High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours • Hacker News Board

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#231

Post by jayd16 » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

ren_engineer wrote: post #43

mrandish wrote: post #8

> "High-earning men in the 25-to-39 age range who could be described as “workaholics” were pulling back, often by choice" This seems like great news. I know several guys who've recently opted to earn less in exchange for more time off at home with their young kids. They are happier and the kids love it.

the last sentence of the article hints at the real reason it was written in the first place: >But as staff cut back their hours, it costs medical organizations money it's just companies screeching that they are making less money because salaried employees are doing less unpaid work. I think the pandemic had a large effect on people in terms of 1. Having to face potential mortality much earlier than expected and thus…

>doing less unpaid work

Even with official work hours only, it's cheaper to hire, train, and manage one person for 40 hours a week than two people.

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#232

Post by coffeebeqn » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:32 PM UTC

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #151

synergy20 wrote: post #32

I don't know how to define 'high earning men' in real, but mathematically, earning up to 170K paying 24% tax is a fine spot, after that the tax becomes 32~35%, stretching yourself for decreasing return is not very exciting, why not taking a step back and enjoying life more instead.

I don't think you have actually done the math on taxes if you think that. First off, the 32% bracket kicks in at 170k of taxable income , which is going to be at least 183k of actual income because of the standard deduction (probably higher because of itemized deductions). Second, the 6.2% social security tax stops at 160k of income, so your income in the 32% bracket is really only taxed at 1.8% more than most of you…

Minus 401k contributions and bad investments which could be another 25k off your income. And like too many people seem to not understand, your whole salary won’t be taxed at that rate - only the amount that goes over the limit

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#233

Post by bluefirebrand » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:33 PM UTC

SeanAnderson wrote: post #209

bluefirebrand wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. When I met my girlfriend she was really clear that she didn't want to date someone who didn't have a similar level of accomplishment to her. It wasn't about money entirely, but money was a part of it. She has a master's degree and manages a department of people at a fairly big company. I only have a bachelor, and I don't manage people, but I earn more than her. So I guess it balances out? She would never date a…

As long as she sticks by you if an accident befalls you and your career prospects shift to disability then I have no concerns with your partner's stance here. Otherwise, "money is a part of it" takes a bit of a weirder tone, ya know? Life happens to people. Health issues are guaranteed to come up. Sometimes it's by chance and that's hardly the time for a life partner to abandon you due to perceived misalignment in va…

Yes, that's a fair point.

However, I think someone is allowed to have certain standards when first looking for a partner, and a different set of standards after a meaningful relationship has developed.

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#234

Post by enraged_camel » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:33 PM UTC

nebula8804 wrote: post #202

SideQuark wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The linked article .... The problem here is not journalism - it's people unable or unwilling to read correctly. The second sentence contains a link to the study [1] with all the information you need. > Which is why almost no one reads that stuff Yep, it is clear people don't read this stuff; many simply assume things instead. When you fail to read an article then assume it's another example of your prior belief, esp…

Hmm you've inspired an idea. For stories like this, wish there was some browser extension that would link the study (maybe through user submitted content?) That way, users can avoid clicking the link altogether and just go read the study.

The problem is most people aren’t qualified to correctly interpret scientific studies. Even if the abstracts are written in laypeople terms, the studies often contain important nuances.

In an ideal world we would have competent scientific journalism that can talk about science both accurately and also in an interesting way. Alas…

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#235

Post by zug_zug » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:33 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #114

VLM wrote: post #74

The linked article works hard to provide only meaningless personal anecdotes and promote speculation to avoid any actual answers while pushing pre-selected agendas. AKA, journalism in a nutshell. Sadly typical. Which is why almost no one reads that stuff anymore and no one takes it seriously anymore. As a member of the group in question, I find the data easy to believe. Its less than two weeks work on average. If I g…

The article was mostly quoting statistics from a linked study in the beginning, only quoting a few people to get a feel for why this may have changed. Anyway, people taking time off between jobs only applies to people who actually swapped jobs. Unless job hoppers started taking a month off it’s not going to result in these numbers: The top-earning 10% of men in the U.S. labor market logged 77 fewer work hours in 2022…

So top 10% is $173,176

So basically this is just saying layoffs exist in tech.

