My take is that there are fundamental limitations to try to pigeon-hole reasoning to LLMs, which are essentially a very very advanced autocomplete, and that's why those % won't jump too much too soon.
> Exactly. It’s fair to criticize Israel for civilian casualties just like all of those countries have been criticized for failing to live up to their stated standards.
Russia doesn't target civilian population to the extent Israel does. There is a reason only Israel is charged with genocide, and not Russia. Don't get me wrong, both the countries' governments are run by bunch of homicidal dictators, but only Isreal systematically does enough war crimes and human rights violations to fit the criteria of genocide.
This is entirely incorrect. Putin's arrest warrant is for the mass kidnapping of Ukrainian children. The legal definition of genocide explicitly calls out such a situation as an example. There are other reasons why your comparison is flawed.
> instead of just saying random stuff like a coward.
You can't comment like this on HN, no matter what you're replying to.
You've posted many comments in this thread that are inflammatory and risk breaking the guidelines. On a topic like this one, this guideline is especially important:
Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
You've been asked before to make an effort to observe the guidelines. Please remind yourself of them and keep them in mind when commenting here.
Israel's government is doing a genocide on the Palestinian people. The ICC sees it and that is why the war criminal Netanyahu has a warrant for his arrest and will be tried in the Hague, not Nuremberg, but close enough.
> Just because I can’t do anything to improve the situation does not mean that I am in favour of the status quo. That does not make me evil either.
It does. The Germans who stood aside when the Nazis rose to power and the soldiers just "executing orders" were as much to blame for the rise of Hitler as the ones supporting it. Not taking a side against evil is taking evil's side. And you of all peoples should have learned from your history. Genocide is bad.
> How does Germany end apartheid in the West Bank?
By applying pressure on the international community to boycott Israel. Same way Germany is applying pressure on the international community to boycott Russia.
> Germany is the absolute last country on this planet to lecture the rest of us on how to criticize Israel
What a bad take. Germany, if it learned its lessons from the Holocaust, which was a genocide they did on the Jewish population, is absolutely the FIRST country in the world to teach Israel that what it's doing is absolutely abhorrent. Don't repeat my mistakes, so to say.
> So they perpetrated the Holocaust, claimed that they learned from their mistakes and drowned themselves in guilt, and now act as holier than thou unconditional defenders of Israel as it commits a genocide in Gaza.
Yes, because they haven't learned shit from their past.
Yes he does. Helping an authoritarian regime known for oppression and killing its dissidents is not ethical.
And sure as hell we would not mind our business, standing aside when evil is being done makes you participate in evil. Saudi Arabia needs to be named and shamed and boycotted, the same way Russia and Israel currently are.
Perhaps this is true. But history is also littered with leaders that want to do The Right Thing, but end up entrapped in the power dynamics of the system. The more authoritarian a regime the more it resembles a game of thrones.
Leaders like Assad and Kim Jung Un promised reforms but ended up ruling much like their fathers before them. People are quick to dismiss such early promises as Machiavellian posing but I believe the issues are more systemic. They end up as authoritarians because thats the only way for them and their kin to remain safe in the face of opposition. The ruling elites are comfortable in their local optimum and moving out of it will be politically chaotic. The status quo for them is the least worst choice.
I would not be too quick in expecting change from these regimes is I guess what I'm trying to say. They're not always as firmly established as they might seem.
That's fair. As a foreigner, it's hard to determine how much has improved in Saudi Arabia. The improvement might be less marked than the impression I've gotten from the outside.
MBS already wants to modernize and liberalize Saudi Arabia. This is for economic reasons, and, I would guess, also because his macabre reputation is a drag when he's partying with his Western friends.
Any boycott that would get Saudi Arabia more humane government would be a good boycott. It just seems more likely that sanctions would wreck their economy and lead to a religious fanatic taking over.
