6 ms·

The article raises good points about the need for formal societal taboos against constant work. The ideal (often violated, though) in our modern society of the

The article raises good points about the need for formal societal taboos against constant work. The ideal (often violated, though) in our modern society of the "40-hour week" as a reasonable amount is one of them. Having regular times for contemplation and separation from the bustle of the world is important. The gig economy has dangers in it. There's a liberating aspect in that people "can choose their own hours," but then that means that they have to work more to keep up with someone else who is working a few extra hours to get ahead in their own lives. It seems like the world of labor has a tragedy of the commons aspect to it, where it's in everyone's immediate individual interest to work just a little bit longer, but the end result is that everyone has to work more for the same reward. A bit like the two-income trap: some benefits, some liberation, but there's also a cost. I do wish, though, that the article fully grappled with the issue of the 'shabbos goy.' It praises the virtues of having everyone able to participate in a time of separation from work, but then there's this practice where the conveniences of life are still indulged in by having an outsider labor for you.

emodendroket 8y ago
> I do wish, though, that the article fully grappled with the issue of the 'shabbos goy.' It praises the virtues of having everyone able to participate in a time of separation from work, but then there's this practice where the conveniences of life are still indulged in by having an outsider labor for you. I'd say the traditional Christian concept of the sabbath is looser and doesn't really require this kind of thing. In effect I'd say that it is an attitude more concerned with the spirit and less with the letter of the law (so, for instance, I don't think turning on the light is an issue, and putting money on the table for someone to take isn't actually adhering to the prohibition on commerce).
- ido 8y ago
  In effect I'd say that it is an attitude more concerned with the spirit and less with the letter of the law (so, for instance, I don't think turning on the light is an issue, and putting money on the table for someone to take isn't actually adhering to the prohibition on commerce). That's something that generally rubs me the wrong way about a lot of things with orthodox jewish practices (especially the ultra orthodox) - there is so much effort trying to find loopholes in the rules, instead of adhering to their spirit instead.
  - abraham_lincoln 8y ago
    And yet, they are the only ones observing the Sabbath.
    - mikepurvis 8y ago
      But the whole point is that it depends on your approach. Jesus was very clearly in opposition to the religious elites of his day by choosing to walk, teach, and even perform physical healings on the Sabbath. The summation of the rationale for this is pretty clear: it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12%3A9-13 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12%3A9-...
      - neaden 8y ago
        Right. But Jesus wouldn't have wanted you to be driving for Uber on the Sabbath either.
        mikepurvis 8y ago
        I think all I'm saying is that there's a middle ground where you go screen/internet free, and avoid things like housework, shopping, planning, and meal preparation in favour of spending time with family, but don't sweat things like non-religious reading, turning lights on and off, and walking to the park.
        danjc 8y ago
        He says the Sabbath was created for man not man for the Sabbath. His reaction was to the legalism of the day.
        RobertRoberts 8y ago
        He didn't call it legalism, he called it everything from hypocrisy (heaping up burdens on people) to simply evil (neglecting elderly parent for the sake of ritual).
- RobertRoberts 8y ago
  I would argue that you can follow the letter of the law with the resting on the sabbath quite easily. There is almost no instructions on this topic. And to even clarify Jesus teachings on the sabbath, it's ok to even work on the sabbath under some circumstances (rescuing your ox). And this is the letter of the law. The Orthodox Jewish teachings are extra biblical and but re often confused as biblical. Not to different from how the Pope creates extra rules for Catholics.
natalyarostova 8y ago
>where it's in everyone's immediate individual interest to work just a little bit longer, but the end result is that everyone has to work more for the same reward If everyone is working more, more value is being created in total. So it's not zero-sum. You might then say "Yes, sure, but is working more hours to buy more things really better than a culture where we work less and spend more time eating dinner with our families?", which I would agree with, but is more of a cultural comment than an economic comment.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Perhaps the social taboo needs to be against the continual enrichment of the ownership class with that additional value being created by everyone working more?
- DanAndersen 8y ago
  Next aeon article: "Let's bring back 'thou shalt not covet' as an act against rampant capitalism"!
- frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
  >If everyone is working more, more value is being created in total. If (in a simple example) everyone works 40 hour weeks but then they start working 40hrs + 10hrs of gig work, if you remain just a 40hr worker you will fall behind not just them, but also where you were previously. A pie growing does not mean your piece grows, in fact situations where your piece is shrinking faster than the pie grows are the exact motivation that can lead to tragedy of the commons. I'd say this example is actually a perfect example of tragedy of the commons, to twist your comment a bit to fit the canonical example given in econ classes: If everyone is fishing more, more value is being created in total. So it's not zero-sum. You might then say "Yes, sure, but is fishing more really better than a culture where we fish less?", which I would agree with, but is more a cultural comment than an economic comment. I hope that illustrates why it actually is more of an economic comment than a cultural one. Economics is more than just the rhetoric of doing positive-sum things.
- lukeschlather 8y ago
  > If everyone is working more, more value is being created in total. That's often false. It's very easy to create negative value, and it becomes easier the less you rest. It's also hard to measure when additional work starts creating negative value, so you can easily end up in a downward spiral of productivity as people compete for not just illusory but counterproductive gains.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
rhapsodic 8y ago
> The article raises good points about the need for formal societal taboos against constant work. The ideal (often violated, though) in our modern society of the "40-hour week" as a reasonable amount is one of them. Having regular times for contemplation and separation from the bustle of the world is important. It may be important for you, Dan, but it's not important for me. Please, don't try to impose any more "formal societal taboos" on me. I've really had a bellyful of them. It seems like everyday there's a new one. There is nothing stopping you from choosing a path in life that allows you plenty of time for "contemplation and separation from the bustle of the world." So go ahead and choose your own path, and let me choose mine. Fair enough?
- bambataa 8y ago
  Cool, how can I afford to buy a house in an area of roughly my choice and not work horrible hours? Oh wait I can’t do both. And you’d probably say that’s my choice to forgo living in a nice house in a nice area. But of course, if houses cost 50% less and everyone worked 50% less I could afford the same house and work half as much, leaving more time to do what I want. Suddenly it seems like the decisions we make have an impact on other people. So how can you choose your path without impacting on my path, and vice versa?
  - rhapsodic 8y ago
    > Cool, how can I afford to buy a house in an area of roughly my choice and not work horrible hours? Oh wait I can’t do both. And you’d probably say that’s my choice to forgo living in a nice house in a nice area. Uh, no, I would say that I really, truly, seriously, do not care what you choose to do with the 24 hours in each of the days of your life. So please, don't try to tell me what I should or should not do with mine. I'm sick and tired of busybodies and crybabies who pine for new "societal taboos" for the rest of us to observe. The majority of people on HN are not like that, but a sizable portion are. And I'm more than happy to incur the inevitable downvotes to call them out on it.
    - bambataa 8y ago
sandworm101 8y ago
>> this practice where the conveniences of life are still indulged in by having an outsider labor for you. Exactly. My sunday starts at 0300, when I relieve someone who worked the graveyard shift from saturday. I'll sit at a desk in a darkened room all day just in case a phone rings. I'll probably be on HN commenting on some article, but I have to be at that desk. Cops have to be at work too. All the nurses and care providers, airline pilots and air traffic people, all the hotel operators ... the only reason anyone can safely stay home on a sunday is because legions of other people do not. I'm fine with the concept of a day off, but we shouldn't attach religious meaning to something not available to everyone.

