151–160 of 179 posts
If you reply to emails before 9 and after 6, you're telling your manager/client ... hey! I am at your disposal 24/7. By the way, if your boss gave you a "work laptop" you're already screwed.
Not just your manager / client, but your direct colleagues too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am quite convinced we are losing at the wealth game globally - despite many people's attempts to illustrate that global poverty is decreasing (I lack data and drive to prove this point sadly) So what is it that has convinced you that we're losing, in the face of evidence to the contrary?
I apologise for the following unstructured stream of unconsciousness. It would be interesting to know what age group you are in as that could well colour your perspective. For me, my anecdata leads me to believe it is very hard to get on the wealth ladder. I have built this perspective from associating with people ranging from backgrounds of very working class to ultra high net worth people. We live in a world where…
This smells like selection bias. The people who aren't struggling that badly aren't complaining about it!
32% of americans 18-35 live at home [0], but that isn't an all-time high -- in 1940, for instance, approximately 35 percent of people in that age range lived at home.
[0] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/05/24/479327382...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am quite convinced we are losing at the wealth game globally - despite many people's attempts to illustrate that global poverty is decreasing (I lack data and drive to prove this point sadly) So what is it that has convinced you that we're losing, in the face of evidence to the contrary?
I apologise for the following unstructured stream of unconsciousness. It would be interesting to know what age group you are in as that could well colour your perspective. For me, my anecdata leads me to believe it is very hard to get on the wealth ladder. I have built this perspective from associating with people ranging from backgrounds of very working class to ultra high net worth people. We live in a world where…
So, is the comparison point Roman London? During the Blitz? When Pea Soup was a common pollution issue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pea_soup_fog)? Or is it a period post war until about 1980 when assets hadn't caught up to a booming economy?
Some parts of life are more expensive in a few world cities that are more than their local population, places like London, SF, NYC, Paris. In such places, housing is likely prohibitively expensive for almost everyone, as the market size (aka demand) is every person in the world worth north of $USD 10 million in the entire world. That market is a LOT larger than even ten years ago, and has a motivated population (the Chinese) who prefer foreign assets over local ones. On the flipside, supply has not kept up, as most world cities have housing approval procedures that are glacially slow, and held back by NIMBYs.
But even then, the London of 1950 wasn't the place it is now, and lots of things like air quality have improved vastly, as has what is available to do - from eating to drinking and general entertainment.
Ironically, I think what you parents did is the same way everyone today could make great wealth - move to a city in another country with opportunity. My ex moved to Beijing and made 1st world money while spending like a local - so > $100K with expenses under $1K a month.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In other words, the employees can't generate the same surplus value without the company. So the company did in fact generate some of it, so the profit isn't stolen at all, it's earned. Marx has been dead for 135 years, and people still parrot his confused ramblings without thinking. Amazing.
> So the company did in fact generate some of it, so the profit isn't stolen at all, it's earned. It is common to refer to this as unearned income because it is income received by virtue of ownership not work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pressure to compete. I don't think it's anything companies convinced people into doing, it seems more like one of those unwritten rules. Especially in tech. Your system breaks, you are responsible. Not good to simply look at the clock and say 'well that's a day' if you want more responsibility, leadership, respect, trust etc.
> Not good to simply look at the clock and say 'well that's a day' if you want more responsibility, leadership, respect, trust etc. Sadly, the effect of this is that there's less incentive to build resilient systems, since there's always someone available to fix things quickly. Trying to convince corporate to spend more time and money on building a system that looks/smells/feels the same, but is presumably more resil…
Minds require rest to function optimally, so pushing yourself to an extreme comes at a cost that gets realized down the line instead. Identifying which means of functioning comes at the greatest cost is not easy to analyze or ascertain. So working together in addition to competing is important as well.
All principles of capitalism. Just, never before in history has there really been so much attention paid to the mind. Software, eesh, yep.
If your employer tracks you by the hour, then of course email while commuting is work. Also thinking about a design while taking a shower in the evening is work. Also waking up in the middle of the night and not being able to fall asleep because work issues are bothering you is work. Why employers (in the knowledge business at least) track people by the hour is beyond my understanding.
> Why employers (in the knowledge business at least) track people by the hour is beyond my understanding Because in some countries it is a legal requirement. Where I work, in Austria, there is currently a legal limit of 10 working hours per day and a total of 50 hours per week, except in exceptional circumstances. Therefore, all employees must log their working hours. I found the process odd when I first moved here.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Women joining the workforce lead to a long term decrease in the labor supply. The only reason wages haven’t gone up is a massive influx of foreign born workers that keeps supply high.
Anticonceptional techniques are IMHO the game changer. Humans have always tried to limit their offspring. Once it was possible without extreme measures, parents prefer to pour more resources on fewer kids. My wife haven't worked out a single day in life, and haven't ever taken a single anticonceptional pill, either. The only thing we agreed without discussion in our marriage was having a single kid. I went to vasecto…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why employers (in the knowledge business at least) track people by the hour is beyond my understanding Because in some countries it is a legal requirement. Where I work, in Austria, there is currently a legal limit of 10 working hours per day and a total of 50 hours per week, except in exceptional circumstances. Therefore, all employees must log their working hours. I found the process odd when I first moved here.…
Are you salaried or are you paid per hour?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it takes a very special type of daftness to think for centuries men were "supporting" women by not allowing them to work.
This world is built upon the dead bodies of men. Men who fought wars to protect their kin, men who fell from the top of buildings they were constructing, men who suffocated to death deep in the tunnels, or drowned in the ocean... Let us not forget them. Let us not belittle their sacrifices.
If your employer tracks you by the hour, then of course email while commuting is work. Also thinking about a design while taking a shower in the evening is work. Also waking up in the middle of the night and not being able to fall asleep because work issues are bothering you is work. Why employers (in the knowledge business at least) track people by the hour is beyond my understanding.
Why is it not work, if your employer doesn't track you by the hour?