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

The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

lessfoolish.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 92 posts

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#31

Post by bawolff »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #6
bawolff wrote: post #2

The article defines the opposite of being a workaholic ("work matyr") as > “Time Indifference – We put off what must be done and do not use our time to support our own vision and further our own goals.” Personally i can't really identify with that view. I find work hardest to focus on when it is opposed to my own vision/goals (other then the goal to pay my rent). I suppose its still the same thing as a second order e…

> spending time procrastinating is usually more time then just straight up doing it, which is less time on your own goals When it comes to employment, I've never found it actually benefits me all that much to work hard and deliver results early. And it doesn't free me up that extra time to pursue my own goals either. I don't think I'm alone in this.

For me, there is a difference between "procrastinating" where i can't really focus on the thing im supposed to be doing but also can't really do anything else because im super stresssd & anxious about it, and just intentionally putting something off

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#32

Post by nyokodo »

tw04 wrote: post #15
xyzelement wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

//It’s strange that we even work more or even at the same amount of time as 100 years ago. We don’t. A hundred years the average man was putting in 7 to 7 shifts on the factory or the farm. Physically exhausting, dangerous and painful labor that required your physical presence and likely left you too exhausted for anything else. Today you and I are click clacking our keyboards in a safe and air conditioned environmen…

Much like the anti-vax movement, the average American seems in complete denial of how things really were a hundred years ago. Prior to unions, work looked completely different - EVERYONE has benefitted from the change unions brought about. It's easy to tell yourself that sort of thing would never happen in a country like this when you weren't a direct witness to people (including children) literally being worked to d…

> Prior to unions, work looked completely different

Average working hours were dropping for decades before Labor Unions became popular in the 1930s driven by the productivity gains referenced elsewhere in the thread. The trend continued unabated other than an increase during WWII even after Union membership peaked in 1980 and dropped for 30 years. It doesn’t seem that Labor Unions were the cause of this improvement trend.

1. https://ourworldindata.org/working-hours

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#33

Post by bawolff »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #30
jvanderbot wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument has another side, equally preposterous: That because of the increased productivity we should all be wealthy, working a few hours a day to do the "same" work, or being rewarded proportionally more (of course, inflation adjusted) for working more than that. It's preposterous because relative wages have stagnated relative to productivity boons, but oh man has standard of living increased as you say. A perso…

Can we trade iPhones and TVs for retiring at 40, with healthcare, housing, and food for life?

I mean, if you work in tech (high wages), live somewhere not america (free healthcare), are willing to live somewhere not ostentatious, the answer is almost certainly yes.

There is a whole movement around it called FIRE.

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#34

Post by klyrs »

jhp123 wrote: post #25
xyzelement wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

//It’s strange that we even work more or even at the same amount of time as 100 years ago. We don’t. A hundred years the average man was putting in 7 to 7 shifts on the factory or the farm. Physically exhausting, dangerous and painful labor that required your physical presence and likely left you too exhausted for anything else. Today you and I are click clacking our keyboards in a safe and air conditioned environmen…

The idea that in 1924 people were working 84-hour weeks (including Sunday!) is preposterous. For example Ford introduced the 8-hour day at its factories in 1914.

You were responding to somebody talking about farm labor, by talking about industrial labor. I'm not gonna pick a side here, but to say that what you each present as fact is not in conflict.

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#35

Post by JackMorgan »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #30
jvanderbot wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument has another side, equally preposterous: That because of the increased productivity we should all be wealthy, working a few hours a day to do the "same" work, or being rewarded proportionally more (of course, inflation adjusted) for working more than that. It's preposterous because relative wages have stagnated relative to productivity boons, but oh man has standard of living increased as you say. A perso…

Can we trade iPhones and TVs for retiring at 40, with healthcare, housing, and food for life?

There is this, https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-si... which is pretty similar. And yes, I am well aware not everyone can achieve this. Families are expensive, eating out with friends is expensive, not everyone makes $X per year.

