JONTILLMAN.COM | part of the problem since 1976

In 2005,Valerie A. Ramey and Neville Francis authored a paper entitled A Century of Work and Leisure. In it, they look at work and leisure trends in the twentieth century. They conclude that some 70 percent of the decline in hours worked has been offset by an increase in hours spent in school. Further, contrary to conventional wisdom, average hours spent in “home production” - that is, cooking, cleaning, caring for children, and the like - are actually slightly higher now than they were in the early part of the last century. Meanwhile, leisure per capita is approximately the same now as it was in 1900.

Their findings were in direct opposition to the predictions that John Maynard Keynes made in his 1930 essay Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren, that rising productivity would result in a large increase in leisure during the next hundred years. And, he speculated that the central problem for humanity would be using its abundant leisure time in a meaningful way.

Now Mark Aguiar and Erik Hurst have published another paper, entitled Measuring Trends In Leisure which seems to be an attempt to roll back or refute the Ramsey/Francis paper.

Why do I care? Because the whole basis for their paper is wrong. Classifying every minute of the day into productive and non-productive is an industrial-age fantasy, one that has little if any relevance in the modern world, whether we are talking about work, leisure, or the bits in-between.

Additionally, the whole paper stinks. The methodology is obviously flawed, even to a layman like myself.

According to the study, in 2003, the difference between core market work and total market work, excluding non-market work (Laundering your suits or uniforms, repairing your commuter vehicle, waiting for the train, etc.), is the difference between 29.82 and 33.01, which is a difference of 3.19 hours, or roughly 191 minutes a week.

Total market work, which according to their data is 3.19 hours of more work time than “core market work,” measures things like: “any time spent on other work-related activity, including commuting time, formal breaks at work, time spent searching for a job, etc.” One wonders what etc. entails, but whatever, let’s just assume there’s more to total market work than just the three items listed.

It does not include food prep, car repair, or anything that enables work, as that falls under non-market work.

So, looking at the average commute time, which is 26.5 minutes, and let’s assume the silly notion of only 5 days of work a week, that’s 132.5 minutes, which leaves us with approximately 58 minutes for eating during your workday, talking at the water cooler, or using the restroom. In a five day spread, that would give you a whopping 11.7 minutes per day to eat, drink, piss, and crap.

Does anyone think these are valid numbers, when a small bout of constipation, or breathing between bites of food, clearly vitiates the data? Chicago School economists are wanks, whether they work for the Federal Reserve or not.