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#236

Post by oneoff786 » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:34 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #215

tristor wrote: post #172

Great. I count myself amongst this group. I used to regularly do a bit of work across weekends, and stay late or start early to always be the one willing to adjust for the timezone differences of other people. I no longer do this, I work my set hours, with an hour buffer in the morning and afternoon (8AM-6PM local time) and I don't work weekends. My weekends are now sacrosanct and used for social hobbies, spending ti…

> we have now learned about the harm caused by absentee fathers Can you expand on this, references etc? Up until now, I've only heard about the (substantial) harm caused by fatherless homes / single mothers (maybe single parents? not sure, it might be too small sample for single fathers).

I recall reading studies that suggested it was not the quantity of time spent with parents but the quality that seemed to correlate with long term results. Provided the actual needs of the child were taken care of by someone.

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#237

Post by gisely » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:36 PM UTC

mshake2 wrote: post #226

tristor wrote: post #172

Great. I count myself amongst this group. I used to regularly do a bit of work across weekends, and stay late or start early to always be the one willing to adjust for the timezone differences of other people. I no longer do this, I work my set hours, with an hour buffer in the morning and afternoon (8AM-6PM local time) and I don't work weekends. My weekends are now sacrosanct and used for social hobbies, spending ti…

i'm tired of creating a disproportionate amount of value and reaping the same rewards and allowances as everyone else because anything more would be seen as unfair. no thanks. if the value i'm creating isn't directly correlated with my earnings, i'll go do something else.

You do that John Galt.

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#238

Post by jrace » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:36 PM UTC

mshake2 wrote: post #226

tristor wrote: post #172

Great. I count myself amongst this group. I used to regularly do a bit of work across weekends, and stay late or start early to always be the one willing to adjust for the timezone differences of other people. I no longer do this, I work my set hours, with an hour buffer in the morning and afternoon (8AM-6PM local time) and I don't work weekends. My weekends are now sacrosanct and used for social hobbies, spending ti…

i'm tired of creating a disproportionate amount of value and reaping the same rewards and allowances as everyone else because anything more would be seen as unfair. no thanks. if the value i'm creating isn't directly correlated with my earnings, i'll go do something else.

I am feeling the same way. Finished last year with the exact same performance review scores as my coworker.. someone who admits to never checking emails, ignoring assigned bugs, and refusing to check the ticketing system.

After hearing this person bragging about 'being an asshole stops people from asking him to do work' and the getting the same raise I did has caused me to rethink my work methods.

It is difficult to change, but being a hard working people pleaser seems to be no longer valued.

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#239

Post by kevinventullo » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:38 PM UTC

tmountain wrote: post #48

chiefalchemist wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see job postings with "must be able to multitask" and "high intensity environment" and I think the 80s called and it wants its 8 ball of coke back. It's common knowledge - or should be - multitasking is a productivity loss, not gain. And the last thing the world needs is another headless-chicken culture where working hard and frantic is confused with smart and efficient. Guard your calm...no one else will.

What are some strategies for guarding your calm that have worked for the HN crowd?

http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html

Re: High-Earning Men Are Cutting Back on Their Working Hours

#240

Post by havelhovel » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 5:41 PM UTC

nixgeek wrote: post #127

bradlys wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d also argue that for young men - unless you’re an absolute unit and breathtakingly handsome… you’re always going to need to make more than your partner for a long term relationship. Being a bartender or taking a lower wage job is a surefire way to only being able to sleep around. I’ve only met a few women who earn more than their spouse and can actually only think of one off the top of my head. Every other couple…

This in itself is a huge problem and addressing it requires some combination of: (i) regulation backed up with investigations and significant fines for violation; (ii) transparency into pay equity; (iii) corporate action, optimally because it’s the right thing, but pessimistically because you can’t ignore the prior two points.

The parent comment was arguing that women choose to be with men who earn more than them. This was in no way a data point for wage inequality, which you seem to be implying.