No, he does want to turn saudi arabia into a secular democracy. He is just doing the bare minimal in order to gain legitimacy and investments/business. He is not a believer in human rights, democracy and religious freedom. He is literally a dictator and a murder.
He doesn't need to. Saudi Arabia doesn't give citizenship to foreigners. We don't want permanent foreigner migration like Japan and South Korea and other countries. 99% of the population is already Muslim. All foreigners are temporary workers on 1 year visas. They're just in KSA for doing their jobs. Their views never mattered in the past, now and will never matter in the future. They do their job contract and they leave. Lol what's so amazing about democracy. Look at America. Democracy means income taxes, giving citizenship to foreigners, bringing third world shithole refugee criminals, junkies and crap, having your government policies change way too much often, giving precedence to foreigners for jobs. No thanks! Saudi Arabia has a good small growing population of 20 million Saudi citizens. It's close knit, homogeneous, same religion, culture etc. Monarchy provides us all the benefits we need. Look at Kuwait, it tried having a partial democracy and fails miserably.
Mohammed bin Salman? He is probably a complex man, but by accident of history the only thing we know about him is the killing of Khashoggi and the gnarly details of the body disposal process.
In Saudi Arabia, if you're not someone he wants to torture or kill, you can enjoy increased religious freedoms, gender equality, and international ties.
It's a bit like Iran before the revolution: the Shah was liberalizing and modernizing his nation, while at the same using SAVAK to torture his opposition.
> In Saudi Arabia, if you're not someone he wants to torture or kill, you can enjoy increased religious freedoms, gender equality, and international ties.
Increased compared to taliban rule? Wow, thanks so much to the benevolent dictator for allowing a woman to go out without a male companion without being stoned. And thank the benevolent dictator for not having an interest in me specially. All praise the guy who could dismember many people but chooses to do that only to a couple, and who could imprison many, but does it mostly to his family and whoever he pleases.
If there were an overwhelming majority in Saudi Arabia who demanded the full set of human rights we have in the West, then it would be unconscionable to say anything positive about Mohammed bin Salman.
This quote is from a story from before Saudi women got the right to drive. The piece argues it was a common take:
Mashaal El-Maliki, a housewife:
"Female driving will destroy family life because it will give husbands a chance to know other women who (as drivers) will be free and without guardians."
The best path forward is whatever path is the shortest to making life bearable for liberal Saudis, but that doesn't end in conservative revolt (and deeper theocracy). When a considerable portion of a nation opposes basic freedoms, there are fewer viable options.
>the Shah was liberalizing and modernizing his nation
Quaint revisionism; in fact Mossadegh was already actually liberalizing and modernizing the nation while Pahlavi was turning it into a US/UK client state.
No leaders are 'ideal', but the only way you can equivocate between these two is taking it making a tacit assumption that reorienting the state apparatus and your economy towards the needs of foreign clients - and away from the enrichment of regular people at home - is good.
The concern I raise is that religious fanatics replace MBS. In that context, the relevant Iranian comparison is pre-1979 and post-1979. Post-1979 is a nightmare, a terrifying Twilight Zone episode. See:
In Saudi Arabia, MBS is probably better than a more fanatical Wahabist government. I gather the power struggle between the royals and the clerics is ongoing. Human rights progress would reverse under the latter.
I don’t see political dissidents being killed left and right in my western country. I don’t see minorities being arrested and killed just for being different in my country. I don’t see blatant forced labor being the norm in my country. We do have dark moments in our history, and we do have our own issues at home (not the US btw), but it’s nowhere near what’s happening in Saudi Arabia so don’t try to play to tie (“jugar al empate” as we say here).
There are plenty of ways of finding out this day and age. The difference is that no one is getting arrested for posting something on X, or for whistleblowing.
There are certainly evil things in the west but nothing to compare with things like cutting people's heads off for having gay sex or following the wrong religion or punishing rape victims.
