SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Billionaire Jack Ma, long an outspoken advocate for China's extreme work culture, says that people should be able to work just 12 hours a week with the benefits of artificial intelligence.
People could work as little as three days a week, four hours a day with the help of technology advances and a reform in education systems, the Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. co-founder said at the World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai Thursday. He spoke on-stage with Elon Musk, the chief executive officer of Tesla Inc. who is building manufacturing facilities in the city.
[...] Just this year, Ma endorsed the China tech sector's infamous 12-hours-a-day, six-days-a-week routine, so common it earned the moniker 996. In one blog post, China's richest man this year dismissed people who expect a typical eight-hour office lifestyle, defying a growing popular backlash.
"I don't worry about jobs," Ma said on Thursday, making an optimistic case that AI will help humans rather than just eliminate their work. "Computers only have chips, men have the heart. It's the heart where the wisdom comes from."
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 14 2019, @04:26PM (15 children)
It is better to work just enough so you don't get into the next tax bracket. The more you work the more money the government takes claiming it will be used for something good but instead uses to fund propaganda against you, secret bioweapon labs, etc: https://constitution.solari.com/fasab-statement-56-understanding-new-government-financial-accounting-loopholes/ [solari.com]
(Score: 5, Informative) by i286NiNJA on Monday October 14 2019, @05:31PM (5 children)
This is the kind of crap advice I hear from wendys managers who make 35k when they're trying to dupe shift scrubs who make 15k
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 14 2019, @05:44PM (1 child)
Really? Wendy's managers are discussing FASAB 56 with their employees? Do you have a source for this ever happening once?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 14 2019, @11:42PM
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 14 2019, @06:39PM (2 children)
Exploitative managers may over state the case - but there is truth in what GP says. My first year out of high school, I learned that working sixty hours could mean less take-home pay than working forty hours. The sweet spot was 50 hours, and every hour over 50 meant a small cut in take-home, until 59, when the take-home nose dived.
I later learned that you got a big chunk of that missing money back when you filed your tax returns, but it definitely feels like a loss from week to week.
Over the years, that sweet spot has fluctuated a little, but I'll bet if you experiment, it's still pretty close to fifty hours.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 15 2019, @02:29AM
Not sure about your country/state but that's not how the federal tax code works in the U.S.
Only what you make over a given tax bracket gets taxed at the higher rate, the tax rate of your entire income does not increase.
only what you
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday October 15 2019, @02:17PM
I have to correct myself. Where I wrote "forty" up there, should be "fifty". That is, working sixty hours, you can find your take-home being less than it was at fifty.
Mis-spoke, and mis-typed all at the same time. I've never worked overtime, and taken home less pay than I would have taken home at forty hours. And, I spent a couple hours off and on, wondering if I said what I meant to say, LOL.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 14 2019, @05:41PM (8 children)
Tax brackets are gradual. Sure the rate of earning has gone done somewhat, but there's no sudden drop in what you earn by ending up in the next tax bracket.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 14 2019, @05:46PM (6 children)
You misunderstand, I am not talking about taking home more/less money. I am talking about legally making sure the government gets as little as possible to spend on their nefarious or wasteful projects. Basically like eating a low carb diet to fight cancer.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 14 2019, @05:52PM (2 children)
So how's that going for you?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 14 2019, @06:01PM (1 child)
Great. Basically I work whenever I feel like it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 15 2019, @11:44PM
Do you feel any remorse for not helping to fund all the public works (like the roads, duh) that you use all the time?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 14 2019, @11:14PM (2 children)
Somalia is a good destination for you. With a clever choice of your whereabouts, you can end by not paying any tax at all your entire life, however long or short it may be. I guess you can't beat that satisfaction.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 15 2019, @12:57AM (1 child)
Somalia is a failed socialist state:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia#Somali_Democratic_Republic_(1969%E2%80%931991) [wikipedia.org]
That is the last place someone like me wants to live.
(Score: 2, Funny) by khallow on Tuesday October 15 2019, @07:47AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 14 2019, @08:26PM
In general you're right, but there are the occasional "tax cliffs" where marginal tax rates can be 100% or greater. Happens frequently with Obamacare subsidies.