
Reasons the 9 to 5 Workday is Obsolete - joeyespo
https://blog.30hourjobs.com/5-reasons-the-9-to-5-workday-is-obsolete/
======
lethologica
I went from a typical 9-5 job to working part time, about 16 hours, to focus
on my studies. Doing this increased my overall happiness by a massive factor.
Being able to spend the majority of my day on something I was actually
interested in and passionate about pulled me out of a "life is meaningless,
why bother" mentality that my former job had buried me in.

The pay cut was drastic, but I was lucky (in a way) that I had come from
having nothing the majority of my life so going back to almost nothing was an
easy transition because it was essentially my 'default mode'. And even when I
was making a considerable amount of money, lifestyle creep never became an
issue. I lived well within my means. This is important because this
combination allowed me to actually quit my job and live off of savings for
years while I went back and completed my undergraduate. I've had friends in
similar situations who have had to go back to a job they hated because they
couldn't adjust. But for me, it was worth cutting every single cent and I will
never work a 9-5 ever again.

~~~
Guest42
If only it was actually 9 - 5, seems that 7:30 - 6 is a lot more common

~~~
mister_hn
I focus to do always 8.00-16.00 or 7.30-15.30. doing more than 8 hours a days
is bad for you and your employer anyway..

Actually I would prefer to work 6 hours a day for 5 days or 4 days for 8
hours, so I can have more time for me and my interests

------
noipv4
I have noticed that 9 to 5 works best for most middle managers and other
gossip oriented staff.

As for the productive workers; they should be allowed to work at the time of
their own choosing.

------
vanniv
It is interesting that we have largely the same group of people complaining at
the same time, that:

1) They don't feel like working as hard as people in the past used to work,
and

2) They feel they're being screwed by a "rigged system" because they're not as
rich as people used to be.

~~~
HammockWarrior
That's the whole point of productivity gains... Either you're richer or you
can work less or ideally both.

~~~
cylinder
I own a business. I invest in a garden hose so my gardener can water the
plants more productively than refilling a watering can constantly. Why would
you expect the financial savings of my investment to flow to the gardener
rather than to me? If anything, the gardener is now exerting much less effort,
and may accept the job for less pay (or be replaced by someone less skilled
and cheaper).

~~~
HammockWarrior
Well, at least at a societal level because you want to live in a relatively
equal society and have all of the benefits that come with that as opposed to a
feudal dystopia.

~~~
vanniv
Feudal dystopias, as you call them, were characterized by minimal capital
creation and the lack of rights to exploit that capital leading to both
poverty and inequality.

On the other hand, the sudden explosion of capital creation and exploitation
that sparked the industrial revolution led to the creation of the first
societies in which wealth and freedom were attainable by families not of noble
birth.

~~~
HammockWarrior
And that happened after the period of horrific exploitation of people in
factories, including children. Economic growth is good not in itself but only
if it is widely shared. It will be better for economic growth in the long run
anyway because inequality comes with its own set of problems.

~~~
neoburkian
A society where everyone is poor is worse than a society where some are rich
but most are poor. It is worse that everyone be in crushing poverty forever,
than to have unequal distribution of wealth.

“Growth is only good if widely shared” is a meme that has led to immiseration
every time it is implemented. If capitalism has to own child labor, then
redistributionists have to own the violent mass scale enslavement of the
peasants under Mao/Stalin.

