10 01 12 - 08:09A good idea:
A thinktank, the New Economics Foundation (NEF), which has organised the event with the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion at the London School of Economics, argues that if everyone worked fewer hours â say, 20 or so a week â there would be more jobs to go round, employees could spend more time with their families and energy-hungry excess consumption would be curbed. Anna Coote, of NEF, said: "There's a great disequilibrium between people who have got too much paid work, and those who have got too little or none." - The Guardian
Unfortunately, they're arguing all the wrong reasons. Their idea above is basically wealth redistribution through limited working hours and universal employment. This means making sure every incompetent has a job, dumbing down the work market further.
I have a better idea: get the incompetents out of the work force.
We can continue paying them, if you like. It will actually cost less that way, as we will no longer be subsidizing their incompetent performance on the job. Put them on welfare, make jobs more intellectually and physically rigorous, and put only our best people in those jobs.
Then cut the vote to anyone without a job.