+- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Society and Culture (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-8.html)
+--- Thread: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure (/thread-4802.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - tg63 - 06-18-2018
(06-16-2018, 09:34 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you see any hope for another period of time charged with radical fun if you want it? Seems that mindset disappeared circa the mid-1980s when society went from hedonistic to workaholic almost overnight. Aren't there at least some left who want to love, play, dance and create?
I do miss those sentiments, but they certainly aren't values that are considered noble or even desirable in this phase of the cycle. After all, they aren't qualities that contribute to increasing productivity.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - David Horn - 06-18-2018
(06-16-2018, 09:34 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you see any hope for another period of time charged with radical fun if you want it? Seems that mindset disappeared circa the mid-1980s when society went from hedonistic to workaholic almost overnight. Aren't there at least some left who want to love, play, dance and create?
I'm retired. Love, play, dance and create are about all I do … except for those nasty unavoidable tasks involved in day-to--day living.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - David Horn - 06-18-2018
(06-18-2018, 12:10 PM)tg63 Wrote:(06-16-2018, 09:34 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you see any hope for another period of time charged with radical fun if you want it? Seems that mindset disappeared circa the mid-1980s when society went from hedonistic to workaholic almost overnight. Aren't there at least some left who want to love, play, dance and create?
I do miss those sentiments, but they certainly aren't values that are considered noble or even desirable in this phase of the cycle. After all, they aren't qualities that contribute to increasing productivity.
Increased productivity is no longer a net plus, unless you are in the ownership class. All the benefits flow there, while all the efforts to achieve are produced by the work-for-a-living crowd. At some point that may finally sink into the skulls of hoi polloi, and the paradigm might shift. So far, the workers are identifying with the moneyed interests, because they have so much in common.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - pbrower2a - 06-19-2018
(06-18-2018, 03:28 PM)David Horn Wrote:(06-18-2018, 12:10 PM)tg63 Wrote:(06-16-2018, 09:34 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you see any hope for another period of time charged with radical fun if you want it? Seems that mindset disappeared circa the mid-1980s when society went from hedonistic to workaholic almost overnight. Aren't there at least some left who want to love, play, dance and create?
I do miss those sentiments, but they certainly aren't values that are considered noble or even desirable in this phase of the cycle. After all, they aren't qualities that contribute to increasing productivity.
Increased productivity is no longer a net plus, unless you are in the ownership class. All the benefits flow there, while all the efforts to achieve are produced by the work-for-a-living crowd. At some point that may finally sink into the skulls of hoi polloi, and the paradigm might shift. So far, the workers are identifying with the moneyed interests, because they have so much in common.
Exactly. It goes to economic rent. The rentier gets to exact from the worker or consumer a charge (essentially a privately-collected tax) for the privilege of living in the rentier's world. It is much like the dues that a feudal lord exacted from a peasant.
In a competitive economy, increased production and innovation tend to drive costs of getting things down to a bare minimum. So it has been with the high-tech objects of the time, whether the bone china of the Wedgwood family, the Model T Ford, or most of our electronic gadgets. A capitalist might get rich with an innovation whether in the invention or production of objects, but eventually everything goes obsolete and requires fresh innovation for a desirable product or some new trick of cutting cost on the production line. Nineteenth-century bone china might still be useful, but a Model T Ford is too under-powered (among other things) to be safe on a modern road, and the $1295 color TV set from 1953 (which cost about as much as a new car at the time for a 15-inch-screen display) might be in use today -- as a plant stand. A 15" display is fully adequate for a portable computer.
Rentier capitalists (and Donald Trump is a prime example) are more concerned with how much they can exact from a customer than with efficiency. They sacrifice efficiency for gain. They can exact much of the fruit not only of toil, but also innovation and imagination. They are the sorts of capitalists who best fit Karl Marx' stereotype. Needless to say, they are not the most admired of capitalists.
Of course the other sorts of capitalists grade into rentier capitalists, and we have another exploitative elite, to wit the managerial elite which has come to resemble the Soviet nomenklatura, a class that has shown the possibility of exploitation without ownership.
Exploiters are hated, but they usually are able to lavish funds upon intellectual shysters able to bamboozle people , political hacks willing to serve them in complete submission in return for a near-sinecure, and in the end brutal enforcers. We are in for a very rough ride, and we can't get off the infernal vehicle that has us trapped upon it. Donald Trump may be an incompetent do-it-yourself despot, but you can count on this: he will have more competent successors more effective at turning up the terror on anyone who balks at seeing his highest purpose in life enriching some idle-rich creep who charges us heavily (in suffering) for the privilege of living in his world.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - tg63 - 06-19-2018
(06-18-2018, 03:28 PM)David Horn Wrote:(06-18-2018, 12:10 PM)tg63 Wrote:(06-16-2018, 09:34 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you see any hope for another period of time charged with radical fun if you want it? Seems that mindset disappeared circa the mid-1980s when society went from hedonistic to workaholic almost overnight. Aren't there at least some left who want to love, play, dance and create?
I do miss those sentiments, but they certainly aren't values that are considered noble or even desirable in this phase of the cycle. After all, they aren't qualities that contribute to increasing productivity.
