13 ms·

Why Not a Three-Day Week?

85 points by mrcdima 12y ago

happycube 12y ago
I've always thought a four-day week makes a lot more sense than five... 4:3 on/off is a much nicer ratio than 5:2.
- Laremere 12y ago
  Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=semdh-j8V6w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=semdh-j8V6w
  - iagooar 12y ago
    I think that working in IT allows you to earn enough money to sustain a four-day week, even having a family.
    - k__ 12y ago
      Many people think so, but you'll get those 50%-80% jobs only in those sectors where they don't pay enough per hour that you can live from it. It's a real shame....
    - odonnellryan 12y ago
      IT is insane in a way. Management (who are not technical) make 4-10 times more than technical staff.
- iagooar 12y ago
  It's exactly what I'm thinking about lately. A lot of colleagues of mine work 4 days a week, from Mon - Thu, and have 3 days off. It is a HUGE difference compared to the 5:2 ratio. It's not that I don't enjoy my job, but it sound so much sane to me. I hope next year I'll have saved a little bit of money I currently need so I'll be able to do a 4 day working week.
  - czep 12y ago
    If you ever have the opportunity to work 4 days a week, choose Tuesday to Friday, rather than Monday to Thursday. The reason is that everyone else will be in a good mood on Friday so it will be much less stressful working Fridays rather than Mondays. For the same reason, don't burn your floating holiday on a Friday.
- techsupporter 12y ago
  I have been fortunate enough to work a 4x10 shift for my employer for the past 6 or 7 years. At this point, the shift and hours are almost worth more to me than the actual job I am doing since having the three days off makes for a much more relaxed weekend. Being off for one or two weekdays when most everyone else is at work is also a definite plus since it makes getting errands done and just going out and being a "tourist" in my own city much easier.
edroche 12y ago
This is the biggest thing I miss from my consulting days. I would never work a 5-day week. It would either be a 3-day or 4-day week, leaving lots of time for travel, family and hobbies. Sadly, I could never see our clients accepting any business day where we are not available during regular business hours.
- patio11 12y ago
  Clients are surprisingly willing to deal with that. It may be less of a hard constraint than you think it is, particularly if you train your clients to expect that type of working relationship. I had an interesting call with a doctor client recently. "I didn't notice a number on your website." "That's correct." "So how am I supposed to get in touch with you?" "I recommend email." "But you only respond to email a day later." "That's correct." "Shouldn't you make yourself more available to your customers?" "With respect, doctor, I'm exactly as available as I wish to be." You would think she'd be mad after a conversation including that, but she actually left happy, because I was able to fix her problem.
  - kyllo 12y ago
    Kind of ironic that a doctor would say that to you. Just try getting a doctor's direct line or cell. It's almost impossible, they have receptionists because they'd be overwhelmed with patients calling them with stupid questions all day if they didn't. Of course, you could also just hire a remote assistant to field phone calls for you if you wanted.
    - patio11 12y ago
      Working on it, but since I don't have one yet and was not returning voicemail reliably I hid the number.
- exstudent 12y ago
  Maybe I'm parsing your comment incorrectly, but do you mean that you used to have clients that allowed you to make your own schedule but you no longer do? Out of curiosity, what caused the change? I firmly believe we'll see more people move to a consulting model where they work far fewer hours, are more productive and make as much or more money as before.
psychometry 12y ago
Why not? Because capitalism. New technology will continue to automate away more and more jobs, from manufacturing to the service industry. This could be one of the greatest achievements in human history, leading to that so-called "leisure society" futurists talked about, but that would require a massive overhaul of most countries' economic systems. All those gains in productivity mostly enrich the owner class while the rest of us have to fight even harder for the jobs that haven't (yet) been eliminated by technology. In the U.S., it's hard to imagine getting a single conservative lawmaker to sit down at a table and have a frank discussion about wealth redistribution or a minimum income or public ownership schemes, possible solutions to this problem. That makes me worry that the inevitable transition away from our obsession with the free-market and pursuit of capital will be painful rather than celebratory. And that things will have to get worse before enough of us can consider implementing solutions that make things better.
- rgrieselhuber 12y ago
  One of the biggest practical hurdles to that sort of wealth distribution is simply that there is a whole world of people outside the US ready and willing to accept investment and residence from the owner class.
  - mjburgess 12y ago
    That's not a problem. profits made within a country can be taxed within a country. Stopping the export of capital is a legal/legislative issue, not a logistical one. The rich have already left. The mythical class we're "punishing" arent tied to nations/peoples any more. Their assets are however. Their companies operate within nations. They wealth is spent in deals/properties/etc. within countries. If a Koch brother lands on US soil he can be arrested and all of his assets seized. If he does a deal with a US company, all of the transactions can be subject to US law. It's a matter of political will.
- wyager 12y ago
