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

301–310 of 477 posts

Re: “People simply empty out”

#301

Post by ihaveajob »

price wrote: post #25
_delirium wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

My grandmother basically did that, in rural Texas. She was a nurse, shifted to inspecting nursing homes for the state, and then to consulting for nursing homes, and worked at reduced hours up to six months before she died in her 80s. She had plenty of time for family, friends, and her church, and still got the satisfaction of putting her professional expertise to good use and getting paid. Seemed to work out pretty w…

I think this used to be much more common in the past. My grandfather, a farmer, also worked till about 6 months before passing, when his heart started weakening, at age 92. He would pull 12 hour days, and that's what kept him alive and happy. He would get depressed when he came to visit us in the city with nothing to do. Going from working 40 hours a week when you're 64 to idling all day as you turn 65 is just not healthy.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#302

Post by sateesh »

eshvk wrote: post #173
VexXtreme wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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! And this exact kind of thinking is what the societal overlords want yo…

It is funny you should say this. A friend recently had me interview for his company. He is a great guy, works too much, wakes up in the middle of the nights when he is on call. His boss started off by agreeing that yes, the friend worked too much. He may even have used the word burning out. He then hastened to tell me about his theory in life. Your 20s and 30s are meant to be a time for learning. Apparently, this "le…

May be he was lucky and it worked for him. I am not sure that would work well all the times. It is not necessary that the skills you acquire working harder would make you still relevant (as tech lead or manager) when you are in your forties and fifties. At the same time it is no guarantee that you would still be employed in the same organization where you worked hard during your twenties and thirties. I think not burning out, being healthy, staying fit and to never stop learning would work better.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#303

Post by king_jester »

mkrecny wrote: post #276
king_jester wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While I don't agree with physical or verbal abuse, I think in this case Fiance probably hurt Bukowski more with her words than he did with his kick. So you do agree with physical abuse. According to you, if your partner says something that upsets you, its totally OK to hit them. That is domestic abuse 101.

> So you do agree with physical abuse. According to you, if your partner says something that upsets you, its totally OK to hit them. That is domestic abuse 101. That's absurd. Where did I say "if your partner says something that upsets you, it's totally OK to hit them"? I stated that: a) Bukowski's fiance probably hurt Bukowski (by stating that she cheats on him) more than he did by kicking her. b) It didn't seem lik…

> a) Bukowski's fiance probably hurt Bukowski (by stating that she cheats on him) more than he did by kicking her.

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.

I don't know if you yourself has been in an abuse relationship or know anyone that has been, but these kinds of statements happen all the time as a way to create a justification for the abuse inflicted on someone. It's not only abusers that do this, but people that are friends and acquaintances of both the abuser and abused.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#304

Post by gd1 »

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…

"Let them eat iPad"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2011/03/11/ny-feds...

Re: “People simply empty out”

#305

Post by ececconi »

You know, I don't see the career ascent about forgetting my own life. I see it as a way I can do good for this world. If I have people under my span of control, I can impart what I believe to be good in this world as a part of my leadership and management style.

I also want to be a motivational speaker when I 'grow up'. I came from humble beginnings. Some people's talks have really changed my life. In order to give those talks and be invited to speak, yes you have to ascend the established social order.

Am I wasting my life by working a lot? No. The things I work so hard for have real effects in this world. My mom has been working for over 40 years of her life. If I do things right, she'll be able to retire eventually. Do I work harder than other people do for the same, or less, compensation? I'm sure I do. But you know what, you have to make the best of the situation you're in.

I was recently invited to give my first talk. Here is the abridged executive summary: http://www.evernote.com/shard/s34/sh/9a92bf45-27e1-4470-be7e...

Re: “People simply empty out”

#306

Post by GFischer »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #289

IS even the question of leading a meaningful fulfilling life uniquely modern? How many cavemen or Egyptians or middle age serfs were running around saying "Boy I need more experiences to give my life meaning"? Maybe we have amazing lives and because we are human beings we are always looking for more.

"How many cavemen or Egyptians or middle age serfs were running around saying "Boy I need more experiences to give my life meaning"?"

They did. We don't have recordings on the cavemen, but in the Middle Ages you had people becoming monks, joining the Crusades, etc..

Re: “People simply empty out”

#307

Post by madaxe »

sz4kerto wrote: post #245
lotsofcows wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently it's acceptable to downvote without providing an argument. It's anonymous and requires no thought so it's very popular.

No, just there are people who understand why physical abuse and violence is not tolerable in _any_ situation, especially not against the weak. People who equate physical and verbal violence (by verbal violence I mean anything not physical) either have no idea what they're talking about or they're mentally ill.

Yes, and those people are the same folks who give women who are violent or abusive to men a free pass, as women can't be violent against men as men are so much stronger than women.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#308

Post by madaxe »

king_jester wrote: post #303
mkrecny wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you do agree with physical abuse. According to you, if your partner says something that upsets you, its totally OK to hit them. That is domestic abuse 101. That's absurd. Where did I say "if your partner says something that upsets you, it's totally OK to hit them"? I stated that: a) Bukowski's fiance probably hurt Bukowski (by stating that she cheats on him) more than he did by kicking her. b) It didn't seem lik…

> a) Bukowski's fiance probably hurt Bukowski (by stating that she cheats on him) more than he did by kicking her. 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. I don't know if you yourself has been in an abuse relationship or know…

You don't think that screwing around and then rubbing it in your partner's face is abuse?

Re: “People simply empty out”

#309

Post by GFischer »

LekkoscPiwa wrote: post #246

Interesting fact: 100usd in 1969 bought you nearly 3 ounces of gold. Price of gold today is 1350usd. Today's value of 100usd in 1969 would be about $4k. Not bad at all.

100 USD from 1969 would be equivalent to 636 USD today. So it would have been a great buy, but you have to take inflation into account.

Also, 100 USD from 1969 invested in the stock market (S&P 500) in 1969 would have given you 5403 USD from 2013 today, so buying those ounces wouldn't even have been the best investment.

Almost any solid investment over 50 years would give absurd returns.

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Edit: source for the S&P quote:

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/market_cagr.htm

Re: “People simply empty out”

#310

Post by rwallace »

enraged_camel wrote: post #111
enoch_r wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The cost of healthcare alone makes subsistence living impossible. What? It's perfectly possible to receive "subsistence healthcare" in today's society--just never go to the doctor or take any medicine. If you want to splurge, do some research online, and you'll gain knowledge leagues ahead of "subsistence" medicine.

I think you grossly misunderstood what I said. What I meant by "subsistence living" is working enough to cover the essentials, and no more. These essentials include food, water, shelter, and healthcare. The problem is the last one: it is astronomically expensive, which means that subsistence living still means working a ridiculous amount of hours.

Okay, but if you define the essentials that way, not one person who ever lived before the mid-twentieth century or thereabouts was ever able to obtain the essentials for any price. (The standard of healthcare you get today by never seeing a doctor in your entire life, just taking into account the protection you get from other people having been vaccinated against the deadliest infectious diseases, is better than anything that used to be available to kings and presidents.)

So if you want a better standard of living than Caesar or Charlemagne or Washington could have dreamed of, you have to work, yes. Is that shocking or unreasonable? I doubt the men I just named would have thought so.

Post reply on HN