Increased productivity is no longer a net plus, unless you are in the ownership class. All the benefits flow there, while all the efforts to achieve are produced by the work-for-a-living crowd. At some point that may finally sink into the skulls of hoi polloi, and the paradigm might shift. So far, the workers are identifying with the moneyed interests, because they have so much in common.
wouldn't we have to be well into the 1T before that shift really starts?
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - David Horn - 06-19-2018
(06-19-2018, 11:24 AM)tg63 Wrote:(06-18-2018, 03:28 PM)David Horn Wrote: Increased productivity is no longer a net plus, unless you are in the ownership class. All the benefits flow there, while all the efforts to achieve are produced by the work-for-a-living crowd. At some point that may finally sink into the skulls of hoi polloi, and the paradigm might shift. So far, the workers are identifying with the moneyed interests, because they have so much in common.
wouldn't we have to be well into the 1T before that shift really starts?
It should be the motivator that energizes the 4T. 1Ts tend to be utilitarian, with communal efforts and communal rewards. By the time the 1T begins, it's too late to notice you aren't part of the commonweal. That has to be the result of the communal efforts that "win" the 4T, and so far, not too much of that is happening.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - beechnut79 - 06-21-2018
(06-18-2018, 12:10 PM)tg63 Wrote:The last awakening was also a time when, for better or worse, personal feelings took center stage. We learned then, and are still learning, that feelings change like the tides. "Do you feel me?" was somewhat of a buzz question for a time. Feelings were analyzed as never before. It was something that marketers seem to have latched onto, because so often when consumer surveys are done you might get asked a question such as "Is this brand and flavor of yogurt for someone like me?" Personally though I feel that questions like this are sort of silly.(06-16-2018, 09:34 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you see any hope for another period of time charged with radical fun if you want it? Seems that mindset disappeared circa the mid-1980s when society went from hedonistic to workaholic almost overnight. Aren't there at least some left who want to love, play, dance and create?
I do miss those sentiments, but they certainly aren't values that are considered noble or even desirable in this phase of the cycle. After all, they aren't qualities that contribute to increasing productivity.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - David Horn - 06-22-2018
beechnut79 Wrote:The last awakening was also a time when, for better or worse, personal feelings took center stage. We learned then, and are still learning, that feelings change like the tides. "Do you feel me?" was somewhat of a buzz question for a time. Feelings were analyzed as never before. It was something that marketers seem to have latched onto, because so often when consumer surveys are done you might get asked a question such as "Is this brand and flavor of yogurt for someone like me?" Personally though I feel that questions like this are sort of silly.
The last 4T with those traits was the one that followed the Trascendental 2T, and we know how that went.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - beechnut79 - 06-22-2018
Yes, some of the residue from that time is still with us over a century and a half later. But I doubt that there was much if any aggressive marketing in those days because we weren't nearly as consumer crazy as now.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - David Horn - 06-23-2018
(06-22-2018, 02:02 PM)beechnut79 Wrote: Yes, some of the residue from that time is still with us over a century and a half later. But I doubt that there was much if any aggressive marketing in those days because we weren't nearly as consumer crazy as now.
True. The atmosphere is very similar, but the tools have changed dramatically. To be honest, today's tools make the problems worse, since every side can beat a loud drum and raise the political temperature quickly. I'm doubtful that they can be applied effectively to reducing tensions, not that there seems to be an interest in doing that.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - beechnut79 - 06-11-2019
Was just thinking about this one of my "children" on this forum. One of the last posts here talked about the way feelings are explored, and during the last Awakening, in fact more toward its end, encounter groups were a big venue for expression of feelings. Although this was a passing fad ala disco, (in fact its heyday was the early-80s post disco, many of the ideas arising from it could still be relevant today. Questions such as: how do you nurture yourself? Do you take time out for yourself?
The latter of these when I read it brought back memories of creating this thread in order to explore how much people really do take time out for themselves, especially those more on the upper echelon of the income scale who have become legendary for workaholism. Does anybody sense any yearning for a return to days when lives were more balanced and work time and family/social/free time were in most cases divorced from one another? Will more of our bodies and souls ask us to spend some quality time looking after ourselves, realizing it's okay to schedule time out for ourselves and to set boundaries. This reminds me of, I believe, France, where a law supposedly took effect that would prohibit employers from sending out non-emergency emails after normal business hours. At least I believe that was the way it was worded.
If we don't look after ourselves it's pretty difficult to be present for those you love. And not just on a set-aside love fest day in February.
Do any of you think we will ever see that society of increased leisure we were, some half century ago, all bur promised?
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - pbrower2a - 06-11-2019
(06-11-2019, 10:26 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you think we will ever see that society of increased leisure we were, some half century ago, all bur promised?
We got the forty-hour workweek as the result of the Great Depression. There just wasn't enough work to go around with the fifty-hour workweeks of the 1920s.
With manufacturing and computer-organized clerical work we can work far fewer hours and achieve just as much.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - beechnut79 - 06-12-2019
(06-11-2019, 02:48 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:(06-11-2019, 10:26 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you think we will ever see that society of increased leisure we were, some half century ago, all bur promised?
