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

The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 520 posts

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#341

Post by WhompingWindows »

hnaccount141 wrote: post #98
steelstraw wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's up with all the language games lately? "Defund the police". No no, we don't actually mean defund the police... "Anti work". No no, we don't actually mean we're anti work...

In both of these cases "we" is a group of thousands of people with varying opinions. There are absolutely plenty of people who very much believe in defunding the police and ending work. As both movements have grown more popular we've naturally seen more people who agree with the general spirit of the movement but hold more moderate views.

This is Reddit...this is the Internet...what percentage of these "people" are actually individual humans writing their own beliefs?

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#342

Post by lanfeust6 »

bmhin wrote: post #169
Tenoke wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In both cases what you mean is not the default reading. Defund means to remove funds, and you meaning something else is not 'exactly that'. Anti means you are against something, so the natural reading is that you don't want that thing (work) to be a thing anymore, not the more convoluted meaning you say is 'exactly that' even though nobody unfamiliar can possibly guess at it from just the word anti.

If your "default" reading of any sociopolitical proposal is to assume it is an absolutist desire and not one more nuanced or practical under the hood, you have a wrong default. "Defund the police" meaning "zero funds for the police" or "no police exist". "Anti-work" meaning "against all work" or "work" meaning "general expenditure of productive effort" or something. You can look a little bit more into any slogan or l…

> If your "default" reading of any sociopolitical proposal is to assume it is an absolutist desire and not one more nuanced or practical under the hood, you have a wrong default.

Why would anyone "assume nuance" from explicit language? There's no ambiguity about what it says at face value.

Even proponents can't keep it straight in this case. An above user suggests it means "People should not have to work to live. ", whereas the anti-work sub's faq describes its mission as being "against work under Capitalism". To the extent that one labors under Socialism, they labor to live, if History is any indication. Notwithstanding, "living" can practically mean more than just subsistence since, obviously, no one supporting anti-work is starving. They're thinking about comfort and quality of life, not merely survival, and this is deliberately conflated. They can all quit their jobs and survive. Moreover, basic income, once it is implemented, would allow citizens to be consumers and purchase more comforts without working even in a Liberal democratic Capitalist society - that isn't contingent on Socialism at all.

If your buzzword means whatever it is you want it to mean, and others persistently don't interpret it the same way, then it's a failure. It only succeeds at increasing friction.

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#343

Post by Flankk »

makecheck wrote: post #329

At least two things happened here: - The pandemic gave most people an unusually-long period of time at home to help them realize all the things they could have been doing (e.g. spending more time with family, not being stuck in a commute), if only their work had not been sucking up all their time and energy. - Income vs. expenses changed to the point where people couldn’t hope to pay off their debts even if they work…

There has been a massive psychological shift too. Everyone suddenly realized life is short and you need to take action before it is too late. Starting a business has risk and there is fear associated. All that goes out the window when you realize you have nothing to lose.

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#344

Post by jklinger410 »

steelstraw wrote: post #28
softwaredoug wrote: post #3

> spectacles like the immense popularity of the "Anti-Work" thread on Reddit — have gone as far as to suggest this record-breaking trend is a movement of young, able-bodied Americans rejecting work altogether. I don't think this is the point of "anti work". The point is (to me) that people should be treated equitably at work and that work shouldn't be the center of our lives

What's up with all the language games lately? "Defund the police". No no, we don't actually mean defund the police... "Anti work". No no, we don't actually mean we're anti work...

Intentional psi ops designed to create overreactions on both sides. Narratives in this country have to be fabricated for that effect before they are accepted.

A single voice may have freedom of speech, but the accepted narrative is controlled and much louder.

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#345

Post by WhompingWindows »

steelstraw wrote: post #28
softwaredoug wrote: post #3

> spectacles like the immense popularity of the "Anti-Work" thread on Reddit — have gone as far as to suggest this record-breaking trend is a movement of young, able-bodied Americans rejecting work altogether. I don't think this is the point of "anti work". The point is (to me) that people should be treated equitably at work and that work shouldn't be the center of our lives

What's up with all the language games lately? "Defund the police". No no, we don't actually mean defund the police... "Anti work". No no, we don't actually mean we're anti work...

There have been language games since the dawn of time. Our very human speech evolved to allow us to discuss other humans, to gossip, to chat, to play social games like conversation, debate, acting, humor, rapping. Language has been and always will be full of games.

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#346

Post by jonnycomputer »

KerrAvon wrote: post #298
jonnycomputer wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are the rich and then there are the really rich, and then there are the unbelievably rich. I'll happily call a family earning 500k/y on two salaries in a small town where a million dollar home is literally a mansion on a hill "rich". Because they are. They just aren't as rich as the Trumps or Bezoss of the world.

