As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Anti-work: Not Safe For Work, or is Work Not Safe For Us?

FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARDinterior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
edited March 2010 in Debate and/or Discourse
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -Goethe

Only a small and diminishing fraction of work serves any useful purpose independent of the defense and reproduction of the work-system and its political and legal appendages. Twenty years ago, Paul and Percival Goodman estimated that just five per cent of the work then being done—presumably the figure, if accurate, is lower now—would satisfy our minimal needs for food, clothing and shelter. Theirs was only an educated guess but the main point is quite clear: directly or indirectly, most work serves the unproductive purposes of commerce or social control. Right off the bat we can liberate tens of millions of salesmen, soldiers, managers, cops, stockbrockers, clergymen, bankers, lawyers, teachers, landlords, security guards, ad-men and everyone who works for them. There is a snowball effect since every time you idle some bigshot you liberate his flunkeys and underlings also. Thus the economy implodes.

Forty per cent of the workforce are white-collar workers, most of whom have some of the most tedious and idiotic jobs ever concocted. Entire industries, insurance and banking and real estate for instance, consist of nothing but useless paper-shuffling. It is no accident that the "tertiary sector," the service sector, is growing while the "secondary sector" (industry stagnates and the "primary sector" (agriculture) nearly disappears. Because work is unnecessary except to those whose power it secures, workers are shifted from relatively useful to relatively useless occupations as a measure to assure public order. Anything is better than nothing. That's why you can't go home just because you finish early. They want your time, enough of it to make you theirs, even if they have no use for most of it. Otherwise why hasn't the average work week gone down by more than a few minutes in the last fifty years?


The anti-workers' rallying cry: Eight hours pay for four hours work!

The systematic suppression of a person's real desires—and that is largely what work consists of—is exacerbated by capitalism's incessant manipulation of artificial desires, "as advertised." This gives daily life the character of mass neurosis, with increasingly frequent psychotic episodes. To relieve the all-embracing boredom of daily life, society offers an endless array of distractions and stupefactions, most of them "available at a store near you". The trouble is, these distractions and stupefactions, legal or illegal, soon become part of the boredom, for they satisfy no authentic desire.

Children too learn to work, or at least how to suffer boredom. From the earliest age they are taught to obey orders. School and church teach them the necessity of going to and staying at a particular place for a prolonged period, even when they would rather be anywhere else. All the classic parental admonitions—"Sit still!", "Do what I tell you!", "Don't talk back!", "Stop behaving like a bunch of wild Indians!"—are part of the education of the well-behaved, uncomplaining wage-slave...

Is the anti-work movement an actual "movement" in the sense of having a nonprofit organization and leadership? No. But it can be argued that everybody who browses the Internet on an employer's dime, or spends the first half-hour of work sipping coffee and reading the news on their iPhone, is part of the unofficial anti-work movement.

Does the anti-work movement argue for the complete and total abolition of work? No. This is a philosophical idea, "philosophical" in the sense of being abstract and academic. It involves reframing the idea of work - so that we no longer see it as the meaning of life or a form of nobility, but merely as a necessary evil. The concrete goals of the anti-work "movement," so much as it exists, do not involve the complete elimination of labor, but rather a reduction of it. Fewer hours, doing more meaningful and enjoyable work.

Likewise, I don't think it's possible to have an economy without work. However, I recognize it as a necessary evil, and I think there's a fundamental moral responsibility of everybody to make sure that we mitigate that evil as much as possible. That includes supporting flexible work schedules, a healthy work/life balance, opposing discrimination, standing up against hostile workplaces, and advocating for employee welfare.

Also, random image thrown in for shock value:
p1010204ld.jpg

every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Feral on
«1345

Posts

  • Options
    Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User regular
    edited April 2023
    -

    Andrew_Jay on
  • Options
    NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Wouldn't getting rid of everything but what we need for food/shelter also mean getting rid of computers and videogames and the internet and recorded music?

