5 ms·

"Profit maximization" on its own would have left most people working 12+ hours a day 6 days a week, like it was very common in the 19th century. Luckily, it's n

"Profit maximization" on its own would have left most people working 12+ hours a day 6 days a week, like it was very common in the 19th century. Luckily, it's never been the only force shaping our societies.

WalterBright 6mo ago
Working long hours was necessary in those days because productivity was much lower. Productivity has gone up so much people can work a lot less, and vast part of the population doesn't work at all.
- amanaplanacanal 6mo ago
  Depends what you mean by work. Most people do a lot of work themselves that the Richie Rich would pay somebody else to do, like cooking, cleaning, childcare, gardening, etc. If it counts as work when you hire somebody to do it, it should equally count as work if you do it yourself.
  - WalterBright 6mo ago
    People still did cooking, cleaning, childcare, and gardening in those times of 12 hour work days. BTW, cooking in those days was an all day affair. The wood stove required continuous feeding and watching. Today one can just put the food in a microwave. I cook a steak now and then, it's the only cooking I do. It takes about 10 minutes. The dishwasher does the cleaning. Rich people hire others to do the cooking because the rich peoples' jobs pay off far more per hour of work. For example, if my profession pays me $100/hr, it makes perfect sense to pay someone $30/hr to do the cooking for me, as I am still $70/hr ahead.
    - nobodyandproud 6mo ago
      Division of labor. The men worked, the women stayed home. Things went to hell for single-parent families
- danmaz74 6mo ago
  Sure, productivity increase is hugely important, but if you only pursue profit maximization, then all the productivity increase goes into profits, which means that the general population doesn't increase their well being much if at all. The 40hr work week didn't come by as a consequence of the profit maximization mentality, but as a consequence of hard fought battles by the workers/employees against that mentality. And when I say "hard fought" I mean in the literal sense, with at least 1,000 workers killed just in the US in those days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_deaths_in_United_States_labor_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_deaths_in_Unite...
  - WalterBright 6mo ago
    The Law of Supply and Demand is in play, and it means a company cannot dictate prices, wages, or working conditions in a free market economy. Rising productivity would have reduced the average work week regardless. If you still aren't convinced, consider that the benefits package routinely offered to employees is worth around 40% of their pay.
    - KittenInABox 6mo ago
      > Rising productivity would have reduced the average work week regardless. Do you have evidence of this? > consider that the benefits package routinely offered to employees is worth around 40% of their pay Please define "routinely" and "employees". Part-time employees do not get benefits packages, much less benefits packages worth 40% of their pay. PTO, Sick time, family leave, and other "benefits" are actually legally mandated and I do not see any evidence that companies would offer this if they were not mandated to do so.
      - WalterBright 6mo ago
        > Do you have evidence of this? Yes. Part time work. Google sez: "Total compensation generally exceeds base salary by 30% to 50% for many roles, meaning salary often represents only 60% to 70% of an employee's total worth to the company." Google sez total compensation includes bonuses, commission, stock options, employer-paid insurance (health, life, disability), retirement contributions, paid time off, tuition reimbursement, student loan assistance, gym memberships, employee discounts, Childcare assistance, commuter benefits, and relocation expenses. None of those are mandated by law.
- AngryData 6mo ago
  Working long hours was not necessary in those days, it was forced upon people by declining wages as profit was transferred from individuals, families, and small businesses towards the capital class. The entire movement to introduce the 40 hour work week was based on people wanting to reduce their hours towards what their grandparents worked and survived on. The entire luddite movement was based on declining wages and worsening work conditions compared to the generations before them.
  - WalterBright 6mo ago
    I don't know where you're getting that information from, but analysis of the bones of American colonists shows they worked themselves to an early death. Life expectancy and average height improved throughout the 19th century.

WalterBright 6mo ago

Working long hours was necessary in those days because productivity was much lower. Productivity has gone up so much people can work a lot less, and vast part of the population doesn't work at all.

amanaplanacanal 6mo ago
Depends what you mean by work. Most people do a lot of work themselves that the Richie Rich would pay somebody else to do, like cooking, cleaning, childcare, gardening, etc. If it counts as work when you hire somebody to do it, it should equally count as work if you do it yourself.
- WalterBright 6mo ago
  People still did cooking, cleaning, childcare, and gardening in those times of 12 hour work days. BTW, cooking in those days was an all day affair. The wood stove required continuous feeding and watching. Today one can just put the food in a microwave. I cook a steak now and then, it's the only cooking I do. It takes about 10 minutes. The dishwasher does the cleaning. Rich people hire others to do the cooking because the rich peoples' jobs pay off far more per hour of work. For example, if my profession pays me $100/hr, it makes perfect sense to pay someone $30/hr to do the cooking for me, as I am still $70/hr ahead.
  - nobodyandproud 6mo ago
    Division of labor. The men worked, the women stayed home. Things went to hell for single-parent families
danmaz74 6mo ago
Sure, productivity increase is hugely important, but if you only pursue profit maximization, then all the productivity increase goes into profits, which means that the general population doesn't increase their well being much if at all. The 40hr work week didn't come by as a consequence of the profit maximization mentality, but as a consequence of hard fought battles by the workers/employees against that mentality. And when I say "hard fought" I mean in the literal sense, with at least 1,000 workers killed just in the US in those days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_deaths_in_United_States_labor_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_deaths_in_Unite...
- WalterBright 6mo ago
  The Law of Supply and Demand is in play, and it means a company cannot dictate prices, wages, or working conditions in a free market economy. Rising productivity would have reduced the average work week regardless. If you still aren't convinced, consider that the benefits package routinely offered to employees is worth around 40% of their pay.
  - KittenInABox 6mo ago
    > Rising productivity would have reduced the average work week regardless. Do you have evidence of this? > consider that the benefits package routinely offered to employees is worth around 40% of their pay Please define "routinely" and "employees". Part-time employees do not get benefits packages, much less benefits packages worth 40% of their pay. PTO, Sick time, family leave, and other "benefits" are actually legally mandated and I do not see any evidence that companies would offer this if they were not mandated to do so.
    - WalterBright 6mo ago
      > Do you have evidence of this? Yes. Part time work. Google sez: "Total compensation generally exceeds base salary by 30% to 50% for many roles, meaning salary often represents only 60% to 70% of an employee's total worth to the company." Google sez total compensation includes bonuses, commission, stock options, employer-paid insurance (health, life, disability), retirement contributions, paid time off, tuition reimbursement, student loan assistance, gym memberships, employee discounts, Childcare assistance, commuter benefits, and relocation expenses. None of those are mandated by law.
AngryData 6mo ago
Working long hours was not necessary in those days, it was forced upon people by declining wages as profit was transferred from individuals, families, and small businesses towards the capital class. The entire movement to introduce the 40 hour work week was based on people wanting to reduce their hours towards what their grandparents worked and survived on. The entire luddite movement was based on declining wages and worsening work conditions compared to the generations before them.
- WalterBright 6mo ago
  I don't know where you're getting that information from, but analysis of the bones of American colonists shows they worked themselves to an early death. Life expectancy and average height improved throughout the 19th century.