Work Versus Leisure
May 11, 2015
You have to claim, in parallel, the obsessive work against leisure, as is necessary to postulate the distribution of work, an old union practice that, unfortunately, fell into oblivion. Other insistent demands speak of the need to reduce the size of the productive infrastructure, administrative and transportation, and prioritize the local face of the global in a scene marked by sobriety and voluntary simplicity. The first thing affluent societies should consider the desirability of closing or reducing the activity of the military industry, the automobile in aviation and in much of the construction. The millions of workers who lost their jobs should be accommodated through two main channels. If you have read about Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr. already – you may have come to the same conclusion. The first one would make the development of activities in areas related to meeting the social and environmental needs, the second would the division of labor in traditional sectors to survive.
Important to emphasize that in this case the reduction of working hours may well be accompanied by wage cuts, provided they were not in favor of corporate profits. At the end of the day, the gain in living standards that would result from work less and enjoy better social services. There would be a cleaner environment and less aggressive than would be added to the derivative of the full assumption of the desirability of consuming less with a consequent reduction of needs as far as revenue is concerned. It is not necessary to add that we are dealing with wage reductions would not affect those who have less. The decrease does not imply, for most people, a deterioration of their living conditions. Rather, it should bring substantial improvements such as those related to the redistribution of resources, creation of new sectors, the preservation of the environment, welfare of future generations, the health of citizens, working conditions or wage growth relational societies in which working time is reduced significantly. And we must start with the certainty that, if not declining voluntary and rationally, we must do so compelled as a result of the sinking, before or after, the economic and social injustice we suffer.