{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3","title":"Time for Things Labor, Leisure, and the Rise of Mass Consumption","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9780674250529","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3","id":"10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3","uuid":"10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3","title":"Time for Things Labor, Leisure, and the Rise of Mass Consumption","normalized_title":"timeforthingslaborleisureandtheriseofmassconsumption","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9780674250529","isbns":["9780674250529","9780674250536","9780674979512"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":355,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Time%20for%20Things%20Labor%2C%20Leisure%2C%20and%20the%20Rise%20of%20Mass%20Consumption","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/10f0f318-a2eb-4ea9-8798-d4fb0304f8c3/search"},"page":{"printed_page":278,"pdf_page":286,"physical_index":286,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"150fa583a81e8cf1a36cebbfd6a793c41a3ea55f3ed7b07d54e7fa114839893c"},"chapter":"FOR","content":"7. In The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Weber ([1930] 1992) famously argues that the Calvinist doctrine of predestination created an unbearable uncertainty in early Protestants about whether or not they were among the elect. To assuage that uncertainty, Protestants sought to regiment their lives in such a way as to be as economically productive as possible—“testifying to their belief” through their conduct. Economic productivity then served as a sign of true belief, as well as an indication of God’s favor, thereby providing reassurance to the individual that she was a member of the elect.\n\n8. Knight (1921) argued that leisure is a commodity that workers will be increasingly inclined to “buy back” as their hourly wages increase: “In so far as men act rationally—i.e., from fixed motives subject to the law of diminishing utility—they will at a higher rate divide their time between wage earning and non-industrial uses in such a way as to earn more money but to work fewer hours” (pp.  117–18). Pigou (1932) argued that when income decreases (as a result of increased taxation, for example), workers will be willing to expend more efort up until the point at which marginal disutility of efort equals the marginal utility of income. This is simply because the marginal disutility of efort does not decrease when income decreases. It follows that for Pigou, the value of leisure decreases in relative terms as income declines, so prompting the worker to increase her efort (and reduce her leisure). In theoretical terms, Pigou’s argument proceeds from the same ground as Knight’s, only looking in the other direction, as it were—as increments of income are lost (rather than gained), the associated loss of utility per increment increases. Conversely, it follows that Pigou, like Knight, holds that as income increases, workers will reduce their efort, cutting hours. It should be mentioned that the prominent economist Lionel Robbins, who had strongly subjectivist leanings with respect to value, disagreed with both Knight and Pigou on this, arguing that it is not possible to know a priori what the consequences of changes in income will be on the demand for work or leisure. Robbins pointed out that even if we accept as a law that returns to income tend to diminish at the margin, there is no way of knowing at what rate they will diminish and hence no way to predict what efect a change in income will have on the supply of labor. The consequences of an increase in the wage rate then depends, according to Robbins, entirely on the income elasticity of demand for wage goods and leisure. “It is all a matter of elasticities,” as he put it (Robbins 1930, p.  128).\n\n278\n\nNotes to Pages 5–6","previous_page":null,"next_page":279}