Started By
Message

re: The average work week in the 1890s was 100 hours

Posted on 7/21/20 at 12:35 pm to
Posted by Joshjrn
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2008
29891 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 12:35 pm to
quote:

Looks to be about 60 to 70 hours a week.


I would buy in a heartbeat. Hell, I'd buy 80. But 100?
Posted by theGarnetWay
Washington, D.C.
Member since Mar 2010
26811 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:02 pm to
quote:

LINK

quote:
So you just said it's actually false but then said that conclusion based on theories? That doesn't seem like a scientifically sound comment.



Well the studies show they had to work 15-20 hours a week. So even if they are significantly off i feel pretty confident saying they worked less than 100 hours a week


Still, your link shows that there is one theory based off like 2 studies that have already been criticized for not including all the necessary factors into what counts as "work."

Posted by Bigbee Hills
Member since Feb 2019
1531 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:03 pm to
quote:

I know a lot of successful people that put in 100 hours a week.

You lazy, broke dick pieces of shits wouldn't understand hard work.


You may be trolling but I know that at the peak of our startup enterprise when we employed over 400 people from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico on fluid jobsites performing utility right-of-way and U.S. Forest Service timber stand maintenance contracts that I easily worked 100+ hours a week for months at a time.

I had no other choice at the time. We had millions of dollar's worth of high-stake, big money, time-sensitive contracts that had extremely high daily operating costs with delayed invoice payments until our work had been audited (which they always took their sweet arse time on doing), tons of collaborators on each contract, and being that one human being is complicated enough as it is, let alone dealing with 400 of them with only a handful of operation managers to oversee multiple jobsites and multiple foremen meant that I, the general manager, had to work myself to the bone.

I did irreparable damage to my body during those years (one example is blowing my knee out on a jobsite due to pure exhaustion and having to get surgery as a result), and I did damn-near irreparable damage to my marriage and other relationships and a whole lot more bad shite.

There comes a point when too much becomes not enough and the return on time invested begins to dip deeply into the red. I'd say that point for me is 70 hours a week for sustained weeks at a time. I pull 70 a week intermittently on a regular basis, especially this time of year, but anything more and it's just not worth it. At that point it's either time for me to throw money at the problem or adjust my game plan.

The folks you know who work 100 hours weeks consecutively won't do it for a sustained, decades-long amount of time because they'll either be dead from the stress or too busy with divorce proceedings, the ills of a now-grown child without any resemblance of who his parent is, etcetera. The ramifications of working that much are too numerous to even count.

Anything over 70 hours a week for consecutive months at a time is for the mfing birds. It's a foolish thing to do, at best.
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
46689 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:06 pm to
quote:

It’s crazy how much smarter the bottom rung of the population is Relative to the top compared to What that gap was in 1890.

I think the difference is just as great today.
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
46689 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:10 pm to
quote:

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

Well, it ended slavery, and it appears that it is ending warfare and poverty. As you pointed out, it increased lifespan, and as this thread points out, it radically reduced the work week. Quite a disaster.
Posted by DiamondDog
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2019
11911 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:10 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/17/21 at 11:36 pm
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
281843 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:11 pm to
quote:

This all changed around the 20s with progressive movements


Technology has been the biggest driver. Everything from farming to industry became far less labor intensive.
Posted by Lima Whiskey
Member since Apr 2013
22594 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:13 pm to
quote:

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering


Yes
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
46689 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:33 pm to
quote:

There was so much more freedom.

So many more toothaches and other ailments, too. Also, a life expectancy in the 50's.
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
46689 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

I'm skeptical unless it includes household chores.

All the chores were household chores. They were almost all farmers.
Posted by alphamicro
Shreveport
Member since Mar 2012
542 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:05 pm to
quote:

The great great grandfather worked in some factory in Shreveport and she did industrial laundry from what I gather.
If you're curious and know someone with an ancestry.com subscription the census records plus old city directories (assuming they didn't live in the country) may fill you in on their work.
Posted by TaderSalad
mudbug territory
Member since Jul 2014
25102 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:08 pm to
quote:

People are miserable now because we’re not wired to have so much leisure time



Lots of lazy AF people out there...
Posted by CuyahogaTigerJr
Northeast ohio
Member since Aug 2018
2317 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:12 pm to
You worked, you ate, you slept, repeat
Posted by mmmmmbeeer
ATL
Member since Nov 2014
8769 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:16 pm to
quote:

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries.


A lot of scary words here and countless accusations, but not a single example of HOW the Industrial Revolution directly led to anything on this list of grievances and atrocities.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
71364 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:19 pm to
quote:

A lot of scary words here and countless accusations, but not a single example of HOW the Industrial Revolution directly led to anything on this list of grievances and atrocities.
you and i don't agree on much, but it is insanely ahistorical to claim that we were living in some peaceful, safe, pastoral world before industrialization.

Farm life was brutal.
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
29000 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:21 pm to
quote:

The populace is basically as smart as it’s ever been
Debatable
Posted by tzimme4
Metairie
Member since Jan 2008
30069 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:22 pm to
What else did they have to do besides eat sleep and screw
Posted by 21JumpStreet
Member since Jul 2012
14770 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:23 pm to
Those people worked harder, not smarter.
Posted by Brazos
Member since Oct 2013
20557 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:27 pm to
Exactly. There wasn’t near the amount of pussified “men” we walk around with today. In order for a society to thrive and survive strong men must be present in order to lead. That’s just the way it’s always been and will always be.
Posted by DiamondDog
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2019
11911 posts
Posted on 7/21/20 at 2:29 pm to
Thanks but I’m not sure there’d be any records. The first 10 years of their childhood they lived in tents on the outskirts of town, if you can even fathom that. I still wonder if they were f-ing with me when they told me that.
This post was edited on 7/21/20 at 2:29 pm
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram