Slashdot Mirror
Young Men Are Working Less. Some Economists Think It's Because They're Home Playing Video Games. (nytimes.com)
Video games are instrumental in understanding why younger men are working fewer hours, according to a paper published Monday by the National Bureau of Economic Research. From an article: By 2015, American men 31 to 55 were working about 163 fewer hours a year than that same age group did in 2000. Men 21 to 30 were working 203 fewer hours a year. One puzzle is why the working hours for young men fell so much more than those of their older counterparts. The gap between the two groups grew by about 40 hours a year, or a full workweek on average. Other experts have pointed to a host of reasons -- globalization, technological change, the shift to service work -- that employers may not be hiring young men. Instead of looking at why employers don't want young men, this group of economists considered a different question: Why don't young men want to work? Economists Erik Hurst and his colleagues estimate that, since 2004, video games have been responsible for reducing the amount of work that young men do by 15 to 30 hours over the course of a year (syndicated source). Using the recession as a natural experiment, the authors studied how people who suddenly found themselves with extra time spent their leisure hours, then estimated how increases in video game time affected work. Between 2004 and 2015, young men's leisure time grew by 2.3 hours a week. A majority of that increase -- 60 percent -- was spent playing video games, according to government time use surveys. In contrast, young women's leisure time grew by 1.4 hours a week. A negligible amount of that extra time was spent on video games. Likewise for older men and older women: Neither group reported having spent any meaningful extra free time playing video games.
It couldn't be that it's harder to find full-time jobs or that the full-time jobs keep having fewer and fewer hours (36.5 hours was the average full-time job last I saw.)
But no, we're all at home playing video games. I wish I had gotten that memo!
Why don't young men want to work?
They've made a BIG assumption there. They skipped the important bit about why they aren't hiring and jumped straight to "let's blame them with what they are spending their time on," which is a really shitty thing to do.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
While the article specifically suggests video games, I'd suggest it's a broader dimension of work-life balance. I think there's been a culture shift that killing yourself for your job isn't worth it, particularly when employers are showing less and less loyalty to their employees than in previous generations. Couple that with the idea that people just can't get ahead, be it because of debt from education, etc, and who's going to bust their hump like Grandpa did for 30 years? When the option to work less, enjoy more leisure time, and defer the costs of living to your credit cards is so appealing, is it any wonder that a trend of working less is emerging? Video games just happen to be the entertainment channel of choice.
Could it be that "young" men just saw the prior generation(s) go through massive lay off's, lost their houses, their life savings and decided, "screw this, if the reward can be taken away like that, why the F should I work so hard?"
Really IMHO American corporations have themselves to blame for this. They have done a very good job of removing any kind of job security, chased profits for the sake of chasing profits, off-shored, out-sourced, missed en masse why claiming it was "necessary". Yeah I get it.
They listened to the greybeards talking about the 50-60 hours weeks they worked when they were young, and now see how the greybeards get kicked to the curb. They smartened up, they know there's no real reward for busting your ass for a company.
They look into the past and see the amount of time people worked.- Back when working a lot afforded you a house, a car, and you could support your family on single income.
Now you work for a fraction of the price, barely make ends meet, while putting in a shit ton of hours.
You can't afford a vacation, you have to rent places that can be questionable, your vehicle is falling the fuck apart.
You can mostly work and give that money to someone else just for the option to live under a shelter, have food and water, clothes, and transportation to work.
Who the fuck wants to work for that reason? Like fuck off.
Or not. At least in the USA, the phrases "left the work force" and "unemployment rate" are completely disconnected. If you're unemployed for a signficant period, you have "left the workfirce", and are no longer counted as unemployed.
Which is one of the many things that make our definition of "unemployment rate" pretty much meaningless.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
A little title inflation going on?
Take a 'Bundy vacation' in the office. Stop working. Wear Hawaiian shirts for a week. Say 'aloha' to everyone. Believe it, you're at a luau! Have your staff instruct _everybody_ to humor you, you're 'architects'...Whoever 'they' are, 'they' will give you some time off.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yeah, let blame video games rather than a decade of economic stagnation that has left a generation that feel they can't even aspire to the things their parents took for granted would be attainable.
We see a lot of these articles lately.
The most discouraging part is that the majority of the pieces aren't worrying about the lack of upward mobility, stagnant and negative wage growth, increase in male suicide and mental issues, lack of roles in current society for 50% or so of guys, etc.
No. The true calamity is, instead, the dearth of marriageable men for the many educated and 30+ women who now cannot find a good man to marry. Of course, what this really means is that women, now making just as much as men (if not more when single) refuse to marry men with lower incomes and / or educations than themselves.
As for myself in my late 30's, I don't have a problem with finding a good and somewhat stable job and income. My problem is that, after seeing numerous older relatives and now friends torn apart by the family court system during a divorce, I have little interest in marrying a 35-40 year old women who just realized, 15 or so years of having fun and finding herself, that she does, in fact, want the kids and family package she was promised. Unfortunately, most of these women are only looking for a guy with enough cash to pay for it all - something increasingly overpriced (houses, weddings, diamonds, kids) in most areas of the US these days.
