3 minute read
Money-Rich, Time-Poor
Over the last two decades, global wealth has risen. Yet material affluence has not translated into time affluence. Instead, most people, like Scott, report feeling persistently “time poor.” Defined as the chronic feeling of having too many things to do and not enough time to do them, time poverty is increasing in society.
According to data from the Gallup US Daily Poll, a nationally representative sample of US residents shows that in 2011, 70% of employed Americans reported that they “never had enough time,” and in 2018, this proportion increased to 80%. In 2018, 80% of employed American knowledge workers reported they “never had enough time” to do either personal or professional things.
Advertisement
— Gallup US Daily Poll
Today, time poverty and “busyness” are often seen as signals of productivity, success, and high status. Yet putting in more hours does not translate to higher earnings. The graph shows various countries that earn significantly more than their hard-working counterparts.
Fig 1.6: How Americans spend their time by Nathan Yau with data from American Time Use Survey. Scan the code below to see the interactive visualization.
Recent scientific evidence also provides compelling proof that feeling timepoor can adversely affect subjective well-being (e.g., life satisfaction, positive affect), mental health, work performance, creativity, and relationship quality.
These imbalances have a greater impact in the long run, from feeling overwhelmed to feeling burnt-out at work. People in the U.S. alone spend around $48 billion in healthcare costs due to work-related stress.
Economists point out that the solution to this problem is increased productivity. Improving productivity will increase our output and reduce the effort required, freeing up time for people. But the trends speak otherwise, as the number of people reporting feelings of time poverty has increased by 10% despite the reduction in work hours and increase in productivity. What economists fail to acknowledge is that in the age of hyper-competition, increased productivity becomes the norm. One does not go home, because if they finish the work early, they get assigned more work.
If we dissect Scott’s socio-economic status, he would be classified as “WEIRD,” a term coined by Joseph Heinrich to mean Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. This specific group is fairly privileged, with respect to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, wherein his ideals are aligned with the dominant socio-economic culture. He has been educated to question and
Fig 1.7: GDP vs. Working Hours - source Fenestra et al, 2015
understand things for himself, is skilled enough within the industry to be able to contribute economically to society and alleviate himself from material poverty, and lives in a society that gives him the right to freedom of the way he lives. Yet despite these privileges, the problems this demographic faces are surprising. Although researchers define time poverty as a state or condition in which a person or community lacks the discretionary time required for social and human capital activities, simplifying some of the terms in the definition reveals what this condition really is: captivity.
Time Poverty
To some, captivity may sound exaggerated, but in the capitalistic conditions we live in today, it’s a Hobson’s choice: a free will in which only one thing exists. If Scott chooses not to comply, by clocking in fewer hours at work or not being punctual, he will face monetary and social consequences. Monetarily, he may lose pay or risk termination from his job. Socially, Scott may be judged as lazy, unproductive, and unreliable. Either of these consequences would impact Scott’s ability to live a dignified life, and thus shape the economic and cultural morale with which he must strive to comply, sacrificing his own desires. The problem of time poverty is essentially the problem of lack of choice.
