10 ms·

I haven't been this exhausted ever. Being productive at work and handling my children's needs throughout the day is unbelievably taxing, leading to Friday night

I haven't been this exhausted ever. Being productive at work and handling my children's needs throughout the day is unbelievably taxing, leading to Friday nights where I fall asleep with them ~730 and end up sleeping 12 hours. I hope this leads to realization of how important work/life balance is here in the States. This Protestant work ethic simply isn't necessary with today's productivity.

gabaix 6y ago
I am moving to my parents’ city for this exact reason. My wife and I are full time professionals, and we are failing at educating our children.
- ryneandal 6y ago
  Thankfully we live in the same city my parents live in, and they're retired. They've been an absolute godsend.
shadowgovt 6y ago
The (traditional) Protestant work ethic also assumed a Protestant community centered around a church as cultural / societal hub. Not even the PWE suggested people go all out all the time without community support.
- Consultant32452 6y ago
  Traditionally raising children was a multi-generational effort with grandparents often living under the same roof. Not to mention women were less likely to work outside the home back then. Modern society is highly efficient, but also highly susceptible to disruption. It'll be interesting to see how we figure out how to adapt.
  - bobthepanda 6y ago
    Elizabeth Warren actually has a book on this very topic: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/23/18183091/two-income-trap-elizabeth-warren-book https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/23/18183091/t... >>> The “two-income trap,” described The “two-income trap,” as described by Warren, really consists of three partially separate phenomena that have arisen as families have come to rely on two working adults to make ends meet: The addition of a second earner means, in practice, a big increase in household fixed expenses for things like child care and commuting. Much of the money that American second earners bring in has been gobbled up, in practice, by zero-sum competition for educational opportunities expressed as either skyrocketed prices for houses in good school districts or escalating tuition at public universities. Last, while the addition of the second earner has not brought in much gain, it has created an increase in downside risk by eliminating an implicit insurance policy that families used to rely on. This last point is really the key to Warren’s specific argument about bankruptcy, though it’s the first two that would drive her larger interest in politics. Bad things have always happened to families from time to time. In a traditional two-parent, one-earner family, there was always the possibility that mom could step up and help out when trouble arose. “If her husband was laid off, fired, or otherwise left without a paycheck,” Warren and Tyagi write, “the stay-at-home mother didn’t simply stand helplessly on the sidelines as her family toppled off an economic cliff; she looked for a job to make up some of that lost income.” Similarly, if a family member got sick, mom was available as an unpaid caregiver. “A stay-at-home mother served as the family’s ultimate insurance against unemployment or disability — insurance that had a very real economic value even when it wasn’t drawn on.” A modern family where mom is already working has no “give” and is much more likely to be pushed into bankruptcy by job loss or family illness unless it builds up a big financial cushion.
    - jjeaff 6y ago
      To elaborate on the "no benefit" for the families, and Warren probably talks about this, but there is benefit for corporations. They get nearly double the supply of workers which drives down wages and gives them more productivity per dollar spent. So in effect, a wealth transfer to equity holders.
      - 6y ago
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    Traditionally being when? The US was settled by people leaving those old generations behind and moving west (be it from somewhere in Europe to the US or from somewhere in the US to somewhere less populated in the US) with their spouse and maybe young kids. You always had stay at home moms, because home was usually mom's workplace, often dad's too. Multi-generational households in the US existed as the exception when early settlers brought their entire communities over or when first generation Americans moved West with their immigrant parents. Having multi-generational households was never the norm.
    - sukilot 6y ago
