While I can understand the injustice/suffering aspect of the workweek, I'd lke to point out that good coordination among people, organizations, government bodies, etc. could actually reduce the workweek to fewer days. If you can carry out a task in 3 days, why work for 5 day? Kairos (timing) is what I'm talking about and not Chronos (time).

This is where the whole Marxist idea gets messy with reality.

Is doing a job for 3 hrs worth the same as doing a job for 5 hrs if paid hourly? Should jobs be paid equally or not - how/why?

This is where the whole Marxist idea gets messy with reality.

Is doing a job for 3 hrs worth the same as doing a job for 5 hrs if paid hourly? Should jobs be paid equally or not - how/why? — I like sushi

I think this problem is related to the one about age. Is time a good measure of age?

I think this problem is related to the one about age. Is time a good measure of age? — TheMadFool

I assume you mean 'maturity'?

I assume you mean 'maturity'? — I like sushi

About right.

Parkinson's Law

I suppose we could say that we lack a measure for work and time is just a surrogate marker.

Well, not really. We pay some people more not merely because they work more. We pay some people more because they are good at what they do. In economics (not necessarily mere 'finance') efficiency is key.

The problem is generally that people get 'comfortable' and expect comfort to be the normal state of affairs for human life. Then they demand these 'rights' for free.

Well, not really. We pay some people more not merely because they work more. We pay some people more because they are good at what they do. In economics (not necessarily mere 'finance') efficiency is key.

The problem is generally that people get 'comfortable' and expect comfort to be the normal state of affairs for human life. Then they demand these 'rights' for free. — I like sushi

I don't know if I agree but suffice it to say we, as you claim, have some idea what work means and how it's to be measured although it seems rather nebulous. Give it time, we'll get there.

although it seems rather nebulous. — TheMadFool

Because no one is a set of numbers. We have to constantly adjust and readjust, so yeah, 'nebulous' rather than 'rigid'.

To say we lack a measure for work is nonsense. We have multiple ways to measure work (and if we mean work in a 'nebulous' sense or not). Economics is about - roughly speaking - getting and distributing 'resources' (which can be literally anything that is of value to someone/something).

We measure everything by the immediate and long term cost/requirement (be this money, time, expertise and/or whatever else including physical energy).

As we're CLEARLY talking about paid work then if we reduce our hours we reduce our wage (assuming we're doing the same job) unless whoever you are working for is willing to restructure the payment system.

Because no one is a set of numbers. We have to constantly adjust and readjust, so yeah, 'nebulous' rather than 'rigid'.

To say we lack a measure for work is nonsense. We have multiple ways to measure work (and if we mean work in a 'nebulous' sense or not). Economics is about - roughly speaking - getting and distributing 'resources' (which can be literally anything that is of value to someone/something).

We measure everything by the immediate and long term cost/requirement (be this money, time, expertise and/or whatever else including physical energy).

As we're CLEARLY talking about paid work then if we reduce our hours we reduce our wage (assuming we're doing the same job) unless whoever you are working for is willing to restructure the payment system. — I like sushi

I see but consider physics.

$Work = Force \times Distance$

$Force = mass \times acceleration$

I'm sure that in between these two formulae, time will emerge as a poor metric for work. I don't know how exactly but just a guess. Would you mind giving it a shot?

Is doing a job for 3 hrs worth the same as doing a job for 5 hrs if paid hourly? Should jobs be paid equally or not - how/why? — I like sushi

As long as we consider antiwork, anti-life, we’re fucked. Or, less dramatically, the problem is intractable. I’m ok with that being that my solution is rebellion through antinatalism. Boycott throwing new workers into the mix.

Hey just saw this. Cool real world examples, thanks for sharing. What do you think the construction trades like electrical, plumbing, construction, bricklaying, represent in a philosophical sense? These are the necessary jobs to grow the physical infrastructure of the economic system. I find it funny how I find nothing satisfactory as a solution: hunting-gathering is laughable now. Small scale farming is too. Communes only work if at all because they’re nestled in the bosom of a much larger outside economy. No new people born = no new economic hamsters. Antinatalism right now is the only form of protest against the condition of “work”.

