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

211–220 of 279 posts

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

#211

Post by InclinedPlane »

michaelochurch wrote: post #42

25 hours is a good number for average people. I'd say 15-20, even. Ambitious or highly dedicated people will always work more than that, and that's a good thing. What they should have is a lot more freedom in how they spend that time-- working two jobs, one job and school, side projects. The problem is this bullshit conformist fiction in which everyone has to pretend to be ambitious (but only internally) and dedicate…

In my opinion the biggest problem is not either of these things, it's the labor and tax laws.

Today working around 40 hours a week is an important prerequisite for a great many important things such as the traditional suite of full-time employee benefits (health insurance, for example).

Additionally, social security and medicare taxes take 14% of income right off the top, and then federal and state income tax adds onto that. Such high tax burdens make it much more difficult for people to build up their own savings, and it's no surprise that savings rates have plummeted over the years. Lack of savings results in greater dependence on employers and less negotiating capability for non-traditional work hours.

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

#212

Post by pc86 »

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…

> Almost everyone who has ever lived (and almost everyone living today) would consider themselves lucky to have the spending power of an American on minimum wage.

And those people you're speaking of live in rural China or sub-Saharan Africa. Someone is not "lucky" by any global standard to be making minimum wage delivering pizzas in NYC or LA.

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

#213

Post by JoeAltmaier »

pc86 wrote: post #212
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…

> Almost everyone who has ever lived (and almost everyone living today) would consider themselves lucky to have the spending power of an American on minimum wage. And those people you're speaking of live in rural China or sub-Saharan Africa. Someone is not "lucky" by any global standard to be making minimum wage delivering pizzas in NYC or LA.

Oh come on. That person is a bus ride away from some cheaper place, where they can live in comparative comfort.

Its exactly those available resources that separate 1st-world from 3rd-world. We are like fish, who cannot sense the water.

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

#214

Post by userulluipeste »

nitrogen wrote: post #190
samstave wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jesus, you and ctdonath sound like 20-something morons. Get a fucking life with several mortgages and children. Or, better yet - go live the idolized life of the genius software development hermit you both appear to think yourself to be. What a wonderful life that will be. I am so sick of these douchebag HNers that all think of themselves to be the next rails revolution and have no fucking clue as to what it actually…

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.

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

#215

Post by ozgung »

zurn wrote: post #134
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…

> We overwhelmingly choose to work the greatest number of hours we can sustainably tolerate (somewhere between 40 and 60 hours for most people), in order to maximise our spending power. Not so: http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DatasetCode=AVE_HRS (the statistic above excludes vacatyion and national holidays, sick leave, paid maternity/paternity leave etc, which are also much more generous these days) Note how the wel…

Wow, one of those lists that we're at the top position as Turkey, with an almost 50-hour work week (plus 10-15 hours for commuting). I work in a science park inside a university campus and it's mandatory to work at least 45 hours a week. I always thought this is an insanely counter-productive policy and now I have statistical proof.

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

#216

Post by StavrosK »

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.

Healthcare, too, and jobs, if possible. It's not working very well here in Greece, due to the economy, but we still try.

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

#217

Post by adventured »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #114
jseliger wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. I'm not convinced this is true: there are also intense coordination costs and learning costs. Two programmers working 20 hours a week, for example, are way less productive tha…

Sorry, I must disagree. Two people working 20 hours a week are refreshed, not burned out, have time for educationally side projects, etc. I am in my early 60s and for my whole life I limited my work hours to 32 hours per week, even working for large companies. I had lots of time for educational side projects, exercise, extra time with family and friends, and mediation. My only regret was not perhaps cutting this to l…

That's a very subjective statement. I don't get even remotely burned out by 40 hours of work per week. I work every day of the week. I work when I want to. I don't have a family. I'm 32 years old. The organization of my life is by strict choice, and I love what I do, so I prefer to work longer hours. I'm more productive when I work 40+ hours.

I spend time learning, doing R&D / experimenting, doing product work, etc. The most fun I have is on the R&D. I've been doing it for 17 years straight and there's nothing else I'd rather be doing, I rarely suffer from exhaustion / burnout (and that's always when somethings fails, rather than feeling tired by the actual work).

This discussion is also going to vary dramatically based on the structure of your current life, including family / job / mood / etc. Adding further to the subjectivity of it.

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

#218

Post by dragons »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #213
pc86 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Almost everyone who has ever lived (and almost everyone living today) would consider themselves lucky to have the spending power of an American on minimum wage. And those people you're speaking of live in rural China or sub-Saharan Africa. Someone is not "lucky" by any global standard to be making minimum wage delivering pizzas in NYC or LA.

Oh come on. That person is a bus ride away from some cheaper place, where they can live in comparative comfort. Its exactly those available resources that separate 1st-world from 3rd-world. We are like fish, who cannot sense the water.

What if that person is a dad who has two kids, a wife, and parents living locally, who take care of their kids during the day? Not everyone can so easily be uprooted.

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

#219

Post by JoeAltmaier »

dragons wrote: post #218
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh come on. That person is a bus ride away from some cheaper place, where they can live in comparative comfort. Its exactly those available resources that separate 1st-world from 3rd-world. We are like fish, who cannot sense the water.

What if that person is a dad who has two kids, a wife, and parents living locally, who take care of their kids during the day? Not everyone can so easily be uprooted.

Yes, that's a difficult choice. Still, they have the choice. They can take the bus, or ride a train, or move in with the parents. Not to mention the free clinic open 24 hours, and the internet, and food stamps, and on and on.

The point is, its a 1st world problem no matter how you cut it. "My job is not satisfying. I wish I had more money for discretionary spending." These are not 'real' problems.

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

#220

Post by Mvandenbergh »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #211
michaelochurch wrote: post #42

25 hours is a good number for average people. I'd say 15-20, even. Ambitious or highly dedicated people will always work more than that, and that's a good thing. What they should have is a lot more freedom in how they spend that time-- working two jobs, one job and school, side projects. The problem is this bullshit conformist fiction in which everyone has to pretend to be ambitious (but only internally) and dedicate…

In my opinion the biggest problem is not either of these things, it's the labor and tax laws. Today working around 40 hours a week is an important prerequisite for a great many important things such as the traditional suite of full-time employee benefits (health insurance, for example). Additionally, social security and medicare taxes take 14% of income right off the top, and then federal and state income tax adds on…

If that were the case then savings rates should have trended upwards over the last few decades as tax rates have come down in the US.
Post reply on HN