      "early settlers" is a tiny slice of history.
    - shard 6y ago
      Tradition being up to the present, actually, in large parts of the world. (Repeating a comment to another article:) I suspect that people living with family until 20s/30s is likely to be much more common than people here expect, and that not doing so is an anomaly of the current age occurring in only certain cultures, with a possible return to norm in the future.
      - pc86 6y ago
        If you're discussing "protestant work ethic"-based communities, and "multigenerational housing"-based communities, they are generally mutually exclusive.
        shard 6y ago
        I suppose it depends on whether by "Protestant work ethic", you are referring to people who are actually in the Protestant/Calvinist faith, or if you are using it as a euphemism for general workaholism, as there are many non-Protestant communities which espouse hard work and frugality as main tenets to follow in life, which do have a higher rate of multigenerational-housing-based communities. Also, it would be interesting to explore exactly how and why "protestant work ethic"-based communities and "multigenerational housing"-based communities became generally mutually exclusive, whether there is causation, or just a happenstance correlation.
  - zeveb 6y ago
    > Modern society is highly efficient, but also highly susceptible to disruption. That's something my wife & I have been discussing recently. She pointed out that traditional family structures have more slack built into them, which comes in handy in times of trouble. The problem is that in the modern Taylorist world we treat slack as waste. But it really isn't, any more than insurance is waste.
burlesona 6y ago
The “Protestant Work Ethic” was built around the notion of a two-parent household with the parents specialized such that one works outside the home while one works inside the home. It also assumes a significant social safety net in the form of family and close community support via churches, schools, etc. I understand the gist of what you mean, but I think you’re really pointing at the idea of the “nuclear family,” and the “two-income household,” both of which are post-war ideas. Specifically, Elizabeth Warren wrote an entire book about this “Two Income Trap,” how much more fragile it makes families, and why we should be working to get back to one-income being a reasonable option so that more people could choose it when their circumstances demanded it.
- throwaway45349 6y ago
  The problem with going back to one income is cultural. Men want to be the breadwinner, so it's going to end up forcing women out of the workforce and back into the home. There's no way to have one income viable again without halving the supply of people in the workforce.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    > Men want to be the breadwinner And there's the problem. I'd be totally comfortable if my future wife ended up being the financial supporter of the family. There's technical things I'd like to invest time and mental resources in that wouldn't necessarily make money, but would be fulfilling, and housework is already something I do a lot of and wouldn't mind being more responsible for if I wasn't spending 40+ at the office. I can't imagine dumping my career whilst I'm the higher earner, but if she ends up making more than me (kinda likely actually, given some time), it might be the most sensible solution. Marriage should be a team activity where either partner is willing to take on whatever role is best for the family.
    - throwaway45349 6y ago
      Both men and women usually prefer men to be the breadwinner though - this isn't just cultural - it has biological roots. Breaking away from that on a mass societal-wide scale will not be easy. Thankfully humans are one of the few animals who override their instincts so it's not impossible.
stormdennis 6y ago
Protestant work ethic. I used to believe in this but the hardest working people I spent time working with were actually Catholic.
platetone 6y ago
I'm still uncertain how I'm supposed to lead twins through online Kindergarten and write software all day. They can't even fucking use scissors without my help.
- jjeaff 6y ago
  As someone with a young one at home and that works from home, you cannot without help. My advice is to not over-tax yourself trying to do two things at once. It is very tiring both mentally and physically to switch back and forth too frequently. Focus on your kids when they need your focus and reserve your strength for planned time that you can actually focus on work. Like during nap time or after bedtime.

