Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Loneliness Epidemic

melmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 337 posts

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#311

Post by chongli »

zwkrt wrote: post #151
LordFast wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Anecdotally, this checks out. All of my middle/lower-middle class friends from high school have long been married and raising families, almost in all cases raising them with their extended families. Most of my professional tech friends are barely getting started in their late 30s, and everyone who's started had basically put their career into a slower gear first. I made a similar choice a couple of years…

You have assumed the role of the loser, as per https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-... It feels nice down here, join us!

The 3 layer hierarchy which seems to be a cornerstone for that piece's thesis is just a restatement of the structure of The Party from Orwell's 1984, applied to companies rather than all of society.

It is an interesting way to look at organizations though.

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#312

Post by watwut »

fromthestart wrote: post #226
watwut wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking care of old or sick relative is not selfish. Staying in the same job is not selfish. No more selfish then changing job because some perk.

Quitting a job to take care of a sick loved one does not benefit the people you worked with toward a common goal, nor society at large. >No more selfish then changing job because some perk. The point here is that GP was complaining that there were no career benefits to making such a decision - why should there be, exactly? Such a career move benefits oneself and ones family. No one else.

> The point here is that GP was complaining that there were no career benefits to making such a decision - why should there be, exactly? Such a career move benefits oneself and ones family. No one else.

Same as leaving the job and changing. Benefits no one but you.

When all possible actions are framed as selfish, that whole argument is nonsense.

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#313

Post by AstralStorm »

dondawest wrote: post #285
zwkrt wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have assumed the role of the loser, as per https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-... It feels nice down here, join us!

No way man, I bet if we found out the specifics we’d both deem him “clueless” on the GP hierarchy. Unless he literally works in a warehouse or in a position that is pure “worker bee,” $100 says if we knew the actual job title this guy held we’d deem him “clueless.” (Not that he actually IS clueless, who knows, I’m just using that word in the gervais principle sense of it). “I made a similar choice a couple of years a…

No, that's entirely what a "checked out" Loser person would say. The step before upper management until you add enough egoism and sociopathy in. ;)

Clueless, these are the people who believe in so called company values, think they can change things or try to achieve something. Relatively rare nowadays in most places, but these do happen. Both of the middle managers were this.

Losers are people who indeed care more about social aspects than getting things done. While the top sees this as a distraction it really is, but does not care about the day to day operations, just power.

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#314

Post by AstralStorm »

ci5er wrote: post #224
gordaco wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this is 100% correct. In particular: the amount of choices that have become "career killers" and therefore unacceptable is terrifying. Choose a degree that appeals to you, where you will learn what you like, instead of one which acts as a stepping stone for a higher paying job? Even in countries with sane tuition prices (read: not the US) plenty of people will blame you, and that decision in particular, for an…

I think I am sympathetic to your point-of-view, but I'm not sure, because it seems (to me) that you are maybe conflating a couple of different costs. Let's start at the numerator - you appear to be calculating life "happiness" (according to some internal metric) vs ... cost. You appear to be calculating costs as being: - Not making more money because the degree did not lend it to making more money - Social approbatio…

The society does not pay you. The company does, and many bigger corporations have a ton of impossible b.s. projects that are essentially a waste if time for anyone who is not a boss counting the number of employees.

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#315

Post by mikorym »

mikorym wrote: post #187
rayiner wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The average person has to consider all options in the light of both the current employer and the specter of tomorrow’s. Moving across the country for a high paying job? Great! Moving to be closer to friends? That’s a career killer. The median person lives just 18 miles away from their mom. 57% of Americans have never lived outside their home state. A third have never lived outside their hometown. The more I read ab…

Or: first world problems.

Seems people don't like this comment. Let me elaborate: In poorer countries, or in historically poorer countries, there is often a culture of group interaction: food sold in the streets, social events in the streets, greeting people and getting to know those around you. A lot of this is based on mutual struggle or mutual need towards each other.

