The Paradox of Productivity: Why a 15-Hour Workweek Feels Unattainable
In 1930, economist J.M. Keynes famously predicted that the average workweek would decrease to just 15 hours. The productivity advancements that he anticipated have indeed come to pass, yet many individuals, especially low-wage workers, still find themselves working longer hours than predicted. This article explores why the promise of reduced work hours may feel like an unattained dream.
Increased Consumption and Standards of Living
The increase in consumption and the basic standard of living has risen dramatically over the past century. Today, owning a car is not just a luxury but a near necessity. The expectation for air-conditioned homes, multiple sets of clothing, advanced healthcare, and better food is far higher than in the past. Additionally, government expenditure has significantly increased, threefold compared to the 1920s, including military expenditures and servicing of a massive national debt.
Furthermore, the population has grown exponentially, from approximately 1.8 billion in 1930 to over 7 billion today. This means that resources such as water, energy, and land are divided among a much larger population. People now share spaces that were once private, leading to a more crowded and resource-sparse environment.
Manual Labor vs. Skilled Labor
Manual labor has become less valuable compared to skilled labor. Numerous factors, including labor-saving devices, automation, and global competition, have significantly reduced the value of manual labor. Skilled labor, such as repairing and maintaining complex machinery, is now more in demand and more financially rewarding.
Business owners often find it more economical to hire skilled laborers for longer hours rather than multiple workers for shorter shifts. This phenomenon is well-documented in literature such as The Mythical Man-Month, which explores the challenges of managing complex projects and teams.
Widespread Misconceptions about Future Predictions
People often make flawed predictions about the future. J.M. Keynes’ 15-hour workweek prediction is a prime example of such a misjudgment. While the advancements in productivity have been significant, the expectations for a basic standard of living have also evolved. Today, the concept of living on a 1930 standard of living is almost inconceivable.
Real per-capita earnings have increased by a factor of about 7 from 1929 to the present. This means that an average worker could today afford a 1930 standard of living by working just 6 hours per week, assuming income distribution has remained relatively stable. However, the question remains: is this a genuine inquiry, or a form of complaint rather than a real question?
Counter-Arguments to Increased CEO Pay
Some critics argue that increased CEO pay disproportionately benefits a small elite, while workers' pay has not kept pace with the rise in productivity. It is true that CEO compensation has grown exponentially compared to the cost of the average worker for a company, which includes increased taxes and labor costs. Yet, it is also crucial to recognize that productivity and compensation among workers have often tracked closely with productivity gains.
For a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between productivity and compensation, one must reference the article Productivity and Compensation: Growing Together. This article provides a nuanced perspective on how larger companies and markets contribute to wealth disparity but do not inherently mean that poorer individuals are worse off.
Conclusion
The paradox of productivity lies in the fact that while manual labor is less valuable and automation has changed the landscape of work, the standards of living continue to rise. Workers would indeed be able to achieve the 1930 standard of living in far less than 15 hours per week. However, the reality is that people today aspire for a much higher and more diverse standard of living. Therefore, the 15-hour workweek, as proposed by Keynes, appears to be an unattainable dream in contemporary times.