We got the forty-hour workweek as the result of the Great Depression. There just wasn't enough work to go around with the fifty-hour workweeks of the 1920s.
With manufacturing and computer-organized clerical work we can work far fewer hours and achieve just as much.
Actually at least the eight-hour day concept was won toward the end of the 19th century with events such as the Haymarket and Pullman riots.
Weekends though were a byproduct of the Great Depression as a cost-saving measure, but first it was a five and a half hour workweek with mostly half days on Saturdays. Full weekends didn't become commonplace until around the 1960s.
Might be worth discussing why so many can't seem to try to stay grounded and find balance and calm in their lives.
As far as the second line goes, we have clearly gone in the opposite direction despite increased productivity as a society-wide "I don't have time" syndrome kicked in during the mid-1980s and hasn't really let up since, hence increased demand for things such as food delivery.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - Hintergrund - 06-12-2019
People "at work" waste so much time with useless meetings (I guess the Boomer narcissists and Silent talkers like them so much...) - or on the internet.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - pbrower2a - 06-12-2019
(06-12-2019, 09:17 PM)Hintergrund Wrote: People "at work" waste so much time with useless meetings (I guess the Boomer narcissists and Silent talkers like them so much...) - or on the internet.
Meetings were not so necessary when work was assembly-line work or farm labor. Maybe some bosses love to hear themselves speak.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - Eric the Green - 06-13-2019
(06-12-2019, 09:17 PM)Hintergrund Wrote: People "at work" waste so much time with useless meetings (I guess the Boomer narcissists and Silent talkers like them so much...) - or on the internet.
This boomer certainly doesn't. But others do.
RE: Why Technology Didn't Produce Increased Leisure - pbrower2a - 06-13-2019
(06-12-2019, 08:07 PM)beechnut79 Wrote:(06-11-2019, 02:48 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:(06-11-2019, 10:26 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: Do any of you think we will ever see that society of increased leisure we were, some half century ago, all bur promised?
We got the forty-hour workweek as the result of the Great Depression. There just wasn't enough work to go around with the fifty-hour workweeks of the 1920s.
With manufacturing and computer-organized clerical work we can work far fewer hours and achieve just as much.
Actually at least the eight-hour day concept was won toward the end of the 19th century with events such as the Haymarket and Pullman riots.
Left-leaning radicals were always ahead of the social curve in those days. Eight hours of heavy physical labor is more exhausting than eight hours of not-so-strenuous work.
Quote:Weekends though were a byproduct of the Great Depression as a cost-saving measure, but first it was a five and a half hour workweek with mostly half days on Saturdays. Full weekends didn't become commonplace until around the 1960s.
Cost-saving, sure... but revenue resulting from weekend work was not so readily available. In any event, the overtime premium made Saturday work less justifiable unless there was a boom in manufacturing demand (think of World War II requirements for military equipment).
Quote:Might be worth discussing why so many can't seem to try to stay grounded and find balance and calm in their lives.
Illiberal education grounded entirely in 'business' topics, or even in excessive specialization at the undergraduate level? Undergraduate education has become a watered-down grad school in most universities. The idea of college was to improve a youth, broaden his exposure to areas of intellectual curiosity, and give some respect for the slow progress of Humanity in making a better world. Since about 1980, college education has been mostly about preparing people for jobs. Youth rarely learn that there is more than pop culture, easily accessible and shrewdly marketed (yes, pop culture is as much a commodity as is rice or gasoline) with few alternatives readily available.
Pop culture, to put it tamely, is practically engineered for appreciation by people of low-normal intelligence -- whether in music, television, movies, or mass art. (I can say much the same about religion, politics, and advertising, which may explain why someone heavily involved in the creation of mass low culture could become President. No, I am not discussing Ronald Reagan, the peak of whose film career coincided with the Golden Age of American cinema, when the creative activity had to operate on several different levels of sophistication at once).
Pop culture is mere entertainment, and it does not enrich life. It is at most a pastime. The less that one thinks, the more one tolerates it. But today, thought is itself a subversive activity even if the objective is to simply enrich life and expand one's intellectual universe. Note that classical music that demands attention, learning, curiosity, and patience has practically disappeared from places that still sell recorded music. (OK, entities like Wal*Mart and Target are hardly intellectual paradises, and they have undercut the music retailer). It is far easier to market rock, country, or even religious music. An intelligent person can easily tire of mass culture, but if he has no idea of where to search for better, then what can he do? Buy more or 'better' stuff?
Quote:As far as the second line goes, we have clearly gone in the opposite direction despite increased productivity as a society-wide "I don't have time" syndrome kicked in during the mid-1980s and hasn't really let up since, hence increased demand for things such as food delivery.
We need to allocate time for humanizing our lives. We may not need the opera, but good reason exists for Turandot or Brahms' second piano concerto taking much more time than the latest pop tune. And that is only music. Sure, most people are lazy, and if they got more time off the job with similar pay they would wallow in mass low culture or even in such bilge as pornography. On the other side, more free time means more responsibility for entertaining oneself and filling a gap of structure that bosses impose. Work can be less scary, as one can do much work with little thinking.