Countries with a long average working time are more economically successful than those countries which do not have a long working time. To what extend do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe that lengthening the working

hours

of citizens could allow the country to have better economic development than the nations that have shorter office

hours

.

This

essay completely disagrees with that argument for some reasons.

Firstly

, a long working day is not enough if people don’t use effective management.

Therefore

, increasing working time is not useful without the use of technologies.

For instance

, it is widely known that North Korea’s population is considered the most working population in the world. An average working day there lasts for nine

hours

.

However

,

this

country is not economically advanced.

This

means that the length of working

hours

does not affect economic development.

Secondly

, a long working time does not guarantee a high outcome.

On the contrary

, it negatively impacts the results since long-hour workers are likely to have higher fatigue. They

consequently

cause a lack of concentration and decreased productivity. In the worst case, they might get a work-related disease

such

as depression or even suicide.

For example

, the Japanese are well-known as long-time workers, and their industriousness has contributed to

develop

Change the verb form

developing

show examples

the economy since the end of the 2nd World War. Nowadays, the suicide rate among the working generation is relatively high, and the economy of Japan becomes slower and slower. Not only these health problems are not good for economic growth

,

Add the word(s)

but,

show examples

they will

also

cost immaterial to the society. To conclude, work quality does not measure by the length of working time. I believe that well-being conditions are essential to contribute to the economy.