> Except most people don't already spend 40h per week reading books or practicing their crafts.
If someone does the average only (40 hrs) and does 7 hours of personal learning on their craft in their spare time - nobody would consider them a workaholic. That's what I'm trying to say.
I work more than the average just like many on this board. Well guess what? I'm more skilled than the average. And I have a wider range of skills than most (from software engineering to marketing). I didn't get there by clocking 40 at each role or at my own businesses. And I probably wouldn't have been able to build successful businesses without going deep into learning for years ahead of time.
To many - the extra work hours are a focus on their craft and learning. I'll add marketing tech skills. Or customer acquisition skills. Or finance.
If I was reading marketing books for 7 hours per week that wouldn't be equated with working. That would be called learning.
And to many people - that's a huge part of their life.
Just because my hobby or thirst of information may include "work", doesn't mean people with knitting hobbies after they clock out 40 have a better work/life balance.
To me - some of my work is a hobby because I find it fascinating and I'll explore different industries much like someone may explore different cuisines in their home chef hobby.
Also - I still have more regular hobbies than most people I know, because apart from some Hacker News time, I don't spend 2-3 hours daily on social media like most people.
I don't get the work/life movement (apart from employer abuse of some employees).
Do you truly enjoy your life or not? Life balance is more appropriate to consider.
If they spent 47h per week doing it, people would call it unhealthy too. (or dedicated, if they have no sense of healthy temperance at all)