So it turns out, I don't really need to spend very much money as a single guy. Without the kids and mortgage and all the rest, it turns out most guys don't really need much money (women spend approximately 80% of discretionary income - that's why advertisements are targeted to them and not single guys). So no need to continue slaving away at the office for the promise of mgmt. or any piece of the profits - the Boomers are still sucking off all the meat, and will be 'till they're last breath. And for me, that means when I'm in my 50s or so, and won't care anyway.
Companies are happy to give employees more hours.
They are just not willing to give more pay.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
The people like these researchers see young men not as people, but merely as tools that exist to serve their ends.
Thus the researchers see any time young men spend on things that interest them rather than "being productive" as time being "stolen" from the society that owns them.
Most of the comments are going to be about the lack of jobs, roles, and status most young men in America are now seeing. And this is probably the majority of the reason for men checking out.
But as a single guy is his prime (mid 30s) who is able to find well paying jobs and earn a good living, I'll tell you why I'm finding less and less reason to give a shit about my career, money, and status anymore. 2 Reasons:
1. It's apparent that no matter how hard I work and how well I perform, I'm never going to get a decent mgmt position (i.e. share in the profits) of any company because there are way too many older Boomers who are not letting go. Some of them still need the money, others don't, but just aren't ready to retire. Regardless of the reason, I'm stuck in the middle. And if and when my time comes for a senior role, I'll be in my 50's and will care even less than I do now.
2. Marriage and kids are too risky. Besides the absurd cost of houses and children, lack of job stability, and all the rest, I've seen too many male friends and family be destroyed by divorce: Losing their kids, their savings, and freedom for a decade or two (child support and alimony). Half my friends who are still married don't look like they're enjoying it either (though they all love their kids).
Without a mortgage, kids, wedding costs, wife who has a spending addiction, etc - turns out a guy like me doesn't need much money to be content. And since I no longer expect anything for my work, I've decided to not give much, either. Fuck it.
I wonder if lower marriage rates has anything to do with this. Not being married, having a kid, etc. means less pressure to work and earn as much money as you can. And if people aren't getting married, then there's a chance that this would affect the mood of these men and they would need a vice to fill the void. Video games are easy to access, don't really have any downsides and are completely legal. (I'd wonder if this was just because of the relationship landscape overall, but I don't know if people coupling up is less than it used to be.) The fact that more women than ever are probably working also means there might be less pressure on men to work themselves to death. Two pay checks and gender equality means less necessity for men to be the breadwinner. That said, I'd also put my money on video games being the drug of choice for men to spend their spare time with as opposed to men finding ways to increase their spare time to facilitate their gaming habits. (Not that I wouldn't take a day off from work for a new game now and then.)
They're wrong. It's because of easy access to p0rn websites.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have "work" to do.
#DeleteFacebook
It's interesting that just a few hours ago, we had an article asking whether or not it was worth it to put in long hours at a job. I'm sure the video game thing was meant to increase the article's clickbait factor, but there might be something to this.
Back a long time ago from when I started working (so, maybe peaking around the 60s) getting a job with a large US company was about the closest you could come to lifetime employment without earning tenure. I know lots of people from that era who worked from high school to retirement for large manufacturers, AT&T, IBM, etc. There was a degree of loyalty on both sides, employer and employee, that's missing in the modern workforce. Companies hung onto people as long as they could, and barring some major disaster, you could pretty much count on having a job. There was a clear career path internally, such that you always had an income that kept up with your experience. In return, people were expected to give a little more of themselves. I distinctly recall many families being relocated (at company expense) frequently to work on new projects or land promotions. That must have been hard, but it was the price one paid for the employer's loyalty to the employee.
Am I advocating lifetime employment, no layoff rules/policies and more loyalty on both sides of the fence? Yes, I suppose I am. You don't see companies giving a second thought to sending entire technical departments to India to save 25% in absolute labor costs. And for all but the rockstars, you never see companies paying people to move and take on new jobs. I'm well aware that some people are making out quite well in this new system. But, not enough people are benefiting from what should be a broad period of economic recovery. Companies _can_ afford to offer people stability and security; they just choose not to.
If I were a recent grad facing 40+ years of the current situation work/life wise, and saw many examples of people being kicked to the curb years short of retirement, then I might not want to bust my ass so hard.
As a Brit, I think that is insane, I have 5.6 weeks of legally mandated paid leave per year, that is the minimum they are allowed to get away with. My old job gave me 32 days per year, Americans are all bonkers for putting up with the way companies treat you.
Our state will hunt you down. If you are a baby daddy and mom decides to live off the dole, they will find you. And you will pay.
This insane attitude is precisely a BIG reason more and more of these young men just opt out of having relationships and/or families altogether. They know the socjus whiteknights (and/or tradcon wannabes) like yourself are drooling at the opportunity to wave those righteous fingers before throwing them in debtor's prison where, ironically, they can't do shit about making money for anyone. Of course, the obviousness of the latter escapes the irrationality of those who imposed such laws in the first place.
Waah snowflake. You have no idea how lucky you are.
Yeah, and that's why men are checking out. They say "the deck is stacked against us" and society replies with shaming language. Then, they check out.
Working longer and harder is a choice, and yet here you are trying to shame them into fitting your expectations. Good luck with that.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.