Seizing the wealth and power of the Plutonic-kleptocrats will be extraordinarily difficult, so in the meantime, I recommend people who can do so, reduce their needs and wants so that they can keep themselves afloat on less the 40 hours per week, maybe 30, maybe 25. This is no easy thing, especially after 40 years of inflation and stagnant wages. It's like unto impossible in high-cost areas, like San Francisco, NYC, LA, Washington D.C., Boston, etc. — Bitter Crank

Do you see a differentiation with a plutocrat that that invented a new product and ones that just found themselves as heads of industry by luck? The ones that invented something, will say they are getting their just reward and providing jobs for the little people to [sell, train, support, install, account for the money of, transport, warehouse, market, website maintain, develop further product development], of the product they started.

I see but consider physics. — TheMadFool

Not exactly on topic. So nope.

As long as we consider antiwork, anti-life, we’re fucked. — schopenhauer1

It depends what people define as 'work' and 'anti-work'. Like I said, people often think 'this is hard, so why should I suffer?' It is a very juvenile way of viewing the world. Most seem to grow out of it though, and some cotton on quicker than others.

I believe it was Twain who said something about work and play being essentially the same thing. That is a healthier view I think.

It is a very juvenile way of viewing the world. — I like sushi

Anytime someone says “juvenile” as if a law of some sort, I immediately get red flags of a straw man argument- that is an argument based on false and personal assumptions of the person claiming something juvenile. So juvenile that is. See how anyone can use it like a condescending tool of vapid, useless rhetoric? I can tar and feather you with no argument at all..just a word.

I believe it was Twain who said something about work and play being essentially the same thing. That is a healthier view I think. — I like sushi

Perfect way to make something wrong seem right. Work is play. Work is growth. Doublespeak. It’s necessary and sooo not juvenile to embrace.

I see but consider physics.
— TheMadFool

Not exactly on topic. So nope. — I like sushi

Really? I must be seeing things.

Anytime someone says “juvenile” as if a law of some sort, I immediately get red flags of a straw man argument- that is an argument based on false and personal assumptions of the person claiming something juvenile. So juvenile that is. See how anyone can use it like a condescending tool of vapid, useless rhetoric? I can tar and feather you with no argument at all..just a word. — schopenhauer1

Juvenile as opposed to mature. If you have a problem with it you have a problem with it. If you are just looking for red flags you'll find them everywhere from everyone all the time.

Explain then. I must be more foolish than you.

Juvenile as opposed to mature — I like sushi

No shit. Yes the implication is if you tar and feather as juvenile (by definition not mature) you don’t need an argument.

as if a law of some sort — schopenhauer1

Rhetoric ^^

I'm reading the novel Jurassic Park by the late Michael Crichton. In it the gigantic T. Rex is a problem no doubt but its the much smaller Velociraptors that are the real killers; heck, even the Procompsognathids manage to put a child in hospital.

Rhetoric — I like sushi

Now you’re getting it..using one word to define what is right and good without argument.

Explain then. I must be more foolish than you. — I like sushi

I don't think I will. It probably doesn't make sense.

I'm reading the novel Jurassic Park by the late Michael Crichton. In it the gigantic T. Rex is a problem no doubt but its the much smaller Velociraptors that are the real killers; heck, even the Procompsognathids manage to put a child in hospital. — TheMadFool

Rhetoric only hurts if the audience takes the bait. Work is necessary to survive. But the assumption is that this is good in the first place. You immediately end the conversation to question this necessity of life or life itself by saying it’s juvenile. Bypass all thinking and just tar and feather.

You have issues.

The context was in terms of experience and maturity. When I was younger, like everyone else, I didn't understand the extent to which I was juvenile - but I was because I was young (juvenile means young and not fully developed). Teenagers are juveniles. Some people mature more slowly than others due to circumstances. Is that so hard to take in?

What is it that I said that you find so threatening here? I honestly don't know why you just snapped at one word and assumed I was stating some kind of "law"?

What is it that I said that you find so threatening here? I honestly don't know why you just snapped at one word and assumed I was stating some kind of "law"? — I like sushi

Rhetoric only hurts if the audience takes the bait. Work is necessary to survive. But the assumption is that this is good in the first place. You immediately end the conversation to question this necessity of life or life itself by saying it’s juvenile. Bypass all thinking and just tar and feather. — schopenhauer1

Trying to explain things is basically the best way to understand them I would say. Even if you make a hash of it you can at least build on your next attempt.

I really don't see how talking about the physics definition of 'work' fits into this specific topic?

So it was just bait? You were baiting me.

Why?

If work is necessary to survive and you don't want to work then you want to die? Okay. I kind of enjoy work. Work isn't exactly always a 'chore' so to speak. Like here and now writing this - although I'm not exactly getting paid for it but it is at least honing a skill little by little.