You do not realise how privileged people in the west are - as someone who has lived inn a country that was bad at the time (nothing like Saudi Arabia but things such as journalists being disappeared and a nasty civil war) westerners who say "oh, its just the same" make me really just look delusional and completely unaware of their privilege.
We literally have a western country opening fire on unarmed people queuing for food in the same region. It's literally on the front page right now. Prosecutors for those crimes have had their accounts frozen by Microsoft.
So yeah, no. Statements about human rights have no credibility.
The last thing anyone needs advice about human rights is from the west. The invasions and mass murders in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Iran, Libya. Still remember that pr*ck Colin Powell showing that vial to justify that invasion of Iraq. The world's worst murderers have been the British, Dutch, Belgian, French, Spanish and American empires throughout history. The worst genocide in history was committed by Belgium in Congo where they killed millions.
Lol no one gets their head cut off for gay sex or wrong religion. Capital punishment is only for murder, terrorism, rape and drug smugglers. The Saudi Government is quite liberal there. It's your own Saudi families that will ostracize you based on their own decisions.
You keep talking about dissidents. I still remember Obama and his Arab spring and how thousands died because of him. The west like to implant people to create internal conflicts inside countries. It's not going to work in the Gulf countries as all the citizens know how the Americans thrive on instigating conflict. That journalist just wanted to create anarchy. I still remember the terrorist attacks at my American school and other cities in Saudi Arabia during 2004 - 2005. I trust the police and government to eradicate all the extremist and outside threats to the country and keep everyone safe. They've basically cleaned out all the extremism in these past 20 years from the country. The Americans also enjoyed keeping the Saudis and Iranians fighting until the Chinese stepped in and created peace between these two countries.
Americans need to worry about their own backyard with their crap healthcare, poverty, homelessness, illegals, gun violence etc. Saudi Arabia isn't perfect, but Saudi citizens have to pay no income taxes, get free universal healthcare, free education, free university education, all government paid scholarships for universities abroad (tuition, travel & living), first priority in all jobs, social security support for low income citizens, interest free mortgages, etc. Plus Saudi Arabia long with the other Gulf countries like UAE & Qatar are some of the safest countries. All illegals arrested and deported every month, low crime rates, no African/Asian Refugee illegal drunk junkies roaming the streets (like Europe/America), no homeless tents, no gun violence etc.
The Gulf countries along with Japan, South Korea, Singapore and China know how to keep their countries safe, clean and well. Look at Europe & Scandinavia now with all the illegals running around.
Your country, at least to the extent you seem to claim it as such, only started letting its women drive in 2018. As recently as 2011 there was no law prohibiting violence against women. So that's one way of keeping the crime rate low, I guess.
If someone were paying you to defend the Saudi state in online forums, you would probably go to the trouble of giving your posts at least a tiny bit of nuance.
No ones paying me anything. I've lived there for almost 3 decades there and travelled around the world too including western countries. I know how the country has transitioned in these last 30 years from the clutches of religious extremists and into a more comfortable country for its young generation of citizens. Saudi Arabia has always been a traditional country with Bedouin customs. Before, all families had personal drivers and chauffeurs to help the women travel around. In the last few years, Saudi Arabia has fired millions of foreigners and encouraged more women to get in the work force. Hence, the government decided to let them drive. Companies that hire women in Saudi Arabia get more benefits from the government. Women get all their travel expenses refunded to them by the government for the first few years. There are so many universities and programs for universities for women. Regarding the crime rate, yes it's low compared to western countries. Crime does occur both in families and around the country, but the government helps takes care of all these issues. The streets are still safer in the Gulf countries than compared to western countries. You won't find african/asian junkies, drunks, muggers roaming around the streets stealing or threatening people. The government does an amazing job of maintaining order and arresting and deporting thousands of illegals and criminals each month.
> Before, all families had personal drivers and chauffeurs to help the women
travel around.
It is frankly incredible how profoundly you are missing the point.
> Crime does occur both in families and around the country, but the government helps takes care of all these issues.