    Nah I'm cool with how things are.

    It does make you think, though. Especially the part about you working a set amount of hours even if you get done with your work early, at least at a lot of jobs.

    Nocturne on
  • Options
    Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    i support this philosophy of work as necessary evil, wholeheartedly

    Evil Multifarious on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    i support this philosophy of work as necessary evil, wholeheartedly

    I struggle between two poles.

    On the one hand, I understand why it's important to have a job that you love, that is meaningful to you.

    On the other hand, I'm not entirely certain that it's healthy to define yourself by your occupation. I cringe a little bit when the first question somebody asks me at a party is, "So what do you do for a living?" First off, I don't want to be identified by my job. Secondly, why do we use the word "living" when talking about an occupation? I don't live to work, I work to live (and I wish I didn't have to, at that).

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User regular
    edited April 2023
    -

    Andrew_Jay on
  • Options
    NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    A_J I don't think that's the idea at all.

    It's more that a lot of Western Society revolves around the idea of an 8-hour workday. It also revolves around the idea that you spend the ages from 5-18 or 5-22 or 5-26 preparing for "what you're going to do with the rest of your life" and that you are defined by the answer to that question.

    I think the idea expressed here is "How much fat can be trimmed?"

    Nocturne on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    This thread made me think of Mike Rowe's comments about the "war on Work".

    http://www.oneweekjob.com/2009/03/11/mike-rowe-weve-declared-war-on-work/

    Evander on
  • Options
    Aroused BullAroused Bull Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Andrew_Jay wrote: »
    Twenty years ago, Paul and Percival Goodman estimated that just five per cent of the work then being done—presumably the figure, if accurate, is lower now—would satisfy our minimal needs for food, clothing and shelter.
    It sounds nice and all, but I can't help but think this is a philosophy founded in the sheer privilege and excess of western life.

    As in "we already have so much stuff, why break our backs working for more? Wwhy not stop working altogether and just make do with what we have?". The reality though is that for the majority of the world's people, if they stop working - especially at those necessary jobs that provide food, clothing and shelter - they die. Modern/developed life provides the technology that allows us to minimise the work necessary to provide necessities - it also requires us to work at seemingly "unnecessary" work to maintain the structure that provides for those efficiencies.

    For all of history we've had to work to support the society we live in, in order for that society to also support us, so obviously there's a strong social pressure to work. One could certainly make a case that, in rich industrialised western societies, we could trim a lot of the inefficient chaff that's built up as part of the system, and all work fewer hours for the same pay. But I haven't seen any compelling economic evidence that we could stop the majority of work and still live our current lives of luxury. And that's what we need, an economic argument, not a rallying cry, which is all I can find from skimming that site.

    Aroused Bull on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Nocturne wrote: »
    A_J I don't think that's the idea at all.

    It's more that a lot of Western Society revolves around the idea of an 8-hour workday. It also revolves around the idea that you spend the ages from 5-18 or 5-22 or 5-26 preparing for "what you're going to do with the rest of your life" and that you are defined by the answer to that question.

    I think the idea expressed here is "How much fat can be trimmed?"

    There's a valid point that this is a discussion that only makes sense in first-world economies.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    HiroconHirocon Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    I dream of a world where all non-creative work is done by self-maintaining solar-powered robots.

    Hirocon on
  • Options
    BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Feral wrote: »
    i support this philosophy of work as necessary evil, wholeheartedly

    I struggle between two poles.

    On the one hand, I understand why it's important to have a job that you love, that is meaningful to you.

    On the other hand, I'm not entirely certain that it's healthy to define yourself by your occupation. I cringe a little bit when the first question somebody asks me at a party is, "So what do you do for a living?" First off, I don't want to be identified by my job. Secondly, why do we use the word "living" when talking about an occupation? I don't live to work, I work to live (and I wish I didn't have to, at that).

    Isn't that exactly what that question you dislike is asking? "What do you do (to earn) a living."

