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

“People simply empty out”

lettersofnote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 477 posts

Re: “People simply empty out”

#371

Post by hnnnnng »

nhangen wrote: post #359

I have three things to say about this: 1. Many people are horrified by the thought of not being a simple worker bee. They say they want change, but they don't. They want the security of someone else taking care of them. The reason wealth exists is because there are people that cannot live this way, and thus, make their own way. You cannot fault hard working business owners because their employees put themselves in a…

#1 is flat out wrong. THERE IS NO SECURITY! Is mcdonalds right? paying people so little that they need another job to not be out on the street? How is that TAKING CARE of employees? Before you say mcdonalds is an exception, theres so many others so dont give me the bullshit about wealth exists because blah.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#372

Post by lsc »

epo wrote: post #257
dalek_cannes wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a way out of the looking-the-part problem. Cultivate an image of an eccentric genius (and work hard to actually have genius level skills) and people will start to focus more on what you can do and less on what you look like you can do . In fact, that's why the tech industry seems to get an exemption -- they're mostly perceived as eccentric geniuses. Also, spend lavishly on the best clothes, eat lavishly, but…

Jesus, you people are delusional! You are not perceived as eccentric geniuses, not by anyone. Never, ever. They might say that to keep you on the treadmill but the the truth is that (especially by VCs) you are perceived as cannon fodder with a personal hygiene problem. You are kept around as long as you are useful and don't bitch too much. The minute that stops you are out on your ear. Welcome to the real world.

Yeah, uh, I didn't mention that you are only employed as long as the employer thinks you are useful because that's obvious, and is true across all fields. Dressing nice doesn't change that, except to the extent that dressing nice makes you more useful in your job role.

My point was just that if you are in management or sales, it seems that having expensive clothing and an expensive car are part of that 'being useful' - Appearance is a huge part of those jobs that are primarily human interaction. Appearance is a hugely important when dealing with other humans. I mean, I'm not saying that social skills and appearance don't matter for the technical individual contributor; they do, but it is not everything (like it is for management and sales.) It is possible to be technically good enough that people are willing to employ you in spite of your poor social skills. Obviously, that isn't the case for sales and management (as those jobs are, in a very real sense, social skills in and of themselves.)

Also note: If you are dealing directly with VC, you are more sales/management than an individual contributor.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#373

Post by nhangen »

hnnnnng wrote: post #371
nhangen wrote: post #359

I have three things to say about this: 1. Many people are horrified by the thought of not being a simple worker bee. They say they want change, but they don't. They want the security of someone else taking care of them. The reason wealth exists is because there are people that cannot live this way, and thus, make their own way. You cannot fault hard working business owners because their employees put themselves in a…

#1 is flat out wrong. THERE IS NO SECURITY! Is mcdonalds right? paying people so little that they need another job to not be out on the street? How is that TAKING CARE of employees? Before you say mcdonalds is an exception, theres so many others so dont give me the bullshit about wealth exists because blah.

In capitalism, pay is a result of supply and demand. The truth is that working at McDonald's requires very little skill, and because of that, offers very little pay. I thought they paid a great wage when I worked there during high school.

And you're right, there is no security, so what is your solution other than whining about it?

Re: “People simply empty out”

#374

Post by reinhardt »

_delirium wrote: post #16
blackhole wrote: post #5

I feel like too many people get sucked into the idea of furthering their career, to the point that they forget to further their own life. What is the point of existence if we never get around to experiencing it? "It's not the things we do in life that we regret on our death bed, it is the things we do not." - Randy Pausch

Hence the somewhat curious (and I think, very American) idea of the "Golden Years". If you put your head down and work hard, taking no vacations, until you're age 65, then you flip 180 degrees in the other direction and retire into a life of full-time leisure. So if you live long enough, it really won't be a waste; you cash it in all at the end! A Scandinavian psychologist somewhat recently proposed a typically Scand…

> he suggested people should work to age 80, but work proportionally less in all the years up to there.

Here's another crazy idea: become financially independent in your 30s; no hitting the startup jackpot required: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/145360121X/ref=ox_sc_act_ti...

Re: “People simply empty out”

#375

Post by lars512 »

LekkoscPiwa wrote: post #251
lars512 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Move outside the US to a country with socialised medicine. Done.

I hope you're not sarcastic. According to the CIA Factbook the US doesn't even make it to the top 50 countries in the world in life expectancy. And there are only 19 developed countries in the world, this makes us worse than 31 developing nations in life expectancy. Used to be number 1 in 1960s. I'm a dual Polish/US citizen. Poland has better life expectancy according to the CIA Factbook than the US does. Poland had…

I was deadly serious, and I agree with you.