emodendroket 8y ago

> I do wish, though, that the article fully grappled with the issue of the 'shabbos goy.' It praises the virtues of having everyone able to participate in a time of separation from work, but then there's this practice where the conveniences of life are still indulged in by having an outsider labor for you. I'd say the traditional Christian concept of the sabbath is looser and doesn't really require this kind of thing. In effect I'd say that it is an attitude more concerned with the spirit and less with the letter of the law (so, for instance, I don't think turning on the light is an issue, and putting money on the table for someone to take isn't actually adhering to the prohibition on commerce).

ido 8y ago
In effect I'd say that it is an attitude more concerned with the spirit and less with the letter of the law (so, for instance, I don't think turning on the light is an issue, and putting money on the table for someone to take isn't actually adhering to the prohibition on commerce). That's something that generally rubs me the wrong way about a lot of things with orthodox jewish practices (especially the ultra orthodox) - there is so much effort trying to find loopholes in the rules, instead of adhering to their spirit instead.
- abraham_lincoln 8y ago
  And yet, they are the only ones observing the Sabbath.
  - mikepurvis 8y ago
    But the whole point is that it depends on your approach. Jesus was very clearly in opposition to the religious elites of his day by choosing to walk, teach, and even perform physical healings on the Sabbath. The summation of the rationale for this is pretty clear: it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12%3A9-13 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12%3A9-...
    - neaden 8y ago
      Right. But Jesus wouldn't have wanted you to be driving for Uber on the Sabbath either.
      - mikepurvis 8y ago
        I think all I'm saying is that there's a middle ground where you go screen/internet free, and avoid things like housework, shopping, planning, and meal preparation in favour of spending time with family, but don't sweat things like non-religious reading, turning lights on and off, and walking to the park.
      - danjc 8y ago
        He says the Sabbath was created for man not man for the Sabbath. His reaction was to the legalism of the day.
        RobertRoberts 8y ago
        He didn't call it legalism, he called it everything from hypocrisy (heaping up burdens on people) to simply evil (neglecting elderly parent for the sake of ritual).
RobertRoberts 8y ago
I would argue that you can follow the letter of the law with the resting on the sabbath quite easily. There is almost no instructions on this topic. And to even clarify Jesus teachings on the sabbath, it's ok to even work on the sabbath under some circumstances (rescuing your ox). And this is the letter of the law. The Orthodox Jewish teachings are extra biblical and but re often confused as biblical. Not to different from how the Pope creates extra rules for Catholics.