But still, some people live on as little as possible and invest in their retirement aggressively. I have some friends who are into this, they drive that same shitty car from college, live with roommates, cook everything at home, etc. They are content living with that knowing they are investing for retirement in their 40s.

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#36

Post by nyokodo »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #30
jvanderbot wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument has another side, equally preposterous: That because of the increased productivity we should all be wealthy, working a few hours a day to do the "same" work, or being rewarded proportionally more (of course, inflation adjusted) for working more than that. It's preposterous because relative wages have stagnated relative to productivity boons, but oh man has standard of living increased as you say. A perso…

Can we trade iPhones and TVs for retiring at 40, with healthcare, housing, and food for life?

> Can we trade iPhones and TVs for retiring at 40, with healthcare, housing, and food for life?

No, because we don’t have enough people younger than 40 to support half the population being retired, let alone the productivity loss from the absence of later career workers, nor the loss of capital and tax income from those age groups. The only alternative would be autonomous robots and they require the skill and capital those age groups provide and autonomous robots are way harder than iPhones and TVs!

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#37

Post by bee_rider »

Terr_ wrote: post #26

> To be time drunk means to be so “drunk” that one forgets time exists. Hold up, there's something off about this terminology. When alcohol-drinks are drunk on alcohol, they may forget many things, but the existence of (more) alcohol is not typically one of them!

One could forget how many drinks they consumed. Although, I guess, probably not that one is drinking in general.

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#38

Post by OJFord »

Terr_ wrote: post #26

> To be time drunk means to be so “drunk” that one forgets time exists. Hold up, there's something off about this terminology. When alcohol-drinks are drunk on alcohol, they may forget many things, but the existence of (more) alcohol is not typically one of them!

> When alcohol-drinks are drunk on alcohol

Hang on, how many have you had? :'D

I guess it could make sense like 'enjoying using lots of time', so forgetting it exists in the sense of not caring about ifs passage?

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#39

Post by richrichie »

tw04 wrote: post #15
xyzelement wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

//It’s strange that we even work more or even at the same amount of time as 100 years ago. We don’t. A hundred years the average man was putting in 7 to 7 shifts on the factory or the farm. Physically exhausting, dangerous and painful labor that required your physical presence and likely left you too exhausted for anything else. Today you and I are click clacking our keyboards in a safe and air conditioned environmen…

Much like the anti-vax movement, the average American seems in complete denial of how things really were a hundred years ago. Prior to unions, work looked completely different - EVERYONE has benefitted from the change unions brought about. It's easy to tell yourself that sort of thing would never happen in a country like this when you weren't a direct witness to people (including children) literally being worked to d…

Indeed. I would also add the climate-change cult to the list. They forget how bad things were just 100 years ago.

Re: The virtuous mean between time drunkenness and work martyrdom

#40

Post by OJFord »

ralph84 wrote: post #7
zitterbewegung wrote: post #4

It’s strange that we even work more or even at the same amount of time as 100 years ago. We have systems that increase worker productivity and even software by itself for the most part should be decreasing the amount of work to be done since it’s supposedly a large force multiplier for productivity. Economists predicted we would be working less (but they are bad at predicting most things) so while there might be a fe…

Because humans don’t care about absolute wealth they care about relative wealth. As long as someone else is working more there’s going to be pressure to keep up with them.

I assume 'absolute wealth' means some amount (or not) of property, assets, that one's content with? Not like I'll be happy with 100k in the bank no matter how much anyone else has - because that just doesn't make sense, it's inherently relative; to care about the absolute value we have to mean real goods.

So then I think it's just plainly not true? I think most people even want particular things, not to have the same or more things as others. To the extent that it's clichéd parenting, or associated with derogatory remarks like 'social climber', 'keeping up with the Jones', etc.

Certainly Instagram and 'influencer' culture in general acts against that, but it's not hard to find people eschewing it either.

Post reply on HN