gabaix 6y ago

I am moving to my parents’ city for this exact reason. My wife and I are full time professionals, and we are failing at educating our children.

ryneandal 6y ago
Thankfully we live in the same city my parents live in, and they're retired. They've been an absolute godsend.

shadowgovt 6y ago

The (traditional) Protestant work ethic also assumed a Protestant community centered around a church as cultural / societal hub. Not even the PWE suggested people go all out all the time without community support.

Consultant32452 6y ago
Traditionally raising children was a multi-generational effort with grandparents often living under the same roof. Not to mention women were less likely to work outside the home back then. Modern society is highly efficient, but also highly susceptible to disruption. It'll be interesting to see how we figure out how to adapt.
- bobthepanda 6y ago
  Elizabeth Warren actually has a book on this very topic: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/23/18183091/two-income-trap-elizabeth-warren-book https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/23/18183091/t... >>> The “two-income trap,” described The “two-income trap,” as described by Warren, really consists of three partially separate phenomena that have arisen as families have come to rely on two working adults to make ends meet: The addition of a second earner means, in practice, a big increase in household fixed expenses for things like child care and commuting. Much of the money that American second earners bring in has been gobbled up, in practice, by zero-sum competition for educational opportunities expressed as either skyrocketed prices for houses in good school districts or escalating tuition at public universities. Last, while the addition of the second earner has not brought in much gain, it has created an increase in downside risk by eliminating an implicit insurance policy that families used to rely on. This last point is really the key to Warren’s specific argument about bankruptcy, though it’s the first two that would drive her larger interest in politics. Bad things have always happened to families from time to time. In a traditional two-parent, one-earner family, there was always the possibility that mom could step up and help out when trouble arose. “If her husband was laid off, fired, or otherwise left without a paycheck,” Warren and Tyagi write, “the stay-at-home mother didn’t simply stand helplessly on the sidelines as her family toppled off an economic cliff; she looked for a job to make up some of that lost income.” Similarly, if a family member got sick, mom was available as an unpaid caregiver. “A stay-at-home mother served as the family’s ultimate insurance against unemployment or disability — insurance that had a very real economic value even when it wasn’t drawn on.” A modern family where mom is already working has no “give” and is much more likely to be pushed into bankruptcy by job loss or family illness unless it builds up a big financial cushion.
  - jjeaff 6y ago
    To elaborate on the "no benefit" for the families, and Warren probably talks about this, but there is benefit for corporations. They get nearly double the supply of workers which drives down wages and gives them more productivity per dollar spent. So in effect, a wealth transfer to equity holders.
    - 6y ago
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Traditionally being when? The US was settled by people leaving those old generations behind and moving west (be it from somewhere in Europe to the US or from somewhere in the US to somewhere less populated in the US) with their spouse and maybe young kids. You always had stay at home moms, because home was usually mom's workplace, often dad's too. Multi-generational households in the US existed as the exception when early settlers brought their entire communities over or when first generation Americans moved West with their immigrant parents. Having multi-generational households was never the norm.
  - sukilot 6y ago
    "early settlers" is a tiny slice of history.
  - shard 6y ago
    Tradition being up to the present, actually, in large parts of the world. (Repeating a comment to another article:) I suspect that people living with family until 20s/30s is likely to be much more common than people here expect, and that not doing so is an anomaly of the current age occurring in only certain cultures, with a possible return to norm in the future.
    - pc86 6y ago
      If you're discussing "protestant work ethic"-based communities, and "multigenerational housing"-based communities, they are generally mutually exclusive.
      - shard 6y ago
        I suppose it depends on whether by "Protestant work ethic", you are referring to people who are actually in the Protestant/Calvinist faith, or if you are using it as a euphemism for general workaholism, as there are many non-Protestant communities which espouse hard work and frugality as main tenets to follow in life, which do have a higher rate of multigenerational-housing-based communities. Also, it would be interesting to explore exactly how and why "protestant work ethic"-based communities and "multigenerational housing"-based communities became generally mutually exclusive, whether there is causation, or just a happenstance correlation.
- zeveb 6y ago
  > Modern society is highly efficient, but also highly susceptible to disruption. That's something my wife & I have been discussing recently. She pointed out that traditional family structures have more slack built into them, which comes in handy in times of trouble. The problem is that in the modern Taylorist world we treat slack as waste. But it really isn't, any more than insurance is waste.

burlesona 6y ago

The “Protestant Work Ethic” was built around the notion of a two-parent household with the parents specialized such that one works outside the home while one works inside the home. It also assumes a significant social safety net in the form of family and close community support via churches, schools, etc. I understand the gist of what you mean, but I think you’re really pointing at the idea of the “nuclear family,” and the “two-income household,” both of which are post-war ideas. Specifically, Elizabeth Warren wrote an entire book about this “Two Income Trap,” how much more fragile it makes families, and why we should be working to get back to one-income being a reasonable option so that more people could choose it when their circumstances demanded it.

throwaway45349 6y ago
The problem with going back to one income is cultural. Men want to be the breadwinner, so it's going to end up forcing women out of the workforce and back into the home. There's no way to have one income viable again without halving the supply of people in the workforce.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  > Men want to be the breadwinner And there's the problem. I'd be totally comfortable if my future wife ended up being the financial supporter of the family. There's technical things I'd like to invest time and mental resources in that wouldn't necessarily make money, but would be fulfilling, and housework is already something I do a lot of and wouldn't mind being more responsible for if I wasn't spending 40+ at the office. I can't imagine dumping my career whilst I'm the higher earner, but if she ends up making more than me (kinda likely actually, given some time), it might be the most sensible solution. Marriage should be a team activity where either partner is willing to take on whatever role is best for the family.
  - throwaway45349 6y ago
    Both men and women usually prefer men to be the breadwinner though - this isn't just cultural - it has biological roots. Breaking away from that on a mass societal-wide scale will not be easy. Thankfully humans are one of the few animals who override their instincts so it's not impossible.

stormdennis 6y ago

Protestant work ethic. I used to believe in this but the hardest working people I spent time working with were actually Catholic.

platetone 6y ago

I'm still uncertain how I'm supposed to lead twins through online Kindergarten and write software all day. They can't even fucking use scissors without my help.

jjeaff 6y ago
As someone with a young one at home and that works from home, you cannot without help. My advice is to not over-tax yourself trying to do two things at once. It is very tiring both mentally and physically to switch back and forth too frequently. Focus on your kids when they need your focus and reserve your strength for planned time that you can actually focus on work. Like during nap time or after bedtime.