The Economics of Time

Seneca's argument is that we are not given a short life but make it short. His evidence is behavioural and unflattering: people guard property meticulously, negotiate over small sums, and hand over their time to anyone who asks for it without any accounting at all.

The mechanism he identifies is that time feels unlimited until it is not. There is no visible balance, no statement, and no moment at which the account is shown — so expenditure proceeds as though the supply were infinite, and the shortfall appears only at the end.

The practical response is to make the balance visible artificially. Price commitments in hours per year, convert to weeks, and look at the number. The point is not austerity — it is that a decision made against a real price is a different decision.

Recurring commitments are where time actually goes, and they are almost never re-decided. A commitment agreed to once, for good reasons, in different circumstances, persists for years without review.

The absence of a price also means that the wrong things get protected. People will defend a small financial loss for hours and give away an evening a week for a decade without noticing they made a trade.

And the arithmetic is genuinely shocking, which is what makes it effective. Two hours a week is two and a half waking weeks a year. Said as "two hours a week" it is nothing; said as weeks of a life it becomes a decision.

Audit recurring commitments specifically. One-off events are visible and self-correcting; it is the standing ones that run for years unreviewed.

Include the hidden costs: travel, preparation, and the recovery time after things that drain you. A two-hour commitment with an hour of travel and an evening of flatness afterwards is not a two-hour commitment.

Price attention as well as time. A recurring low-grade obligation that occupies background attention for a week costs more than its calendar footprint suggests.

Re-decide rather than merely cancel. The useful question is not "should I stop" but "would I agree to this today, at this price, in my current circumstances" — which is a different and easier question.

Protect deliberately as well as cutting. The exercise should produce at least one commitment you now defend more firmly because you have seen what it costs and decided it is worth it.