10 ms·

I'm kind of suspicious whenever I hear the phrase "work/life balance". It strikes me as something that seeks to reinforce the industrial-revolution-era idea th

by ken 15y ago

I'm kind of suspicious whenever I hear the phrase "work/life balance". It strikes me as something that seeks to reinforce the industrial-revolution-era idea that my (week)days should be broken into thirds: working (not fun but pays bills), playing (fun but costs money), and sleeping. Sure, that's definitely better than working 12 hour days, but is that really the goal? It seems that most of the fun-loving and happy people I know, regardless of their financial situation, don't operate in such a world. A good friend and startup founder (who you might think would tend towards free-market/libertarianism, since he works very hard and surely wants to be compensated for it) asks me: we can feed and clothe and house everyone, so why don't we? Why isn't work optional? People who work hard to make a dent in the universe will anyway, and people who just mess around don't really get much done at work anyway, so why keep up the charade? How many great ideas (or works of art) are stuck in somebody's brain simply because they don't know how to make that idea pay the rent? I'm a programmer -- or at least, of all the things I've done in my life, that's the one I've been paid the most money for. But personally, I hate that it's always indoors and sedentary. It's unfortunate that society places so much value on an activity that is arguably bad for my physical and mental health. So why are virtually all programming jobs (ostensibly) full-time, i.e., 40 hours? A programmer's salary is great, but why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? Out of all the possible ways of dividing up my time, spending all daylight hours indoors writing code is perhaps the worst I can imagine. I know I don't have all the answers, but I think that after a decade of work, I'm starting to know what questions to ask. If I find myself asking about "work/life balance", I've already lost, because it means I'm admitting that the "work" is something I know I won't love doing. Certainly some people have no problem breaking their day up like this, but I can't, and I suspect I'm not alone.

