0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
That is not even close to the entire history of mankind you silly goose
Quote from: Kat Kid on August 24, 2022, 04:08:18 PMQuote from: Justwin on August 24, 2022, 11:26:52 AMQuote from: michigancat on August 23, 2022, 12:15:39 PMare all consumption increases made by choice?Is 1950-2022 the best representation of the history of mankind? Does the EU consume as much as the US? If not, are their hours worked increasing relative to the US?Maybe not 100%, but I would say consumption levels are made by choice.The years 1950-2022 might not be the best representation for mankind, but we have decent data for that time period. Moreover, almost all productivity gains have occurred since 1800, so when looking at how productivity gains are allocated, the relatively recent past is the best time period to look at. How much do you think productivity increased in the US and Western Europe from 1800-1950? I'd bet productivity was at least 10x in 1950 compared to 1800. That means in France and Germany productivity is at least 70x in 2022 compared to 1800 (likely much more). How many hours do you think people are working a week in those countries on average? Let's say it's just 25 hours per week. In order for half of productivity gains to be allocated to leisure, that means people had to be working 875 hours per week in 1800. There are 168 hours in a week.The EU may or may not consume as much as the US and their hours worked may or may not be increasing relative to the US. That is immaterial to how they have chosen to allocate productivity gains over the last 200-250 years. Anywhere that has seen substantial productivity gains, those places have largely allocated those gains to increasing consumption. The time before 1800 is really pretty unimportant as there were hardly any productivity gains before then.The idea that there weren’t enormous productivity gains before 1800 is insane. I get that available data can skew things but going from hunter gatherers to pyramids seems pretty rough ridin' massive.How about intercontinental trade?What percent of productivity gains do you think occurred before 1800 and what percent do you think occurred after 1800 even allowing for intercontinental trade?
Quote from: Justwin on August 24, 2022, 11:26:52 AMQuote from: michigancat on August 23, 2022, 12:15:39 PMare all consumption increases made by choice?Is 1950-2022 the best representation of the history of mankind? Does the EU consume as much as the US? If not, are their hours worked increasing relative to the US?Maybe not 100%, but I would say consumption levels are made by choice.The years 1950-2022 might not be the best representation for mankind, but we have decent data for that time period. Moreover, almost all productivity gains have occurred since 1800, so when looking at how productivity gains are allocated, the relatively recent past is the best time period to look at. How much do you think productivity increased in the US and Western Europe from 1800-1950? I'd bet productivity was at least 10x in 1950 compared to 1800. That means in France and Germany productivity is at least 70x in 2022 compared to 1800 (likely much more). How many hours do you think people are working a week in those countries on average? Let's say it's just 25 hours per week. In order for half of productivity gains to be allocated to leisure, that means people had to be working 875 hours per week in 1800. There are 168 hours in a week.The EU may or may not consume as much as the US and their hours worked may or may not be increasing relative to the US. That is immaterial to how they have chosen to allocate productivity gains over the last 200-250 years. Anywhere that has seen substantial productivity gains, those places have largely allocated those gains to increasing consumption. The time before 1800 is really pretty unimportant as there were hardly any productivity gains before then.The idea that there weren’t enormous productivity gains before 1800 is insane. I get that available data can skew things but going from hunter gatherers to pyramids seems pretty rough ridin' massive.How about intercontinental trade?
Quote from: michigancat on August 23, 2022, 12:15:39 PMare all consumption increases made by choice?Is 1950-2022 the best representation of the history of mankind? Does the EU consume as much as the US? If not, are their hours worked increasing relative to the US?Maybe not 100%, but I would say consumption levels are made by choice.The years 1950-2022 might not be the best representation for mankind, but we have decent data for that time period. Moreover, almost all productivity gains have occurred since 1800, so when looking at how productivity gains are allocated, the relatively recent past is the best time period to look at. How much do you think productivity increased in the US and Western Europe from 1800-1950? I'd bet productivity was at least 10x in 1950 compared to 1800. That means in France and Germany productivity is at least 70x in 2022 compared to 1800 (likely much more). How many hours do you think people are working a week in those countries on average? Let's say it's just 25 hours per week. In order for half of productivity gains to be allocated to leisure, that means people had to be working 875 hours per week in 1800. There are 168 hours in a week.The EU may or may not consume as much as the US and their hours worked may or may not be increasing relative to the US. That is immaterial to how they have chosen to allocate productivity gains over the last 200-250 years. Anywhere that has seen substantial productivity gains, those places have largely allocated those gains to increasing consumption. The time before 1800 is really pretty unimportant as there were hardly any productivity gains before then.
are all consumption increases made by choice?Is 1950-2022 the best representation of the history of mankind? Does the EU consume as much as the US? If not, are their hours worked increasing relative to the US?
