View Full Version : NY Times Book Review: How Much Is Enough?
I read this with interest and thought I'd post it here, as possible fodder for discussion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/books/review/how-much-is-enough-by-robert-skidelsky-and-edward-skidelsky.html?_r=1&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/books/review/how-much-is-enough-by-robert-skidelsky-and-edward-skidelsky.html?_r=1&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto)
Tussiemussies
8-19-12, 4:53am
Very interesting article, it would be interesting if people were only working 20 hours a week!
From my perspective, idle hands and minds make mischief. So the idea of less work is no help unless one can find some activity that gives one a sense of worth and value to oneself and society.
SteveinMN
8-19-12, 10:48am
Mr. Posner (author) should be invited to visit our little corner of the Internet...
From the article:
Nations would be defenseless, with soldiers who were on duty only 20 hours a week and had few weapons because the employees of munitions makers were also working only 20 hours a week. And imagine the maintenance of internal order in a society in which police officers, firefighters and paramedics worked only 20 hours a week.
Seriously? Maybe there could be, oh, I don't know ... THREE shifts of firefighters and paramedics? Mind = blown. Or, since so many people believe that wishing makes something so, maybe we could station firefighters for only those 20 hours when there were fires and truck accidents and cats in trees. Why pay for more than you need?
Silly article, from my perspective.
About 3 1/2 years ago, I made the decision to sell my home and leave a very demanding, stressful, 60 hr. + per week job and to live much more simply. I think the world would be a much better place if people would work less, have less material belongings and enjoy their lives more.
Seriously? Maybe there could be, oh, I don't know ... THREE shifts of firefighters and paramedics? Mind = blown. Or, since so many people believe that wishing makes something so, maybe we could station firefighters for only those 20 hours when there were fires and truck accidents and cats in trees. Why pay for more than you need?
Silly article, from my perspective.
Or twice as many firefighters could be employed part-time as full-time and all could live with less, but enjoy their lives more.
ToomuchStuff
8-19-12, 10:56am
The article talks about maintaining their lifestyle. Most people want to improve their lifestyle (not so many minimalists), as well as some of the activities require money going out. (buying new games, movies, sports equipment, etc) It is also harder to spend a lot of money when one is at work, verses off playing around. (especially with the numbers of people who get drunk and stupid)
try2bfrugal
8-19-12, 12:19pm
About 3 1/2 years ago, I made the decision to sell my home and leave a very demanding, stressful, 60 hr. + per week job and to live much more simply. I think the world would be a much better place if people would work less, have less material belongings and enjoy their lives more.
This has worked for us, too. This past year has really dawned on me how little we really need to be happy. In the fifties where I grew up everyone had 1,000 sq foot houses with one bathroom and many families just had one car, and obviously no smart phones or cable. We didn't walk around thinking how miserable of a life that was. It was just normal. I spent a lot of my days at the beach, riding my bike or playing in the local woods. My school was about a mile from my house and we had to go home for lunch, so I walked 4 miles minimum every school day - even in winter.
Then I grew up, moved to a mild climate and started driving my kids to school four blocks from our house! What was I thinking?
Good grief. If I spent my all of my days lying in a hammock and staring at the sky it would still beat working for a living, hands down.
Those few individuals who find real, meaningful expressions of their true selves and are able to earn money in their pursuit are a breed apart and much to be envied, in my experience.
ApatheticNoMore
8-19-12, 2:01pm
Good grief. If I spent my all of my days lying in a hammock and staring at the sky it would still beat working for a living, hands down.
+1 And lying around staring at the sky is an activity I enjoy too :)
Nations would be defenseless, with soldiers who were on duty only 20 hours a week and had few weapons because the employees of munitions makers were also working only 20 hours a week. And imagine the maintenance of internal order in a society in which police officers, firefighters and paramedics worked only 20 hours a week.
Oh don't get me started on the defenseless part (you mean no war with the whole world? oh that would be horrible!). The firefighters could in the "worst case scenario" be volunteer I guess, that has historical precidence, but more likely they could just do shorter shift work, of course.
The article talks about maintaining their lifestyle. Most people want to improve their lifestyle (not so many minimalists), as well as some of the activities require money going out. (buying new games, movies, sports equipment, etc) It is also harder to spend a lot of money when one is at work, verses off playing around. (especially with the numbers of people who get drunk and stupid)
I don't want to improve my lifestyle but I do earn a decent wage, if I earned more money, not unusual for my field, I'd probably save the majority of it. And as for spending more money it depends, there's the cost of the commute (do I sometimes get in the car for leisure activities, well of course, all the time. But the daily commute to work it is much further than I usually commute for leisure activities. It's more driving period I think. I don't like or wouldn't chooose driving that far, it I had a better choice, it's just the job I got now :( ). There's the cost of all the things to do to relieve how much you hate the hours you spend at your job. And I DEFINITELY spend money on this.