    They don't ask, "What is the job that defines your life?"

    Burtletoy on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    This thread made me think of Mike Rowe's comments about the "war on Work".

    http://www.oneweekjob.com/2009/03/11/mike-rowe-weve-declared-war-on-work/

    I've actually ranted about that TED speech before.

    On the one hand, him saying "You don't have to follow your dreams" is refreshing. On the other hand, his comments about safety (the fishing boat captain saying "it's not my job to get you home alive") and people who advocate decreasing the work week bother me, for obvious reasons.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Feral wrote: »
    Nocturne wrote: »
    A_J I don't think that's the idea at all.

    It's more that a lot of Western Society revolves around the idea of an 8-hour workday. It also revolves around the idea that you spend the ages from 5-18 or 5-22 or 5-26 preparing for "what you're going to do with the rest of your life" and that you are defined by the answer to that question.

    I think the idea expressed here is "How much fat can be trimmed?"

    There's a valid point that this is a discussion that only makes sense in first-world economies.

    but first world economies exist in their current form only because of the exploitation of second/third world economies, to some extent

    if a first world economy were to abandon its exploitative practices - a massive, world changing proposal in itself - how much fat could we trim?

    probably still a great deal, i think.

    i like the model of a co-op where people live for very low housing rates and keep costs down by doing and sharing the work in their community, for example, and i'm sure it could be implemented on a larger scale, but i'm not sure how effective it would be

    and i'm not sure that a single, continent-spanning nation could survive such a mode of existence intact; it seems it would work far more effectively for smaller communities

    Evil Multifarious on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    They don't ask, "What is the job that defines your life?"

    In many contexts, I feel that this is exactly the question that is being asked.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Hirocon wrote: »
    I dream of a world where all non-creative work is done by self-maintaining solar-powered robots.

    Yeah! It'll be great! Just like Vonnegut's The Player Piano! Perfect Society!

    Burtletoy on
  • Options
    CommunistCowCommunistCow Abstract Metal ThingyRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Feral wrote: »
    On the other hand, I'm not entirely certain that it's healthy to define yourself by your occupation. I cringe a little bit when the first question somebody asks me at a party is, "So what do you do for a living?" First off, I don't want to be identified by my job. Secondly, why do we use the word "living" when talking about an occupation? I don't live to work, I work to live (and I wish I didn't have to, at that).

    I do have to remind myself of such things since I have been having a really hard time at work. On the other hand we do spend a large portion of our waking hours at work so I can see why people are defined by their work.

    This week I was told I could not work from home consistently even though I actually get more work done at home. The reason is I can work for 2-3 hours and then take a 20-30 minute break and do whatever I want without any worries of admonishment for slacking. Then once I am refreshed I can come back and work hard. I cannot however work hard for 8 fucking hours straight (or 4 hrs and 4hrs with a lunch break).

    I've heard of various discussions of attention span and how short it can be and how often people get interrupted at work. Yet we do nothing in the regular work day to try and mitigate these things.
    I'm going to try and find some case studies or statistics on attention span or work efficiency and I shall get back to the thread.

    CommunistCow on
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • Options
    Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    it was the smallest on the list but
    Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    I do have to remind myself of such things since I have been having a really hard time at work. On the other hand we do spend a large portion of our waking hours at work.

    This week I was told I could not work from home consistently even though I actually get more work done at home. The reason is I can work for 2-3 hours and then take a 20-30 minute break and do whatever I want without any worries of admonishment for slacking. Then once I am refreshed I can come back and work hard. I cannot however work hard for 8 fucking hours straight.

    I've heard of various discussions of attention span and how short it can be and how often people get interrupted at work. Yet we do nothing in the regular work day to try and mitigate these things.

    I'm going to try and find some case studies or statistics on attention span or work efficiency and I shall get back to the thread.

    I agree with everything you say here and I'd love to see your evidence whenever you come back. :)

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if he the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Well, hunter-gatherers don't spend eight hours per day working. They spend more like two or three, depending on the particular society we're talking about.

