Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 73 posts

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#51

Post by Xurinos »

cubicle67 wrote: post #11

I work between 25 and 30 hours a week. I don't earn a great income, especially compared to figures mentioned here, but it's enough to pay the bills and I'd rather spend more time at home than at work. It works because we have a very modest house with an equally modest mortgage. We own the car, my wife runs a very tight budget and we don't have many other outgoings. Our largest expense (greater than the mortgage payme…

The downside to the extra time I have, is that I haven't exactly used it wisely - in fact I've mostly squandered it, which makes me sad looking back at the year gone by.

I have been thinking about this myself, and I realized something: This squandering that I am doing... I WANT to squander. I want that playtime or whatever. It was what I enjoy at that time. Is it truly time wasted?

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#52

Post by yummyfajitas »

billjings wrote: post #47
yummyfajitas wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide a source? It sounds interesting, if true. Such a result has interesting implications. Since we know the demand for medicine is not perfectly inelastic (various experiments with copays prove this), it would suggest that some external force (insurance companies?) is keeping prices down and the constraining factor is supply.

If you haven't already read Atul Gawande's New Yorker piece comparing medical care expenses in McAllen, TX vs El Paso, TX, then here you go: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_... Obviously it covers more than just this particular topic, but the odd behavior of markets for health care is a central concern he addresses.

I was kind of hoping for more than just 2 data points (McAllen and El Paso). Maybe even some hard numbers.

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#53

Post by [deleted] »

Xurinos wrote: post #51
cubicle67 wrote: post #11

I work between 25 and 30 hours a week. I don't earn a great income, especially compared to figures mentioned here, but it's enough to pay the bills and I'd rather spend more time at home than at work. It works because we have a very modest house with an equally modest mortgage. We own the car, my wife runs a very tight budget and we don't have many other outgoings. Our largest expense (greater than the mortgage payme…

The downside to the extra time I have, is that I haven't exactly used it wisely - in fact I've mostly squandered it, which makes me sad looking back at the year gone by. I have been thinking about this myself, and I realized something: This squandering that I am doing... I WANT to squander. I want that playtime or whatever. It was what I enjoy at that time. Is it truly time wasted?

[deleted]

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#55

Post by pavel_lishin »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #48
jasonkester wrote: post #42

I often hear people making statements like the one in the title (I'd kill to...), but usually the first response that jumps into my head is "No, you wouldn't." If you really wanted a four day work week, you would have one. You'd make it a priority and either negotiate it into your current job or go find an employer who was flexible enough to allow it. The fact that you're working 5 days a week can be taken as a state…

You seem to assume everyone can get anything they want, any time.

Not everyone, but drive matters.

If a four-day week was important enough for you to literally kill for - and yeah, that's hyperbole - you could probably find a way of making it happen if it was more important to you than to everyone else.

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#56

Post by pavel_lishin »

cubicle67 wrote: post #11

I work between 25 and 30 hours a week. I don't earn a great income, especially compared to figures mentioned here, but it's enough to pay the bills and I'd rather spend more time at home than at work. It works because we have a very modest house with an equally modest mortgage. We own the car, my wife runs a very tight budget and we don't have many other outgoings. Our largest expense (greater than the mortgage payme…

Who was it that said, "The time you enjoyed wasting wasn't wasted"?

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#57

Post by neild »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #46
neild wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have had "part time doctors" in the US for a while, not to mention a movement toward "girl specialties" (read: gyno/derm/few others). It's a significant contributor to our rising medical costs. Actually, an increase in the number of doctors (or, presumably doctor-hours) seems to lead to an increase in medical care costs. Adding more doctors increases the amount of medical service provided rather than providing the…

Could you provide a source? It sounds interesting, if true. Such a result has interesting implications. Since we know the demand for medicine is not perfectly inelastic (various experiments with copays prove this), it would suggest that some external force (insurance companies?) is keeping prices down and the constraining factor is supply.

There's one article in particular that I'd like to link to, but I'm having difficulty digging it up.

If you'd like some data to play with, however:

https://www.cms.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/05_NationalHeal... http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2010/ranks/rank18.htm...

The former contains Medicare spending per enrollee on a per-state basis, and the latter has the number of doctors per capita.

Of the top ten states in Medicare spending per enrollee, six are in the top ten in doctors per capita.

This is all just a back of the envelope calculation, of course, but it does argue against the thesis that more doctors equals cheaper health care.

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#59

Post by maw »

jasonkester wrote: post #42

I often hear people making statements like the one in the title (I'd kill to...), but usually the first response that jumps into my head is "No, you wouldn't." If you really wanted a four day work week, you would have one. You'd make it a priority and either negotiate it into your current job or go find an employer who was flexible enough to allow it. The fact that you're working 5 days a week can be taken as a state…

That would be really nice if it were true.

For some people it is; for many more it simply is not.

Re: Oooh - I'd kill for a four day week...

#60

Post by hessenwolf »

jasonkester wrote: post #42

I often hear people making statements like the one in the title (I'd kill to...), but usually the first response that jumps into my head is "No, you wouldn't." If you really wanted a four day work week, you would have one. You'd make it a priority and either negotiate it into your current job or go find an employer who was flexible enough to allow it. The fact that you're working 5 days a week can be taken as a state…

Mmmm... are you taking this very literally?

I indulged in hyperbole. I mean that I would really like a four day week. It would be good for my personal research.

If I have kids, I would still like the option to work a four day week, but for different reasons. By kids, I mean children, not baby goats. I used slang just there.

Post reply on HN