Arelius 15y ago
The problem is that there does still exist a whole lot of jobs that require people to do them that are not easy to motivate people to do. Some of these jobs are required so that we can house, clothe, and feed them. If nobody actually had to work, would we really have enough people building homes, farming food, and making, and distributing food such that we could continue to feed, clothe and house everbody? I don't know what the answer is, but you must admit that there is a serious possibility that the answer is No. I agree everybody should have the right to food, clothes, and shelter, but I'm not sure that the approach of giving it to everybody for free will actually be sustainable, at least not without some additional thought into the infrastructure.
- timwiseman 15y ago
  The basic idea being discussed is very close to a "Guarunteed Minimum Income" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income ). Essentially, everyone regardless of work is supplied with a certain minimum, but with enough work they can earn far more than that minimum. I do not believe it has ever been fully tried in practice (though a strong social safety net comes somewhat close in a piecemeal fashion). But there is no reason in principle it cannot work and some respected thinkers such as Thomas Paine have advocated it. There would be enough people motivated by a combination of the love of the job and the desire to earn more than the low-guarunteed minimum to ensure necessary societal functioned. It may have some undesirable side effects, but in principle it could be made to work. Edit: Slight edit for clarity.
  - omegant 15y ago
    Well we enjoy the effects of the "social" engine of grouth in Spain now a days(among the other problems as a construction bubble, etc..) Basically you have people trying all sort of tricks to recieve a salary from the government just because they deserve it. That way they don't have to work anymore. People tend to look at this as a right and the ones who go and earn their money with their effort are regarded as "dumb", after all it makes no sense to work if you don't need to. Maybe this is a cultural thing, but I find dangerouse to reinforce people in receiving money with out contributing with their job.
    - uncr3ative 15y ago
      I don't know if people should receive actual money, but it makes sense to me that they receive access to safe housing, food, healthcare and education. I don't think this can work in poorer societies, but in ones which can afford it, well, it seems most humane. If you aren't working, and can, well you won't be able to brag to your friends about having the latest ipad, but you should still have a place to sleep and food to eat. I think most people don't like sitting idly by all day long and since a lot of fun things cost money, they'd be willing to sacrifice some of their time to be able to afford those other things. I have been to Norway a few times and I liked the way they managed to balance things out there. Also, I recently watched this TED talk: http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html How economic inequality harms societies and I thought it was interesting.
fusiongyro 15y ago
> why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? I have often wondered about this myself. I think I could be equally productive as a programmer on 20 hours a week, since I spend a lot of time on the web and generally doing things that we programmers do when we need to give our minds a break. I really don't think anybody can actually do 40 hours of programming a week. I'm going to lazily posit the law has something to do with it. I had my own business for a while, but never really made enough money at it (I'm a lousy entrepreneur). Even if I weren't making more money for about the same time investment, I might have fled from business ownership simply because I didn't like having nightmares that I did the taxes wrong—and I never had an employee. It's probably as hard and as expensive tax-wise to hire someone for 20 hours a week as 40 and probably a lot harder for more than 40. Another possibility is that it's just what happens in our society. These answers don't feel all that satisfying to me.
- runawaybottle 15y ago
  You have no idea how much time I spend fake-working in the office. If I have to build something new, it usually gets done within a certain time range (that could be over the course of a day, several days, and I often dabble with it at home. Once it's done, it's done. I have to fake-work for the rest of the week. Now, I guess I could manage my work habits so that project takes the span of a week (not working late, not taking work home), but I haven't been able to figure out how to do that. If anyone passes by my desk on fake-work days, I look like a real slacker asshole.
  - fusiongyro 15y ago
    See, fortunately for me we use Java at work, and these day long excursions turn into 40 hour weeks. ;)
    - nnythm 15y ago
      Interesting. My experience with Java is that the only thing that gets in the way of programming in Java is the verbosity, which an IDE with powerful refactoring tools (eclipse, IDEA, eclim) gets around nicely. I would argue that in many ways, Java is easier to program in than a lot of other currently hot languages because there is so much tooling around it (although I would trade basically any python package manager for ivy any day), it is statically typed, and its behavior is generally boring but extremely predictable, and not hard to reason about, excluding the threading library which is not super fun. What have you found is frustrating about using Java?
jedberg 15y ago
> A programmer's salary is great, but why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? You can. You need to become a contractor and only accept 20 hours of work a week. I know that the guy that teaches yoga and step at my gym is a programmer as his "day job". That's one way to stay healthy.
Poiesis 15y ago
> why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? Health insurance.
- thejteam 15y ago
  This is a standard answer that everybody gives, but for the most part it just isn't true. People hear the occasional horror stories and assume it is difficult for everybody without trying to source it themselves. I am leaving my current job at the end of the month and will be freelancing/starting my own business. I bought health insurance with no problems. I was approved in less than 2 weeks. I am married and have 3 small children and pay a little less than 300 a month.
  - codenerdz 15y ago
    You are fortunate not to have any pre-existing conditions in your family and i wish you not to ever have any. If you were to develop a serious condition while on individual or or a small business(<10 people) group plan, you will eventually be priced out of your insurance by your carrier raising your rates. This risk is generally spread out over large group such as a big company with several thousands of employers such as Google and thus their medical costs are same regardless of your medical history. Furthermore once you or your family member develops a "preexisting medical conditions", you may not be approved next time you decide to to from corporate plan to individual. My wife was denied by one carrier for having chronic migraine for which she was taking prescription drugs and not seeing a doctor more than once a year. With a current state of healthcare/insurance, I will only be able to leave my current employer and start a startup for as long as COBRA and CAL-COBRA allows. After that I will be forced to either join a larger company or have my family be without healthcare if a carrier decided to deny us coverage for preexisting conditions.
    - dj_axl 15y ago
      > You are fortunate not to have any pre-existing conditions THIS. Although in many states there is a high risk pool that you can sign up for, when insurers deny you. I know someone who's done this in California and while there was a 6-9 month waiting list, and the coverage wasn't great, it was much much better than no coverage at all. States with high risk pools: http://www.naschip.org/states_pools.htm http://www.naschip.org/states_pools.htm
vacri 15y ago
People who work hard to make a dent in the universe will anyway, and people who just mess around don't really get much done at work anyway, so why keep up the charade? This is typical libertarian claptrap, from the Skilled White Male litany. The only thing of value appears to be making a dent with your special skills, and no consideration is given to the huge numbers of unskilled jobs required to keep 'the universe' running. The point is that society supports far more shitty retail jobs than universe-denting programming jobs. Those shitty jobs need to be done, and it's hard to excel in them. What kind of dent can a convenience store clerk make? They're still necessary though - and for people in those jobs, work is not particularly fun. In terms of your hand-wringing about full-time programming work, there are all sorts of ways you can work part-time in programming and part-time in something else. That you can't see this shows you haven't really thought about the problem seriously. Hell, if you really are a 'denter' and have skills that are in demand, you have a good chance of simply going up to your boss and saying that you only want to work part-time now. Frequently they'll still want to keep you on for your dentable skills.