    On the other hand, then they die at 45 of preventable infections.

    So, you know, trade-off.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Feral wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if he the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Well, hunter-gatherers don't spend eight hours per day working. They spend more like two or three, depending on the particular society we're talking about.

    On the other hand, then they die at 45 of preventable infections.

    So, you know, trade-off.

    didn't hunter-gatherers also spend large amounts of time lying on the ground doing nothing, due to their small caloric intake and the necessity to conserve energy for later hunts and gathers?

    sounds thrilling

    Evil Multifarious on
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    One wonders if he the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.
    Actually it'd be like 16 hour work days. Hunting, gathering, defense of the home from various things... This whole system of work and trade and such allows people like me, who are physically inept, to survive while we provide goods and services that the hunters aren't skilled at.
    Dyscord wrote: »
    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.
    I can agree to that.

    Henroid on
  • Options
    HiroconHirocon Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    Hirocon wrote: »
    I dream of a world where all non-creative work is done by self-maintaining solar-powered robots.

    Yeah! It'll be great! Just like Vonnegut's The Player Piano! Perfect Society!

    I've never read it, but I admit that automation can exacerbate imbalances of wealth in a capitalist society. Hopefully, there would be enough publicly-owned solar powered robots to provide for the basic needs of the non-working population.

    Hirocon on
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Hirocon wrote: »
    I dream of a world where all non-creative work is done by self-maintaining solar-powered robots.

    Non-creative work? Man, technology does creative work too. Haven't you heard of procedurally generated music? FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE ARTISTS AND I SAID NOTHING.

    Henroid on
  • Options
    CommunistCowCommunistCow Abstract Metal ThingyRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Can you honestly say you work HARD for 8 hours a day without any distractions except for the standard OSHA breaks?

    P.S. meetings do not count as working hard unless you live in some magical land where meetings contain more than 20% useful material.

    CommunistCow on
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Can you honestly say you work HARD for 8 hours a day without any distractions except for the standard OSHA breaks?

    PS meetings do not count as working hard unless you live in some magical land where meetings contain more than 20% useful material.

    There are people who would argue that CEO and other officials work "harder" than the guys working at loading docks, or in quarries and mines, etc.

    We call these people "silly gooses."

    Henroid on
  • Options
    Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    i support this philosophy of work as necessary evil, wholeheartedly

    I struggle between two poles.

    On the one hand, I understand why it's important to have a job that you love, that is meaningful to you.

    On the other hand, I'm not entirely certain that it's healthy to define yourself by your occupation. I cringe a little bit when the first question somebody asks me at a party is, "So what do you do for a living?" First off, I don't want to be identified by my job. Secondly, why do we use the word "living" when talking about an occupation? I don't live to work, I work to live (and I wish I didn't have to, at that).

    Isn't that exactly what that question you dislike is asking? "What do you do (to earn) a living."

    They don't ask, "What is the job that defines your life?"

    Like most communication, it's less than completely literal.

    I mean, why is it that the thing we most want to learn about someone we've just met (after their name, anyway) is what their job is? In the whole universe of things that make people interesting and unique, the go-to option for casual small talk is your job. The person's job (or lack thereof) then informs the entire rest of the conversation.

    If you meet a dude and it's "hey bob, I'm tom. So, what do you do for a living" and he tells you that he sweeps floors or whatever, that changes your entire perception of him. There's no real reason it should, of course, because society needs people that sweep floors, but now his entire social identity is bound up in his menial job.

    Obviously getting to know bob would reveal him as being a more complex individual, but most casual conversation doesn't get past that point.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    it was the smallest on the list but
    Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • Options
    Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Can you honestly say you work HARD for 8 hours a day without any distractions except for the standard OSHA breaks?

    P.S. meetings do not count as working hard unless you live in some magical land where meetings contain more than 20% useful material.

