[schmichael]

Productivity gains are more likely to be used to increase margins (profits and therefore value to shareholders) then it is to reduce work hours.

At least since the Industrial Revolution, and probably before, the only advance that has led to shorter work weeks is unions and worker protections. Not technology.

Technology may create more surplus (food, goods, etc) but there’s no guarantee what form that surplus will reach workers as, if it does at all.

[bloppe]

Margins require a competitive edge. If productivity gains are spread throughout a competitive industry, margins will not get bigger; prices will go down.

[LPisGood]

That feels optimistic. This kind of naive free market ideology seems to rarely manifest in lower prices.

[anon7000]

> Productivity gains are more likely to be used to increase margins (profits and therefore value to shareholders) then it is to reduce work hours

I mean, that basically just sums up how capitalism works. Profit growth is literally (even legally!) the only thing a company can care about. Everything else, like product quality, pays service to that goal.

[timClicks]

Sorry if this is somewhat pedantic, but I believe that only US companies (and possibly only Delaware corporations?) are bound by the requirement to maximize shareholder value and then only by case law rather than statue. Other jurisdictions allow the directors more discretion, or place more weight on the company's constitution/charter.

[tirant]

That’s not a good summary of capitalism at all because you omit the part where interests of sellers and buyers align. Which is precisely what has made capitalism successful.

Profit growth is based primarily on offering the product that best matches the consumer wish at the lowest price, and production cost possible. That benefits both the buyer and the seller. If the buyer does not care about product quality, then you will not have any company producing quality products.

The market is just a reflection of that dinámica. And in the real world we can easily observed that: Many market niches are dominated by quality products (outdoor and safety gear, professional and industrial tools…) while others tend to be dominated by non-quality (low end fashion, toys).

And that result is not imposed by profit growth but by the average consumer preference.

You can of course disagree with those consumer preferences and don’t buy low quality products, that’s why you most probably also find high products in any market niche.

But you cannot blame companies for that. What they sell is just the result of the aggregated buyers preferences and the result of free market decisions.

[goatlover]

Failure of politics and the media then. Majority of voters have been fooled into voting against their economic interests.