- tsotha 15y ago
  >This is typical libertarian claptrap, from the Skilled White Male litany. No it isn't. That's straight-up Socialism. The phrase who you might think would tend towards free-market/libertarianism doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
  - vacri 15y ago
    The idea that people who make dents are the only ones that work hard, and people who don't make dents don't want to work/don't work hard is part of the worldview of libertarians.
    - learc83 15y ago
      No libertarian is going to suggest that the guy out laying asphalt isn't working hard. You seem to have confused libertarians with some sort of ultra-elitists, whom I don't think exist in any significant number. Only a very small fraction of mankind is actually making a dent in the world. Are you saying that libertarians believe that only 0.01% of people are actually working hard?
SandersAK 15y ago
You actually can do all of the things you want to do. The only thing that is stopping you is the risk / uncertainty of changing your situation. One thing I've come to believe is that there is never enough time for anything. And so you have to make time. If you're serious about adjusting your life to fit more outdoor or social interactions, there are part-time jobs and activities that can fulfill that. And there are plenty of contract jobs to fill up 20hrs a week, probably even several part-time contracts.
lwat 15y ago
> ...why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter... Here's one reason: you'll accumulate experience at half the pace of those programming 40 hours a week, which means you'll probably lag behind others in terms of usefulness and salary.
- femto 15y ago
  But you'd be awesome at writing code for agricultural applications! My point is that there is value in acting as a conduit for knowledge between disciplines. In fact, most "breakthroughs" consist of someone porting an existing technique from one discipline to another.
BrainInAJar 15y ago
> why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? I would gladly give up 20% of my salary to take Fridays off entirely.
- ja2ke 15y ago
  Same. I think about that too often.
  - kevinsd 15y ago
    don't forget you cost your company more than your salary and compensation.
    - ja2ke 15y ago
      True. I'd also not be drinking water, using a parking space, or any of the other office facilities, and if I shut down my PC I'd be using less electricity. I'd of course still be receiving benefits and taking up space on the mail server, and my desk would sit there unused.
- splicer 15y ago
  I'd prefer taking Wednesdays off. I'd probably end up working from home anyway, but at least I wouldn't have to wear pants: http://dailytannenbaum.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/times-im-wearing-pants.jpg?w=570 http://dailytannenbaum.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/times-im-...
InclinedPlane 15y ago
All of the labor laws have been set up around the model of people with life-long careers working at a factory (or equivalent). That is no longer the norm, and the impedance mismatch between outdated laws and the modern workplace has become greater and greater. Why is 40 hours the norm? Why is working a single job all the time the norm? Why are all of your health insurance and retirement options tied to your current employer? In every case it's due to an accident of history.
- kijin 15y ago
  > Why are all of your health insurance and retirement options tied to your current employer? In every case it's due to an accident of history. I won't deny that it's an accident of history, but I'm not sure if it's related to the same accident of history that made single full-time jobs the norm. After all, most other countries where single full-time jobs are the norm don't have that particular problem.
  - InclinedPlane 15y ago
    It's certainly related. At many points in the history of US labor people have sought for the appropriate "resting point" for various responsibilities (such as pensions and retirement investments) and often they've come to the employer, because through a certain viewport during a certain period of time it seemed like a sensible solution.
- adrianhoward 15y ago
  Why are all of your health insurance and retirement options tied to your current employer? In every case it's due to an accident of history. Indeed. If you look outside the US you'll find many countries that aren't set up that way. It's going to be interesting to see how that effects the way jobs evolve in the future. Mine aren't in the UK for example - and I imagine that if they had it would have had quite an impact on the risk/benefit of some of my work decisions over the years.
minikomi 15y ago
I'm currently working 3 days a week as a programmer, 3 days a week as an English teacher here in Tokyo. Balance is really important to me.
- wahnfrieden 15y ago
  Doing contract work?
  - minikomi 15y ago
    No, part time in a company who needed English speakers on short notice. Not great pay but interesting (in its own way).
    - nandemo 15y ago
      Interesting. I'm also in Tokyo. How can I contact you? Or, can you send me an email?
      - minikomi 15y ago
        My name at gmail or same name on twitter
jonmrodriguez 15y ago
> I hate that it's always indoors and sedentary. It's unfortunate that society places so much value on an activity that is arguably bad for my physical and mental health. You should invent a computer specifically designed to allow you to work outdoors, including while walking. I'm on that same mission for the same reasons. http://bit.ly/vergence-singularity http://bit.ly/vergence-singularity
drags 15y ago
> A programmer's salary is great, but why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? My company does this. Work half-time, get paid 50% of full-time programmer's salary + health insurance. My anecdotal impression is that "productivity" is much higher than 50% of a full-time person, but everyone feels less busy, less stressed and more relaxed. Ends up being a great deal for both employer and employee I think. Anyway, if you're a Rails dev in the Bay Area drop me a line, we're hiring.
- cgag 15y ago
  I just recently commented about this in another thread (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3841211 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3841211), It makes me really happy to see a company that's doing this. Unfortunately I've just begun learning rails, and am not in the bay area (yet!).
- sage_joch 15y ago
  Anecdotally, I seem to get at least as much work done during a two-week sprint in which I have taken a few days off. Programming is not a linear process. On the other hand, there is something to be said for being immediately available to handle issues that arise during work hours, I suppose.
infectoid 15y ago
"I'm a programmer -- or at least, of all the things I've done in my life, that's the one I've been paid the most money for." Nice. Pretty much how I see myself. Also, FYI. After many years in the industry I realised I was stagnating so I decided that something needed to change. After a lot of thinking I managed to negotiate a 4 day week with my employer. I wanted an extra day to work on other projects and to learn new things. Eventually I signed up for Uni and am now working on a masters part time. I'm thinking about pushing for a 3 day week next semester. Just remember that anyone can do this. If you are a good worker most employers will do what they can to keep you around. More often than not, you can do in 4 days what 2 juniors can just manage in 5 (you may not realise this, I didn't).
1123581321 15y ago
Why do you think the proportions of "try" and "don't try" are fixed? Evidence suggests environment and culture affect how hard-working and curious are a group of people. There's no evidence that unlimited unemployment for as many as want it is financially possible or good for anyone's physical or mental health. You want nobody to go hungry or homeless; this is noble but it can't be solved by only having programmers, stock traders and artists go to work.
Kliment 15y ago
Well here's an idea. Imagine a company where you get hired with a probation period, and if you manage to automate a significant aspect of your job during that period, you get to keep it. That is, if you make yourself obsolete, you get to keep the pay. If you then do the same for another task, you get to keep the pay for the higher-paying of the two AND you get to give the lower-paying one to a person of your choice. This gives you both incentive to take crappy, menial jobs as a technology expert (a robot could do that crap - no human should be so punished) and the most valuable thing of all - free time without worrying about income. And if you like automating human-degrading jobs, you can move up while giving people you care about the same thing. Just an idea I'm throwing out there, it's my best answer so far for how to deal with the problem.
