4 ms·
Working hours had been trending down for a while at that time, so it must have seemed reasonable.
by stuaxo 10y ago
Working hours had been trending down for a while at that time, so it must have seemed reasonable.
- snrplfth 10y agoThey've continued trending down since then, especially when you count hours of domestic labour, which has dropped a lot (and no surprise, since you're not getting paid wages for those hours generally.)
- mark_edward 10y agoThis, I think, leaves out how much formerly domestic labor has been converted into social labor provided either by the state or market forces. Which could be responsible for a lot of reduction as well, as when one does this efficiencies of scale and rationalization can take place in an organization. I have no idea how or why either aspect would be bigger. Hypothetically, reduction of (for example) childcare hours could be as much about proliferation of daycares and kindergarten and schooling in general as it's about development in domestic childcare technologies. Eating and fix prison is microwaves and McDonald's, etc.
- snrplfth 10y agoBut what I'm saying is that both paid labour and unpaid labour (or "domestic labour") are both going down in number of hours. People working in daycares and kindergartens are already counted in the paid labour hours. What technology does is make domestic labour time-effective enough so that keeping house is no longer a full-time occupation, which permits for the expansion of other kinds of work.
- mark_edward 10y agos/fix prison/such things/
- collyw 10y agoHow can you claim this when essentially they have doubled - two wages are (usually) needed to provide for a family these days.
- ArkyBeagle 10y agoSo don't family. Problem solved :)
- bigmanwalter 10y agoSeems like a reasonable solution for the whole world to adopt. What could go wrong?
- ArkyBeagle 10y agoI know, right?