Life expectancy is pretty different than productivity as is income.
I don't understand free marketers/individual liberty folk being mad at unions/wanting to unionize.
Quote from: Cire on August 25, 2022, 01:32:36 PMI don't understand free marketers/individual liberty folk being mad at unions/wanting to unionize.unions are typically coercive as they generally mandate that someone be a union member as condition of employment at a particular employer (which in some cases means an entire profession).as i have cause to know, they also sometimes advocate for govt to change the terms of employment for non-union members even when there are no unions active in a given profession.
Sounds like the free market at work to me
I wonder how much hours worked over the last ~70 years has to do with "full time" work being 40 hours and working fewer hours results in a huge cliff in pay, benefits, and stability compared to purely wanting to consume more
Quote from: michigancat on August 25, 2022, 02:51:00 PMI wonder how much hours worked over the last ~70 years has to do with "full time" work being 40 hours and working fewer hours results in a huge cliff in pay, benefits, and stability compared to purely wanting to consume moreI think the 40 hour work week probably does more to keep hours down, not up. Especially if you are considering the last 70 years. A whole lot of people would be expected to work more if their employers didn't legally have to pay 1.5x for overtime.
Quote from: Justwin on August 24, 2022, 04:39:38 PMQuote from: Kat Kid on August 24, 2022, 04:08:18 PMQuote from: Justwin on August 24, 2022, 11:26:52 AMQuote from: michigancat on August 23, 2022, 12:15:39 PMare all consumption increases made by choice?Is 1950-2022 the best representation of the history of mankind? Does the EU consume as much as the US? If not, are their hours worked increasing relative to the US?Maybe not 100%, but I would say consumption levels are made by choice.The years 1950-2022 might not be the best representation for mankind, but we have decent data for that time period. Moreover, almost all productivity gains have occurred since 1800, so when looking at how productivity gains are allocated, the relatively recent past is the best time period to look at. How much do you think productivity increased in the US and Western Europe from 1800-1950? I'd bet productivity was at least 10x in 1950 compared to 1800. That means in France and Germany productivity is at least 70x in 2022 compared to 1800 (likely much more). How many hours do you think people are working a week in those countries on average? Let's say it's just 25 hours per week. In order for half of productivity gains to be allocated to leisure, that means people had to be working 875 hours per week in 1800. There are 168 hours in a week.The EU may or may not consume as much as the US and their hours worked may or may not be increasing relative to the US. That is immaterial to how they have chosen to allocate productivity gains over the last 200-250 years. Anywhere that has seen substantial productivity gains, those places have largely allocated those gains to increasing consumption. The time before 1800 is really pretty unimportant as there were hardly any productivity gains before then.The idea that there weren’t enormous productivity gains before 1800 is insane. I get that available data can skew things but going from hunter gatherers to pyramids seems pretty rough ridin' massive.How about intercontinental trade?What percent of productivity gains do you think occurred before 1800 and what percent do you think occurred after 1800 even allowing for intercontinental trade?I don’t know, i don’t have a huge dispute with the quote you posted, but that post does kind of mix some data points. Life expectancy is pretty different than productivity as is income.
https://twitter.com/JohnAnzo/status/1564558574033977344
@sys does shor have a take on this
The conditions wherein rail workers are expected to be in a permanent state of “on call” is unacceptable. I hope they get some PTO and sick days.
Quote from: Kat Kid on September 15, 2022, 07:26:43 PMThe conditions wherein rail workers are expected to be in a permanent state of “on call” is unacceptable. I hope they get some PTO and sick days.In exchange for not being in a permanent state of being "on call," rail workers will accept lower wages, correct?