  If automation continues and demand stays the same, things like 3-day work weeks will come about naturally. A capitalist system would not prevent that from happening. Would you care to share why you think capitalism would prevent an increase in leisure time (even though it has been increasing since the industrial revolution)?
chillingeffect 12y ago
w/r/t The Protestant Work Ethic: The book only gets a one-sentence mention in the article, but much, much more could be said. Particularly, it presents overworking as a form of paranoia. Working was framed as a duty to God and since we didn't know if God existed, we were to work hard, just in case. Now that we've (largely) shifted our beliefs from a Christian god to more diffused spirituality, we can stop justifying overwork in this way.
- learc83 12y ago
  > Now that we've (largely) shifted our beliefs from a Christian god to more diffused spirituality Where did you get that from? A quick google search says about 3/4 of Americans identify as Christian, and about 62% are members of a church congregation.
  - MisterBastahrd 12y ago
    I'd guess about half of that identify as Christian because it's socially unacceptable to be agnostic. Church communities have more uses than simple religious worship. Ask any salesman.
    - jqm 12y ago
      On this topic how many days a week do pastors work?
      - PaulWillis 12y ago
        The pastors I'm familiar with all work a typical work week - 40 hours or more. Plus visiting the hospital, counseling, weddings, funerals etc.
      - learc83 12y ago
        My dad was a music director and assistant pastor. He worked about 5 days a week, and also had another job on the side. Choir practice, church functions and services, preparing sermons, visiting sick church members, counseling members, and doing charity work add up to a good bit of time.
rch 12y ago
Haven't tried it myself, but I like the idea of working a 9/80 with every other Friday off. One interesting effect is that those who are in the office on Friday end up feeling more productive or relaxed since there are fewer people around. I also wonder if every other Monday off might be better in some cases.
- nostrademons 12y ago
  My sister did 9/80s. They were pretty nice when she first moved to the area, but the problem is that you have to take them off on a Friday and it's use-it-or-lose-it. Now that she's married, it's pretty rare that her husband gets time off when she does, and so the extra Friday was basically just a "sit at home in front of the TV day and veg", while the 9 hour days meant that it was an hour less time to spend with her husband in the evenings. I think she's switched back to a regular schedule now. I have some former coworkers that effectively did 9/80s as well, since they maxed out their vacation and started taking every other Friday off so they wouldn't lose it. It usually worked better, ironically, for people without many hobbies, since they were okay with just sitting at home and vegging for Friday. 4-day weekends could be great if all of society moved to them, but they're tricky when it's just some employers because the people you love aren't around to hang out with. I actually tend to prefer taking Wednesday off; a veg-day to break the week in half seems much more relaxing than a 3-day weekend where you can't do anything fun for one of the days.
grimtrigger 12y ago
I would love some kind of job board for "lifestyle jobs". Thats jobs with 2 or 3 day work weeks and a 9-5 schedule. I might go as low as $60k (+ benefits) if it was offered. The closest thing to achieve that now is freelancing.
- mr_luc 12y ago
  Yeah -- and it's way easier to pack out 4 or 6 solid months of work than it is to find work that trickles in regularly at anything like "2 days a week," at least for me.
- jodi 12y ago
  Check out Escape the City. "We connect people with exciting non-corporate opportunities" http://www.escapethecity.org/ http://www.escapethecity.org/
PaulWillis 12y ago
Yes, let's work 3 days a week in the West. China will continue to work 6 or 7 days. Fast forward 10 years and the reserve currency will be the yuan.
- georgemcbay 12y ago
  Well, if you really believe it is as simple as being a pure numbers game then based on population counts we're going to have to find a way to work 24 to 28 days a week to keep up with the Chinese. So either your premise is horribly flawed or we're fucked no matter what we do.
  - PaulWillis 12y ago
    I agree it will eventually happen, but of course it will happen faster if we're less productive.
    - joedrew 12y ago
      The whole point of advocating for fewer work days is that we are just as productive in fewer hours. That's why overtime doesn't work long-term; you wear out and do less per unit time.
      - TeMPOraL 12y ago
        I think that used to be the whole point, somewhere around one hundred years ago. I thought that now the point is, we're doing mostly bullshit jobs anyway, so how about we all agree to work a bit less and have some time to live our lives?
    - titter 12y ago
      So the reason for working longer hours is to ensure that the Chinese people have to work longer hours (which ensures that Westerners have to work longer hours)? Seems like a pretty bad prisoner's dilemma - and a pointless exercise if you already accept that China will ultimately win.
- 12y ago
michas 12y ago
I stopped reading after "John Maynard Keynes". This guy had no clue about true economics and we all suffer today for his insane theories. Three days workweek if stupid idea, because, as some real economist, Adam Smith said: there are three sources of wealth: land, capital and work. You cannot expect to become wealthier by just working less, for the same reason that you won't get fit by excercising less, or get smarter by learnig less.
Keyframe 12y ago
Why not half a salary?
- WalterSear 12y ago
  Because two 20 hour employee are worth considerably less than one 40 hour employee for all but the most menial jobs.
  - 21echoes 12y ago
    [citation needed]
    - WalterSear 12y ago
      Have you worked anything other than menial jobs?
