Eugene Coyle wrote: > Yes, Jim, and one way of redistributing power is cutting the work week to > four days, with no loss of pay. "If done right." Are you then in favor of > the four day week?<
Sure. where's the mass movement? without a movement, it seems like an empty slogan: the bosses are going to resist having their power redistributed to others by changing hours per week without pay. Slogans can sound nice, but can be really empty and even irritating, like all those Trotskyist "transitional programs," Maoist "correct lines," and even old favorites like "liberty, equality, fraternity." What matters is practice. > In addition, I assert again that sharply cutting working time in the USA is > the only feasible way of dealing with global warming and a necessary > component of dealing with the current economic crisis.< The _only_ feasible way to fight global warming? what are the others you've ruled out? what is your argument against them? how is cutting work hours superior to, say, a carbon tax? (There's a fellow on pen-l -- whose name I've spaced out (Gar?) -- who had another proposal for fighting global warming. It would be nice to hear from him.) A _necessary_ component of dealing with the current economic crisis? _absolutely_ necessary? the US and world capitalism got through the 1930s without a move to a four-day week, didn't it? can't it do it again? Of course, we are currently the kind of hours-per-week cut that happens whenever there's a recession, especially a deep one. Bosses don't just fire workers: they also cut hours... and pay. -- Jim Devine / "Nobody told me there'd be days like these / Strange days indeed -- most peculiar, mama." -- JL. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