- creamyhorror 15y ago
  Interesting idea, but what happens to the older or less-educated workers who could have handled jobs similar to those? You might eliminate the need for drudgery, but you'd need a way to bring lower-end workers up to the levels needed for jobs that were previously 'beyond' them, and place them in those jobs. It's the eternal problem of Luddism (aka technology is taking away our jobs and we aren't getting better ones).
  - Kliment 15y ago
    Well, they can be gifted an income source from one of the more proficient ones and that gives them a chance to develop themselves with all the newfound free time.
patio11 15y ago
Become a consultant. You get wide freedom in how you spend nonbillable hours. There exist many people working 1,000 hours a year or less. We all know this. At some point we started believing they must not be successful members of the professional class. That is observably false.
- batista 15y ago
  >There exist many people working 1,000 hours a year or less. Heck, there are people out there that haven't worked a day in their lives... (drum roll) ...night watchmen.
- danssig 15y ago
  If only it were that easy. :)
eik3_de 15y ago
> Why isn't work optional? This is what the German Pirate Party has in it's manifesto: 11 Right to secure livelihood and social participation Each person has the right to a secure livelihood and social participation. Respecting and protecting human dignity is the highest commandment of the German Basic Law. People can only live in dignity if their basic needs are met and their social participation is assured. In our monetary economy, this requires an income. If an income can only be achieved through work, we must assure full employment to protect all people’s dignity. This is why full employment has been a major goal of our economic policy in the past. There are two paths by which we try to achieve this goal: Through economic measures which aim to create jobs or through publicly financed jobs with the main goal of securing people’s livelihood. These are both detours which require substantial public funding. If public funds are used, however, this must be done as efficiently as possible. Since the goal is to secure an income and a livelihood for everyone, this income should be guaranteed directly to each individual. Only this way can we protect the dignity of all people without exception. Just as we provide public security, traffic routes and large parts of the educational system without a direct compensation, a secure livelihood must also become a part of our infrastructure. We Pirates are convinced that the overwhelming majority of people will seize the chances provided by a secure livelihood to develop their full economic and social potential. A secure livelihood creates room for self-determined education, research and economic innovation. It enables volunteerism, e.g., taking care of relatives and children, independent journalism, political activity or creation of art and free software. This benefits our entire society. This is why the Pirate Party supports solutions which guarantee unconditionally a secure livelihood and social participation while sustaining and enabling economic freedom. We want to prevent poverty, not prosperity. (from http://www.piratenpartei.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/parteiprogramm-englisch.pdf http://www.piratenpartei.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/parte...)
nodata 15y ago
Because once you remove people's payment for something, you remove their right to make decisions about the things they would have previously bought.
forgottenpaswrd 15y ago
"It's unfortunate that society places so much value on an activity that is arguably bad for my physical and mental health. " IT IS NOT, I work as a programmer(I 'm engineer) too. You are the person responsible to be healthy, you don't have to work sitting down. You can(You should) go out every single day and exercise. Do not blame your job,your girlfriend or your wife, your parents or society. It is your responsibility. Don't feel that I'm trying to criticism you. On the contrary I'm taking the time to write(the only time I use for reading news I won't read today) this because I want to help you. I don't know you but I would have loved someone telling me in the past. I could not believe the change I experienced when I started doing it myself. Believe me, there is scientific reasons for that. I read a lot of scientific papers and entire books explaining the reasons. Your veins get bigger, your brain gets more oxygen, your cells get more food and evacuate waste much much better(read about the lymph system), your sugar is used and not converted into fat, your insulin gets lower level(you feel less anxious)... there are entire books about the details, but long story short, your life improves and you feel better, you work much better. When you work sitting down, your body remains in a passive state, it has to do with blood pressure that change a lot when you stand up(proportional to height from your toes). The body "reacts" to standing up as it is a signal to activate for daily activity. We are made for moving a little every day, but no so much. You only need moderate exercise every single day. You will be much more energetic, more capable, optimist, people will love to be with you... you will work without counting the time because it feels great. It is not a single step, it takes years of continuous improvement, but it is worth it. You need to experience it yourself to believe or actually seeing other people much better than you(that is the way I changed, when I stopped being in denial seeing other people do much better than me). What you should not do is blaming others or other things(your job) for not being healthy. About doing 20 hours as programmer, 20 hours as a designer or teacher... well YOU CAN. Who is putting the gun in your head telling you what to do or not?. You are a grown up person, Aren't you?(maybe you are a teenager that started programming at 6, I don't know) It doesn't matter, you can do real(not reading HN or facebook) 40 hours of programming a week(I do) once you know how to manage yourself. Read "the power of full engagement" just for starting to get it. It will take a while for you to break bad habits from years of bad training. Another invaluable audiobook:" The Now habit" but the first step is stop being in denial of where you are first. I expect a lot of people to downgrade this post because there is a lot of population in HN that do it wrong, that martyrise theirselves into work because they don't know how to do it better.
batista 15y ago
>I'm kind of suspicious whenever I hear the phrase "work/life balance". It strikes me as something that seeks to reinforce the industrial-revolution-era idea that my (week)days should be broken into thirds: working (not fun but pays bills), playing (fun but costs money), and sleeping. Sure, that's definitely better than working 12 hour days, but is that really the goal? It seems that most of the fun-loving and happy people I know, regardless of their financial situation, don't operate in such a world. Maybe. But isn't it also obvious that not all jobs are the kind of jobs required for the above to be true (people, generally, do not "love" flipping burgers, for example), and that, actually, jobs you "love" are in the minority (and we absolutely need the majority jobs too). There's nothing wrong in your job NOT being your "passion" --and that is not constrained to burger flipping but also to IT and every kind of environment. If we only insisted on people working on their "passion" we wouldn't have things like technical documentation (unless many people exist that like to devote their life to writing 500 pages of SGML for other people's programs).
gaius 15y ago
we can feed and clothe and house everyone, so why don't we? There are already communities where everyone has the absolute right to food, shelter, healthcare and education. Those who live there could, if they wished, devote themselves full-time to self-improvement and community work. In reality, they're called "sink estates".
JonWood 15y ago
> A programmer's salary is great, but why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? You can. You just have to learn to negotiate. I currently work 4 days a week, with the other day being split between helping with a youth club, and Open Source hacking, and throwing a mountain bike down hills. I had to spend more time looking when I last changed jobs, but that also ended up with me in a job that I love for other reasons as well.
rmc 15y ago
why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer There is a shortage of programmers out there. Start negotiating with your employer or get a new job. Make that a condition.

