Other People Needed to Live "4-Hr Workweek"

[wordlover]

For those of us who live in economically developed countries, it is possible to do the things suggested like hiring a virtual assistant or going on a mini-retirement. But someone has to BE the virtual assistant. They have to work for YOU or someone else who is living this way. Also, someone has to be around to collect your mail when you are off on a mini-retirement. Ferriss suggests hiring a close friend or relative.

I love this book and it has a lot of great ideas. But in order for you to be able to live cheaply in extravagance, there has to be someone to do the grunt work for you cheaply, virtual assistants, maids, chefs, etc. The "4-hour workweek" is possible for everyone with the brains, will. and resources to hire cheap labor, but not at the same time. If all of your friends and relatives were overseas, who would check your mail? There always has to be someone around to take care of emergencies. If you have an abundance of friends and relatives, it is likely that at least one of them will be around to help you out. So this may not be a concern, but you still need to depend on others to help you. You are not the lone creator of this lifestyle. Everyone who supports you helps create the "4-hour workweek".

I'm not criticizing the use of cheaper labor. In certain countries, work, period, is helpful due to the scarcity of jobs, low pay or not. Hiring people in these countries helps the economy develop so that more people can have opportunities later on and perhaps, at better pay.

In order for us to live the 4-hour workweek, we need to have the resources to do so whether it is other people or computers, etc. We need the support of other people, regardless of how self-reliant we are. The 4-hr workweek is a team effort led by one individual. I don't think Ferris would disagree, but I just wanted to emphasize that.

[earthmother65]

You hit upon the ethical conundrum that's on a lot of reader reviews of this book - at the end of the day, i come to my usual mantra on this book and it's philosophy, you need to find what's right for you, there's no one-size-fits-all. So I like the simplification, enjoy-life-before-retirement parts, don't mind outsourcing when it's a win-win for both of us (as my housekeeper often reminds me, we're helping each other....). But it's a dangerous precipice....

[TinaD]

Here's a thought...I am using an Indian website developer for my sites. I don't have a lot of money right now, so I can't afford to pay $3000 for an American to do the same work. I can afford $400 for an Indian to do the work.

As I mentioned on another similar thread...the company I used to work for billed me out at $100/hr and paid me $17. While I had healthcare, I contribute to it as well, so even all things considered they probably made a profit of $50/hour on me (and you don't even want to know what the disparity became as I got senior!).

I would never want to take advantage of someone I hired in this manner...but I don't actually know how the pay system works at my developer. As I get more savvy about all of this I hope to be able to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen because of me. H

Hiring cheap labor in a 3rd World country (or even domestically) is fine IMO, as long as the money isn't going into the pockets of a middleman.

[clanshrapnel]

There is no leader or successful person who believes they can succeed solely on their own. In a matter of fact, the more people you connect and work with (notice I said work with, not leech from), the more successful you are likely to become.

This isn't made-up fiction, but it's well-known fact in the business world. Just look at the large number of books out there on developing a personal network. You're not just helping yourself, but you're helping others AS WELL.

Think of it this way. If nobody used outsourcing to create a middle class in other countries, then you would have people who are immensely poor with little potential to escape poverty. Do you think the local government or their local community will pay them as well as someone overseas does through elance or such programs? Would someone in the USA be happy to be paid in euros instead of USD for a project, or do you think they'd complain that they're being exploited?

Globalization gives everyone opportunities, and furthermore, it can help balance economies. Places like Buenos Aires may have no potential to escape their economic turmoil if it weren't for their weak peso; thus, travelers come and spend their money in Argentina, putting money in Argentina's economy.

Who holds the view that purchase power parity (PPP) is 'unbalanced, unfair, and exploiting individuals?' Only the myopic....

[wordlover]

Think of it this way. If nobody used outsourcing to create a middle class in other countries, then you would have people who are immensely poor with little potential to escape poverty. Do you think the local government or their local community will pay them as well as someone overseas does through elance or such programs? Would someone in the USA be happy to be paid in euros instead of USD for a project, or do you think they'd complain that they're being exploited?

Globalization gives everyone opportunities, and furthermore, it can help balance economies. Places like Buenos Aires may have no potential to escape their economic turmoil if it weren't for their weak peso; thus, travelers come and spend their money in Argentina, putting money in Argentina's economy.

We agree. There's nothing wrong with outsourcing. But it takes more than one person to create the four-hour workweek. That was my point.

[kamakiri]

As I mentioned on another similar thread...the company I used to work for billed me out at $100/hr and paid me $17. While I had healthcare, I contribute to it as well, so even all things considered they probably made a profit of $50/hour on me...

Are you serious? Try having employees once. It is a simple drill, do you really think your company profited $50 an hour off you? I ask my employees this once a quarter at company outings. The usual answers range form 40-75%, with the occasional 90%. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of companies profit 5% or less, and the ones that hit 10% are few and far between.

