That does sound like an onion article
10 hours on the clock. 1-2 hours commuting both ways. 1/2 hour eating lunch away from home. 2 hours on basic needs. 8 sleeping. 2 with kids and pets.
This ensures that you will be incapable of happiness or enrichment and will spend every rest day frantically trying to do the stuff you couldn’t get done and then vegetating.
Eventually you will burn out if you aren’t 20.
This isn’t an optimal schedule it’s schedulinh a break down
Eh, by 30 you should be dead anyway. A real Christian would live as they did 2025 years ago, with the same life expectancy.
^(/s)
Dayuuuum
First off, this is a fucking ad. Article author is Mark Gerson who repeatedly references a book titled “God Was Right” written by… Mark Gerson… Set to release next month.
Second, just some of my “favorite” parts:
Contemporary research has shown that we can enjoy and find meaning in any job as long as we frame it correctly. This is called “job crafting.”
Numerous studies have found that there is a productivity ceiling.
The rate of production slowed for the hours 50 to 55.
However, there was no increase in output from hours 56 to 70.
“That extra 14 hours was a waste of time.”
And so, we now have the number of what we have termed the “productivity ceiling”: It’s 55 hours a week.
And here’s the amazing and maybe divine math.
A Sabbath observer can work 10 hours a day for five days a week. He can really only work half a day on the sixth, as he needs to prepare for Shabbat — leaving him with a 55-hour work week.Where in the bible does it actually say that?
Right next to where it says to attack your trans neighbors to distract from the policy failures of your politicians.
2 Opinions 3:12
Because before that it was 7 days a week work…
The definition of “work” here is the question. I don’t think spending 55 hours in front of a computer, under fluorescent lights and breathing recycled air, is what the ancients had in mind.
No, the ancients never said anything about working a certain amount of time each week at all. Dude just made up some numbers and said God said it.
Well if God says that’s how it should be, then it should be across the board for “everyone”. No more golfing for the orange buffoon. No more elaborate holidays for the wealthy. Get the hell back to work you overpaid CEOs.
So I get to work from home and also raise my kids on corporate time like in the old farm times
Most units of time are based on nature. A day is one rotation of the Earth. A month is the moon’s orbit. A year is the Earth’s path around the sun.
But a week? There’s no natural explanation for it.
Well, given that a moon cycle is about 28 days long, each quarter of that is 7 days. Before we had electric lights at night, most people were very aware of the moon phase.
Now I’ve actually finished the article. That intro just ticked me off enough that I needed to say something before continuing. :-P
The study they cited shows that, surprise surprise, people need a break. That makes total sense. But the whole 55 hours a week thing? They seem to be advocating for people going to work for 55 hours a week, rather than the typical 40 hours for a full-time job. That’s total baloney, though. There is so much work to do outside of my job. They mentioned volunteering and child rearing, but what about the basic work to live?
People have to eat, so they have to prepare food. They have to go to the grocery store. They have to do laundry. They have to clean their house. If they have a yard, there is yard work. There is time spent grooming oneself. If a person has kids, they may need to help their kids with homework. People have to shop for other necessities, like clothes. People spend time commuting to and from work. There is so much necessary stuff to do outside of a job that I would consider “work” because it’s neither sleeping nor leisure.
So what is the point of this article? “God was right” that people need a break sometimes? Or “God was right” that the break should only be one day in 7? Are they seriously advocating for moving to a 55-hour work week?
The way they read into the scripture verse was really weird, too. They pulled a lot of meaning that’s not textually there out of “Six days thou shalt work.” The act of working has some inherent value now beyond what you’re actually accomplishing? They’re also conflating people not wanting to do any work with people not liking their jobs. Sure, a person could find meaning in being a janitor at a hospital, but not all jobs have some net social benefit like that. A person working at a call center to scam people doesn’t have any deeper meaning to find and doesn’t have to like their job.
The whole thing sounds like they’re saying that everyone needs to shut up and be abused at work, working long hours, and if we’re not happy about it, it’s our own fault for not liking our jobs, and we need to suck it up and get with the program because Fox News said that God said so.
No thanks.
That’s exactly what I was thinking reading through the article… Yeah, I’m generally at my best if I spend most of the day doing stuff, with the occasional rest day. People tend to want to work and accomplish things, but when their time is consumed by what feels like meaningless drudgery on top of the other daily necessities, that’s a recipe for a mental health crisis. It feels like the author is deliberately omitting the part where your “55 hours” necessarily has to include all the stuff you work on outside of work, including hobbies.
I have never seen that clip before. He was so dumbfounded by O’Reilly’s example of a mysterious force that he resorted to sarcasm. Ngl I don’t think I could have even responded to that
Interesting to see that take. When it was new, Redditters criticized him for not giving a better response. You know, the response they came up with when they’re sitting comfy in their house, and not actually there in the moment.
Which is to say that your take is correct when you have reasonable expectations of ability to improv a response.
I have, unfortunately, been in situations where I needed to convince someone to change their stance only to realize they held that stance out of contrived ignorance. It’s one thing to walk into a situation knowing that you are trying to educate, it is quite another to realize that person has already weaponized their education to push a narrative
deleted by creator
Also because its rather optimal for a week length. France tried a 10 day week but it was too long.
