Work redistribution not Income redistribution

Unemployment is reaching highs in many countries.  I've mentioned it before, but the principal cause of this is efficiency.  We've become too efficient.  Technology and automation replaces vast areas of human labor.  Globalization also reduces the need for human labor.

The growth-mass employment model that briefly existed during the industrial revolution was an anomaly that won't be repeated.  We'll have new innovations, but they won't generate mass jobs.

I've covered that before, so I won't go into it much more.

However, what I've noticed is the actions taken by our leaders tend to be strange.  This includes both the public sector and the private sector.  They both seek 'efficiencies'.  What this has translated into is those who are working... are working longer, expected to do more, and under more stress.  While at the same time, many people remain unemployed.

Now sure, there are many reasons why this occurs.  Labor laws are more aligned this way.  In the public sector, it is easier to layoff people than to cut wages.  Payroll taxes also encourage keeping 1 workers instead of two.

Even in this context, people then think the correct solution is to tax the already over worked workers more and then redistribute income to the unemployed.  This naturally meets resistance.  How would you feel about working 10 hour days with no job security only be to be told you have to pay more taxes so someone else can get money for doing nothing...? 

The focus in the future should be on work redistribution... not income redistribution.
Ontario for example has lots of unemployed teachers as it is a very attractive profession.  Would it not make sense to keep more people employed.  Perhaps have 2 teachers each earning 40k/year and teaching half time than having 1 teacher earning 90k teaching full time.  More families are supported.  People are more relaxed.  That could be done for most of the public sector.

Getting rid of all payroll taxes would encourage similar things in the private sector.
It's obviously not possible for all jobs.  Some jobs require expertise or personal ambition to the extent that job sharing is not possible.  But those are not the majority of jobs.

Going through such a change is definitely difficult given our current socio-economic model.
So much of what we do is based on growth and outdoing our neighbor.  Housing for example is simply all about outbidding people to be in the better neighborhood.  If jobs are shared and people are more egalitarian, what happens to this whole culture?

Similarly, we have all kinds of jobs that people think they are too good for.  Jobs in farming, mining... Once again, we could job share these into a more relaxed form.  Perhaps you only need to work on a farm for a few months of the year to earn a decent living.

We should be focused heavily on putting people to productive use.  Leave people enough spare time to then perform charitable work or interests.

In this kind of society, we could remove much of the redundant work for the sake of work.  We could dramatically simplify the tax code and remove the need for so many financial people.  We could legalize marijuana and get reduce the need for prisons.  We could simplify the legal system and get rid of many lawyers.  If people are reasonably assured they can get a job to make some kind of a decent living, they would let these things occur. 

The current methodology can only lead to social unrest.  Huge numbers of unemployed people and and over-worked workforce is not a recipe for prosperity.


Popular posts from this blog

What does it mean to live in a free society?

Post Scarcity Economy

The Niqab is cultural?