How to Make Time for Everything (Then Actually Do It)
Based on Ali Abdaal's video on YouTube. If you like this content, support the original creators by watching, liking and subscribing to their content.
A full week’s 168 hours can be exhausted by sleep, work, food, chores, fitness, and entertainment/media before adding side goals.
Briefing
Making time for everything starts with a blunt arithmetic reality: the average week already gets fully allocated before most people add “extra” goals like learning an instrument, building a side business, or writing consistently. Using a “168 hours” spreadsheet framework, the analysis breaks a typical week into sleep, work, food, chores, fitness, entertainment, and social time—then shows how quickly the remaining “free” hours go negative once childcare and modern media habits are included.
The spreadsheet begins with sleep and work as the two largest fixed blocks. With an average of about 8.7 hours of sleep per night (rounded to 8 for simplicity), plus a wind-down period, sleep-related time lands at roughly 56 hours per week, leaving about 108.5 hours for everything else. Work then consumes another large chunk: assuming an 8-hour workday, five days a week, plus lunch, commute, and daily prep/transition time, work totals about 52.5 hours per week. At that point, sleep and work together account for roughly a third of life each, leaving “about a third” for everything else.
Food and household tasks narrow that remaining space further. Based on internet averages, eating and food prep/cooking add up to around 12 hours per week, while chores land around 6.5 hours per week (roughly under an hour a day). Entertainment and media are the biggest surprise. The analysis cites about 19 hours per week watching TV shows/movies/streaming, plus additional time on social media apps. Even with conservative assumptions, entertainment totals roughly 29.5 hours per week, leaving only about four hours per week for “everything else” after entertainment, fitness, and basic social/family time are accounted for. The conclusion is stark: even without kids, the typical allocation can already exhaust the 168-hour budget.
Childcare makes the situation collapse. Adding roughly 2 hours per day of active childcare plus additional weekly admin/logistics and kid-related tasks pushes childcare to at least ~18 hours per week, driving the spreadsheet into “overdrawn” territory—negative free time—meaning there is no room left for additional ambitions unless something changes.
The second half turns the math into a personal case study: Ali Abdaal’s own strategy while working full-time as a doctor and building YouTube and a side business. He frames the solution as three levers: squeeze efficiency in required tasks, sacrifice selectively, and “double dip” by combining activities (like using commute and lunch time for audio books/podcasts). His biggest time unlock came from cutting cooking and healthy meal prep—skipping breakfast, relying on ready meals/takeaway, and reducing food-related time from typical estimates (10–15 hours/week) down to about 2.7 hours/week. He also reduced chores via outsourcing (a cleaner every other week), minimized entertainment by largely avoiding TV, and kept social media lower than average. Double dipping mattered too: he used commute time (often at 2–3x speed) and sometimes lunch breaks to plan and consume content.
The takeaway is not that everyone should copy his sacrifices, but that time scarcity is real and non-negotiable. The spreadsheet approach helps people identify where their hours actually go, then decide what to trade—entertainment, media scrolling, certain comforts—rather than blaming themselves for failing to “fit everything in.” For parents especially, childcare can consume a huge portion of the week, so the only sustainable path is deliberate tradeoffs or major life changes like reducing work hours.
Cornell Notes
A “168 hours” time-audit framework shows why “time for everything” often fails: typical weeks get fully spent on sleep, work, food, chores, fitness, and especially entertainment/media. Even before childcare enters the picture, conservative averages can leave little to no room for additional goals. Adding childcare pushes most people into negative “free time,” making extra projects impossible without tradeoffs. Ali Abdaal’s example while working full-time illustrates three levers—improve efficiency, sacrifice selectively, and double dip by combining tasks (e.g., audio learning during commutes). The practical message: download the spreadsheet, map current time use, then choose what to change based on real constraints rather than guilt.
How does the 168-hours spreadsheet demonstrate that “free time” can disappear even without kids?
Why does childcare change the math so dramatically?
What three levers does Ali Abdaal use to create time while working full-time?
What was the biggest sacrifice in his personal example, and what did it buy him?
How did “double dipping” work in his routine?
What’s the video’s stance on whether these sacrifices are universally advisable?
Review Questions
- If you remove entertainment and social media time from a typical week, what categories still remain “fixed,” and which ones are most likely to be adjustable?
- In the 168-hours framework, what combination of categories most quickly drives the schedule into negative free time once childcare is added?
- Which of the three levers—efficiency, sacrifice, or double dipping—would be easiest for you to apply first, and what specific time category would you target?
Key Points
- 1
A full week’s 168 hours can be exhausted by sleep, work, food, chores, fitness, and entertainment/media before adding side goals.
- 2
Entertainment and media time are often the fastest path to “overdrawn” schedules, even under conservative assumptions.
- 3
Childcare adds both direct care hours and recurring logistics/admin, pushing many households into negative free time.
- 4
The practical method is to map current time use (time audit or estimates), then compare it to an “ideal week” to identify the biggest gaps.
- 5
Creating time usually requires tradeoffs: improve efficiency, sacrifice selectively, and double dip by combining learning/planning with otherwise idle time.
- 6
Ali Abdaal’s example highlights how reducing food-related time, outsourcing chores, limiting TV, and lowering social media can free substantial hours—though those choices aren’t presented as universally optimal.
- 7
Parents face a steeper constraint because childcare can consume a large share of the week, making major changes (or major tradeoffs) more necessary.