Most people would quickly get bored without the resources for varied and exciting leisure activities like foreign travel, movies and television, casinos, restaurants, watching sporting events, engaging in challenging athletic activities, playing video games, eating out, dieting, having cosmetic surgery, and improving health and longevity
Do you know how boring my job is? Trust me my leisure time can not compete with that! But anyway I know myself, I don't really think the ideal situation for me is no work (at least not unless I got very involved in volunteering etc. which is maybe what I'd do if I had that money!) I know the ideal situation to me is BALANCE, which is less time devoted to work than I do now. I've worked less and know exactly how it feels and how preferable it really is.
I don't want most of those leisure activities. Travel can be fun but is not necessary, I don't watch movies,I don't watch television, I don't go to casinos, I go to restaurants sometimes with others but could just as easily go to potlucks!, I dont' watch sporting events, most athletic activities I engage in are free (hiking), I don't play video games, I can diet without spending money (but I don't diet other than try to follow various health protocols - I hate dieting), cosmetic surgery - well mayber some lasers or something someday but not now, I don't think it costs much to improve health (although sadly healthy food can cost something) and there is no miracle long life pill now (that I could buy if only I was rich). I do need health insurance in this society I guess.
Productivity would fall because workers would acquire skills at a slower rate.
Actually I've ALWAYS assumed the reverse. That more time is the potential to actually study new technology for your work rather than just doing the same drudgery. I don't expect everyone to, but I see it as at least a possibility. I quite often find I enjoy learning even job skills. I hate work. Why? Because it's NOT mostly learning, it's mostly drudgery. I really do feel my mind is being mostly wasted in my job (and that's a terrible thing or something :))
The Skidelskys have an exalted conception of leisure. They say that the true sense of the word is “activity without extrinsic end”: “The sculptor engrossed in cutting marble, the teacher intent on imparting a difficult idea, the musician struggling with a score, a scientist exploring the mysteries of space and time — such people have no other aim than to do what they are doing well.” That isn’t true. Most of these people are ambitious achievers who seek recognition
yea so, as if seeking recognition was the same thing as seeking money. It's not.
If they lacked consumer products and services to fill up their time they would brawl, steal, overeat, drink and sleep late
they might sleep late (oh no the horror - only a morning person would think that a horror, he'd be shocked at my job, many people come in the office around 10 - debauchery is already all over the place!) What about all the people who overeat at their jobs to get through the day, or at home when they come home exhaused from the day? I sure don't see the workaholic culture as actually preventing the obesity epidemic (or we wouldn't have one). By the way being sleep deprived actually makes people more obese. How much is enough .. when your soul is empty?
try2bfrugal
8-19-12, 3:01pm
There is nothing sacred about 40 hours a week. For many corporate jobs 40 hours is a myth anyway. Many of the jobs we have had really required 60 hours of work. At my first job if anyone walked in even ten minutes late there were some people who would say things like good afternoon. Of course if you looked at how much work people actually got done in a week, those were not the high productivity types.
I like working on my own. I only have to work as much as I need to pay the bills and savings so I get rewarded for how efficiently I work, not how many hours I sit in my office.
From my perspective, idle hands and minds make mischief. So the idea of less work is no help unless one can find some activity that gives one a sense of worth and value to oneself and society.
I think I'm far busier now that I've "retired" than I was when I was working 80+ hour weeks for The Man.
It's just now I'm doing things I find of greater personal and community value.
awakenedsoul
8-19-12, 4:06pm
This has worked for us, too. This past year has really dawned on me how little we really need to be happy. In the fifties where I grew up everyone had 1,000 sq foot houses with one bathroom and many families just had one car, and obviously no smart phones or cable. We didn't walk around thinking how miserable of a life that was. It was just normal. I spent a lot of my days at the beach, riding my bike or playing in the local woods. My school was about a mile from my house and we had to go home for lunch, so I walked 4 miles minimum every school day - even in winter.
Then I grew up, moved to a mild climate and started driving my kids to school four blocks from our house! What was I thinking?
Well said. We don't really need all this stuff that everyone has now. I find I enjoy the lifestyle of farming, cycling to run errands, cooking and baking from scratch, and doing as much myself as far as repairs, etc...that I can. It's rewarding on many levels. I also like the feeling of canceling an account that is too expensive. I don't miss my landline phone or basic cable. I love reading about how people lived back in the 30's, and aspiring towards that. I enjoy the Internet, but I'm not interested in spending tons of money on technology. To me, it's a waste. I have less choices now, and I find it's less stressful. My basic needs are met, and I feel fortunate.
