• Fenzik@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Unemployment generally only measures the percentage of people who are seeking work but unable to find it. Those who don’t work because they are otherwise taken care of aren’t usually counted. That’s actually the source of the discrepancy in the article so the headline is bs imo.

    I’m all for reducing our working hours as a population though. More productivity should equal less work, not more GDP

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You also have the issue of what to do with NEET young adults. What happens if a large class of people are created that don’t have a way to contribute to the economy? How are they going to be able to interact with the economy as they are going to be given the lowest social status due to their lack of work?

      • Fenzik@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        People shouldn’t have the lowest social status just because they don’t work, that’s the thing. We should take care of everyone’s basic needs and let people work on things they are passionate about, instead of simply treating with poverty those that don’t participate.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is going to be hard explaining to the janitor in a job that isn’t what they are passionate about that some one gets the same pay and respect as they do, but have a job they like.