4 ms·

Sometimes I think about how even the number 40 is totally arbitrary. If we made the norm 30, would things be that different? It's such a sad thought that ~half

by sktrdie 11y ago

Sometimes I think about how even the number 40 is totally arbitrary. If we made the norm 30, would things be that different? It's such a sad thought that ~half (if not more) of the time we are alive, we spend at work, mostly doing something we don't like. Then I look at this from a cosmic prospective, where we live in this tiny little planet inside a huge universe we barely know anything about, and yet we were able to create a system of living with one another that requires us to do something we don't want to most of the time!

Frondo 11y ago
Oh it's heartbreaking to think about. This, now, in the 2010s, is the world we've allowed to happen (or been complicit in building). I saw this in an article someone sent me recently: ".. a 1965 Senate subcommittee predicted we would be working 14 hours a week by the year 2000, with at least seven weeks of vacation time." Well, that didn't happen, though our businesses are far more productive than they've ever been in history. Can anyone offer a defense of the continued 40-hour work week, the lack of paid vacation (or people's general unwillingness to use it?), and the way all those productivity gains have all benefited a very, very tiny amount of people?
- themoonbus 11y ago
  Not a defense, but I feel part of it is due to the value we place in our society in on being busy, see: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/30/the-busy-trap/ http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/30/the-busy-tra... It's not just in the workplace that we equate being busy with being important.
  - norea-armozel 11y ago
    That reminds me of a lecture by Murray Rothbard regarding the matter of productivity and religious beliefs. He noted that Catholicism although sees idleness as a sin, it doesn't confuse leisure time with it. Whereas Protestants of the time of the Reformation (and there after to some extent) saw leisure as idleness (thus a sin). It makes me wonder how much religion has affected our social norms even today beyond the obvious question of prohibitions on certain sexualities, drinks, and the like.
- dylanjermiah 11y ago
  "and the way all those productivity gains have all benefited a very, very tiny amount of people? " The quality of life has been rapidly increasing for the entire planet. Visit ourworldindata.org and view all 16 of the data entries.
  - Frondo 11y ago
    I'm talking about the U.S. While it's great that other countries have experienced a benefit, I don't really want to see Americans keep working the way we have been, so that the tiny slice of ultra-wealthy in our country can continue to enrich themselves. And...since this article is about overwork--and how we're putting in longer hours--I really don't see what the point is in bringing up developing nations' economic status, except to try and distract us from how much harder we're working.
sitkack 11y ago
We have constructed a big prison and some fools get it "run it" but even they still have to work there. It isn't just work, it is commuting, having a lawn, having a house just like the neighbors. Our free will is illusory when the box the particle is in only has a handful of states. The depth and breadth of possibilities for existence are huge but we have constrained them to a very narrow swath. Blue pill, red pill.
Chinjut 11y ago
This is the saddest thing. Not only have we set up this system of living, but we've also acclimated to it, in the manner of Stockholm Syndrome, to the point where many reflexively defend it and excoriate those who propose living differently. [And of course 40 hours/week is totally arbitrary! It wasn't determined by science or principle (a nice round multiple of 10 like that (in our arbitrary time units of 24-day hours and 7-day weeks)...). It's just the milepost the labor movement happened to get to before, for other reasons, ceasing to exist as a force of note. Before the standardization of the 40 hour workweek, you could surely hear perfectly analogous arguments for the objective naturality of the 50, or 60, or whatever, hour workweek as you would now for 40.]

by sktrdie 11y ago

Frondo 11y ago

Oh it's heartbreaking to think about. This, now, in the 2010s, is the world we've allowed to happen (or been complicit in building). I saw this in an article someone sent me recently: ".. a 1965 Senate subcommittee predicted we would be working 14 hours a week by the year 2000, with at least seven weeks of vacation time." Well, that didn't happen, though our businesses are far more productive than they've ever been in history. Can anyone offer a defense of the continued 40-hour work week, the lack of paid vacation (or people's general unwillingness to use it?), and the way all those productivity gains have all benefited a very, very tiny amount of people?

themoonbus 11y ago
Not a defense, but I feel part of it is due to the value we place in our society in on being busy, see: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/30/the-busy-trap/ http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/30/the-busy-tra... It's not just in the workplace that we equate being busy with being important.
- norea-armozel 11y ago
  That reminds me of a lecture by Murray Rothbard regarding the matter of productivity and religious beliefs. He noted that Catholicism although sees idleness as a sin, it doesn't confuse leisure time with it. Whereas Protestants of the time of the Reformation (and there after to some extent) saw leisure as idleness (thus a sin). It makes me wonder how much religion has affected our social norms even today beyond the obvious question of prohibitions on certain sexualities, drinks, and the like.
dylanjermiah 11y ago
"and the way all those productivity gains have all benefited a very, very tiny amount of people? " The quality of life has been rapidly increasing for the entire planet. Visit ourworldindata.org and view all 16 of the data entries.
- Frondo 11y ago
  I'm talking about the U.S. While it's great that other countries have experienced a benefit, I don't really want to see Americans keep working the way we have been, so that the tiny slice of ultra-wealthy in our country can continue to enrich themselves. And...since this article is about overwork--and how we're putting in longer hours--I really don't see what the point is in bringing up developing nations' economic status, except to try and distract us from how much harder we're working.

sitkack 11y ago

We have constructed a big prison and some fools get it "run it" but even they still have to work there. It isn't just work, it is commuting, having a lawn, having a house just like the neighbors. Our free will is illusory when the box the particle is in only has a handful of states. The depth and breadth of possibilities for existence are huge but we have constrained them to a very narrow swath. Blue pill, red pill.

Chinjut 11y ago

This is the saddest thing. Not only have we set up this system of living, but we've also acclimated to it, in the manner of Stockholm Syndrome, to the point where many reflexively defend it and excoriate those who propose living differently. [And of course 40 hours/week is totally arbitrary! It wasn't determined by science or principle (a nice round multiple of 10 like that (in our arbitrary time units of 24-day hours and 7-day weeks)...). It's just the milepost the labor movement happened to get to before, for other reasons, ceasing to exist as a force of note. Before the standardization of the 40 hour workweek, you could surely hear perfectly analogous arguments for the objective naturality of the 50, or 60, or whatever, hour workweek as you would now for 40.]