This is how society should respond to the impact of automation, new business models, and baby boomers that don’t need to or can’t retire.

Many people fear the effects of automation and innovation, because they allegedly “destroy jobs”. But the goal of most technology has always been to eliminate or simplify work that has to be done by humans, so reducing the workload should not be unexpected, nor feared. Instead, the work load should be more widely distributed.

Decades ago, as people envisioned robots and computers, they talked about how people wouldn't have to work as much, or at all. Yes, that’s the idea. However, by sticking with an obsolete work model (the 40 hour work week), we just create higher unemployment and, for those who do have jobs, a longer work week.

It’s hard to legislate (politically, anyway) a shorter work week, but by lowering the threshold for overtime pay, employers can be motivated to reduce the work week (more time off!) and increase the number of people working (which will decrease reliance on government assistance). Instead of retiring and living on pensions and social security and drawing down nest eggs, baby boomers can continue to work at a reduced schedule, creating work opportunities for new entrants to the work force, while also reducing demands on retirement programs.

Employers may complain about the costs of a larger workforce, but it’s possible that those costs could be offset by reductions in government spending, which would reduce the need for taxes. Also, if people are working part time into their late sixties and early seventies, they will have more money to spend, which will be good for the economy, while reducing the burden on the social security system. And setting a trend for an ever decreasing work week.