Skip to main content

The movie "In Time"

For a sci-fi movie set in 2169, "In Time" is remarkably similar to the choices we face today.



The premise

Future humans are genetically engineered to stop physically aging at 25. Then their life-clock (built into their forearm) starts counting down from 1 year. They'll die at 26 unless they add more time to their clock. As Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) describes it,
Time is now the currency. We earn it. We spend it.

While the wealthy have all the time they need, Will lives in the ghetto, where people "just want to wake up with more time than there are hours in the day" because when the clock reaches zero, that's it.

Spending Time

Characters earn extra time by getting paid or by passing it between people. They lose time as their clock ticks down or when they buy things.

So is a purchase worth the time lost? With less than a day on their life-clock is it worth giving up 4 minutes of life to pay for a coffee? Is it worth losing years of life to have a car?

Equally they have to be aware that time is constantly ticking away. Will tells his friends he doesn't "have time to gamble" (anymore). Though he used to win, the winnings don't make up for the time lost in the game.

Henry Hamilton

Henry has over 100 years on his clock. He laments to Will that "there are men with a million years while most live day to day". Realising there's more than enough for everyone, he wants to give away his time.

His question to Will, "If you had as much time as I had, what would you do with it?" is important. Will's answer impresses him and he leaves Will with a century.

"What would you do with it?"

Will gives 10 years to his friend Borel. We later find out that Borel used it to drink himself to death. Borel's wife understandably berates Will for giving him so much time.

It's one things to have the time to spend. It's another to spend it wisely.
(Sidenote: In the real life virus shutdown, many of us have more time on our hands, and alcohol sales have gone up 30%.)

Time zone travel

At one point Will travels from the ghetto to one of the wealthier areas. To cross the border he has to give up a whole year. In the movie this seemed an outrageous cost to be in a nicer area. But then I think of today's property prices. To buy into a 'prestigious' area could easily cost a year's salary or more.

Back to reality

So much of this applies to real life. In theory we pay for things with money, but that money often comes from giving up hours, days or years of our life to work.

Even our daily coffees or takeaway meals can add up to a 6-figure sum. That's a lot of free time wiped off our clock (and transferred to our employer's clock).

Our savings and investments are the opposite. As they grow, we're adding extra years of free time into our lives. A day's wage saved today could grow into a week. A week into a month, a couple of months into a year.

As in the movie, the system does favour the already wealthy. However, most of us have the opportunity to make wiser decisions and become more time-rich. Whether or not we do so is up to us.

Related reading

My day planner for extra home-time during 2020.
Work Optional - this book looks at getting to the point of not having to work, and what to do when you get there.
Time and How to Spend It - how to better spend our time to enjoy it more.
How to waste a year's wages - Do the opposite of this, but it shows how easy it is for a year's effort to slip through our fingers.
More articles about spending

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

5 Reasons why we hoard - and they're wrong

"Less is More" is one of the catch-cries of downsizing. Often the fewer things we have the more we value them. So it's a great title for a book that's basically a manual for how to de-clutter your home. The introductory chapter of Less is More: How to De-clutter Your Life gives some great insights into why we find it so hard to reduce our stuff. Here are 5 of them - the last one is one of the biggest for me. 1. The cost of holding on. We were raised by our parents and grandparents and in their day items were expensive and space was cheap. It made sense in those days to hold onto stuff just in case you ever needed it. But today housing is expensive and items are cheap. It's hard to change a habit, but now we save much more by downsizing. 2. Keeping it in the family. For some reason we prefer to give things to those close to us. Again this was viable in the days of big families and lots of children to receive hand-me-downs. But these days we have smaller fa...

20 unplugged ideas

May 1-7 is Screen-Free Week . It's about spending time away from the screen and more time with each other - or doing things we love. It's a great chance to break the work-tired-watchTV-ads-shop-work cycle. This list of twenty alternative ideas is great for screen-free week. It's also a great reminder of things we could enjoy if we're shopping and spending less - and maybe working less and enjoying life more.

Will robots take your job?

The future could be very different. It's one reason I started this blog. What will technology mean for jobs? For incomes? For society? So I was excited to find Will Robots Take Your Job? at my local library. What does the book say? There's always been technological change and we've always found jobs. As the more laborious jobs were taken by machines, we took on higher skilled jobs, moving further up the "skill ladder". The main question is whether this time is different. Will the "skill ladder" continue to have higher rungs for humans to move on to? Will these rungs appear as quickly as the current rungs disappear? Either way we're headed for significant disruption. Either large-scale re-training of our workforce or massive unemployment. The author despairs that our leaders seem not to talk about this - and worse still, not have a plan for it. Farmers or horses? In 1870 about 75% of Americans worked in agriculture and used 25 million hors...