This is quite stark in some poorer countries (e.g.: some African, South American or Asian countries). You don't see that much in the US, but you do see it in some European countries and the ones with more of this are the ones that I find have less inertial loneliness. Thus: "first world problems" occur when you need the person next to you less. Maybe this is the same phenomenon that makes a country like Iceland famous for helpfulness towards others?

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#316

Post by imiric »

alexashka wrote: post #221

It's more of a journalist epidemic - they keep reaching for straw-men to justify their existence. Talking about loneliness is slightly more interesting than what dress celebrity X wore at event Y. It's just bullshit - at least the dress talk doesn't pretend otherwise, for the most part. We're living in the greatest time ever. I understand that when you make no money and you're writing articles, it may seem like there…

> We're living in the greatest time ever. I understand that when you make no money and you're writing articles, it may seem like there is a loneliness epidemic. There isn't - we're doing better than ever.

I don't understand how you can claim that with a straight face. Did you read the article?

14% of the UK population say they experience loneliness "often" or "always". 46% of a 20,000 people study in the US reported "sometimes" or "often".

Hundreds of thousands of people in Japan can be classified as hikikomori, living a lifestyle of extreme social isolation. There are similar numbers in most industrialized nations.

Downplaying or ignoring these facts is a terrible disservice to mental health, just as we did for decades with depression. This is indeed a global epidemic and I applaud the UK for introducing health programs to tackle it.

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#317

Post by buboard »

barberousse wrote: post #280
buboard wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. nobody said the do or that they should "be inclusive" 2. miasma is a negative word (means repulsive) I agree however, it is actually one of the reasons that more well-off people tend to socialize less: other people are not always "wonderful"

1 - Of course not, but its a requisite to strong social bonds isn't it? The point is that that the discussion around fulfilling bonds is fairly underspecified to the point that it isn't practically useful from my perspective. 2 - Apologies, I was misusing the word

> Of course not, but its a requisite to strong social bonds isn't it?

A requisite, it isn't. But, for people living in cosmopolitan cities, or people who have an open mind about the world, of course it is.

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#318

Post by granshaw »

peckrob wrote: post #155
gordaco wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this is 100% correct. In particular: the amount of choices that have become "career killers" and therefore unacceptable is terrifying. Choose a degree that appeals to you, where you will learn what you like, instead of one which acts as a stepping stone for a higher paying job? Even in countries with sane tuition prices (read: not the US) plenty of people will blame you, and that decision in particular, for an…

> Stay in your job for 15 years because you like the people, the work itself or some particular perk? When you finally leave, your next job will pay less than if you had hopped around each 2 years. That's if someone wants to hire you. This is so true, and the weirdest thing in the world to me. Especially in tech, you get really heavily punished for staying at a job more than a few years. To the point where, in interv…

> We have this weird aversion to people being content.

As an immigrant I feel this is quite an American thing - there's always talk of your _career_, your _pursuits_, your _goals_, interesting things you did over the weekend...

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#319

Post by granshaw »

davidw wrote: post #139

I miss the social aspects of living in Italy. It just felt easier to connect with people there. People are kind of weird and standoffish here in the US, and in some cases feel a bit fake. If you ask if someone wants to grab a beer (or spritz/wine/whatever) in Italy, and they respond enthusiastically, it seems there's a good chance they'll try and make it happen.

Used to have an Italian neighbor and we talked about exactly this - about how in Italy you'd just invite folks you encounter in for dinner regardless of whatever one-dish thing your family was having at that time, whereas here in America you'd never dream of inviting people in for dinner without some souped-up lavish planned meal

Re: The Loneliness Epidemic

#320

Post by icebraining »

mapcars wrote: post #93
radcon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. This is like saying alcoholism is an easy problem to solve because all they have to do is stop drinking.

It is actually just that easy. It is your own hand takes a glass or bottle and puts it into your own mouth, no one else's. The problem is you are not conscious about it, the same thing about not being willing to make contact with others.

It's simple, not necessarily easy.
Post reply on HN