natalyarostova 8y ago

>where it's in everyone's immediate individual interest to work just a little bit longer, but the end result is that everyone has to work more for the same reward If everyone is working more, more value is being created in total. So it's not zero-sum. You might then say "Yes, sure, but is working more hours to buy more things really better than a culture where we work less and spend more time eating dinner with our families?", which I would agree with, but is more of a cultural comment than an economic comment.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
Perhaps the social taboo needs to be against the continual enrichment of the ownership class with that additional value being created by everyone working more?
DanAndersen 8y ago
Next aeon article: "Let's bring back 'thou shalt not covet' as an act against rampant capitalism"!
frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
>If everyone is working more, more value is being created in total. If (in a simple example) everyone works 40 hour weeks but then they start working 40hrs + 10hrs of gig work, if you remain just a 40hr worker you will fall behind not just them, but also where you were previously. A pie growing does not mean your piece grows, in fact situations where your piece is shrinking faster than the pie grows are the exact motivation that can lead to tragedy of the commons. I'd say this example is actually a perfect example of tragedy of the commons, to twist your comment a bit to fit the canonical example given in econ classes: If everyone is fishing more, more value is being created in total. So it's not zero-sum. You might then say "Yes, sure, but is fishing more really better than a culture where we fish less?", which I would agree with, but is more a cultural comment than an economic comment. I hope that illustrates why it actually is more of an economic comment than a cultural one. Economics is more than just the rhetoric of doing positive-sum things.
lukeschlather 8y ago
> If everyone is working more, more value is being created in total. That's often false. It's very easy to create negative value, and it becomes easier the less you rest. It's also hard to measure when additional work starts creating negative value, so you can easily end up in a downward spiral of productivity as people compete for not just illusory but counterproductive gains.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

rhapsodic 8y ago

> The article raises good points about the need for formal societal taboos against constant work. The ideal (often violated, though) in our modern society of the "40-hour week" as a reasonable amount is one of them. Having regular times for contemplation and separation from the bustle of the world is important. It may be important for you, Dan, but it's not important for me. Please, don't try to impose any more "formal societal taboos" on me. I've really had a bellyful of them. It seems like everyday there's a new one. There is nothing stopping you from choosing a path in life that allows you plenty of time for "contemplation and separation from the bustle of the world." So go ahead and choose your own path, and let me choose mine. Fair enough?

bambataa 8y ago
Cool, how can I afford to buy a house in an area of roughly my choice and not work horrible hours? Oh wait I can’t do both. And you’d probably say that’s my choice to forgo living in a nice house in a nice area. But of course, if houses cost 50% less and everyone worked 50% less I could afford the same house and work half as much, leaving more time to do what I want. Suddenly it seems like the decisions we make have an impact on other people. So how can you choose your path without impacting on my path, and vice versa?
- rhapsodic 8y ago
  > Cool, how can I afford to buy a house in an area of roughly my choice and not work horrible hours? Oh wait I can’t do both. And you’d probably say that’s my choice to forgo living in a nice house in a nice area. Uh, no, I would say that I really, truly, seriously, do not care what you choose to do with the 24 hours in each of the days of your life. So please, don't try to tell me what I should or should not do with mine. I'm sick and tired of busybodies and crybabies who pine for new "societal taboos" for the rest of us to observe. The majority of people on HN are not like that, but a sizable portion are. And I'm more than happy to incur the inevitable downvotes to call them out on it.
  - bambataa 8y ago

sandworm101 8y ago

>> this practice where the conveniences of life are still indulged in by having an outsider labor for you. Exactly. My sunday starts at 0300, when I relieve someone who worked the graveyard shift from saturday. I'll sit at a desk in a darkened room all day just in case a phone rings. I'll probably be on HN commenting on some article, but I have to be at that desk. Cops have to be at work too. All the nurses and care providers, airline pilots and air traffic people, all the hotel operators ... the only reason anyone can safely stay home on a sunday is because legions of other people do not. I'm fine with the concept of a day off, but we shouldn't attach religious meaning to something not available to everyone.