Try the political quiz

52 Replies


How might a 32-hour workweek change the way you value and manage your time?

 @9KWNBGP from Michigan answered…2mos2MO

32 hours a week would be nice for sure. but I wonder how my money will change.

  @Patriot-#1776Constitution from Washington commented…2mos2MO

Answer – workers will be so unproductive that goods and services will be generated at unprecedentedly slow rate, business will become dramatically less productive, the economy will tank, and the government will gain more power over our lives.

 @9KWQWMG from Illinois answered…2mos2MO

You'll have more time outside of work to sleep or do whatever else you want.

 @9KWMSY6Patriot from Ohio answered…2mos2MO

32 hours a week sounds pretty good will definitely increase productivity and employment.


Could reducing the standard workweek create a better work-life balance, or would it lead to increased stress to fit current workloads into fewer hours?

 @9KWQWMG from Illinois answered…2mos2MO

Its a benefit because it'll be easier to balance work-life and you'd get more sleep. Also a negative because stress will increase because there will be more work, or the work will be faster.

 @9KWMSY6Patriot from Ohio answered…2mos2MO

It'll mean more people will get hired as you'd need 3 work teams each covering 4 days, with a little overlap for the teams also making your workers less tired and more productive due to having more energy.


Do you believe a shorter workweek would improve or harm the quality of workers' output, and why?

 @9KWMDPLRepublican from Pennsylvania answered…2mos2MO

improve, it would allow more rest time which in end effect would create more productivity.

 @9KWLZP3 from Missouri commented…2mos2MO

yes because people spend so much of their life at work, with a little free time I'm sure you would have a higher likely hood on people wanting to work longer and not quit.

 @MooseCharlieSocialistfrom Kansas commented…2mos2MO

It would also require overtime pay at time and a half for workdays longer than eight hours, and overtime pay at double a worker’s regular pay for workdays longer than 12 hours.

 @D1plom4tLlamaGreen from Tennessee disagreed…2mos2MO

Common misconception. Price will only go up a little bit, due to minor extra expenses. But wages in the US will only be a small part of the total cost of getting a product on the shelf, so it won’t go up by as much, percentage wise, as the wages per hour

Competition ensures this

 @MooseCharlieSocialistfrom Kansas disagreed…2mos2MO

They’re getting that $$ back one way or another.

 @D1plom4tLlamaGreen from Tennessee disagreed…2mos2MO

Eventually. That’s the issue with capitalism; you constantly have to enact new laws to ensure people get to live their life with a fair wage.

But hey, cross that bridge yada yada.

 @JollyRelishSocialistfrom Arizona agreed…2mos2MO

Studies and trials in other countries has shown the production by employees has increased under the 32 hour work model and companies results have increased.

Imagine being against this and wanting to work 40 hours. You know it’ll apply to you as well right?

 @SomberUnanimousLibertarian from California commented…2mos2MO

The government has no right to say how many hours a person should or should not work.

 @JollyRelishSocialistfrom Arizona disagreed…2mos2MO

You are free to work more or less. This establishes a standard to base things off of, just like how 40 is the existing standard

 @SomberUnanimousLibertarian from California disagreed…2mos2MO

There shouldn’t be a standard or overtime or minimum wage. Let me and an employee or employer talk and agree on terms then go from there. It’s not rocket science.

  @9CJ6CB6 from Virginia commented…2mos2MO

No, give minimum wage laws to states, but enact a federal minimum floor for minimum wages. Allow workers to negotiate with companies on things past that point, and scale the minimum wage per state to inflation, so that the minimum will actually remain stable.

 @JollyRelishSocialistfrom Arizona disagreed…2mos2MO

You're the reason labor laws, minimum wages, and OT regulations exist. Because employers want to pay less while working you more hours.

  @9CJ6CB6 from Virginia commented…2mos2MO

Yes it does, we gave it that power through the establishment of labor laws that we DESPERATELY needed in the early 1900s. These laws serve to benefit workers as a whole, and they remain extremely successful in doing so due to their ability to pay workers a higher share of what they actually provide to the company.

 @EmptyYakRepublican from Indiana disagreed…2mos2MO

Remote workers wont be happy when they find out Bernie Sanders wants to double the hours they work every week.

 @ReformGrasshopperDemocrat from Colorado agreed…2mos2MO

lol I wish this were true. I’ve over here doing 60+ hour weeks consistently. If I was in office you’d barely get 40 out of me

 @Int3grityFerretGreen from Ohio agreed…2mos2MO

Yep. I'm on the computer at 8am off by 5pm and fielding random stuff further into the evening. Meanwhile the folks in the office show up at 9ish and clock out at 5ish. I write the most business but got a pittance of a merit bump. Guess who's starting at 9 from now on?

 @MinorityWhipTomatoeSocialistfrom Texas agreed…2mos2MO

Exactly I work way more than forty hours and barely get breaks as a remote worker. Some of it is no joke

  @Patriot-#1776Constitution from Washington commented…2mos2MO

The government has one role – only one – defending our God-given rights to life, liberty, and property. Beyond that, it has no role whatsoever, because government and political power are grave evils. It has zero business regulating how long people work, what people are paid, etc.

  @9CJ6CB6 from Virginia commented…2mos2MO

And absurd amounts of economic power in corporate business isn’t?

  @Patriot-#1776Constitution from Washington commented…2mos2MO

No, because business must persuade you to voluntarily purchase their products and services, whereas government can send people with guns and chains to force you to comply with its will. Should I increase the power of the latter group to decrease the power of the former?

  @9CJ6CB6 from Virginia commented…2mos2MO

When businesses converge and own all of the things you buy, whether monopoly or conglomerated, they have FAR more power over you than a government can name when not actively trying to screw with the people. Indirect power is still power, and there’s lots of it in the corporate sector, so if you ask me, yes, increase government power AND accountability, and decrease corporate power while increasing transparency in their businesses.

  @Patriot-#1776Constitution from Washington commented…2mos2MO

Oh I'm so sorry, I forgot about that Major Corporation that owns a monopoly in every industry. Oh yeah that's right – bummer for the socialist arguments – it doesn't exist, and it's never existed. But Government has a monopoly on the use of force – everyone else gets punished for using force, government doesn't.

 @IntrepidB1ll0fRightsRepublican from Illinois disagreed…2mos2MO


The historical activity of users engaging with this general discussion.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 


Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...