Of Labour and the Value of Time

Macro:

The Minister of Foreign Affairs of my country, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, weighed in on the US-China trade spat.

“And one point is that for us in the middle, and especially for smaller countries, we do not wish to be forced into making invidious choices,” he said

Source: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/us-china-trade-war-beijing-rising-influence-vivian-balakrishnan-11539498

I live in a tiny island nation in Southeast Asia. It is easy to get tossed aside as the giants fight. My forebears on this land have survived. I want to survive - I want those who come after me to survive too.

Micro:

Ecclesiastes 1 King James Version (KJV)

1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.

² Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
³ What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?

I made a new friend recently who shared with me his world view about the ultimate meaninglessness of most people's forms of employment.

The true movers and shakers who will change the world and improve people's lives radically are the ones who have true meaning in their employment.

I can sense the heartfelt sentiment in his words, but I reminded him that none of what he observes is original or novel.

After all, hasn't King Solomon, son of David, lamented the same more than 2000 years ago?

The Elon Musks, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Albert Einsteins and the Wright Brothers among us have created true value for mankind.

This does not detract from the fact that the rest of us ordinary mortals have contribution to society.

While it is true that the humble cashier at 7-Eleven could well be fully replaced in 7 years' time, this does not detract from the fact that he is providing a service that commands economic value now.

While it is true that this cashier can be easily replaced and is perfectly dispensable at a moment's notice, this does not detract from the fact that he is contributing by rendering a service right now.

It does not matter if this service is puny or measly or lowly. Economics have determined that at this current point in time, this is a service that is worth something, hence the cashier gets paid for his job.

To dismiss the cashier and to write him off, is tantamount to saying that life is meaningless because eventually we all pass away, ashes to ashes, dust to dust.


What, then is the meaning of labour?

Labour is to exchange time for money, money to sustain us and keep us alive.

There are indeed people who feel philosophically aggrieved by the apparent meaningless of labour in and of itself, and seek to fall out of the grid.

To these people, if labour were simply and only for the purpose of generating income, once income has been accumulated into self-perpetuating wealth, labour should cease.

Although I am not fit to pass judgment on these people, as I am compelled by necessity to fall in line with the grid, I do venture an opinion that labour can have meaning in and of itself.

Labour can be emotionally rewarding if our skills and talents yield a positive response or outcome where they are directed.

For those among us who are less skilled and less talented, labour serves a pragmatic purpose in keeping us out of trouble.

Because the unemployed will gravitate towards mischief, this is but the natural tendency of man.

What, then is the meaning of time?

If time can be traded for money, then why do people spend a disproportionate amount of money trying to buy time?

Let's say Mr ABC earns $5,000 per month, which for the sake of simplicity he earns $0.50 per productive minute ($5,000/ (22 work days*8 hours * 60 minutes)

If he saves 60 minutes each day per month by driving instead of public commute, he saves 1,800 minutes over a month.

The economic value of the time saved is just $900 (1,800min X $0.50 per minute)

Yet, in Singapore, the average all-in costs of car ownership can come close to $2,000 per month.

Mr ABC cannot afford the car because it is costing him more than his per-minute worth. i.e. the car only makes sense if it costs him up to $900. So if he is spending $2,000 per month for a car, the difference of $1,100 ($2,000 less $900) is simply for vanity, for intangibles, for "face".

This can be boiled down to a simple mathematical question that even a primary school pupil can assess and answer. But no one cares about mathematics when ego comes into play.  In Singapore, cars can be a status symbol, and many men here feel socially pressured to obtain a car. In fact, it has become a little bit of a veben good - the more irrationally costly car ownership is, the more desirable it gets.

Daily Spending Report:
Lunch - Cai png (brown rice, steamed steak consisting of the tail part of a fresh fish, long beans) - SGD6.00 (USD4.38)