Oh I'm sure they do, and when something goes to court, a man's testimony carries twice the weight of a woman's. Or would you deny and/or sugarcoat that?
> You won't find african/asian junkies, drunks, muggers roaming around the streets stealing or threatening people.
You've described this weird racist fantasy of yours more than once now. Do you think that's what the world outside your country is like? That's really sad if so.
You are making the mistake of assuming most people share your values, which based solely on this thread seem to be authoritarian, nativist and male-supremacist.
Yes, all foreign workers get to keep their passports while working there. There were issues 20 years ago with certain companies and sponsors keeping the passports of their employees. It's always been illegal to do that and doesn't happen. The foreign worker comes on their temporary work visa and should leave before their work visa expires. Thousands of foreign skilled engineers, doctors, nurses, accountants, scientists, teachers etc. work in Saudi Arabia. Everyone keeps their passports and it's the company that hires them and renews their visa yearly if they want to keep them in their employment.
Foreign states are often the way they are because their population prefers that. People shouldn't get so spun up about it. If those people came here they'd probably just recreate most of the things they do there.
> Foreign states are often the way they are because their population prefers that.
1. That does not make it ethical. There was a time when the majority of people in the US thought it right to treat black people as inferior. Did that make it right?
2. This stuff is at its worst in counties where the population has no chance to express their preference.
3. How do you know what people's preferences are in "foreign states"? Did you go there and ask a representative sample of people after convincing them they could trust you enough to tell you their real views?
Its amazing how people's expressed preferences match their governments if they will be chucked in jail or murdered if they disagree, and their access to information is limited to what the government things they should know.
I don't think they hide it at all... I think we just don't see governments in the West with the same eyes, sort of like the same effect that happens when watching Vic Mackey or Tony Soprano, and rooting for them fully knowing how morally depleted they are as humans.
This is moral absolutist thinking. Either you're 100% good or 100% evil and there is nothing in between.
Under that thinking, of course, everyone (except, of course, the speaker and friends) is evil and can be accused and held responsible, for their "moral failings".
Oh and you ESPECIALLY don't get to defend anyone with practical arguments, for example, that it is a lot harder for a government that does not have tons and tons of (to them) free natural resources money, like Saudi Arabia (they don't even extract it themselves) to avoid moral problems, and problems in general than it is for, say America. That a country that has to do things itself, just to make a random example, defend it's shores against drugs (and shoot at people who try to ...) has to make a lot of moral compromises (like, perhaps, shooting at criminals trying to flee in a boat) that Saudi Arabia doesn't have to make.
Many countries, like Saudi Arabia, always get a free pass, because "you can't expect them to adhere to ..." when in fact it would be SO much easier for them to have a perfect human rights record, no poverty, extremely liberal societies, ... than it is for the US (because incomes in Saudi Arabia largely does not derive from having Saudi Arabians work, so there's no need to force them to. America shoots at people so Saudi Arabia can export it's oil, ...)
The fact is most non-Western governments (like Saudi Arabia, but they're middle of the boat at best in evilness) don't have the interests of people in mind at all. Regardless if "people" means Saudi Arabian people, people who live in Saudi Arabia including foreignors, or women, or children for that matter. AT BEST, they are like Western companies, at worst ... you can imagine. That a government with the financial means of Saudi Arabia fails here should be 10x worse than similar failings on, for example the US's part (but same for, say, Denmark). But the root cause is simple: the Saudi government is not there to benefit the people there, it benefits itself only.
In other words: these dictatorships are MUCH worse and have MUCH more serious moral failings than the US.
