to go.
     
  19. bobber205 macrumors 68020

    bobber205

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Location:
    Oregon
  20. Ttownbeast macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    #20
    Lately I have been running into more and more people who are working 2 and 3 jobs, they complain about not being able to cover their bills perhaps they should be a little less consumer driven I live just fine on 12 grand a year I don't need too many creature comforts.

    Figure out what you can live without and quit one of those extra jobs. You'll have a little more free time to enjoy your personal health and increase work safety by preventing unnecessary fatigue and you'll put a job back on the market for someone who needs it.

    And if you are working two jobs because your kids are demanding **** tell them to shut the **** up and be happy they aren't starving--maybe they'll learn from your example and find a job when they get to high school rather than expect everything to be handed to them.
     
  21. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #21
    Ehhhh, wrong! Broken Window Fallacy (video)



    Your premise is ridiculous. 80-90 hours? How many Americans do that? 5%? I know lots of professionals that make +$100,000-$200,000 in rural America, working no more than 30-50 hours a week. It's almost as if you're drawing extremes to make your argument the least bit palatable.

    Also, your quote "the American dream is not about amassing wealth, it's about lifestyle." Really? So, wealth has nothing to do with lifestyle? Interesting... Anyway, Mcrain is exactly wrong... wealth provides security, comfort, and opportunity cost. With more wealth, you have more options on how to spend such wealth, on how to spend your time. Mcrain's false dichotomy of 'wealth or lifestyle' is utterly ridiculous... and anyone with real wealth knows it.

    Note I said 'opportunity'. Wealth does not = happiness.


    +1

    +1



    Common accusation by people who get their news in only one spot... the liberal blogosphere... If you think the Tea Party is nothing more than 'a bunch of Republicans' you clearly know nothing about the Tea Party, have read nothing substantive about the Tea Party, and have not reviewed any of the survey data from those who claim to be 'tea partiers.' The whole reason they exist was that they weren't finding the solutions they wanted in teh Tea Party, that the Democrats had a massive horrible problem with spending... but that the Republicans were essentially 'liberal light'. This is why the Tea Party exists, and isn't just called the Republican party.



    You're not alone. Regardless of what some individuals on these boards will tell you, the Tea Party has many Democrat members... people are just plain sick and tired of this big government spending and they're not standing for it anymore.
     
  22. glocke12 macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #22

    I couldnt agree with this more. I make close to $100k a year, and am barely getting by. I am single, dont date and hardly have enough money to pay my bills. I figured if I make that much, and have so little left over, something is wrong, so I took a good hard look at my spending habits and discovered a whole bunch of stuff I can do without.

    $5.00 dollar lattes every morning before work
    $150.00+ sattelite tv bill...and I hardly watch tv
    Literally thousands of dollars tied up in expensive toys I dont have time to use anymore....

    The list goes on, but the point is people really need to separate luxuries from necessities...
     
  23. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #23
    Ehhhhh... Logic fail. Broken windows have nothing to do with taxes.
     
  24. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #24
    Comprehension FAIL.
    Broken windows represent the make-believe invented 'problems' being 'fixed' with the stimulus. While there may be some worthwhile expenditures, much of it is simply fixing things that don't need to be fixed... i.e. broken window! The fallacy is that taking money away from the taxpayers to fix something that isn't broke, somehow stimulates the economy, when in reality if more of that money had stayed with the taxpayers it would have been used correctly and not crushed their opportunity cost spending opportunities. I'm sorry you had such a difficult time comprehending the obvious connection. I should have been more clear.
     
  25. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #25
    No it is a logic fail because it over simplified it. When the economy is in the crappier like it is now people and business will tend to horde and save what money they do have which really would nothing is getting done.

    As for the economy a good way to compare two different ones is compare the US to Europe. The US highs are higher but the lows are a hell of a lot lower. In terms of the economy the goverments job is to smooth out the growth and try to prevent the high and low spikes and have it be smoother. It is better for everyone.

    It already known that things can get so bad in an ecomony that it just feeds itself and gets worse an recovery is next to impossible. The US is not close to that point yet. The growth on the other hand it can pop a bubble and crash everything that cause a long downward spirl.
    We do not want bubbles because when they pop they hurt everyone.
    In an ideal world the government would save money during the good times so when things get bad it can use those savings to keep things going.
     

Share This Page