    I'm not claiming that I spend any less time goofing off than anyone else, I just don't consider it some act of quiet revolution against a system that exists to try and control me.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    it was the smallest on the list but
    Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • Options
    NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Also the question often gives you a topic both people can talk about. Similar to why people make small talk about the weather.

    "Oh, you work in [IT job of some sort]? I do something similar..."

    Nocturne on
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    I should be at work right now. I'm not, because going sooner would mean I'm more fatigued and simply kill time looking busy. And hell, I should enjoy what I do.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    emnmnmeemnmnme Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    The guy doing four hours of solid work is contributing to society just fine. He's also competing with the guy doing six hours of solid work and that guy just bought a new Lexus! I'll show him - I'll put in some twelve hour days! Then we'll see which of us gets laid off and which is made partner!

    We push ourselves to work harder than we have to keep up with the Joneses.

    emnmnme on
  • Options
    ArrathArrath Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Can you honestly say you work HARD for 8 hours a day without any distractions except for the standard OSHA breaks?

    PS meetings do not count as working hard unless you live in some magical land where meetings contain more than 20% useful material.

    There are people who would argue that CEO and other officials work "harder" than the guys working at loading docks, or in quarries and mines, etc.

    We call these people "silly gooses."

    I can understand the argument of stress and all the mental work that is required, but being a big wig is nothing like working in a mine or a quarry or on a drill boat, or a constriction crew, or building a pipeline, etc. You won't get run over by heavy equipment or get brained by a swinging load because you put your guard down in the office, when that is the kind of stuff you have to be on constant watch for, whether you are fresh and just started your shift, or worn out and nearly dead after 8/10/12 hours.

    I have to say I'm glad to work 12 hour construction shifts and glad to work hard at it. I may be tired and sore at the end of every day but I do enjoy the work and the crew, and knowing that my work does have some kind of impact on the world, be it building a wind-farm, driving a tunnel, or deepening a river channel.

    Whereas in the office jobs I've worked I hate it, I can't wait to get done and get out of there.

    Arrath on
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited March 2010
    I think there is a problem that we spend our lives living to work instead of working to live. You don't really have much alternative either. I'd love to live in a world where we're free to explore things that make us happy, to do things that are truly productive and not just selling clothes and make up to people.

    My dad worked 27 years, and he didn't really like his job but he enjoyed the people he worked with. He eventually took ill health retirement and took up painting and writing and it turned out he was really good at it, he had one story published and he had written another which is about to get published as well. And he was happy...And I think of the people slaving away and then their enjoyment is going out for one maybe two nights of the week in a row and spending the money on booze to forget the last week.

    I know that after a week of work, if I have one day off I won't want to do anything because I'm tired and I just want time to myself and knowing I have to be up the following day I can't even really stay up late or sleep in if I want a full day to myself.

    There should address the balance between work and freedom, i.e. a mandatory 4 day work week where if you want to you can work the extra day(s) but if not, you can't be made to. I hate to think of the talent and life being wasted because people are too busy making up t-shirt slogans and flavours of condoms.

    Basically 5/7 of your week should not be spent working.

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Arrath wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    This feels like one of those periodic attempts to dress laziness up as a moral crusade.

    One wonders if the writer(s) think everyone would be happier if we were all hunter/gatherers and our eights hours of labor were actually totally necessary for our subsistence.

    I do think the american emphasis on work-as-identity is pretty fucked up, though.

    Can you honestly say you work HARD for 8 hours a day without any distractions except for the standard OSHA breaks?

    PS meetings do not count as working hard unless you live in some magical land where meetings contain more than 20% useful material.

    There are people who would argue that CEO and other officials work "harder" than the guys working at loading docks, or in quarries and mines, etc.

    We call these people "silly gooses."

    I can understand the argument of stress and all the mental work that is required, but being a big wig is nothing like working in a mine or a quarry or on a drill boat, or a constriction crew, or building a pipeline, etc. You won't get run over by heavy equipment or get brained by a swinging load because you put your guard down in the office, when that is the kind of stuff you have to be on constant watch for, whether you are fresh and just started your shift, or worn out and nearly dead after 8/10/12 hours.