by ken 15y ago

Arelius 15y ago

The problem is that there does still exist a whole lot of jobs that require people to do them that are not easy to motivate people to do. Some of these jobs are required so that we can house, clothe, and feed them. If nobody actually had to work, would we really have enough people building homes, farming food, and making, and distributing food such that we could continue to feed, clothe and house everbody? I don't know what the answer is, but you must admit that there is a serious possibility that the answer is No. I agree everybody should have the right to food, clothes, and shelter, but I'm not sure that the approach of giving it to everybody for free will actually be sustainable, at least not without some additional thought into the infrastructure.

timwiseman 15y ago
The basic idea being discussed is very close to a "Guarunteed Minimum Income" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income ). Essentially, everyone regardless of work is supplied with a certain minimum, but with enough work they can earn far more than that minimum. I do not believe it has ever been fully tried in practice (though a strong social safety net comes somewhat close in a piecemeal fashion). But there is no reason in principle it cannot work and some respected thinkers such as Thomas Paine have advocated it. There would be enough people motivated by a combination of the love of the job and the desire to earn more than the low-guarunteed minimum to ensure necessary societal functioned. It may have some undesirable side effects, but in principle it could be made to work. Edit: Slight edit for clarity.
- omegant 15y ago
  Well we enjoy the effects of the "social" engine of grouth in Spain now a days(among the other problems as a construction bubble, etc..) Basically you have people trying all sort of tricks to recieve a salary from the government just because they deserve it. That way they don't have to work anymore. People tend to look at this as a right and the ones who go and earn their money with their effort are regarded as "dumb", after all it makes no sense to work if you don't need to. Maybe this is a cultural thing, but I find dangerouse to reinforce people in receiving money with out contributing with their job.
  - uncr3ative 15y ago
    I don't know if people should receive actual money, but it makes sense to me that they receive access to safe housing, food, healthcare and education. I don't think this can work in poorer societies, but in ones which can afford it, well, it seems most humane. If you aren't working, and can, well you won't be able to brag to your friends about having the latest ipad, but you should still have a place to sleep and food to eat. I think most people don't like sitting idly by all day long and since a lot of fun things cost money, they'd be willing to sacrifice some of their time to be able to afford those other things. I have been to Norway a few times and I liked the way they managed to balance things out there. Also, I recently watched this TED talk: http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html How economic inequality harms societies and I thought it was interesting.

fusiongyro 15y ago

> why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? I have often wondered about this myself. I think I could be equally productive as a programmer on 20 hours a week, since I spend a lot of time on the web and generally doing things that we programmers do when we need to give our minds a break. I really don't think anybody can actually do 40 hours of programming a week. I'm going to lazily posit the law has something to do with it. I had my own business for a while, but never really made enough money at it (I'm a lousy entrepreneur). Even if I weren't making more money for about the same time investment, I might have fled from business ownership simply because I didn't like having nightmares that I did the taxes wrong—and I never had an employee. It's probably as hard and as expensive tax-wise to hire someone for 20 hours a week as 40 and probably a lot harder for more than 40. Another possibility is that it's just what happens in our society. These answers don't feel all that satisfying to me.

runawaybottle 15y ago
You have no idea how much time I spend fake-working in the office. If I have to build something new, it usually gets done within a certain time range (that could be over the course of a day, several days, and I often dabble with it at home. Once it's done, it's done. I have to fake-work for the rest of the week. Now, I guess I could manage my work habits so that project takes the span of a week (not working late, not taking work home), but I haven't been able to figure out how to do that. If anyone passes by my desk on fake-work days, I look like a real slacker asshole.
- fusiongyro 15y ago
  See, fortunately for me we use Java at work, and these day long excursions turn into 40 hour weeks. ;)
  - nnythm 15y ago
    Interesting. My experience with Java is that the only thing that gets in the way of programming in Java is the verbosity, which an IDE with powerful refactoring tools (eclipse, IDEA, eclim) gets around nicely. I would argue that in many ways, Java is easier to program in than a lot of other currently hot languages because there is so much tooling around it (although I would trade basically any python package manager for ivy any day), it is statically typed, and its behavior is generally boring but extremely predictable, and not hard to reason about, excluding the threading library which is not super fun. What have you found is frustrating about using Java?

jedberg 15y ago

> A programmer's salary is great, but why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? You can. You need to become a contractor and only accept 20 hours of work a week. I know that the guy that teaches yoga and step at my gym is a programmer as his "day job". That's one way to stay healthy.

