Monitor | A 15-hour work week sounds great, but we'd still want more
Our failure to spend more time in leisure is a result of our desire for material wealth with an emphasis on output growth for its own sake
Last Tuesday, Monitor looked at the rise of what it euphemistically called "billshut jobs".
The article was inspired by London School of Economics professor David Graeber, who set out to solve a puzzle.
In 1930, economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that by the early 21st century, advances in technology would require us to work for no more than 15 hours a week, allowing us to spend the rest of our time in leisure.
Why, wondered the LSE professor, has this prediction so signally failed to come true?
Graeber concluded that although in developed economies, industrial, agricultural and domestic occupations had indeed been automated largely out of existence, they had been replaced by vast numbers of jobs in public relations, management consultancy, human resources and similarly unproductive fields that kept millions busy achieving nothing at all.
"It's as if someone were out there making up pointless jobs just for the sake of keeping us all working," he argued. "The ruling class has figured out that a happy and productive population with free time on their hands is a mortal danger."