4 ms·

7-7 so, say 5am - 8pm with the commute and the morning thrown in. That's no family life. If you're checking into work over the weekend, you may think it's an

by thisone 14y ago

7-7 so, say 5am - 8pm with the commute and the morning thrown in. That's no family life. If you're checking into work over the weekend, you may think it's an hour or two, but it'll be 5 or 6 hours, you just don't realize it. So out of the what, 32? hours you have for family over the weekend, another 5 or 6 are spent working. And there's no "personal time" in that schedule yet. That's not sustainable to me.

roel_v 14y ago
So the OP says '60 hours can be done, under some circumstances'. Then you come in and say '100 hours doesn't leave you with a life'. I don't have a stake in this discussion, I don't care - but I hope you see the flaw in your response.
- thisone 14y ago
  The flaw is that the OP doesn't count the actual time involved. Thinking that working 7-7 means you're home and having a family life for the rest of the time is incorrect. Working 7am - 7pm translates more to 5am - 8pm. Just like working 9-5 means 7am - 6pm. Thinking that you will only spend 1-2 hours at the weekend "checking email" is also incorrect. You may spend that much time reading email, but you're going to be spending much more time actually responding to it and checking up on anything required.
  - roel_v 14y ago
    Seriously man, as my nan used to say - "When you're in a hole, stop digging". They guy says "spend 2 hours on the weekend", to which you reply "you can't stop at 2 hours", yet at the same time you try to defend working only 40 hours? How inconsistent is that? The OP sketched out a baseline scenario, and you're saying "yeah but if you change assumptions, your conclusion doesn't hold!". No shit Sherlock? Perfectly valid and reasonable observation: "Yeah it is safe to drink 2 glasses of beer." You: "BEER IS EVIL! IF YOU DRINK 25 GALLONS YOU'LL DIE!" O RLY, who woulda thunk?
    - thisone 14y ago
      heh, I'm not sure where I'm defending anything. I'm saying that the baseline scenario is wrong.

by thisone 14y ago

roel_v 14y ago

So the OP says '60 hours can be done, under some circumstances'. Then you come in and say '100 hours doesn't leave you with a life'. I don't have a stake in this discussion, I don't care - but I hope you see the flaw in your response.

thisone 14y ago
The flaw is that the OP doesn't count the actual time involved. Thinking that working 7-7 means you're home and having a family life for the rest of the time is incorrect. Working 7am - 7pm translates more to 5am - 8pm. Just like working 9-5 means 7am - 6pm. Thinking that you will only spend 1-2 hours at the weekend "checking email" is also incorrect. You may spend that much time reading email, but you're going to be spending much more time actually responding to it and checking up on anything required.
- roel_v 14y ago
  Seriously man, as my nan used to say - "When you're in a hole, stop digging". They guy says "spend 2 hours on the weekend", to which you reply "you can't stop at 2 hours", yet at the same time you try to defend working only 40 hours? How inconsistent is that? The OP sketched out a baseline scenario, and you're saying "yeah but if you change assumptions, your conclusion doesn't hold!". No shit Sherlock? Perfectly valid and reasonable observation: "Yeah it is safe to drink 2 glasses of beer." You: "BEER IS EVIL! IF YOU DRINK 25 GALLONS YOU'LL DIE!" O RLY, who woulda thunk?
  - thisone 14y ago
    heh, I'm not sure where I'm defending anything. I'm saying that the baseline scenario is wrong.