      - 21echoes 12y ago
        yes. and the science is very exhaustively on my side: time and time again, it's been shown that workers (especially knowledge workers like programmers, designers, etc.) are more productive when working less hours. * http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/wcms_187307.pdf http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---pro... * www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2002/07/en/1/ef0207en.pdf * http://sciencenordic.com/we-should-only-work-25-hours-week-argues-professor http://sciencenordic.com/we-should-only-work-25-hours-week-a... * http://news.illinois.edu/WebsandThumbs/Lleras,Alejandro/Lleras_sdarticle-17.pdf http://news.illinois.edu/WebsandThumbs/Lleras,Alejandro/Ller... * the list goes on...
- shurcooL 12y ago
  And half a health insurance that only covers odd days, half dental that covers odd teeth?
theophrastus 12y ago
George Jetson: "These three day work weeks are killing me." (wikipedia: "George's job primarily requires him to repeatedly push a single button") That is, isn't this a product of a far more optimistic (cartoon) past view of the future? and/or "where's my flying car?"
Xcelerate 12y ago
I find the whole economic system to be quite bizarre. Nobody's salary seems to correlate with much except their skill at getting a high salary. For instance, my sister (elementary education) makes even less than I do as a grad student. The difference is that she wakes up at 5:00 AM and works all day teaching and taking care of little kids until 7:00 PM, whereas I wake up whenever I feel like it, head to a coffee shop and work on research (which is basically a computer game for me), and mix in bike rides and whatever else as I please. The difference in salary will be even more extreme once I get my PhD. It really doesn't seem fair, and when I think about the vast majority of the world population in other countries, it seems even less fair. I used to have a more conservative stance that if you want to get more, you just have to work harder, but now I've reversed my stance completely: I think it's mostly luck -- where you were born, who you know, what your social skills are, and if you just happen to be in the right place at the right time. Many jobs seem like they exist solely for the sake of creating more jobs. We have managers of managers of managers. A lot of people don't put a lot of effort into their work (they spend their day browsing the internet), and the ones that do put in an honest effort don't seem to be rewarded for it. The hardest-working employees are rarely promoted into administrative positions. And the best way to increase one's salary is to job hop instead of remaining loyal to one company (http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees-that-stay-in-companies-longer-than-2-years-get-paid-50-less/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees...). I feel like many people have this ingrained notion that you're just "supposed to work" for so many hours a week, and no one is seriously pursuing the goal of creating leisure time (or at least work that's personally enjoyable). We have more than enough technological capability to provide basic survival needs to everyone on the planet, yet we're nowhere close to achieving that goal. Again, I don't know why it's this way. But it is, and it just seems wrong to me.
- exstudent 12y ago
  I think there are two separate issues in your comment... You make more than your sister doing "less" work because knowledge and high level skills are a value multiplier. You may come up with a world changing idea that generates billions of dollars. No kindergarden teacher could achieve that. Pay matches accordingly. Your second point is that there seems to be a lot of people with useless jobs and I couldn't agree more. We're RAPIDLY approaching the point where most people are employed to do basically nothing of value. How many people's jobs could be replaced by the mythical "script" written in a day by a good dev? I'm glad to see us get to this point. People should learn and practice useful skills. So as not to cause a violent revolution, I think we do need some form of basic income though. That would also enable creatives to experiment and produce without economic pressure which I think is great. I also don't care if 99% of people mooch off this model as most people are just wasting time at work as it is anyway.
padobson 12y ago
Economists of yore were wise to see that productivity would increase dramatically, but they were wrong in believing that surplus productivity would translate into leisure time. I look at Google and Ycombinator as the model for the future economy, if economic systems are left unchecked by the threat of physical force. How many people are working at Google everyday on a product that will never produce one red cent? Hundreds? Thousands? How many funded YCombinator startups will never provide a return on investment? 60%? 80%? These days, the smart money is taking all their surplus productivity and putting it into long-shots to create even more surplus productivity. This explains why industries like software development, that have such an enormous productivity surplus, are paying such high wages right now. One could even argue that the shortage of skilled individuals in such an environment will lead to an increase in demand for those who can train such people - leading to something like a more organic education system.
- jazzyk 12y ago
  "paying such high wages" High wages? Not compared to doctors or lawyers or mid-level business folks. My friend is a marketing manager (a glorified secretary/copy writer with an MBA, by her own admission) and she makes more or less as much as a senior developer. Enough already with the "high wages" myth. It is the exact cause for the shortage of software engineers in the US - most young people in the US don't want to pursue it because the reward is not commensurate with the effort and risk.