Lol Saudi Arabia is for Saudi citizens. All foreigners are on temporary 3/6/12 month work visas that are renewed each year. We don't give citizenships to foreigners. We don't need and don't want permanent immigration from foreigners in the country. Look at how Japan and South Korea are thriving. And we certainly don't need advice about human rights from genocide supporting western countries. The same America that has given Israel $30 billion in the last few years to flatten Palestine and kill almost a 100,000 people. You keep talking about dissidents. The government keeps the country safe from terrorism, gun violence, criminals, religious extremists etc. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries are some of the safest places to live along with Japan, Singapore and South Korea. No one can cares about Western comments on dissidents. Saudi Arabia is still very tribal and family oriented. Saudi Aramco is 98% Saudi Citizens and we extract all the oil ourselves. The Americans left long ago. Focus on your own backyard with your crap healthcare, poverty, homelessness, racial violence, gun violence, etc. There's no Saudi citizen living on the streets. Every single Saudi citizen have to pay no income taxes and gets free healthcare, free education, free university education, free scholarships abroad (tuition, travel, housing, person expenses covered), interest free mortgages, first priority in all jobs, and so many other benefits. The richest country in the world (America) spent trillions of dollars in wars across the Atlantic but has thousands of its citizens homeless on the streets.
Saudi Arabia has 20 million Saudi citizens and they're the only priority and future of the country that has surpassed a GDP of $1 trillion.
Bla bla, human right violations, treating laborers as slaves and second hand people, killing political dissidents and throwing billions of oil dollars to whitewash the country's image.
Whatabouting the US doesn't mean Saudi Arabia's human rights violations suddenly vanish in thin air.
Saud Arabia's first priority is just for Saudi citizens only. No laborer is a slave or forced at gunpoint to come work in our country. They pay themselves thousands of dollars in their foreign countries to come work in Saudi Arabia. Nobody forces them. Their work visa is either only for 3 months or 6 months or 12 months. Then, they need to leave once the visa has expired. No one is forced to work in the country as a slave. You can choose to stay living in your own country. Lol political dissidents are turd implants from the Western countries designed to instigate anarchy in the country. It's never going to work anymore because the Gulf citizens themselves know how pathetic the Americans and the west are nowadays. Stop & STF trying to teach about human rights. The US and Europeans are responsible for the genocide of 100,000 in Palestine right now along with the millions in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Vietnam, and so many more. No one needs to whitewash anything. We are spending trillions for our country and the future of our citizens. All the big multi billion projects provide millions of jobs for Saudi citizens and foreigners. And they will continue to provide jobs and revenue for the country for generations to come. The US and the West isn't the bastion of amazing human rights after its support and financing of the current genocide in Palestine.
Saudi citizens are doing just fine and are being greatly supported and have a bright future with the Vision 2030 work happening so far. You worry about your shitty healthcare, gun violence, homelessness, high income taxes, crappy infrastructure, illegal drunks & junkies roaming the streets and other stuff. No one gives a crap about your lame accusations of human rights. You've historically been the biggest mass murders and genocides from killing off the natives in North America and Aborigines in Australia and the recent wars in the middle east. No one gives a crap about some fat old attention whore journalist here anymore. 70% of the Saudi citizen population is under 35 years old and we support the government to keeps the country and us safe from all outside terrorists and other threats.
> You've historically been the biggest mass murders and genocides from killing off the natives in North America and Aborigines in Australia and the recent wars in the middle east.
Absolutely true. And also responsible for the crusades, for the colonization of Africa, Australia and America, and the untold suffering of millions of non Europeans. Europeans also started both the world wars. Nobody is denying that. We know more about human rights violations than anyone else. Thats why we are calling out Saudi Arabia's, the same way I call Israel's genocide upon the Palestinian people.
> No one gives a crap about some fat old attention whore journalist here anymore.
Any normal human with a bit of empathy would decry a dictator killing a journalist and dismembering him like a coward. Also, wherever there a re human rights violations like in Israel, USA and Saudi Arabia, it's our moral duty to investigate further and dethrone the evildoers.
> Lol political dissidents are turd implants from the Western countries designed to instigate anarchy in the country
Ah, the old "everyone who disagrees with the government" is a foreign agent, let's detain them and maybe chop them to pieces. Putin did the same minus the chopping part. Trump is doing the same and trying to bring back Guantanamo. MBS just added the slice and dice for an extra flair.