[froldt]

Are you serious? Try having employees once. It is a simple drill, do you really think your company profited $50 an hour off you? I ask my employees this once a quarter at company outings. The usual answers range form 40-75%, with the occasional 90%. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of companies profit 5% or less, and the ones that hit 10% are few and far between.

Maybe this needs a thread of it's own, but I definitely feel that employees don't understand where the net income goes. They aren't aware that the various overhead costs (utility bills, office supplies, office equipment, managers' salaries, etc) that has to come from the income that "they make". Then when you figure in the cost of each employee (hourly pay, insurance, other perks, workers comp, etc), this brings the per-hour profit surprisingly low.

kamakiri, if I remember correctly from my days as a pizza delivery person, a pizza restaurant gets to keep what, about $.03-.07 out of every $1.00 brought in? With the average being more around the $.03-.05 range?

[kamakiri]

Yep, those numbers are right on.

[jpb209]

I used to work for a rental car company, lets say that the name of the company rhymes with Enterprise Rent A Car.

There is no way that my company only made a 5% profit off of my store. Why?

You do the math:

rent for building (enterprise refuses to own anything), insurance (3rd party insurance for cars, buildings etc), utilities *water coolers and electric fans*, and employee pay (less than min wage for manegment + commision that is based on previous years numbers,) come out to be about $10,000 a month (no joke) (always understaffed)

Cost of 50 vehicles (leased in bulk at below wholesale rates), gas (never any gas in an enteprise car,customers return it with what they leave with, even if that means that there is an empty tank when you leave, and you bring it back full there is no credit for extra gas), insurance, *they dont own ANY cars, there leased* $10000/month

Maintenence on every vehicle, about $7-10/car per month

Cost of advertisements *spread over EVERY enterprise in the nation) So lets say 1000 bucks a month

Add those basic numbers together, and you are looking at a hefty 31000 a month to run a small car branch.

Average income for my 50 car branch a month, 145,000 in net income. A good month would be around 180-200k.

How do they do that? Insurance sales (an extra 12-24.99 on regular cars, $30 on premium cars per day), upgrades (upgrades for 10-20 per day), people without reservations walking in the door (talk about being raped), dealership rentals (half day rentals, and airport rentals), renting within the company (corp events etc) gas collections (pump price + 30% of whatever the pump price is at the time), and you have yourself a regular cash cow.

Tell me that company's don't cheat there employees out of some hefty change.

BTW Enterprise Net Revenue for 2006, *this is a family owned biz by the way, no franchise's* was $8.23 billion dollars.

And did I mention that they just bought out National and Alamo?

So do I feel bad for outsourcing? NOPE. Sorry, its not an ethical thing, its a biz thing. Its all about biz, and as long as your not killing elephants for there ivory, or employing children to make your Nikes, I see no problem with it.

[clanshrapnel]

We agree. There's nothing wrong with outsourcing. But it takes more than one person to create the four-hour workweek. That was my point.

While this may be true, it's an empty statement with no value.

Of course you need more than 1 person to create the 4HWW. You need more than 1 person just to be able to drink clean water or have food at the dinner table. There aren't many things out there that you CAN do with just 1 person in a society (modern or not).

I think your original point was alluding to 'there needs to be someone willing to do work for less pay for this to work,' and my response is there will ALWAYS be someone who will work for less pay as long as different economies exist in this world. Even if every single country changed to capitalism, you would STILL have enough variations in policy and natural resources that some countries would fail (leading to weak currency) and some countries would succeed (leading to strong currency).

There is no such thing as exploitation-- if someone from another country is willing to pay you 3x the amount of money for your widget because they need your widget and 'that much money' isn't that much to them, it would be myopic to decline the offer on grounds of you being 'exploited unfairly.'

[wordlover]

While this may be true, it's an empty statement with no value.

Of course you need more than 1 person to create the 4HWW. You need more than 1 person just to be able to drink clean water or have food at the dinner table. There aren't many things out there that you CAN do with just 1 person in a society (modern or not).


Or in other words, duh.


There is no such thing as exploitation-- if someone from another country is willing to pay you 3x the amount of money for your widget because they need your widget and 'that much money' isn't that much to them, it would be myopic to decline the offer on grounds of you being 'exploited unfairly.'

Well, if someone is willing to pay you 3x as much as you've ever been offered, then that's not exploitation. But I think some children and adults forced into slave labor or prostitution would disagree with you that exploitation does not exist. Paying a poor salary is not exploitation. Ferriss does not advocate exploitation and that was not even the point of the post.

[DaveCraige.com]

treat people well.

tip them.

buy them something nice.

if you work with them for awhile see if you can pay for their healthcare.