85 points by mrcdima 12y ago

happycube 12y ago

I've always thought a four-day week makes a lot more sense than five... 4:3 on/off is a much nicer ratio than 5:2.

Laremere 12y ago
Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=semdh-j8V6w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=semdh-j8V6w
- iagooar 12y ago
  I think that working in IT allows you to earn enough money to sustain a four-day week, even having a family.
  - k__ 12y ago
    Many people think so, but you'll get those 50%-80% jobs only in those sectors where they don't pay enough per hour that you can live from it. It's a real shame....
  - odonnellryan 12y ago
    IT is insane in a way. Management (who are not technical) make 4-10 times more than technical staff.
iagooar 12y ago
It's exactly what I'm thinking about lately. A lot of colleagues of mine work 4 days a week, from Mon - Thu, and have 3 days off. It is a HUGE difference compared to the 5:2 ratio. It's not that I don't enjoy my job, but it sound so much sane to me. I hope next year I'll have saved a little bit of money I currently need so I'll be able to do a 4 day working week.
- czep 12y ago
  If you ever have the opportunity to work 4 days a week, choose Tuesday to Friday, rather than Monday to Thursday. The reason is that everyone else will be in a good mood on Friday so it will be much less stressful working Fridays rather than Mondays. For the same reason, don't burn your floating holiday on a Friday.
techsupporter 12y ago
I have been fortunate enough to work a 4x10 shift for my employer for the past 6 or 7 years. At this point, the shift and hours are almost worth more to me than the actual job I am doing since having the three days off makes for a much more relaxed weekend. Being off for one or two weekdays when most everyone else is at work is also a definite plus since it makes getting errands done and just going out and being a "tourist" in my own city much easier.

edroche 12y ago

This is the biggest thing I miss from my consulting days. I would never work a 5-day week. It would either be a 3-day or 4-day week, leaving lots of time for travel, family and hobbies. Sadly, I could never see our clients accepting any business day where we are not available during regular business hours.