Wow this really is blatant and out in the open. You have to be really dumb to not see how obvious this is (very uneducated, indoctrinated, deeply religious).
This is one of the main purposes of religion. To get slaves to work. The slaves of the time were obviously uneducated, and easily manipulatable with superstitious thinking. Convince them when they die, they’ll go to heaven and live in paradise. As long as you obey, keep working, and don’t fight back.
Its so blatantly obvious, and its right there on FOX news, in the year of our lord 2025. Yowza, the Christians who fall for this are absolutely idiotic, it’s hard not to feel pity, as its really not their fault.
If God wanted his people to work hard he wouldn’t have supported them buying slaves in the Bible
Isn’t Fox News sort of the Onion, though?
Yeah, except their viewers think it’s real.
Yea, I’m not sure why they are allowed to use News in their name but then claim to be entertainment. How is that not misleading?
They help the oligarchs who would be the lens to enforce that
I have bad news about the contents of Grape Nuts.
They think most onion articles are real too.
How 'bout you stop telling me how to live my life and fuck right off.
I chuckled and thought, this is the new too on the nose onion. Only to notice oh its specifically not the onion.
even the thumbnail is oniony
You should work more so that the 1% can buy more mansions and bigger yachts.
Duh.
You should work more so that the 1% can buy more mansions and bigger yachts.
Someone didn’t read the article before taking the rage-bait!
This work doesn’t need to be paid. Volunteering and child-rearing certainly count as long as the activity is demanding, consistent and productive.
Volunteering and child-rearing doesn’t really build a mansion or yacht now does it?
Volunteering and child-rearing doesn’t really build a mansion or yacht now does it?
How much volunteer work is necessary only because the agencies that should have and would have done those things have been shut down to fund tax cuts for the rich?
Or even more directly because the problems being addressed are a direct consequence of government policies instituted solely to benefit a handful of wealthy donors?
How many of those programs would even need to exist if more people volunteered… voluntarily? Wouldn’t have needed to tax people from the get-go. Let alone tax people then tax cut for the rich.
Why should ordinary people already burdened with responsibilities donate their precious time and energy just so that some rich fucks can hang on to even more of the wealth they neither need nor deserve?
Yes spite your local community and the people around you to shake your fist at the rich people who live nowhere near you!
How dare they do something somewhere else!
Meanwhile dumbfucks like me bike/walk their community and clean up the parks on a pretty consistent basis so that we don’t have to pay some company (that’s inevitably owned by a rich person mind you) to contract with the HOA and do some menial task. WOE IS ME! THE SHAME! How dare I help my community!
Edit: Your mentality is that if you let your community suffer, you refuse to volunteer and do nothing at all… that you might happen to get more taxes to “fix” the issues that volunteers could have handled. So this drives up tax costs… Just for ~325 people (or less if local government) in government to figure out a way to alter and move that money into their pockets. Could have just stopped the money flow from the get-go and kept it in your pocket.
Funny how you changed the topic from an arm of the corporate media haranguing people to volunteer to people freely choosing to volunteer…
I didn’t change the topic at all though did I? I stated one thing which was that the stated stuff in the article doesn’t necessarily make the rich richer… and implied heavily that it could even make them poorer… since you know… taking time away from actual jobs to do the things that the religious nutters are recommending in this article would meet the criteria.
But you see… the lemmy hivemind can’t comprehend that nuance. So here we are. People blaming me for something that I never said.
You know what a job is though right?
Volunteered voluntarily? You should go back and finish elementary school.
Yay ad hominem!
It’s funny, apparently your elementary school didn’t teach you all that much either did they? Would seem that I chose to phrase it that way on purpose since… well… you know it’s weird to put the terms next to each other like that right? Might lead a reader to actually think about the concepts and infer some meanings that the author might have been trying to impart.
But that’s okay. You’ll do better next time!
But here, let me barney style it for you. If you work for a living… and have to pay taxes for a service that’s occurring rather than volunteering and handling it yourself, you are in a sense volunteering… in an involuntary manner, your pay to pay for that service!
HUZZAH! Almost like words can have meaning!
Your apologetics is unbecoming. The article is intentionally written to promote the notion that a 40-hour work week is unbiblical, and the line you’ve cited is included to give plausible deniability to anyone who says otherwise.
If you take into account any “activity [that] is demanding, consistent and productive” most people are already “working” way more than 55 hours a week, especially if they’re a parent. To suggest otherwise is profoundly ignorant or disingenuous. This suggests an ulterior motive: begin manufacturing consent to get rid of weekly work hour limits.
Negative. Opposite intention… It takes more than 15 hours a week to raise a child properly. I would argue this is a good stance to reduce the workload on people as far as “jobs” go.
You don’t need to argue random bullshit. Take their argument, and take it to the logical extreme. Done. Now they have to admit that the 40 hour work-week for jobs is excessive.
Edit: Basically make the looney religious nuts eat their words… in case that wasn’t clear.
Is your reading comprehension ok?
It takes more than 15 hours a week to raise a child properly
That’s MY point
So you agree that what you wrote in your original comment is a bullshit defense of a bullshit article?
Is your reading comprehension ok?
Yours clearly isn’t.
You took the rage bait. You took their article to mean something when you can easily make it mean EXACTLY what your point is. You’re just too into arguing with random people on the internet to realize it.
Y’all are crazy.
