9 ms·

Where are you getting the 60-80 figure from? In more recent past we have indeed worked more (at least in developed countries), e.g. the Industrial Revolution, b

Where are you getting the 60-80 figure from? In more recent past we have indeed worked more (at least in developed countries), e.g. the Industrial Revolution, but just a little earlier, like the Middle Ages, we were working far less. People like to joke about peasant life, but they were mostly not working much during winter and fall, or after noon in the warmer months

wavemode 2y ago
"far less" is not well supported. As much as people try to claim that today's norm of 2000 hours per year is akin to slavery, the reality is that average human working hours have fluctuated between 1500-3000 across most places and time periods for which we have data. 1500 is less than 2000, sure, but it's not like it was some kind of work-free utopia. And the important context is that the people working 1500 had no technology or department stores, so they were spending significantly more time than we do nowadays doing regular household things like chopping wood, making clothes and preparing food.
- mvieira38 2y ago
  If 500 hours less work isn't "far less", I don't know what is. If we impose that change on the current work schedule, it would amount to a more than 2 hour decrease on every work day, or a day off the work week. Also, do these numbers account for the hour long commute of today versus working your own land? I bet that would shave off some solid hours too.
  - patcon 2y ago
    Amen
  - marcosdumay 2y ago
    It isn't a completely new category that could reasonably be called "work-free utopia" or where one could reasonably call "normal" where the added 500 hours get called "slavery". Also, the long commutes of today aren't very far from the norm or the last couple of centuries and add up to 200 or 300 hours on average. Some people do have it much worse, but some people also have it much better. That said, the difference between the 1500 and 3000 extremes is huge. And we should be working towards the smallest one being the norm. But all of the upthread observations are perfectly on point.
Isamu 2y ago
>like the Middle Ages, we were working far less. I wish I knew more about what scholarship people are relying on to come to this conclusion. Can someone point me to a definitive source? Subsistence farming is not an easy job.
- JodieBenitez 2y ago
  The middle ages comparison makes no sense. Some hate their jobs so much that they'll put it in balance with a 30yo life expectancy and a (short) life of hard backbreaking manual labour riddled with health hazards. There is really no point in comparing the number of working hours then and now.

wavemode 2y ago

"far less" is not well supported. As much as people try to claim that today's norm of 2000 hours per year is akin to slavery, the reality is that average human working hours have fluctuated between 1500-3000 across most places and time periods for which we have data. 1500 is less than 2000, sure, but it's not like it was some kind of work-free utopia. And the important context is that the people working 1500 had no technology or department stores, so they were spending significantly more time than we do nowadays doing regular household things like chopping wood, making clothes and preparing food.

mvieira38 2y ago
If 500 hours less work isn't "far less", I don't know what is. If we impose that change on the current work schedule, it would amount to a more than 2 hour decrease on every work day, or a day off the work week. Also, do these numbers account for the hour long commute of today versus working your own land? I bet that would shave off some solid hours too.
- patcon 2y ago
  Amen
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  It isn't a completely new category that could reasonably be called "work-free utopia" or where one could reasonably call "normal" where the added 500 hours get called "slavery". Also, the long commutes of today aren't very far from the norm or the last couple of centuries and add up to 200 or 300 hours on average. Some people do have it much worse, but some people also have it much better. That said, the difference between the 1500 and 3000 extremes is huge. And we should be working towards the smallest one being the norm. But all of the upthread observations are perfectly on point.

Isamu 2y ago

>like the Middle Ages, we were working far less. I wish I knew more about what scholarship people are relying on to come to this conclusion. Can someone point me to a definitive source? Subsistence farming is not an easy job.

JodieBenitez 2y ago
The middle ages comparison makes no sense. Some hate their jobs so much that they'll put it in balance with a 30yo life expectancy and a (short) life of hard backbreaking manual labour riddled with health hazards. There is really no point in comparing the number of working hours then and now.