patio11 12y ago
Clients are surprisingly willing to deal with that. It may be less of a hard constraint than you think it is, particularly if you train your clients to expect that type of working relationship. I had an interesting call with a doctor client recently. "I didn't notice a number on your website." "That's correct." "So how am I supposed to get in touch with you?" "I recommend email." "But you only respond to email a day later." "That's correct." "Shouldn't you make yourself more available to your customers?" "With respect, doctor, I'm exactly as available as I wish to be." You would think she'd be mad after a conversation including that, but she actually left happy, because I was able to fix her problem.
- kyllo 12y ago
  Kind of ironic that a doctor would say that to you. Just try getting a doctor's direct line or cell. It's almost impossible, they have receptionists because they'd be overwhelmed with patients calling them with stupid questions all day if they didn't. Of course, you could also just hire a remote assistant to field phone calls for you if you wanted.
  - patio11 12y ago
    Working on it, but since I don't have one yet and was not returning voicemail reliably I hid the number.
exstudent 12y ago
Maybe I'm parsing your comment incorrectly, but do you mean that you used to have clients that allowed you to make your own schedule but you no longer do? Out of curiosity, what caused the change? I firmly believe we'll see more people move to a consulting model where they work far fewer hours, are more productive and make as much or more money as before.

psychometry 12y ago

Why not? Because capitalism. New technology will continue to automate away more and more jobs, from manufacturing to the service industry. This could be one of the greatest achievements in human history, leading to that so-called "leisure society" futurists talked about, but that would require a massive overhaul of most countries' economic systems. All those gains in productivity mostly enrich the owner class while the rest of us have to fight even harder for the jobs that haven't (yet) been eliminated by technology. In the U.S., it's hard to imagine getting a single conservative lawmaker to sit down at a table and have a frank discussion about wealth redistribution or a minimum income or public ownership schemes, possible solutions to this problem. That makes me worry that the inevitable transition away from our obsession with the free-market and pursuit of capital will be painful rather than celebratory. And that things will have to get worse before enough of us can consider implementing solutions that make things better.

rgrieselhuber 12y ago
One of the biggest practical hurdles to that sort of wealth distribution is simply that there is a whole world of people outside the US ready and willing to accept investment and residence from the owner class.
- mjburgess 12y ago
  That's not a problem. profits made within a country can be taxed within a country. Stopping the export of capital is a legal/legislative issue, not a logistical one. The rich have already left. The mythical class we're "punishing" arent tied to nations/peoples any more. Their assets are however. Their companies operate within nations. They wealth is spent in deals/properties/etc. within countries. If a Koch brother lands on US soil he can be arrested and all of his assets seized. If he does a deal with a US company, all of the transactions can be subject to US law. It's a matter of political will.
wyager 12y ago
If automation continues and demand stays the same, things like 3-day work weeks will come about naturally. A capitalist system would not prevent that from happening. Would you care to share why you think capitalism would prevent an increase in leisure time (even though it has been increasing since the industrial revolution)?

chillingeffect 12y ago

w/r/t The Protestant Work Ethic: The book only gets a one-sentence mention in the article, but much, much more could be said. Particularly, it presents overworking as a form of paranoia. Working was framed as a duty to God and since we didn't know if God existed, we were to work hard, just in case. Now that we've (largely) shifted our beliefs from a Christian god to more diffused spirituality, we can stop justifying overwork in this way.

learc83 12y ago
> Now that we've (largely) shifted our beliefs from a Christian god to more diffused spirituality Where did you get that from? A quick google search says about 3/4 of Americans identify as Christian, and about 62% are members of a church congregation.
- MisterBastahrd 12y ago
  I'd guess about half of that identify as Christian because it's socially unacceptable to be agnostic. Church communities have more uses than simple religious worship. Ask any salesman.
  - jqm 12y ago
    On this topic how many days a week do pastors work?
    - PaulWillis 12y ago
      The pastors I'm familiar with all work a typical work week - 40 hours or more. Plus visiting the hospital, counseling, weddings, funerals etc.
    - learc83 12y ago
      My dad was a music director and assistant pastor. He worked about 5 days a week, and also had another job on the side. Choir practice, church functions and services, preparing sermons, visiting sick church members, counseling members, and doing charity work add up to a good bit of time.

