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

We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

sciencenordic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 279 posts

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#241

Post by flyinRyan »

javert wrote: post #167
yakiv wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. If you don't ban monopoly power, people sometimes get it (like Rockefeller sort of did). You don't get all of the nice properties of free markets unless some conditions are met, like the absence of monopolies. Edit: That being said, government can get involved in the wrong ways and cause problems with subsidies and bad regulation.

Actually, monopolies come from the government explicitly banning or regulating away competition. Yes, it's true that you can't get the nice properties of a free market without some conditions being met. Specifically, you need the government to be the arbiter of physical force between people. Otherwise, you have gang warfare (anarchism).

>Otherwise, you have gang warfare (anarchism).

Wow, way to punctuate a diatribe of ignorance with equating anarchism with gang warfare.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#242

Post by flyinRyan »

readme wrote: post #230
olliesaunders wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We should all do whatever the fuck we want, until we die. Yeah but we’re not allowed to. Most employers will demands you show up for 40 hours a week and then frown at you or, at least, never promote you if you don’t stay for a lot more.

We are allowed to. You choose your employer, ergo, you choose your work schedule.

Yea, if you didn't take that job playing video games for $1M/minute then it's your fault, idiot. Oh wait, that doesn't exist and all and your argument is juvenile.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#243

Post by minopret »

jdietrich wrote: post #92

In the 1950s, there was the great promise of "the leisure society" - a future of such material abundance that most people would hardly need to work. That society became possible, but we systematically rejected it in favour of more consumption. The cost of living hasn't meaningfully increased, we've just continually redefined luxuries as necessities. My grandparents are perfectly typical working-class people. They gre…

I suppose nearly all of those reading Hacker News (and the majority of the people in USA) are in the global 2% or so, at least if we measure similarly as here: http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#244

Post by marvin »

xijuan wrote: post #86

But ....what about college students???? People rarely talk about the fact that college students can be as stressful if not more stressful. In graduate school, students are expected to work/study almost all the time... Should we also have a reduce in our work/study load?

You could in principle do the same. I'm currently in a Masters program and have been doing what this link describes since I first started university: Four or five hours of very focused work each day, followed by real leisure time.

Granted, it might be different if I were doing a PhD, but at least up until where I am now this has worked perfectly. I get done just as much while being less stressed and feeling a lot better about life.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#245

Post by readme »

tossacct wrote: post #64
ahomescu1 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could start your own company, be your own employer and work as much as you feel like.

>>>You could start your own company, be your own employer and work as much as you feel like. Most people in the United States do not have this option because they do not have enough money to do so.

It's more about determination and wit than money, IMO.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#246

Post by samstave »

ctdonath wrote: post #223
muoncf wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm honestly curious about this since, even as a student, I'm living on more than that per day. Could you tell me more?

Start with these to get the idea: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com http://tinyhouseblog.com/ http://mypatriotsupply.com Shop at the Dollar Store, Goodwill, Aldi, etc. Look for foreclosed, abandoned, and other dirt cheap real estate; search Zillow.com for sub-$1000 properties (not a typo). Plant a garden. Move. No excuses.

"Move. No excuses"

You sound like a pompous jerk.

This advice is ridiculous.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#247

Post by BSousa »

zurn wrote: post #154
__--__ wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering I just spend the last month putting in 80+ hour weeks along with all of my co-workers, might I humbly suggest you put "n=1" after your post? Then again, I work in video games. Long hours are the industry standard.

I hope the 80 hour standard doesn't spread to the rest of the world, lest the games biz loses all the talented workforce with any sense ;)

Most are already leaving.

I was in the industry and left, and I know many that people I worked with have left as well after about 10 years.

In the UK, I might be mistaken as I read the article a while ago, but it is the (or top 5) industry where people spend less time compared to other creative/professional careers.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#248

Post by samstave »

userulluipeste wrote: post #214
nitrogen wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If something else about life is bothering you, it's probably best not to take it out on us naive 20-somethings. Either way it's clear something about this thread has deeply upset you (happens to all of us), so if it's something deeper going on I wish you luck sorting it out. If not, at the least, I too wish it was possible to live on $10/day and still have some semblance of a family and social life.

I met a lot of people probably like samstave, making a lot of uninspired decisions, like drowning themselves in debt and such, then here comes someone telling about $10/day... Those people feel miserably and "deeply upset" of course, especially because there is no easy way out.

I have zero debt. I make well over $100K per year.

I just get really riled up by the soapbox statements like "I can show you how to live on $10/day" and stating things like "move out of the bay area." a "Simple move" and "no excuses"

This "advice" is ridiculous.

It is simply stupid and arrogant for someone to claim that you can live off $10/day.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#249

Post by tossacct »

burntsushi wrote: post #234
tossacct wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>So long as scarcity exists, [living without constraint] is fundamentally impossible. Absolutely agree. >>>They have the option to raise that money. Absolutely disagree. They are working 2 and 3 jobs, my friend. They do not have the money to raise that money. >>>You're searching for the ability to live without constraint. Please explain where I indicated this, I did not mean to.

The context of this discussion is this comment by olliesaunders: > Yeah but we’re not allowed to. Most employers will demands you show up for 40 hours a week and then frown at you or, at least, never promote you if you don’t stay for a lot more. The whole point here is that we aren't limited to what our employer "allows" us to do. We choose to follow the directions of any particular employer because it typically rewa…

>>>The context of this discussion is this comment by olliesaunders:

Thank you for your thoughtful comment, I will try to explain my original comment for you.

I agree with you that starting a business is possible in the legal sense and it is a culturally acceptable thing to do. The US government and the general socio-economic climate of the US makes it morally, legally, and socio-economically possible to start a business. Agreed.

Here is my response to olliesaunders:

>>>Most people in the United States do not have this option [starting a business] because they do not have enough money to do so.

If starting a business takes X amount of time, Y amount of money, and Z amount of skill, my contention is that most Americans do not have sufficient levels of each. To say nothing of the luck involved.

So with that in mind, let me reply to part of your most recent comment:

>>>You are making the argument that people in the US don't have options. Of course they have options.

This I agree with, as stated above.

>>>The costs may be high to exercise those options, but that doesn't mean they don't have them.

This I do not agree with. Starting a business costs Q amount of money. A certain segment of the population will never earn that much money in their entire lives.

To be snarky, I will likely never earn enough money to buy an island. The fact that it is legal to buy an island does not make buying an island an option for me.

Re: We should only work 25 hours a week, argues professor

#250

Post by tossacct »

yaix wrote: post #193
tossacct wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is a good thing that individuals control their own money, and can choose to give it to whomever they want. Can we agree that people with no money will starve to death unless they use violence to take food from someone, or the government uses violence to take food from someone on their behalf? The foodstamps of this great depression are equivalent to the soup lines of the old great depression: they prevent…

I don't know in the US, but here in Europe the gov't does not need to "use violence" for that. It is pretty much general consensus that people with no monies should get money (not "foodstamps") from the gov't, payed by our taxes, so they can live with dignity, independently of what the reason for their unemployment / poverty might be.

I agree that the governments typically don't need to "use violence". Do you agree that the "threat of violence" is sufficient?

I can't speak to Europe as a whole or the specific country you are from. In the US, you can be put in jail for non-payment of taxes. We have good old debtors' prisons. Also, if you are hungry and take food that does not "belong to you", there are certain criminal laws that can result in imprisonment. How do European governments deal with non-payment of taxes and the taking of food?

By the way, US "foodstamps" are now called "EBT" and you get a normal looking debit card that has certain restrictions on how it can be used (no buying shoes, only food ingredients).

Post reply on HN