    I have to say I'm glad to work 12 hour construction shifts and glad to work hard at it. I may be tired and sore at the end of every day but I do enjoy the work and the crew, and knowing that my work does have some kind of impact on the world, be it building a wind-farm, driving a tunnel, or deepening a river channel.

    Whereas in the office jobs I've worked I hate it, I can't wait to get done and get out of there.

    My whole deal with it is that it's work you can see the results of tangibly vs. intangibility. It's part of why I hate customer service jobs. Like, at least fast food I know I'm getting people fed which sustains them. But part of the job there is ensuring customer satisfaction or joy. The problem there is that it's hard to see the results of sometimes, or impossible to do because people don't give a rats ass about being uplifted by someone serving them food.

    But doing actual physical tasks of build object A, or move objects 27 thru 2748 to location B, that's stuff I can resonate with a bit more. I know something is getting done.

    My ex girlfriend from highschool once got a summer job working for her mom in an office. All she had to do was retrieve files from cabinets or mail things. And I never heard the end of how 'stressful' it was. She refused to listen to my arguments of how it was way cushier than other jobs that exist (she had full access to the internet) and it was also her first job so she had zero perspective. Plus she was getting like $12 an hour - this was in fucking highschool. Even her mom agreed with me that there are worse things (considering her mom was born and raised in China and worked in clothes making places for many hours on end, she knows better).

    Some people just don't get it, and it frustrates me.

    Henroid on
  • Options
    NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    I think there is a problem that we spend our lives living to work instead of working to live. You don't really have much alternative either. I'd love to live in a world where we're free to explore things that make us happy, to do things that are truly productive and not just selling clothes and make up to people.

    My dad worked 27 years, and he didn't really like his job but he enjoyed the people he worked with. He eventually took ill health retirement and took up painting and writing and it turned out he was really good at it, he had one story published and he had written another which is about to get published as well. And he was happy...And I think of the people slaving away and then their enjoyment is going out for one maybe two nights of the week in a row and spending the money on booze to forget the last week.

    I know that after a week of work, if I have one day off I won't want to do anything because I'm tired and I just want time to myself and knowing I have to be up the following day I can't even really stay up late or sleep in if I want a full day to myself.

    There should address the balance between work and freedom, i.e. a mandatory 4 day work week where if you want to you can work the extra day(s) but if not, you can't be made to. I hate to think of the talent and life being wasted because people are too busy making up t-shirt slogans and flavours of condoms.

    Basically 5/7 of your week should not be spent working.

    I don't think it's so much the amount of time spent working, at least not for most people/jobs. Working 40 hours a week is not bad at all, if you're actually working.

    The question here is how much of that time is actually spent working? How often do people get done with their job early, or spend the first hour or two of the day not working?

    Nocturne on
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited March 2010
    Nocturne wrote: »
    I think there is a problem that we spend our lives living to work instead of working to live. You don't really have much alternative either. I'd love to live in a world where we're free to explore things that make us happy, to do things that are truly productive and not just selling clothes and make up to people.

    My dad worked 27 years, and he didn't really like his job but he enjoyed the people he worked with. He eventually took ill health retirement and took up painting and writing and it turned out he was really good at it, he had one story published and he had written another which is about to get published as well. And he was happy...And I think of the people slaving away and then their enjoyment is going out for one maybe two nights of the week in a row and spending the money on booze to forget the last week.

    I know that after a week of work, if I have one day off I won't want to do anything because I'm tired and I just want time to myself and knowing I have to be up the following day I can't even really stay up late or sleep in if I want a full day to myself.

    There should address the balance between work and freedom, i.e. a mandatory 4 day work week where if you want to you can work the extra day(s) but if not, you can't be made to. I hate to think of the talent and life being wasted because people are too busy making up t-shirt slogans and flavours of condoms.