rch 12y ago

Haven't tried it myself, but I like the idea of working a 9/80 with every other Friday off. One interesting effect is that those who are in the office on Friday end up feeling more productive or relaxed since there are fewer people around. I also wonder if every other Monday off might be better in some cases.

nostrademons 12y ago
My sister did 9/80s. They were pretty nice when she first moved to the area, but the problem is that you have to take them off on a Friday and it's use-it-or-lose-it. Now that she's married, it's pretty rare that her husband gets time off when she does, and so the extra Friday was basically just a "sit at home in front of the TV day and veg", while the 9 hour days meant that it was an hour less time to spend with her husband in the evenings. I think she's switched back to a regular schedule now. I have some former coworkers that effectively did 9/80s as well, since they maxed out their vacation and started taking every other Friday off so they wouldn't lose it. It usually worked better, ironically, for people without many hobbies, since they were okay with just sitting at home and vegging for Friday. 4-day weekends could be great if all of society moved to them, but they're tricky when it's just some employers because the people you love aren't around to hang out with. I actually tend to prefer taking Wednesday off; a veg-day to break the week in half seems much more relaxing than a 3-day weekend where you can't do anything fun for one of the days.

grimtrigger 12y ago

I would love some kind of job board for "lifestyle jobs". Thats jobs with 2 or 3 day work weeks and a 9-5 schedule. I might go as low as $60k (+ benefits) if it was offered. The closest thing to achieve that now is freelancing.

mr_luc 12y ago
Yeah -- and it's way easier to pack out 4 or 6 solid months of work than it is to find work that trickles in regularly at anything like "2 days a week," at least for me.
jodi 12y ago
Check out Escape the City. "We connect people with exciting non-corporate opportunities" http://www.escapethecity.org/ http://www.escapethecity.org/

PaulWillis 12y ago

Yes, let's work 3 days a week in the West. China will continue to work 6 or 7 days. Fast forward 10 years and the reserve currency will be the yuan.

georgemcbay 12y ago
Well, if you really believe it is as simple as being a pure numbers game then based on population counts we're going to have to find a way to work 24 to 28 days a week to keep up with the Chinese. So either your premise is horribly flawed or we're fucked no matter what we do.
- PaulWillis 12y ago
  I agree it will eventually happen, but of course it will happen faster if we're less productive.
  - joedrew 12y ago
    The whole point of advocating for fewer work days is that we are just as productive in fewer hours. That's why overtime doesn't work long-term; you wear out and do less per unit time.
    - TeMPOraL 12y ago
      I think that used to be the whole point, somewhere around one hundred years ago. I thought that now the point is, we're doing mostly bullshit jobs anyway, so how about we all agree to work a bit less and have some time to live our lives?
  - titter 12y ago
    So the reason for working longer hours is to ensure that the Chinese people have to work longer hours (which ensures that Westerners have to work longer hours)? Seems like a pretty bad prisoner's dilemma - and a pointless exercise if you already accept that China will ultimately win.
12y ago

michas 12y ago

I stopped reading after "John Maynard Keynes". This guy had no clue about true economics and we all suffer today for his insane theories. Three days workweek if stupid idea, because, as some real economist, Adam Smith said: there are three sources of wealth: land, capital and work. You cannot expect to become wealthier by just working less, for the same reason that you won't get fit by excercising less, or get smarter by learnig less.

Keyframe 12y ago

Why not half a salary?

WalterSear 12y ago
Because two 20 hour employee are worth considerably less than one 40 hour employee for all but the most menial jobs.
- 21echoes 12y ago
  [citation needed]
  - WalterSear 12y ago
    Have you worked anything other than menial jobs?
    - 21echoes 12y ago
      yes. and the science is very exhaustively on my side: time and time again, it's been shown that workers (especially knowledge workers like programmers, designers, etc.) are more productive when working less hours. * http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/wcms_187307.pdf http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---pro... * www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2002/07/en/1/ef0207en.pdf * http://sciencenordic.com/we-should-only-work-25-hours-week-argues-professor http://sciencenordic.com/we-should-only-work-25-hours-week-a... * http://news.illinois.edu/WebsandThumbs/Lleras,Alejandro/Lleras_sdarticle-17.pdf http://news.illinois.edu/WebsandThumbs/Lleras,Alejandro/Ller... * the list goes on...
shurcooL 12y ago
And half a health insurance that only covers odd days, half dental that covers odd teeth?

theophrastus 12y ago

George Jetson: "These three day work weeks are killing me." (wikipedia: "George's job primarily requires him to repeatedly push a single button") That is, isn't this a product of a far more optimistic (cartoon) past view of the future? and/or "where's my flying car?"