Simplicity
8-19-12, 8:15pm
The problem I see with cutting back to only working 20 hours a week is that we simply couldn't afford to live on that. Inflation has been astronomical in the last few years. Groceries alone have gone nuts. I spend the same amount now for just the two of us as I did 3 years ago with a hungry teenage boy (and his friends) at home. And we grow a garden now and raise chickens for both meat and eggs. Gas is now $1.30 a liter. I've cut back spending in every area I can think of and still spend about the same as I did a few years ago, with the exception of electricity - we designed our house to maximize use of solar heat and we now have a wood stove, so our electric bill has dropped over $100 a month.
I'd be bored out of my mind. I actually like working, especially now that I'm into an area that I enjoy and also find interesting and challenging. I enjoy the research I have to do, especially into the gov't regs. OK, I'm weird. :)
My leisure activities are generally low cost - or can be. Reading, photography, writing, playing on the computer, keeping up with current events.
If I had a hubby and family, I would likely want to work less, but as I'm single, I'll work all I like. Current crazy schedule is unusual.
I work 20 hours a week outside the home and I really don't want to do more than that.
Sooo....people would waste time somewhat similarly to how they currently waste money? So what? I don't think everyone would join a gang or find/be prostitutes or something like some of the article implies. I think some would use the time productively and some would spend the time with Jerry Springer. I would probably read a whole lot more, my yard and garden would look a lot better and I'd be in better physical shape. The dog would get walked more, the cat played with more. I'd see my friends and parents more. I'd call people more often. I'd learn things for the sake of wanting to learn them rather than the sake of having to learn them for work or someone else. As for other folks: my parents would know their grandchildren better. My relatives and friends who have kids would spend more time with them (sometimes for better, sometimes for worse I suppose). Probably everyone would get more sleep.
As far as finances, it'd be harder to save for retirement but maybe a little less pressing. Not sure what other factors would be an issue....transportation would be cheaper because I could either ride my bike more or drive fewer days for less gas $.
From my perspective, idle hands and minds make mischief. So the idea of less work is no help unless one can find some activity that gives one a sense of worth and value to oneself and society.
But being retired doesn't mean you are idle - either in hand or mind. There is a whole world out there full of experiences and possibilities that many people who have to earn a living don't have the time or energy to partake in. I could live a thousand lives (all non-working of course) and still just scratch the surface of all the things I want to see, do, experience and give to others. "Time"is the only real commodity of any value IMHO. One that you can't make more of, and once it's gone, it's gone forever.
I'd be bored out of my mind. I actually like working, especially now that I'm into an area that I enjoy and also find interesting and challenging. I enjoy the research I have to do, especially into the gov't regs. OK, I'm weird. :)
....
But "work" doesn't have to be paid work, and finding satisfying work for our minds and bodies is the goal or cutting down on work for The Man.
edited to add: Oh ha ha I see that Spartana wrote the same thing I did, sort of. The "work" of planning and carrying out scenic drives in the upper Midwest is valid work, for instance!
try2bfrugal
8-25-12, 2:40pm
I could never relate to people who are afraid to retire because they do not know what else they would do with their time. I always have a long back log of projects and club activities to do. I never liked to travel when I worked at a corporate job because in off hours I wasn't able to do my projects at home.
I could never relate to people who are afraid to retire because they do not know what else they would do with their time. I always have a long back log of projects and club activities to do. I never liked to travel when I worked at a corporate job because in off hours I wasn't able to do my projects at home.
I know, me too! I almost wrote this as well! We will be very busy when we stop working for money.
Time is really interesting though too. I mean, when you are off for many days in a row (like vacation days), you tend to find things to do anyway that you never found to do before because you didn't have time. Sometimes you need a vacation from your vacation. It is hard to juggle things.
And, once you find a routine, you tend to stick in it. I mean, we can all find ways of getting through 60 hour work weeks and they are actually easier if you do them every week. If you only work 20 hours a week, you can quickly get in to a routine that eats up all your time so you have no free time even.
It is funny, really.
Add an extra day off one week and it is cool.
Have that extra day off every week and it is like you expect it and all of a sudden you have filled it on a routine basis. You have made plans in there.
I feel like the only thing that seems to affect anything is when you accelerate or decelerate something. If you go from no work to a full 40 hours, you fill that.
If you got from 40 hours to 35, you feel that.
But if you stick to one thing, you get used to it.
For sure, let me work less. But, sometimes when I have too many days off in a row (vacation days), I tend to miss work. Sometimes I enjoy making sure I work a certain amount of days. But too many and it is no good.
The ugliest thing ever is to realize that the only thing worse than having to work is see what not working looks like. There are problems no matter what your routine in life, really.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.