Agreements made when the power balance is unequal are by nature not going to be fair. It is to the advantage of the one with more power to use it to get their way. For example, Silicon Valley had a famous issue of anti-poaching agreements to force wages of engineers down. Legally forcing these things is an attempt to deal with power imbalance to the benefit of the most people.

People in the experiment the gp post describes do not want to work 'part time', they want to work 'full time' for 30 hours a week. The fact that you describe that as 'part time' undermines your argument that work time is simply an agreement between adults (as opposed to a schelling point dictated by law, tradition, and convenience).

People don't freely choose to work in a vacuum - they are coerced into it (through property law). I work to avoid homelessness and starvation, and so do most people.

If I stop working, eventually somebody will turn up at my door and throw me out onto the street.

> I work to avoid homelessness and starvation, and so do most people.

Of course. But the fact that we have biological needs is not coercion.

No, but good luck trying to burn some piece of forest to get your piece of earth for your farm. You cannot justify the existing order with basic human needs. In some places you even have to pay for access to water.

The georgist argument strikes again!

Not really Georgist - just an acknowledgment of the basic authoritarian nature of capitalism

> But the fact that we have biological needs is not coercion.

Libertarian thinking in a nutshell.

"biological need" is a strange way to describe being violently attacked in your place of shelter for working insufficient hours for the capitalist class

Wait I'm confused, is this country requiring people take time off to become entrepreneurs?

Nope. It is a right, not an obligation. Your employer can't stop you if your want to test your wings. Though this has actually been around in some form for quite a few years.

I started my first company in 2001 by getting 6 months off from Ericsson. I wanted to during that time, Ericsson would have to allow me to come back and continue as an employee. Quit permamently after three months. Now I'm happily running my fifth startup.

Why did you quit after 3 months instead of leaving that formality until month 6?

Also did you have any unvested compensation (stock awards, bonuses, etc) and what happened to them when you paused your employment?

I left formally after three because the new business was taking off that I couldn't see any reason to go back. Better to have 100% focus on the new business.

No bonus, stocks etc.

I realize the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1937 is considered anathema among libertarians and many owners of enterprises who employ low-wage workers, but I don't think you'll find many takers among populace at large.

The "freedom" you are talking about is the freedom to take or leave work schedules we consider abusive today. If you want to go back to a world where employment means 12/7 or starve, you are free to campaign for the repeal all you like, though. Your senators' aides are standing by, call now. Meanwhile, I will be lobbying them to constrain your freedom a little more.