Xcelerate 12y ago

I find the whole economic system to be quite bizarre. Nobody's salary seems to correlate with much except their skill at getting a high salary. For instance, my sister (elementary education) makes even less than I do as a grad student. The difference is that she wakes up at 5:00 AM and works all day teaching and taking care of little kids until 7:00 PM, whereas I wake up whenever I feel like it, head to a coffee shop and work on research (which is basically a computer game for me), and mix in bike rides and whatever else as I please. The difference in salary will be even more extreme once I get my PhD. It really doesn't seem fair, and when I think about the vast majority of the world population in other countries, it seems even less fair. I used to have a more conservative stance that if you want to get more, you just have to work harder, but now I've reversed my stance completely: I think it's mostly luck -- where you were born, who you know, what your social skills are, and if you just happen to be in the right place at the right time. Many jobs seem like they exist solely for the sake of creating more jobs. We have managers of managers of managers. A lot of people don't put a lot of effort into their work (they spend their day browsing the internet), and the ones that do put in an honest effort don't seem to be rewarded for it. The hardest-working employees are rarely promoted into administrative positions. And the best way to increase one's salary is to job hop instead of remaining loyal to one company (http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees-that-stay-in-companies-longer-than-2-years-get-paid-50-less/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees...). I feel like many people have this ingrained notion that you're just "supposed to work" for so many hours a week, and no one is seriously pursuing the goal of creating leisure time (or at least work that's personally enjoyable). We have more than enough technological capability to provide basic survival needs to everyone on the planet, yet we're nowhere close to achieving that goal. Again, I don't know why it's this way. But it is, and it just seems wrong to me.

exstudent 12y ago
I think there are two separate issues in your comment... You make more than your sister doing "less" work because knowledge and high level skills are a value multiplier. You may come up with a world changing idea that generates billions of dollars. No kindergarden teacher could achieve that. Pay matches accordingly. Your second point is that there seems to be a lot of people with useless jobs and I couldn't agree more. We're RAPIDLY approaching the point where most people are employed to do basically nothing of value. How many people's jobs could be replaced by the mythical "script" written in a day by a good dev? I'm glad to see us get to this point. People should learn and practice useful skills. So as not to cause a violent revolution, I think we do need some form of basic income though. That would also enable creatives to experiment and produce without economic pressure which I think is great. I also don't care if 99% of people mooch off this model as most people are just wasting time at work as it is anyway.

padobson 12y ago

Economists of yore were wise to see that productivity would increase dramatically, but they were wrong in believing that surplus productivity would translate into leisure time. I look at Google and Ycombinator as the model for the future economy, if economic systems are left unchecked by the threat of physical force. How many people are working at Google everyday on a product that will never produce one red cent? Hundreds? Thousands? How many funded YCombinator startups will never provide a return on investment? 60%? 80%? These days, the smart money is taking all their surplus productivity and putting it into long-shots to create even more surplus productivity. This explains why industries like software development, that have such an enormous productivity surplus, are paying such high wages right now. One could even argue that the shortage of skilled individuals in such an environment will lead to an increase in demand for those who can train such people - leading to something like a more organic education system.

jazzyk 12y ago
"paying such high wages" High wages? Not compared to doctors or lawyers or mid-level business folks. My friend is a marketing manager (a glorified secretary/copy writer with an MBA, by her own admission) and she makes more or less as much as a senior developer. Enough already with the "high wages" myth. It is the exact cause for the shortage of software engineers in the US - most young people in the US don't want to pursue it because the reward is not commensurate with the effort and risk.