# A solution to unemployment problems? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 11, 2003, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620 "2003-11-11T14:50:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![laigle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@laigle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/laigle)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/1 "2003-11-11T14:50:22Z")
Okay, here’s a modest proposal I’ve been thinking over: How’s about we go to a maximum 40 hour work week? I keep reading and hearing about how productivity is going up while employment piddles along because people are being forced to work double shifts, sometimes (coughWalmartcough) without overtime pay. I know back when I was still employed I considered 60 hours a normal week. So how about we just take a cue from the rest of the industrialized world, and delimit the amount of labor a business can extract from a single worker? It seems like this would result in a wave of hiring, at least to me. I think this would also have to have some impact on pay, since without the lure of high overtime rates workers would have to get something resembling a living wage up front. And if you want more, you could always moonlight. So, am I nuts here? ---
**Author:** ![CaveMike](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cavemike/32/16379_2.png) [@CaveMike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaveMike)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/2 "2003-11-11T14:59:09Z")
One factor to consider is that there is a fixed amount of employee overhead for health care, vaction time, and other benefits. This overhead often exceeds $10,000 per year. By asking employees to work more than 40 hours per week, employers can minimize their employee head-count and therefore minimize the amount of overhead. ---
**Author:** ![Chicago\_Faucet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chicago_faucet/32/13910_2.png) [@Chicago\_Faucet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chicago_Faucet)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/3 "2003-11-11T15:06:51Z")
I have to agree with you. You are not nuts. This is a good idea. What is preventing us from doing this is that bald headed manager \* yelling at you, threatening your job, if you don’t finish this report before the weekend. At the time, you don’t care about the overall economy. You only care about the upcoming weekend. I work in distribution of products (can I get any more vague?). I deal with headaches and emergencies on a daily basis, mostly caused by people’s unwillingness to accept real world logistics. “My parts are in Spain? So I’m going to have the tomorrow?” “Uh, no. Across the ocean, through customs, will take atleast a week.” “A whole week? Argh!” “I said atleast a week.” “Argh!” I deal with these bald headed managers at my company as well as at my customers’ companies everyday, all day long. Business lives and dies by the month end quota. People promise things that they cannot realistically achieve. The result is a bald headed manager yelling at you for not getting enough done. Thus, we work longer hours to make up for these unrealistic expectations. This is engrained in the US business psyche. \*No representation of any bald headed manager, real or fictitious, is meant to offend any readers here. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/4 "2003-11-11T15:18:46Z")
Zero unemployment is, and has long been, perfectly possible. However, [unemployment is an effective way to control inflation](http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2765). A majority of people would happily accept inflation if the chances of them becoming unemployed for any significant length of time was efectively zero. Unfortunately , the minority who _don’t_ think this way are the richest 1% who own 18% of the wealth here in the UK and an incredible [40% of the wealth in the US](http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1077949,00.html): Inflation to them means significant erosion of their assets, and so any level of unemployment lower than around 4% is considered [“too low”](http://www.cepr.net/columns/weisbrot/labor_day03.htm). ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/5 "2003-11-11T17:01:12Z")
Did this lower unemployment inf France? ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/6 "2003-11-11T17:47:28Z")
If you have to hire more people to do the same work, they will either make less money or pay them less. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/7 "2003-11-11T18:09:20Z")
**Gazpacho** made a good point. This system (or something very similar to it) is in effect in France. IIRC, it’s a 35 hr work week, but I don’t remember how extensive this it-- ie, how much industry is covered by this rule. Dod you really want to subject the US to French unemployment rates? My primary objection to this is one of simple freedom. You are telling someong they are not allowed to work more than 40 hours a week **even if they want to**. What if I don’t want to moonlight? What if I have kids to take care of at night? What if I can’t find a moonlighting job? “You can always moonlight” = “let them eat cake” You cannot legislate wealth. If you could, you could just legislate companies to pay a “lviing wage” to people out of work and dispense with the whole unemployment concept to begin with. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/8 "2003-11-11T18:24:14Z")
> [@](#): > > In the late 1990s France, along with the rest of Europe, was recovering from a period of economic recession, but the unemployment rate remained in the neighborhood of 12%. One of the principal aims of the Jospin government, which took office in 1997, was to create new jobs. It sought to accomplish this by introducing (1998) a 35-hour work week. By 2001, **helped by a booming world economy, the jobless rate had fallen to 9.4%,** the lowest since 1991. My bolding, from [this site.](http://www.discoverfrance.net/France/DF_economy.shtml) Could you imagine that quote about the US? unemployment rate of 9.4% in a **booming world economy**? Please, please don’t turn our economy into one like France’s.:eek: ---
