Reflection on Keynes

An Analysis on Keynes Vision for Today 

By Mel

One hundred years ago John Maynard Keynes envisioned a future in which technological advancements would lead to a 15-hour workweek, allowing individuals to enjoy more leisure and a higher standard of living. He believed that as productivity increased, economic growth would equal into widespread prosperity. However, as we approach his deadline, it is clear that Keynes's predictions have not come to be. While he correctly anticipated that there would be technological progress and efficiency gains, he underestimated the political and economic structures that would prevent wealth from being evenly distributed. Instead of shared prosperity and reduced work hours, wealth disparity, corporate power, and cultural expectations surrounding labor have maintained a system where long work hours persist despite technological advancements.  

In 1930, John Maynard Keynes had made a prediction that “assuming no wars and no important increase in population, the standard of life in progressive countries one hundred years hence will be between four and eight times as high as it is to-day”, explaining that due to technological advancements, society would be able to have the average person working a 15-hour workweek. He had some correct assumptions about technological advancements and how it would increase efficiency, but he had a failure in considering the political and economic structures that would cause wealth disparity. Keynes believed in the concept that Capitalism, left to evolve, would lead to a system in which economic growth meant widespread better human living conditions and an increased leisure time. With this allowed less hours to work there are inherently more hours dedicated to leisure time with a higher standard of living. This would be a world in which our economic problem, that Keynes defines as our “struggle for subsistence” (Keynes), would be resolved. That we would live in a society where there is such a surplus of goods that we no longer have a desire for basic needs, shifting our focus to our interests or wants. This comes with its own problems, in Keynes eyes it would be “startling because-if, instead of looking into the future, we look into the past-we find that the economic problem, the struggle for subsistence, always has been hitherto the primary, most pressing problem of the human race-not only of the human race, but of the whole of the biological kingdom from the beginnings of life in its most primitive forms. Thus, we have been expressly evolved by nature-with all our impulses and deepest instincts-for the purpose of solving the economic problem” (Keynes), meaning that we would have to redesign our primal goals within our lifestyles. He does give examples of this new lifestyle as it is lived by “wives of well to do classes” (Keynes), these women tend to struggle to find meaning in their life, due to the depravity of meaning within their lives. This leads to unhappiness, but there are contrasting opinions as Keynes quotes a poem in which a woman describes how she should not be mourned in death, as she can finally have leisure time.  

Although Keynes has a vision of the future, as we near the year 2030, his predictions have not come to fruition. He had put in clauses for why this might not come true, like major wars and large population jumps, both of these has been true. There have been multiple major wars since 1930, and the population has almost quadrupled in size. Despite these being the given reasons for his predictions being off, I believe that these ideas have not become true due to his lack of focus on the political aspects of economics. For fifty years after Keynes had made this claim, wages and productivity were on the rise. Unskilled and skilled workers were seeing a jump in their wages (Bastani). The increase in technology and in hand productivity, is what Keynes predicted was going to occur, his idea is dependent on the idea that productivity rise would be matched with a better quality of life and higher pay. This then stopped by the 1970s when the increase in wage was no longer dependent on the increase in productivity (Bastani). 

Today we have an enormous wealth disparity where the top 1% of people own most of the wealth. With that same wealth I believe that we could have a reality close to one Keynes describes, but that would be ignoring the cultural, political, and economic factors which have led to today's life. I believe Keynes understood that there would be a shift in workplace culture, but he expected that the economy would act first, that there would be a financial shift and then a cultural one, but now I understand to cause the shift Keynes envisioned there would need to be a cultural shift which would pressure companies to force fewer working hours under same pay. There are international cases of this happening such as Iceland and Japan, but still not to the extent Keynes was imagining. Today, having a job is a crucial aspect of your identity. It's defined early on in high school, which leads to your major, which leads to a job you will hypothetically work for the rest of your life. So, to break away from working as our main goal currently seems impossible. Then due to the political and economic structures we have, large businesses have a large amount of control over society. These businesses keep a larger profit if workers stay working for less wages and longer hours, contradicting what Keynes imagined would happen. Instead of shared prosperity, economic growth has benefited the wealthiest, leading to rising inequality and stagnant wages for the majority. In the absence of progressive taxation, wealth redistribution policies, and strong labor protections, the benefits of economic growth have remained concentrated at the top. Overall, Keynes had a vision that could have become true if not due to the wealth disparity caused in capitalistic ideals. 

Although Keynes accounted for factors like war and population growth as potential barriers to his vision, the true obstacle has been the political and economic structures that prioritize profit over shared prosperity. The rise of extreme wealth inequality, stagnating wages, and the influence of large corporations have prevented the redistribution of economic gains that Keynes assumed would occur naturally. Today, work remains important for individual identity, and without cultural and political shifts that challenge the current economic system, the reality of a 15-hour workweek remains distant. While some countries have experimented with reduced work hours, widespread adoption requires systemic change. Keynes's vision could have been possible, but capitalism’s focus on profit maximization has ensured that economic growth benefits the few rather than the many.

Bibliography: 

Keynes, John Maynard. Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren. 1930.

Bastani, Aaron. Fully Automated Luxury Communism: A Manifesto. Verso, 2019