I'm a Swedish/Australian dual-citizen, and although both countries have higher costs of goods, it seems a most reasonable price to pay to have functioning public health care.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#376

Post by ctdonath »

scotty79 wrote: post #360
ctdonath wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Positive rights vs. negative rights. I reject the notion of "positive rights" on the grounds that forcing other people to do things for you at gunpoint (actual or implied) is morally wrong. I support your right to not get killed; I do not support your "right" to threaten the life of another to compel him to improve your situation.

> I do not support your "right" to threaten the life of another to compel him to improve your situation. Does that mean that you also don't support kicking renters to the curb during winter months if they don't pay?

If they're not paying, they're trespassers. Out. They're free to pursue their right to life without violating someone else's, and they've got far more ability to provide for themselves than you're giving them credit for.

Charity has its place, I advocate and facilitate it, and am not under any delusion that it comes from compelling others to contribute.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#377

Post by mkrecny »

king_jester wrote: post #357
mkrecny wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would that be relevant whatsoever to why someone kicks their partner? You said you don't agree with abuse as a preface and then immediately put physical abuse on the level with having your feelings hurt by something someone said. 1. I stated that I don't agree with abuse (physical or emotional). 2. I stated that in this case I thought the emotional abuse Bukowski's fiance inflicted on Bukowski was worse than th…

> 2. I stated that in this case I thought the emotional abuse Bukowski's fiance inflicted on Bukowski was worse than the physical abuse he inflicted on her. That's my opinion. I think the way that she casually taunted him with her infidelity is _serious_ abuse. The kick is also terribly abusive. How exactly is being honest about not wanting and not committing to a monogamous relationship on an equal playing field as…

> "but hitting someone and being cheated on are not even remotely on the same playing field"

Hey man, I think we've covered some interesting ground here, but I think we just have to agree to disagree. I certainly don't think that cheating should be punished with physical abuse. However, I do think that the cheating on someone who you're engaged to and clearly expects monogamy is worse than hitting someone once. I just do.

Also, let's not forget that, whilst unacceptable, the kick was solicited by her admission of infidelity, whereas the infidelity is seemingly unsolicited.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#378

Post by Loughla »

nhangen wrote: post #373
hnnnnng wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#1 is flat out wrong. THERE IS NO SECURITY! Is mcdonalds right? paying people so little that they need another job to not be out on the street? How is that TAKING CARE of employees? Before you say mcdonalds is an exception, theres so many others so dont give me the bullshit about wealth exists because blah.

In capitalism, pay is a result of supply and demand. The truth is that working at McDonald's requires very little skill, and because of that, offers very little pay. I thought they paid a great wage when I worked there during high school. And you're right, there is no security, so what is your solution other than whining about it?

Those positions require very little skill, and provide very little pay. Correct. The next part is where most people today get the argument wrong; it isn't that those jobs should pay more for the arbitrary sake of paying more.

Those type of jobs are the step for many people that not just have no more steps to take, but have never had any walkway to stand on. Their entire lives have been spent just trying to make it to the next day.

The argument is that those positions are part of a larger, predatory economy or society seemingly designed to keep a certain subset of the country/world subjugated to another. When you see protests about a higher wage at entry level positions such as fast-food and retail, what you're really seeing is the confused, leaderless argument that life sucks for many people and shows no signs of relenting. It's a first world suck, but suck nonetheless.

Source: research into lower-socioeconomic lifestyles while attaining advanced degrees (and living that life when young; thank God for scholarships).

Re: “People simply empty out”

#379

Post by snori74 »

tankbot wrote: post #129

Can I just say that I love Charles Bukowski? If you've never read him go buy his books now. There's so much humanity in there. Some will think he's a downer or depressing, but I think he's genius. His life reminds me of this quote by Hokusai: When I was 50 I had published a universe of designs. But all I have done before the the age of 70 is not worth bothering with. At 75 I'll have learned something of the pattern o…

I've only read one, but it was quite unlike anything I'd read before - old guy, depressing grind of a job, alcohol and rough women - but a rawness and authenticity that you don't often get. At the time I was very interested to learn that he was effectively writing of the life he'd lead.

There's a whole stack of comment below on judging him-as-a-person - but if you read widely you'll be well aware that many books are worth reading despite the character flaws of their authors.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#380

Post by penguindev »

enoch_r wrote: post #87
johnrob wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually a lot more. 4.31% per year is likely what the US government reports. They traditionally under report inflation (although to a greater degree over the past 20 years). The bundle of goods used to measure inflation does not include housing and energy, which have been the primary sources of rising living costs (not to mention medicine, which I only just considered).

First, the CPI absolutely does include housing, energy, and medicine[1]. Second, it's incredibly hard to accurately measure such a nebulous concept as inflation (because there's no such thing as a "general price level"), but it's pretty bold to definitively state that the CPI understates inflation. Measuring inflation is hard . We can buy an iPhone 5 for half what we paid for the first one in 2007--how do we quantify…

If it's so hard to calculate, perhaps the government - and the bank cartel - should stop doing it and leave it and our currency the fuck alone?
Post reply on HN