WarlordSdocy

100% agree but companies are of course against it because hiring people is expensive. Since if you have two people working 3 day work weeks they'll still need to be paid the same amount as working 5 days since they still need to make enough to make a living. It also gives benefits to people working since it means you can go on vacation without a bunch of work piling up since you're the only person who can do it.

Yep but of course companies don't care about it right now as right now it allows them to be more profitable in the immediate term.

I feel like AI is just going to end up replacing interns or entry level people, it can do easy tasks that would take a while by hand to do. Which based on how bad the job market seems to have been for people like me just trying to enter it somewhat makes sense.

The problem comes when those technological innovations increase productivity which companies use solely to increase their bottom line. These innovations should be benefitting workers directly.

Outside of that a lot of your argument rests on the idea that there will always be new better jobs for humans to move into. However even the examples you gave aren't great. How is someone doing manufacturing or transportation or extinguishing the street lights going to suddenly become a computer programmer? Especially considering how atleast in the US you'd have to pay to go to college to do that. And even then we've started to see in recent years a lot of these new "high demand" jobs getting saturated. As time goes on and companies use productivity gains to purely to benefit their profits they're gonna lay off more people and new jobs from new technologies aren't going to be able to keep up.

I think the argument would be that the productivity gains that have happened since the 5 day work week was implemented means that if we want that same level of productivity then a 3 day work week would get that. It would be less productive then currently but the argument would be that a lot of that productivity is just going towards the profits of the companies through having to hire less people. Instead if you wanted to maintain current productivity with a 3 day work week you'd have to hire more people which is good with the amount of wealth transfer and inequality that's been happening.

Edit: not to mention how bad the job market has been recently as well.

I think especially in New York going after landlords, both housing and commercial, would do a great job at making it so smaller businesses (which New York has a ton of) don't have to raise prices and to make it so the minimum wage doesn't have to be as high. That's why I think his rent freeze policy and whatever else he is going to do against land lords will help a lot.

I think that's fair, there definitely is room for improvement but atleast bus wise when I need to go somewhere in Portland I can take the bus or Max and get there. There definitely needs to be safety improvements and better infrastructure for bikes and pedestrians but transit wise it's pretty accessible. The main problem that does need improving is increasing frequency and the hours that transit runs. However route wise it's only once you leave Portland and go out into the wider metro area that the bus network starts to become very lacking.

These people have to be people living out in the suburbs of Portland. Out there sure you need a car but if you're in Portland proper most places have good transit access and are fairly walkable. I say this as someone who lives outside Portland proper but still in the Metro area who drives/bikes out here but when going into the city I generally take transit and walk.

I mean Portland is pretty walkable, I live outside the city but still in the Metro area and whenever I head into the city I take public transit/walk everywhere. There definitely is still room for improvement but it's definitely pretty walkable depending on the part you're in, especially compared to the suburbs.

Ok but I'm pretty sure it's like this because if they make recommendations they go from being a social media company to a publisher, so they can't make recommendations not based on what things you watch through the algorithm. And if you don't have an account they aren't (at least officially) tracking what you watch to make recommendations.

Yeah, cause if one thing turns a population on their government it's attacking the country and doing collateral damage on civilians. That definitely won't unite the people on the side of the government against a common foreign enemy.

I mean they have been attempting to with ramping up the "Iran is just a week away from nukes." that they've been hitting for so many years now.