[djhaskin987]

If everyone started working fewer hours for the same pay you would be effectively devaluing the dollar. You wouldn't actually be adding more value to the economy.

Value in the economy is created by work and there is simply no substitute for that. Shortening the work week would simply make less value in the economy, making us all poorer and more idle.

Too much idleness I can tell you leads to stress, even more stress than too much work. 40 hours is not too much work.

To solve the problem in the article one could still cut the workforce by half that was present in the office simply by adding more work-from-home time for the workers which I find to be healthy my own experience anyway. our office is made similar overtures, saying when we go back to work lots of us. Be working from home as a way to tackle a space issue.

[adrianN]

I'm pretty sure we're far away from too much idleness. 40 hours is too much work. 20 or so would be more than sufficient imho. That would give people time for hobbies and social interaction outside the office.

[sova]

The Makeup of a Dollar [1] would be little affected by a change in working hours, because only the effects of labor are measured, not the actual duration of labor itself.

[1] https://satisologie.substack.com/p/the-makeup-of-a-dollar

[nullc]

You are making an unsound assumption that longer hours mean more economic output.

In some kinds of jobs this may be true, but in others-- especially ones with substantial intellectual or creative components-- it isn't.

In some cases studies have showed increased output from reduced working hours.

[elliekelly]

Many people outside of Silicon Valley have temporarily (in theory) had their salaries cut. 20% less work for 25-30% less pay sounds like it devalues employee time far more than it devalues the dollar.

[greglindahl]

Are people inside Silicon Valley not having their salaries cut?