181–190 of 523 posts
The 40h a day week and modern-day work contracts come as a direct evolution of medieval servitude, with little modification. This explains the system of values that revolve around it, such as for example the notion that it's somewhat something to be ashamed of for an employee to leave its employer, while it's perfectly OK for the employer to terminate the employee at any time. The servant was not expected to leave it…
Factory workers used to work 6 12 hour days. Then 5 12 hour days. Then 5 10 hour days. Now, more like 5 8 hour days.
We live better than kings and plutocrats did 100 years ago, with luxuries undreamed of in history, and with amazing freedoms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is taking care of the children? Who works in the daycares?
I live in Germany, both my kids go to public kindergarten/daycare (there is no distinction between the 2 here, it starts when the child is 1 year old) & the kindergarten teachers are mostly German themselves. They don't earn great wages but they are not indentured servants either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remote work may influence this. Commuting to a workplace just to do the things you might as well do from home will be considered old-fashioned, inefficient and/or shameful in a few years, if my crystal ball is not lying.
The problem with that this is is co located teams are a massive multiplier - very few jobs are truly singleton roles.
When working similar to the Basecamp guys it's even the other way around.
Write problems down and give people time to chew on them. Everyone adds his thoughts and refining the idea will lead to better results than a two hours meeting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Countries where it's normal for both parents to work rely on a serf class, usually of immigrant women, to care for their children at terrible wages so both parents can work. I wonder how long this can be sustainable.
In my country (Poland) we "use" grandparents for that.
-- Bertrand Russell
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Libertarian anti-working-class vitriol Libertarians are not anti-working-class.
Maybe anti-poor is a better description? Could also be that I only notice the assholes and the milder form of libertarians just don't stick out as much :)
No. Libertarians are against any sort of class system (i.e. legal privileges for certain groups). They are neither anti-rich nor anti-poor. Of course, there are libertarians who are jerks, but that isn't what Libertarianism is about. Also, most people only hear about Libertarianism from non-Libertarians, hence they only hear negative things about it.
Libertarianism is mainly about people being free to choose, and being responsible for their choices, as long as they aren't hurting others in the process.
Milton Friedman's book "Free to Choose" is a good introduction if you're interested in more.
The 40h a day week and modern-day work contracts come as a direct evolution of medieval servitude, with little modification. This explains the system of values that revolve around it, such as for example the notion that it's somewhat something to be ashamed of for an employee to leave its employer, while it's perfectly OK for the employer to terminate the employee at any time. The servant was not expected to leave it…
Your entire post is overgeneralization and dramatizing to prove some poorly thought out hypothesis but this here is the most obvious example. When there is enough choice people change jobs all the time - the demand in my local dev market went through the roof last couple of years for multiple reasons - I see people change 2 jobs within a year, demand all sorts of things - last round of job interviews I did the interviewers spent double the time explaining why their company was a great fit for me instead of actually interviewing me for position - compared to the usual narrative of asking why I fit them.
The situation is pretty much dictated by supply/demand and both sides take advantage. Firing and quitting can have negative implications for both sides, just depends on scenario.
I don't see where shame enters the equation.