**Author:** ![laigle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@laigle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/laigle)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/9 "2003-11-11T19:00:14Z")
My last job, I pulled 60 hour weeks, if I was lucky. Several weeks I topped 80. For all this trouble, I got a big fat $0 in overtime compensation pay. Oh wait, that must be because I wanted to. And now I’m such an elitist for suggesting that instead of diverting the overhead and salary for another worker to my incompetent and vastly overpaid boss, we should have hired an adequate workforce. :rolleyes: This isn’t a corporate culture thing. This isnt’ a freedom of business thing. This is a US not doing something intelligent the rest of the civilized world already did, and getting economically clobbered for it thing. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/10 "2003-11-11T19:04:21Z")
> [@](#): > > A majority of people would happily accept inflation if the chances of them becoming unemployed for any significant length of time was efectively zero. No. In fact, Inflation often hurts ordinary people even mroe than the elite. The big problem here is that it destroys wealth. So even if you are getting a job, you may not actually be able to buy anything out of it. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/11 "2003-11-11T19:08:43Z")
> [@](#): > > This isn’t a corporate culture thing. This isnt’ a freedom of business thing. This is a US not doing something intelligent the rest of the civilized world already did, and getting economically clobbered for it thing. Right. The reason the US economy had a slump was because workers had too much overtime, and not because of all those things like 9/11 or the end of the tech boom. Cite? Particularly when its a matter of public record that France is the one being hammered? > [@](#): > > Oh wait, that must be because I wanted to. And now I’m such an elitist for suggesting that instead of diverting the overhead and salary for another worker to my incompetent and vastly overpaid boss, we should have hired an adequate workforce. Which means that your company needs to reassess its direction and you need to look for a new job. And eyah, it might take a while. Tell him you simply cannot do the amount of work he wants you to do. Because its the truth and he isn’t paying you. And if he’s a good man he’ll accept that. And if he isn’t, go somewhere else. Even in the slump we had job growth and new opportunities. If you think there’s nowhere to go, you are wrong. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/12 "2003-11-11T20:40:05Z")
> [@](#): > > laigle wrote: > This isn’t a corporate culture thing. This isnt’ a freedom of business thing. This is a US not doing something intelligent the rest of the civilized world already did, and getting economically clobbered for it thing. Of course it’s a freedom of business “thing”. How can it not be? You’ve placed restrictions on business. Restriction = less freedom. Care to give us some stats on how the US is getting “clobbered” economically? **[Code fix --G]** ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Beaker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/46a35a/32.png) [@Grim\_Beaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Beaker)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/13 "2003-11-11T22:36:38Z")
**SentientMeat** I read your cited article. It states: > [@](#): > > The richest 1% of Americans now own well over 40% of their nation’s wealth. It is a skewed distribution that sets the US apart from other modern industrialised nations. In Britain, widely viewed in America as the embodiment of social stratification, the richest 1% owns a mere 18% of the wealth. without indicating where or how those figures were arrived at. Could you provide a different cite for that statistic? ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/14 "2003-11-11T23:39:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SentientMeat \* > A majority of people would happily accept inflation if the chances of them becoming unemployed for any significant length of time was efectively zero. Bullshit. They will accept inflation up until they have to fill their gas tanks, buy clothes or go to the grocery store and notice that prices have gone up. Zero unemployment is impossible. There will always be some level of frictional unemployment due to bad fits and people switching jobs and whatnot. The solution to unemployment is to create job opportunities. Encourage existing businesses to grow and encourge the development of new businesses. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2003, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/15 "2003-11-12T00:12:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SentientMeat \* > \*\*Zero unemployment is, and has long been, perfectly possible. However, [unemployment is an effective way to control inflation](http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2765). \*\* > > Zero unemployment is only possible if you can force people to work for a living. > > \*\*A majority of people would happily accept inflation if the chances of them becoming unemployed for any significant length of time was efectively zero. \*\* > > Walmart would disagree with you. They are increasing their number of stores in a market that is in decline. Their entire market strategy is lower prices which is a direct result of consumer choice. > \*\* > Unfortunately , the minority who _don’t_ think this way are the richest 1% who own 18% of the wealth here in the UK and an incredible [40% of the wealth in the US](http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1077949,00.html): Inflation to them means significant erosion of their assets, and so any level of unemployment lower than around 4% is considered [“too low”](http://www.cepr.net/columns/weisbrot/labor_day03.htm). \*\* Wealth is not a finite commodity so those numbers have no social meaning. Bill Gates can double his wealth and it does not affect me negatively. In fact, if he does increase his wealth it will be the end result of increased jobs. If that were not the case then the standard of living would be higher in England based on the ratio’s listed above. