As far as the washing machine goes, while washing clothes by hand is indeed laborious (I’ve done it myself), an average person produced MUCH less dirty laundry per week 100 years ago than they do today. They might wear the same pair of overalls all week, and change their underwear only every 2 or 3 days (or less), largely due to the difficulty with washing clothes. It took about one day per week to do wash 150 years ago, similar to how much time my Mom did laundry when I was growing up. Granted she wasn’t rubbing her hands raw against a washboard, but she was still “stuck” at home about one day a week due to laundry.
I can’t seem to find it now, but I remember reading how little time modern cleaning equipment actually saves “housewives” today (I apologize for the antiquated term). Women didn’t spend that much more time cleaning back then, we just accepted a much greater level of dirt and grime.
The spinning wheel (in various stages of evolution, up to and including steam-driven and then electric-powered) and the mechanical loom (same – from a loom operated by a few people to the steam-driven and then electric powered)?
I think the OP needs a better definition. It seems as if all innovations allow more of the product to be made/service and therefore simply increased the time devoted.
For example: the lawn mower. Before mechanical lawn mowing, people simply kept the weeds down to a manageable height with a sickle bar. After the invention of the push mower, people were able to keep their yards neatly groomed. After the invention of the riding lawn mower, people were able to keep their yards and the surrounding 5 acre parcel neatly groomed.
I think as the job gets easier, one just does more of it. It’s easier to wash clothes? Well, now we can change them every day/twice a day. Pictures? The same way. Remember when you used to get a yearly school photo of your cousin’s kids? Now pictures of everything the kid does is blasted all over Facebook.
Keeping with the spirit of the OP as I understand it, I would go with indoor plumbing. Getting water requires near zero effort for a homeowner no matter the volume.
I was searching the thread for this one. Considering that the primary work of mankind was finding or growing food for themselves, the ability to drop the % of people needed to feed themselves from 85%+ to >2% must be the single greatest time saver of them all.
Globally, the % of people involved in agriculture is 45%. 150 years ago it was 85%. A quick calculation shows that over 6 trillion hours are saved each year from people not having to grow their own food.
After all, most of the others mentioned merely divide up the time that is saved from not farming.
Powered motors, whether electric or internal combustion.
Hands down, game over. Nothing else is even close.
Cars, trucks, farm equipment most of all, but also every form of manufacture. Domestically, washing machines and refrigerators (compressor motors) among other things All sorts of things through every aspect of our lives and societies. We live on the backs of powered motors.
Obviously, there is the possibility for “reductionism” (for want of a better term) in discussions like this as technologies depend upon other technologies to happen.
Naw, if he wins, whoever suggested smelting metal wins, since powered motors rely on smelted metal; and then whoever suggested fire wins, since smelting metal requires fire; but really nobody’s suggested the technology of creating a shared language, which is obviously necessary if you’re going to organize people well enough to keep a fire going.
Of the suggestions that fit the OP’s spirit, I think indoor plumbing and the combine are the best.
I nominate gas and electric heating, of homes, ovens, and hot water. Before, you had obtaining firewood or coal, getting a fire going, getting a cast-iron oven or stove up to operating temperature, adding fuel and keeping it distributed (raking coals, etc.), disposing of ashes, and keeping chimneys and flues clean. Now you turn a dial and voilà, heat.
Actually I think this hits the nail on the head. I was going to say the steam engine, that sort of set the industrial revolution on it’s feet.
The thing is, has anything changed that much?
All these things seem to be cursed by the Jevon’s Paradox. The more efficient a process is made, the more demand there is for the products of the process so the amount of work doesn’t actually decrease as the process demands more work to fill the need for more product.
So while it is true that it takes less time and effort to produce a widget, we need more widgets so their production takes as much time as previously although we do get lots more of them.
And as mentioned above, washing and cleaning has become more efficient and easier and as a result our standards have raised and we demand more clean clothes and a cleaner home that takes more time to maintain.
Interesting point that I don’t know if the OP had in mind–this does not come free. There is a lot of labor that goes into mining gas, building pipelines, running plants, mining coal, building and maintaining transmission lines…Do gas and electric heating reduce *net *labor, or just reduce the labor of the person who uses it?
Did I miss it, or has no one mentioned refrigeration and freezing for food storage.
Although I can not recall a specific source, I seem to have seen several references to food preparation and storage using up to 30 percent of a Housewife’s labor/time.
Couple that with the Microwave oven, and from Freezer to table is a matter of 15 minutes out of a day, plus unskilled non cooks can operate the “technology” instead of Mom/Wife having to stop what they were doing and fix the food.
I acknowledge that the terminology is sexist, but in truth, for most of western history, and much of the world, food prep and storage has been the female role.
The technology has actually helped lead to modern feminism, as it freed the “house wife” from being so heavily involved in the manual labor of food prep and storage.
As we have seen, this question leads to a lot of debate.
The first thing that occurred to me that if there is one invention that turn a singular labor intensive job into something that was totally mechanized then I would guess the cotton gin.
It’s just what came to mind. Clothing is something that is utilized by almost all humans and cheap cotton makes it affordable to the point that it is an essential product often given to the needy for free because it is so inexpensive.
And why people in the poorest areas of the planet- Somalia, Haiti, etc.- wear t-shirts and jeans that have gone through eight or nine levels of remaindered markdown.
