專欄職場

The lost leisure time of our lives

Three hours a day is quite enough,” wrote John Maynard Keynes in his 1930 essay Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren. The essay continues to tantalise its readers today, thanks in part to a forecast that is looking magnificently right — that in advanced economies people could be up to eight times better off in 2030 than in 1930 — coupled with a forecast that is looking spectacularly wrong, that we would be working 15-hour weeks.

In 2008, economists Lorenzo Pecchi and Gustavo Piga edited a book in which celebrated economists pondered Keynes’s essay. One contributor, Benjamin Friedman of Harvard University, has recently revisited the question of what Keynes got wrong, and produced a thought-provoking answer.

First, it is worth teasing out the nature and extent of Keynes’s error. He was right to predict that we would be working less. We enter the workforce later, after long and not-always-arduous courses of study. We enjoy longer retirements. The work week itself is getting shorter. In non-agricultural employment in the US, the week was 69 hours in 1830 — the equivalent of working 11 hours a day but only three hours on Sundays. By 1930, a full-time work week was 47 hours; each decade, American workers were working two hours less every week.

您已閱讀25%(1263字),剩餘75%(3783字)包含更多重要資訊,訂閱以繼續探索完整內容,並享受更多專屬服務。
版權聲明:本文版權歸FT中文網所有,未經允許任何單位或個人不得轉載,複製或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵權必究。

臥底經濟學家

蒂姆•哈福德(Tim Harford)是英國《金融時報》的經濟學專欄作家,他撰寫兩個欄目:《親愛的經濟學家》和 《臥底經濟學家》。他寫過一本暢銷書也叫做《臥底經濟學家》,這本書已經被翻譯爲16種語言,他現在正在寫這本書的續集。哈福德也是BBC的一檔節目《相信我,我是經濟學家》(Trust Me, I’m an Economist)的主持人。他同妻子及兩個孩子一起住在倫敦。

相關文章

相關話題

設置字型大小×
最小
較小
默認
較大
最大
分享×