Poiesis 15y ago

> why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? Health insurance.

thejteam 15y ago
This is a standard answer that everybody gives, but for the most part it just isn't true. People hear the occasional horror stories and assume it is difficult for everybody without trying to source it themselves. I am leaving my current job at the end of the month and will be freelancing/starting my own business. I bought health insurance with no problems. I was approved in less than 2 weeks. I am married and have 3 small children and pay a little less than 300 a month.
- codenerdz 15y ago
  You are fortunate not to have any pre-existing conditions in your family and i wish you not to ever have any. If you were to develop a serious condition while on individual or or a small business(<10 people) group plan, you will eventually be priced out of your insurance by your carrier raising your rates. This risk is generally spread out over large group such as a big company with several thousands of employers such as Google and thus their medical costs are same regardless of your medical history. Furthermore once you or your family member develops a "preexisting medical conditions", you may not be approved next time you decide to to from corporate plan to individual. My wife was denied by one carrier for having chronic migraine for which she was taking prescription drugs and not seeing a doctor more than once a year. With a current state of healthcare/insurance, I will only be able to leave my current employer and start a startup for as long as COBRA and CAL-COBRA allows. After that I will be forced to either join a larger company or have my family be without healthcare if a carrier decided to deny us coverage for preexisting conditions.
  - dj_axl 15y ago
    > You are fortunate not to have any pre-existing conditions THIS. Although in many states there is a high risk pool that you can sign up for, when insurers deny you. I know someone who's done this in California and while there was a 6-9 month waiting list, and the coverage wasn't great, it was much much better than no coverage at all. States with high risk pools: http://www.naschip.org/states_pools.htm http://www.naschip.org/states_pools.htm

vacri 15y ago

People who work hard to make a dent in the universe will anyway, and people who just mess around don't really get much done at work anyway, so why keep up the charade? This is typical libertarian claptrap, from the Skilled White Male litany. The only thing of value appears to be making a dent with your special skills, and no consideration is given to the huge numbers of unskilled jobs required to keep 'the universe' running. The point is that society supports far more shitty retail jobs than universe-denting programming jobs. Those shitty jobs need to be done, and it's hard to excel in them. What kind of dent can a convenience store clerk make? They're still necessary though - and for people in those jobs, work is not particularly fun. In terms of your hand-wringing about full-time programming work, there are all sorts of ways you can work part-time in programming and part-time in something else. That you can't see this shows you haven't really thought about the problem seriously. Hell, if you really are a 'denter' and have skills that are in demand, you have a good chance of simply going up to your boss and saying that you only want to work part-time now. Frequently they'll still want to keep you on for your dentable skills.

tsotha 15y ago
>This is typical libertarian claptrap, from the Skilled White Male litany. No it isn't. That's straight-up Socialism. The phrase who you might think would tend towards free-market/libertarianism doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
- vacri 15y ago
  The idea that people who make dents are the only ones that work hard, and people who don't make dents don't want to work/don't work hard is part of the worldview of libertarians.
  - learc83 15y ago
    No libertarian is going to suggest that the guy out laying asphalt isn't working hard. You seem to have confused libertarians with some sort of ultra-elitists, whom I don't think exist in any significant number. Only a very small fraction of mankind is actually making a dent in the world. Are you saying that libertarians believe that only 0.01% of people are actually working hard?

SandersAK 15y ago

You actually can do all of the things you want to do. The only thing that is stopping you is the risk / uncertainty of changing your situation. One thing I've come to believe is that there is never enough time for anything. And so you have to make time. If you're serious about adjusting your life to fit more outdoor or social interactions, there are part-time jobs and activities that can fulfill that. And there are plenty of contract jobs to fill up 20hrs a week, probably even several part-time contracts.

lwat 15y ago

> ...why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter... Here's one reason: you'll accumulate experience at half the pace of those programming 40 hours a week, which means you'll probably lag behind others in terms of usefulness and salary.

femto 15y ago
But you'd be awesome at writing code for agricultural applications! My point is that there is value in acting as a conduit for knowledge between disciplines. In fact, most "breakthroughs" consist of someone porting an existing technique from one discipline to another.

BrainInAJar 15y ago

> why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? I would gladly give up 20% of my salary to take Fridays off entirely.

ja2ke 15y ago
Same. I think about that too often.
- kevinsd 15y ago
  don't forget you cost your company more than your salary and compensation.
  - ja2ke 15y ago
    True. I'd also not be drinking water, using a parking space, or any of the other office facilities, and if I shut down my PC I'd be using less electricity. I'd of course still be receiving benefits and taking up space on the mail server, and my desk would sit there unused.
splicer 15y ago
I'd prefer taking Wednesdays off. I'd probably end up working from home anyway, but at least I wouldn't have to wear pants: http://dailytannenbaum.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/times-im-wearing-pants.jpg?w=570 http://dailytannenbaum.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/times-im-...