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2003, 10:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/16 "2003-11-12T10:31:53Z")
Of course, my mistake, by “zero unemployment is possible” I should have said “zero _long term_ unemployment is possible _for the willing_” since there will always be residual unemployment from the unwilling, those between jobs, those in seasonal jobs or those having to retrain due to obsolete skills. I also admit that unemployment and inflation are not _necessarily_ two sides of the same coin (as indeed argued by the first article I linked to). However, I stand by my argument that unemployment is a tool used to control inflation. Without a labour shortage, workers demand greater wages (since nobody will offer their services at a lower rate), and so unemployment of any lower than, say, 4% is considered a risk to inflation. Interest rate rises are known to throw people out of work, thus creating a group of people willing to sell their services for a smaller sum and hence controlling inflation. I also maintain that “A majority would prefer inflation to the risk of unemployment”, although I admit that I should have made it clear that a “balancing” exercise was taking place. _Of course_ inflation has deleterious effects on everyone, such as price rises and savings erosion. However, this effect is mitigated for those people who have _debts_ rather than savings, and considering the genuine distress caused by long-term unemployment I contend that most would prefer inflation to rise rather than the risk of unemployment rising. (Those of us lucky enough to have assets and few worries about long-term unemployment are necessarily more repelled by inflation, granted.) And yes, I still maintain that, even though there might be numerically more people who would have this preference were they able to experience the two situations and compare, the decision is ultimately made in favour of unemployment **over** inflation by a richer minority. How? Because the poor don’t vote. ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2003, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/17 "2003-11-12T15:34:52Z")
first column year second column unemployment rate third column inflation rate It sure looks to me like low inflation has a much better chance of low unemployment. 55 4.2% -.4% 56 4.3% 2.2% 57 4.3% 3.3% 58 7.3% 2.5% 59 5.0% 0.7% 60 5.4% 1.4% 61 6.9% 1.4% 62 5.5% 0.7% 63 5.6% 1.3% 64 5.6% 1.3% 65 4.6% 1.6% 66 3.8% 2.9% 67 3.9% 2.8% 68 3.7% 4.5% 69 3.5% 5.4% 70 4.9% 6.0% 71 5.9% 4.4% 72 5.7% 3.0% 73 4.9% 5.7% 74 5.4% 11.5% 75 8.8% 9.7% 76 7.6% 5.4% 77 7.2% 6.8% 78 5.9% 7.7% 79 5.7% 11.3% 80 7.6% 13.1% 81 7.9% 10.8% 82 9.6% 6.4% 83 10.1% 2.5% 84 7.2% 4.2% 85 7.4% 3.6% 86 7.2% 1.6% 87 6.2% 4.0% 88 5.4% 4.1% 89 5.3% 5.0% 90 5.2% 4.8% 91 6.9% 4.5% 92 7.8% 3.1% 93 7.3% 3.0% 94 6.1% 2.5% 95 5.6% 3.0% 96 5.3% 2.8% 97 5.0% 2.3% 98 4.5% 1.7% 99 4.3% 2.0% 00 4.0% 3.7% 01 4.6% 2.7% 02 5.8% 1.5% 03 6.4% 2.1% inflation from here: [http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation\_rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx?dsInflation\_currentPage=4](http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx?dsInflation_currentPage=4) unemployment from here: [http://www.forecasts.org/data/data/UNRATE.htm](http://www.forecasts.org/data/data/UNRATE.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2003, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/18 "2003-11-12T15:49:12Z")
Curiously, this argument (or a similar one) has been advanced before. The labor movement for a 40 hour work week grew out of ‘share the work’ demands during the panics of the late 19th century. And we’ve certainly adapted to that. I’m not saying it’s a _good_ idea this time. Just that dismissing it out of hand ignores similar episodes in history. ---
**Author:** ![Palo\_Verde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/65b543/32.png) [@Palo\_Verde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Palo_Verde)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2003, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/19 "2003-11-12T15:51:50Z")
It might work just fine for the guy at Micky-D’s being forced to work long hours and not getting paid. But not everyone is in that position. My husband is an asst. professor. He works incredibly long hours. Part of this is trying to get tenure. Part of this is that there is no one else else at the university (or possibly in the county) who knows enough about his specific experiments and micro-specialty to do the work. But most of this is that he loves his job and is a workaholic. Would this law apply to folks like him? To medical residents? To CEOs? To everyone? ---
**Author:** ![Chicago\_Faucet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chicago_faucet/32/13910_2.png) [@Chicago\_Faucet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chicago_Faucet)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2003, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620/20 "2003-11-12T16:01:13Z")
The inflation game is a race. Since inflation, over time, makes money worth less, the price of goods and services rises. So it’s a race against inflation and time. In order to beat the game, one has to earn more and more money. That means either becoming more competitive, more efficient, or working more hours to compensate for the difference that inflation makes. Sure there are places where there is 0% unemployment. It’s called Communism. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-solution-to-unemployment-problems/212620.md?page=2)