> Saudi citizen population is under 35 years old and we support the government to keeps the country and us safe from all outside terrorists and other threats.
And whoever doesn't support the government, gets chopped to pieces?
I keep finding this baffling. An arab muslim criticizing OTHERS for practicing slavery? And a Saudi at that. WTF. I mean how hypocritical can you get?
> You've historically been the biggest mass murders and genocides from killing off the natives in North America and Aborigines in Australia and the recent wars in the middle east
Really? Who colonized the middle east, Asia and Africa? Look it up, the Roman Empire did, somewhat, and the actual colonizing (meaning conquering, taking free people and turning them into slaves, usually by mass-murder) was done by the successive Caliphates. Have you somehow missed the many paintings made by the slave trade, missed WHAT the slave owners are wearing? The west took over after the last caliph fled islam (the state, not that anyone at the time made any distinction between state and religion at all. And if we're being very honest, not many muslims were sorry to see it end)
The West then proceeded to end slavery and what's left are a bunch of separate states, with some very badly chosen borders, after stealing resources for a couple of decades.
Which state today would have more to do with these Caliphates that did the colonizing and extracting for >1000 years? The western states, the US? Or can you come up with a more responsible party? Perhaps a specific country, claiming to have been the center of islam for said millenium (they're lying, of course. Any time that it actually mattered the center was Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus or Istanbul, never even close to Saudi Arabia. We happen to be in the only incredibly exceptional moment in history Saudi Arabia is not a desert hellhole. That includes the future)
> crappy infrastructure, illegal drunks & junkies roaming the streets and other stuff ...
I once roamed around, by accident in Ryadh, by getting lost. Don't tell me you have any trouble finding the poorer neighborhoods, drunks and junkies (yes not on the streets, same reason you don't find drunks on the streets in Sydney during summer either) ... and, let's be honest, slaves. It is very much NOT the case that everyone has airco in Saudi Arabia.
And I keep hearing about stuff I haven't seen, like the "divorce prisons" of Saudi Arabia. Also, Saudi Arabia has debtor's prisons. Very progressive you people are.
> after its support and financing of the current genocide in Palestine
"The west" isn't supporting that, with some exceptions (Saudi Arabia IS, by the way). Second, Saudi Arabia has genocided more Jews in Saudi Arabia than the ENTIRE Israel-Palestine conflict made in it's >100 years of on-off fighting on both sides. By the way, a genocide, far bigger than the Israel-Palestine conflict is what brought in the current rulers and created Saudi Arabia not 100 years ago, do you even know that?
I mean, I know the answer to that. You learn that quickly when you're there. No, Saudis do not know the history of Saudi Arabia, not even a little bit. Saudi men (you don't see the women) know more about the history of perfume brands than their own history.
> Saudi citizens are doing just fine and are being greatly supported and have a bright future with the Vision 2030 work ... No one gives a crap about some fat old attention whore journalist ...
You mean when the current Saudi government had it's embassy staff kill and chop into pieces an American-Saudi dual citizen? Yes, that government is taking real good care of human rights. I really trust them to treat other Saudi citizens well into the future ...
And Vision 2030, which boils down to "tourism will replace oil revenues", is about as realistic as an umbrella manufacturer's plan to branch out into delivering hot soup during hurricanes. Wait, why am I even making a comparison. Let me repeat the vision: "tourism will replace oil revenues". That's also a joke, just so bad it's not even funny. So at least there's that: in 20 or so years when oil demand has dried up, Saudi Arabia will once again be the desert hellhole it was for most of it's existence. Maybe more like 10 years, or even less, because frankly I doubt oil demand will survive the next recession in the west, whenever that is.
There was this chap called Julian Assange who was framed by the Swedish government and then involuntarily incarcerated in an embassy in London. Close enough?