What do you intend to connote by saying someone is "rich," though? What does it signify? If the definition of "rich" is "independently wealthy," that family certainly doesn't meet it. They still have to work for a living. If it means you never have to worry about where the next meal is coming from or losing the roof over your head, sure, a lot of people are "rich." And maybe this is better than 90% of humanity does,…

Their modes of thought, their concerns and worries, their expectations, their assumptions of what is possible, their habits, their identities, all different.

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#347

Post by ashtonkem »

slowhand09 wrote: post #29
ashtonkem wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The phrase “great resignation” also implies that people are just quitting, when in reality they’re changing jobs. The unemployment rate is lower than it’s been in a decade (except a month or two here and there), people who are resigning are getting new jobs.

The unemployment rate was lower in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019. It went up when the pandemic kicked in. Here is one (of many) sources I found with a single google search. https://www.statista.com/statistics/193290/unemployment-rate...

The seasonally adjusted U-3 fell below 3.9% in May of 2018 for the first time since October of 2000[0]. I might’ve been a bit glib about “a few months”, it was closer to two years, but the general sentiment that the unemployment rate is extremely low right now still stands. It’s far lower than the entire period of October 2000 to May of 2018, which coincidentally covers the vast majority of my working life.

There are still some issues around childcare that need to be worked out, which is probably the biggest source of the gap between U-3 and U-6 right now. But this is still one of the hottest labor markets in most of our lives.

0 - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE/

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#348

Post by subsubzero »

b112 wrote: post #272
subsubzero wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tax laws are confusing, alot of people think that since they made more they are in a new tax bracket and every dollar they made is subject to the new higher tax bracket rate. This is incorrect, every dollar made at and above that high tax bracket is subject to that higher tax rate, every dollar made below is subject to the previous tax bracket.(and this is after 401k and other tax writeoffs).

Clarity here, this is how it is, where you live I presume. Other places do have more horrid, retroactive taxation. But that said, tax rates are typically based upon cutoffs. So the more you make, the more tax you pay. So this means that if you get a raise to meet inflation, you could see your raise more heavily taxed, if it is above the next tax bracket. Eventually, with enough inflation, and no changes to tax regs,…

totally sorry, yes you are right, I forgot to mention I live in the US and that is how tax laws here are set up. And as a caveat I am assuming all income is salary.

Being highly paid in salary you are subject to very high taxation where someone who receives most of their income in stock and sells after holding for a year would have dramatically less taxes on the same amount of money received. Its why these CEO's making $1 a year(and having stock grants in the 100's of millions) are a slap in the face to the working engineer who incurs substantially higher taxes as a percentage than the CEO making 100x his salary.

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#349

Post by speed_spread »

whatshisface wrote: post #31
howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #23

> The Great Renegotiation is also a byproduct of inflation. Workers are seeking better pay to keep up with the rising cost of living. Keeping in mind small business is collectively the largest employer and contributor to US output... let's remember the coming rate hikes will greatly reduce available cash to small businesses that operate with credit lines, credit card debt or via home equity lines. That is a LOT of US…

> In reality, it's a delay of an inevitable downturn unless some magical productivity innovation or goods/services advance emerges to rescue the US economy. That sounds kind of like a plan. Delay until something random happens.

Unfortunately, War is not that random nor is it magic.

Re: The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

#350

Post by lotsofpulp »

sxyuan wrote: post #276
curiousllama wrote: post #207

> But there are growing fears of a wage-price spiral in which workers, seeing rising prices, demand higher pay — and companies, having to pay their workers more, start charging higher prices. These higher prices lead workers to demand even higher pay, leading companies to charge higher prices, and so on. It's the inflationary cycle of nightmares. Can someone explain to me how this works? I'd assume wages to prices ar…

You're assuming McDonald's has a much higher profit margin than it actually does - it's a restaurant chain, not a software company. In other words, the wages for the guy making the burger isn't the only input to cost. E.g., if the beef in that $2 burger used to cost $0.50, it might cost $0.75 now, partly as a response to the need for the farmer to pay himself more. There's also the people working at the meat processi…

Also, I am only going to pay so much for a McDonald's sandwich before I decide the cost to quality ratio is too high, and either make it myself or go to a restaurant that has a better cost to quality ratio.

I find the making it myself option to be much better due to the increased volatility of quality. Sure, I might spend 2 hours cooking and cleaning, but I know the quality will be good 100% of the time, whereas spending $25 per person may or may not get me a decent meal because the restaurant does not have steady employee and/or is cutting corners on quality ingredients to make up for other cost increases.

I think this would hurt the middle restaurants more than McDonalds though. McDonald's has it all streamlined so they can manage costs and still delivery consistency at a low price, but the restaurants in the middle that are okay, but not top tier no longer make sense.

Post reply on HN