51–60 of 102 posts
It’s a terrible choice to make: Freedom versus Security, but I think we deserve both.
It's not surprising that at this point the poll is at 21 vs 22. Competition will ensure that incentives remain more or less balanced between the two options (the less freelancers there are, the more they can charge, and the less full timers there are, the more they will be paid). Unless we lived in a world where one of them was so much easier to attract talent to that the other just died off. For specific people in s…
>Competition will ensure that incentives remain more or less balanced between the two options (the less freelancers there are, the more they can charge, and the less full timers there are, the more they will be paid).
I agree that competition prevents one side from being too lopsided, but there's no reason why it would result in a 50-50 split. For instance, if being employed has structural factors that makes it preferred (eg. stability, economies of scale), then you'd expect more people to be employed. Indeed, that's how the broader economy works; the employed/self-employed ratio in the US isn't even close to 50-50.
Option 3: form a worker owned co-op and distribute profits between members instead of shareholders and management.
Your model could work for businesses that aren't capital intensive (eg. consulting shops), but won't work for anything that requires a runway.
People that do work for themselves often present themselves as victims, being responsible for more in some ways. But the freedom is regained, and sense of liberation. I've offered these individuals many times to simply apply and get a job working for someone else to quench their victimhood. While I'm sure it's happened many times, I've never personally met a taker on that offer.
Unless someone had a terrible experience and couldn't make it work while being self-employed, most people intrinsically know that having your boss be "survival" rather than an actual talking head (who will cut you as soon as you're not profitable just the same), is superior. There's more upside financially doing this as well, rather than locked in a situation where the only reason you're there is because you're creating more value than you accept in pay. Self-employed people always get 100% of the fruits of their passion and labor back.
Right now, its 74 votes for FT, 113 Work for Yourself.
"Work for yourself" is a fine answer if you have enough in savings that you can take the risk of not having work. HN has a greater proportion of people that can do that.
I question how many people voting for FTJ would actually prefer WFY but don't have that level of financial security.
Work for yourself is always superior. The nature of employment is akin to slavery. Master-slave, lord-serf, employer-employee. When the US was founded, people largely worked for themselves as craftsmen and farmers. People were probably a lot happier then than today, for obvious reasons, less oppression. People that do work for themselves often present themselves as victims, being responsible for more in some ways. Bu…
You are always working for someone—whether you have one big customer, a few medium-size ones, or many tiny ones. More customers is in some ways more sustainable, because losing a single customer is less of an impact and you are more likely to have a well-oiled up-to-date process for getting new customers. Perhaps a bigger differentiator is not employment vs. self-employment but whether you can do something you enjoy…
You are always working for someone—whether you have one big customer, a few medium-size ones, or many tiny ones. More customers is in some ways more sustainable, because losing a single customer is less of an impact and you are more likely to have a well-oiled up-to-date process for getting new customers. Perhaps a bigger differentiator is not employment vs. self-employment but whether you can do something you enjoy…
Is not about who do you work for, is about what you own. Running your own show makes you the owner of your work, you could sell your business, pass it down to your family, etc... when you work for somebody else, you are contracting your time, without any ownership, you can't leave your kids your Senior Engineer position at Google, but you could leave them a profitable business. Is like renting vs buying, sometimes ma…
I work for myself and love it but it isn't for the faint of heart. If you want to work for yourself I recommend first working for other people for 5-10 years—basically, get paid to learn your industry. Then when you can't rise any farther, that's the time to go work for yourself. Note I'm a person who's relatively less motivated by money, and my idea of successful self-employment is to be a consultant with a very goo…
Sounds awesome, thanks. It just seems so hard to make this work when you factor in the huge costs of insurance, etc.