The fact that the West persecuted Assange for exposing their crimes against humanity doesn't give right to Saudi Arabia to kill its journalists with impunity either. Surely crimes against humanity and violating human rights can be done by multiple governments, as Netanyahu's genocide against the Palestinians can coexist at the same time as MBS's chopping of journalists and illegal incarcerations.
Oh really? He was chopped up to pieces by the Swedish govt? Or did he hide in an embassy to avoid a rape investigation (of course you believe women just lie about rape)?
Western countries support Israel in the genocide they do on Palestine, and violently quash protests against climate change or said genocide in Palestine. But at the same time we need to call out all evil, including the one happening in Saudi Arabia.
Western governments still allow you to post comments criticizing these things. But we’re on the knife edge of authoritarianism. A few more “everyone is equally bad” elections and that will be gone too.
Cause chopping journalists into pieces is evil, same as attacking your political enemies like what all the douche dictators like MBS, Trump, Putin, Stalin, Netanyahu and many other evil people do.
It does not have to be a replica of of 50s society though. In particular, I do not think the model of "men go out to work, women look after home and kids" is a great one.
There are lot of alternatives. Men can be primary parents (I was, once the kids got to about the age of eight or so, and was an equal parent before that) and they could stay at home (I continued working, but I was already self-employed and working from home, and my ex never worked after having children).
I think the ideal set up (it would have been so for me) would have been for both parents to work part time.
Of course it still comes back to, you should be able to raise a family on the equivalent of one full time income.
Of course, if the leisured society predicted a few decades ago had come to pass it would be one part time salary.
The model of men work while women watch the kids was most of history. Of course is completely ignors 'womens work' which was very needed for survival and defined by things you could do while also watching kids. for the first few years kids eat from mom so she cannot get far from them (after that she is probably pregnaunt again thus restarting the cycle). Mens work was anything that needed to be done that could not be done when pregaunt or nursing a kid.
today men have the ability to watch kids thanks to formula (though it is better for the kids to eat from mom - this is rarely talked about because it is easy to go too far and starve a baby to death in the exceptions).
> I think the ideal set up (it would have been so for me) would have been for both parents to work part time.
Beautifully said, very progressive also!
I am a big fan of the 4-day work week (for the same amount of money as 5 days), it's been transformative for my life. The extra energy and focus you get from that 1 day translates to higher productivity in the 4 days where you do work. Sadly, the current "squeeze em', bleed em' dry, and drop em'" brand of capitalism is incompatible with the majority of the people to experience how good life can be like that.
I certainly ain't looking forward to them raising the retirement age to 1337 by the time I get to retire.
It's like a race where they repeatedly move the finishing line because the organizers took the medals and sold them, while waiting for you to drop dead so they don't have to give you what you are due.
Who wouldn't be a fan of 80% of the work for 100% of the pay? It's a built-in raise equal to or greater than what you'd get from changing jobs, without the switch in seniority or experience.
> Who wouldn't be a fan of 80% of the work for 100% of the pay?
If you, as an employer, want a motivated, energetic workforce who are not slacking off, it's also in your interest to give that opportunity to your employees, as multiple experiments have shown that 4-day work results in increased productivity and employee retention.
Knowledge work does not have 1-1 correspondence between time spent and productivity. Things get VERY non-linear, to the point that more than 50 hours of real knowledge work a week is often LESS productive than 40 hours.
I think nobody should have managers, but your examples were so confidently wrong that it's hard to agree with your whole statement. I am on the opinion that any work, no matter whether "high-skilled" or not, doesn't need managers, unless that's just an euphemism for more senior employees that also do the work.
The managers listed in those open positions are administrative. Doctors don't report to them. Doctors report to another doctor.
The dean & chairperson at your university are not line managers. They are not in the classrooms with teaching professors. They are not in the labs with research professors.
Having someone be in charge of you is not the same as having a line manager. Line managers are down in the trenches with the employees, unlike most of your examples.
reply