InclinedPlane 15y ago

All of the labor laws have been set up around the model of people with life-long careers working at a factory (or equivalent). That is no longer the norm, and the impedance mismatch between outdated laws and the modern workplace has become greater and greater. Why is 40 hours the norm? Why is working a single job all the time the norm? Why are all of your health insurance and retirement options tied to your current employer? In every case it's due to an accident of history.

kijin 15y ago
> Why are all of your health insurance and retirement options tied to your current employer? In every case it's due to an accident of history. I won't deny that it's an accident of history, but I'm not sure if it's related to the same accident of history that made single full-time jobs the norm. After all, most other countries where single full-time jobs are the norm don't have that particular problem.
- InclinedPlane 15y ago
  It's certainly related. At many points in the history of US labor people have sought for the appropriate "resting point" for various responsibilities (such as pensions and retirement investments) and often they've come to the employer, because through a certain viewport during a certain period of time it seemed like a sensible solution.
adrianhoward 15y ago
Why are all of your health insurance and retirement options tied to your current employer? In every case it's due to an accident of history. Indeed. If you look outside the US you'll find many countries that aren't set up that way. It's going to be interesting to see how that effects the way jobs evolve in the future. Mine aren't in the UK for example - and I imagine that if they had it would have had quite an impact on the risk/benefit of some of my work decisions over the years.

minikomi 15y ago

I'm currently working 3 days a week as a programmer, 3 days a week as an English teacher here in Tokyo. Balance is really important to me.

wahnfrieden 15y ago
Doing contract work?
- minikomi 15y ago
  No, part time in a company who needed English speakers on short notice. Not great pay but interesting (in its own way).
  - nandemo 15y ago
    Interesting. I'm also in Tokyo. How can I contact you? Or, can you send me an email?
    - minikomi 15y ago
      My name at gmail or same name on twitter

jonmrodriguez 15y ago

> I hate that it's always indoors and sedentary. It's unfortunate that society places so much value on an activity that is arguably bad for my physical and mental health. You should invent a computer specifically designed to allow you to work outdoors, including while walking. I'm on that same mission for the same reasons. http://bit.ly/vergence-singularity http://bit.ly/vergence-singularity

drags 15y ago

> A programmer's salary is great, but why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? My company does this. Work half-time, get paid 50% of full-time programmer's salary + health insurance. My anecdotal impression is that "productivity" is much higher than 50% of a full-time person, but everyone feels less busy, less stressed and more relaxed. Ends up being a great deal for both employer and employee I think. Anyway, if you're a Rails dev in the Bay Area drop me a line, we're hiring.

cgag 15y ago
I just recently commented about this in another thread (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3841211 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3841211), It makes me really happy to see a company that's doing this. Unfortunately I've just begun learning rails, and am not in the bay area (yet!).
sage_joch 15y ago
Anecdotally, I seem to get at least as much work done during a two-week sprint in which I have taken a few days off. Programming is not a linear process. On the other hand, there is something to be said for being immediately available to handle issues that arise during work hours, I suppose.

infectoid 15y ago

"I'm a programmer -- or at least, of all the things I've done in my life, that's the one I've been paid the most money for." Nice. Pretty much how I see myself. Also, FYI. After many years in the industry I realised I was stagnating so I decided that something needed to change. After a lot of thinking I managed to negotiate a 4 day week with my employer. I wanted an extra day to work on other projects and to learn new things. Eventually I signed up for Uni and am now working on a masters part time. I'm thinking about pushing for a 3 day week next semester. Just remember that anyone can do this. If you are a good worker most employers will do what they can to keep you around. More often than not, you can do in 4 days what 2 juniors can just manage in 5 (you may not realise this, I didn't).

1123581321 15y ago

Why do you think the proportions of "try" and "don't try" are fixed? Evidence suggests environment and culture affect how hard-working and curious are a group of people. There's no evidence that unlimited unemployment for as many as want it is financially possible or good for anyone's physical or mental health. You want nobody to go hungry or homeless; this is noble but it can't be solved by only having programmers, stock traders and artists go to work.

Kliment 15y ago

Well here's an idea. Imagine a company where you get hired with a probation period, and if you manage to automate a significant aspect of your job during that period, you get to keep it. That is, if you make yourself obsolete, you get to keep the pay. If you then do the same for another task, you get to keep the pay for the higher-paying of the two AND you get to give the lower-paying one to a person of your choice. This gives you both incentive to take crappy, menial jobs as a technology expert (a robot could do that crap - no human should be so punished) and the most valuable thing of all - free time without worrying about income. And if you like automating human-degrading jobs, you can move up while giving people you care about the same thing. Just an idea I'm throwing out there, it's my best answer so far for how to deal with the problem.

creamyhorror 15y ago
Interesting idea, but what happens to the older or less-educated workers who could have handled jobs similar to those? You might eliminate the need for drudgery, but you'd need a way to bring lower-end workers up to the levels needed for jobs that were previously 'beyond' them, and place them in those jobs. It's the eternal problem of Luddism (aka technology is taking away our jobs and we aren't getting better ones).
- Kliment 15y ago
  Well, they can be gifted an income source from one of the more proficient ones and that gives them a chance to develop themselves with all the newfound free time.

patio11 15y ago

Become a consultant. You get wide freedom in how you spend nonbillable hours. There exist many people working 1,000 hours a year or less. We all know this. At some point we started believing they must not be successful members of the professional class. That is observably false.