    Basically 5/7 of your week should not be spent working.

    I don't think it's so much the amount of time spent working, at least not for most people/jobs. Working 40 hours a week is not bad at all, if you're actually working.

    The question here is how much of that time is actually spent working? How often do people get done with their job early, or spend the first hour or two of the day not working?

    I work hard, I don't have it in me to slack but I work with someone who does and it pisses me off to no end. But even then, you'd think a reworked week that was more beneficial to the employee may provoke a better working environment and suitable standard of work. That won't deal with people who are just lazy fuckers.

    But I find it hard to switch my concern since the general argument against a strict shorter working week is "I need money for my mortgage" so they're trapped or "it costs the economy money" in which case, fuck off, aren't our very short, uncertain lives worth exploring more than making higher ups and the economy more money?

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Nocturne wrote: »
    The question here is how much of that time is actually spent working? How often do people get done with their job early, or spend the first hour or two of the day not working?

    I've found that there are few people like myself who, in the event a task is done early for the night, will find other productive things to do. It's one of the constant praises I've gotten in every job I've had and I take a metric ton of pride in it.

    There's a lot of people out there who, when they recognize their job is almost done, shift gears and slow down just to fill the gap. People want to get paid but they don't wanna work.

    Henroid on
  • Options
    NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Nocturne wrote: »
    The question here is how much of that time is actually spent working? How often do people get done with their job early, or spend the first hour or two of the day not working?

    I've found that there are few people like myself who, in the event a task is done early for the night, will find other productive things to do. It's one of the constant praises I've gotten in every job I've had and I take a metric ton of pride in it.

    There's a lot of people out there who, when they recognize their job is almost done, shift gears and slow down just to fill the gap. People want to get paid but they don't wanna work.

    Feel free to give yourself a gold star for that, but for a lot of desk jobs there simply aren't other productive things to do.

    Unless I were to like, sweep the floor or something.

    Nocturne on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Nocturne wrote: »
    The question here is how much of that time is actually spent working? How often do people get done with their job early, or spend the first hour or two of the day not working?

    I've found that there are few people like myself who, in the event a task is done early for the night, will find other productive things to do. It's one of the constant praises I've gotten in every job I've had and I take a metric ton of pride in it.

    There's a lot of people out there who, when they recognize their job is almost done, shift gears and slow down just to fill the gap. People want to get paid but they don't wanna work.

    To be frank, I work a lot harder when I have fewer hours. Part of it is knowing that I can't fuck around, part of it is that being at work for more than four hours at a time makes me really tired. I think I got more done per day when I was working 6.5 hours a day, 30 hours a week than when I'm working 9 hours a day, 40 hours a week.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Nocturne wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Nocturne wrote: »
    The question here is how much of that time is actually spent working? How often do people get done with their job early, or spend the first hour or two of the day not working?

    I've found that there are few people like myself who, in the event a task is done early for the night, will find other productive things to do. It's one of the constant praises I've gotten in every job I've had and I take a metric ton of pride in it.

    There's a lot of people out there who, when they recognize their job is almost done, shift gears and slow down just to fill the gap. People want to get paid but they don't wanna work.

    Feel free to give yourself a gold star for that, but for a lot of desk jobs there simply aren't other productive things to do.

    Unless I were to like, sweep the floor or something.

    Ah sorry, I meant to specifically note I was talking about physical jobs. Desk jobs, yeah I guess you're SOL there. But there's got to be something. If not, why are we paying people to be at their desk job for a long time if it only takes half the time to get their daily duties finished?

    Henroid on
  • Options
    NotYouNotYou Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    I want to find a job that operates with a core hour system. 3 or 4 hours that you "have to be at work" and then a list of things you need to get done by certain dates. Whether you choose to work from home or in the office outside of your core hours is up to you. It sounds immensely liberating. Epic games does this.

    NotYou on
Sign In or Register to comment.