batista 15y ago
>There exist many people working 1,000 hours a year or less. Heck, there are people out there that haven't worked a day in their lives... (drum roll) ...night watchmen.
danssig 15y ago
If only it were that easy. :)

eik3_de 15y ago

> Why isn't work optional? This is what the German Pirate Party has in it's manifesto: 11 Right to secure livelihood and social participation Each person has the right to a secure livelihood and social participation. Respecting and protecting human dignity is the highest commandment of the German Basic Law. People can only live in dignity if their basic needs are met and their social participation is assured. In our monetary economy, this requires an income. If an income can only be achieved through work, we must assure full employment to protect all people’s dignity. This is why full employment has been a major goal of our economic policy in the past. There are two paths by which we try to achieve this goal: Through economic measures which aim to create jobs or through publicly financed jobs with the main goal of securing people’s livelihood. These are both detours which require substantial public funding. If public funds are used, however, this must be done as efficiently as possible. Since the goal is to secure an income and a livelihood for everyone, this income should be guaranteed directly to each individual. Only this way can we protect the dignity of all people without exception. Just as we provide public security, traffic routes and large parts of the educational system without a direct compensation, a secure livelihood must also become a part of our infrastructure. We Pirates are convinced that the overwhelming majority of people will seize the chances provided by a secure livelihood to develop their full economic and social potential. A secure livelihood creates room for self-determined education, research and economic innovation. It enables volunteerism, e.g., taking care of relatives and children, independent journalism, political activity or creation of art and free software. This benefits our entire society. This is why the Pirate Party supports solutions which guarantee unconditionally a secure livelihood and social participation while sustaining and enabling economic freedom. We want to prevent poverty, not prosperity. (from http://www.piratenpartei.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/parteiprogramm-englisch.pdf http://www.piratenpartei.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/parte...)

nodata 15y ago

Because once you remove people's payment for something, you remove their right to make decisions about the things they would have previously bought.

forgottenpaswrd 15y ago

"It's unfortunate that society places so much value on an activity that is arguably bad for my physical and mental health. " IT IS NOT, I work as a programmer(I 'm engineer) too. You are the person responsible to be healthy, you don't have to work sitting down. You can(You should) go out every single day and exercise. Do not blame your job,your girlfriend or your wife, your parents or society. It is your responsibility. Don't feel that I'm trying to criticism you. On the contrary I'm taking the time to write(the only time I use for reading news I won't read today) this because I want to help you. I don't know you but I would have loved someone telling me in the past. I could not believe the change I experienced when I started doing it myself. Believe me, there is scientific reasons for that. I read a lot of scientific papers and entire books explaining the reasons. Your veins get bigger, your brain gets more oxygen, your cells get more food and evacuate waste much much better(read about the lymph system), your sugar is used and not converted into fat, your insulin gets lower level(you feel less anxious)... there are entire books about the details, but long story short, your life improves and you feel better, you work much better. When you work sitting down, your body remains in a passive state, it has to do with blood pressure that change a lot when you stand up(proportional to height from your toes). The body "reacts" to standing up as it is a signal to activate for daily activity. We are made for moving a little every day, but no so much. You only need moderate exercise every single day. You will be much more energetic, more capable, optimist, people will love to be with you... you will work without counting the time because it feels great. It is not a single step, it takes years of continuous improvement, but it is worth it. You need to experience it yourself to believe or actually seeing other people much better than you(that is the way I changed, when I stopped being in denial seeing other people do much better than me). What you should not do is blaming others or other things(your job) for not being healthy. About doing 20 hours as programmer, 20 hours as a designer or teacher... well YOU CAN. Who is putting the gun in your head telling you what to do or not?. You are a grown up person, Aren't you?(maybe you are a teenager that started programming at 6, I don't know) It doesn't matter, you can do real(not reading HN or facebook) 40 hours of programming a week(I do) once you know how to manage yourself. Read "the power of full engagement" just for starting to get it. It will take a while for you to break bad habits from years of bad training. Another invaluable audiobook:" The Now habit" but the first step is stop being in denial of where you are first. I expect a lot of people to downgrade this post because there is a lot of population in HN that do it wrong, that martyrise theirselves into work because they don't know how to do it better.

batista 15y ago

>I'm kind of suspicious whenever I hear the phrase "work/life balance". It strikes me as something that seeks to reinforce the industrial-revolution-era idea that my (week)days should be broken into thirds: working (not fun but pays bills), playing (fun but costs money), and sleeping. Sure, that's definitely better than working 12 hour days, but is that really the goal? It seems that most of the fun-loving and happy people I know, regardless of their financial situation, don't operate in such a world. Maybe. But isn't it also obvious that not all jobs are the kind of jobs required for the above to be true (people, generally, do not "love" flipping burgers, for example), and that, actually, jobs you "love" are in the minority (and we absolutely need the majority jobs too). There's nothing wrong in your job NOT being your "passion" --and that is not constrained to burger flipping but also to IT and every kind of environment. If we only insisted on people working on their "passion" we wouldn't have things like technical documentation (unless many people exist that like to devote their life to writing 500 pages of SGML for other people's programs).

gaius 15y ago

we can feed and clothe and house everyone, so why don't we? There are already communities where everyone has the absolute right to food, shelter, healthcare and education. Those who live there could, if they wished, devote themselves full-time to self-improvement and community work. In reality, they're called "sink estates".

JonWood 15y ago

> A programmer's salary is great, but why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer, and 20 hours as a tree-planter, or teaching rock climbing to high school kids, for maybe 55% of a programmer's salary? You can. You just have to learn to negotiate. I currently work 4 days a week, with the other day being split between helping with a youth club, and Open Source hacking, and throwing a mountain bike down hills. I had to spend more time looking when I last changed jobs, but that also ended up with me in a job that I love for other reasons as well.

rmc 15y ago

why can't I work 20 hours as a programmer There is a shortage of programmers out there. Start negotiating with your employer or get a new job. Make that a condition.