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

Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

ludic.mataroa.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 482 posts

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#321

Post by lapcat »

Draiken wrote: post #307
lapcat wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 10x? Financial independence is normally at least 20x, more like 30x. You appear to be overlooking Social Security, which is a crucial source of income that all US workers pay into their entire careers. It's not just savings. > I won't dig into stats for the US because it's of no interest to me. Yet it's interesting enough to you to make baseless empirical claims about the US. > I know that for my country that's abs…

You seemingly care about this but also can't be bothered to bring any empirical evidence for any of your claims. Goes both ways. The US is not that different from everywhere else... we all live in the same capitalist hellhole last time I checked.

> You seemingly care about this but also can't be bothered to bring any empirical evidence for any of your claims. Goes both ways.

Which claims? That Social Security exists? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States... That Medicare exists? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States) That 10x savings is the recommendation? https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/retirement/how-much-do-i...

> The US is not that different from everywhere else

Says you, but you apparently aspire to live and work here, so it's different enough.

> we all live in the same capitalist hellhole last time I checked.

Have you checked North Korea?

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#322

Post by AlbertCory »

> Most managers have never had an independent thought on how to manage people effectively (hence the Agile parroting)

exactly. And if you want to decide whether you want to work at a company, you can look at the top managers and imagine if they ever have independent thoughts.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#323

Post by hotnfresh »

throw9away6 wrote: post #274
astrange wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 100% sure my Tylenol bottles have dosage charts on them, not only because it's so easy to fatally overdose on it but also because manufacturing it is extremely regulated and nobody cares what the manufacturers think about anything.

It’s there but not easy to find

They used to be easy to find, but some years back they redesigned seemingly all pill bottles to hide the instructions. It’s a frustration and makes me wish ill on whoever is behind it, every single time I need to use such a medicine.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#324

Post by lapcat »

Draiken wrote: post #316
lapcat wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 10x? Financial independence is normally at least 20x, more like 30x. You appear to be overlooking Social Security, which is a crucial source of income that all US workers pay into their entire careers. It's not just savings. > I won't dig into stats for the US because it's of no interest to me. Yet it's interesting enough to you to make baseless empirical claims about the US. > I know that for my country that's abs…

Since you're so adamant I had a quick search and it turns out I'm right. >43.09% of American adults had no retirement savings >23.15% of American adults had no (or negative) retirement savings even including the extended assets https://dqydj.com/average-retirement-savings/ Of course you can rely on some government assistance but arguing that's a good enough standard is a bit of a stretch.

> Since you're so adamant I had a quick search and it turns out I'm right.

No, you changed the subject. You said:

> You're telling me most retired Americans have more than hundreds of thousands of dollars in savings?

To which the answer is no, but you don't need a million dollars to retire.

Whereas your link is not about retired Americans, it's about UN-retired Americans: "Statistics are for households headed by adults aged 32-61 at the time of the survey".

I'm done with this conversation. Your games and lack of good faith interest are becoming very tedious to me.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#325

Post by sokoloff »

Draiken wrote: post #304
sokoloff wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living below your means (whatever that is) is a very good thing, not a bad thing. Being stuck on an expenses ~= income treadmill is what sucks.

Living below your means is separated from your standard of living. In a better world everyone should be able to live well without having to sacrifice as much. Somehow we've convinced ourselves that it's always the individual's fault when they have to live with a worse standard of living to maybe retire one day.

It’s the individual’s wise choice (not fault) when they do that, IMO.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#326

Post by lacrimacida »

booleandilemma wrote: post #311
ta988 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you say a salary above the median salary is not enough? This raises a big question of how is half the population in the country getting by.

I've been very confused about how people are getting by. If they're not in tech, and and they're not a member of the professional class (doctor, lawyer, etc), how are they doing it? Is everyone working two jobs and doing uber on top of that, or what? How much of a bubble am I in? I'm in tech and I feel like I'm barely making it.

Middle class has been and continues to being squished and crushed, things are getting worse and worse if you haven’t noticed. And it’s not just in the US, but also other western economies such as Germany, France, UK, etc.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#327

Post by konschubert »

rini17 wrote: post #305
konschubert wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respect that you probably have loved ones to take care of, and that what you are doing is probably a responsible choice. Don't hate the player, etc. But damn, if it isn't depressing to go to work every day and not caring about impact, just impression.

The endless search of The Meaning and the general futility of it with never ending doubts are depressing too.

Or you just do some work that you enjoy and don’t worry too much about meaning.

Thinking about how I look to my boss is not work that I enjoy.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#328

Post by hotnfresh »

achenet wrote: post #155
isthispermanent wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

David Graeber, the author of Debt, is a moron?

I'm personally a big fan of his books, but I've read on various internet sources that some people will accuse him of not being academically rigorous enough. I honestly don't have enough expertise or energy to really judge.

I’ve yet to see a comprehensive critique of either Debt or Bullshit Jobs that was both damning taken at face value, and demonstrated good reading comprehension.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#329

Post by lolinder »

Draiken wrote: post #218
skrebbel wrote: post #192

Blog posts like these are a staple on HN and I’m always mildly offended by them. It seems to me that there’s a class of programmer that will take an overpaid job at a terrible BigCo, spend their evenings writing ranty blog posts about how terrible it all is, culminating in the inevitable “I quit” article, only subsequently to accept a job at a different terrible BigCo. At no point does this article, or most articles…

If we lived in a world where money wasn't so important I would fully agree with you. But it is. I can't earn the same as you all can because I don't live in the US, but if I did I would grind all the leetcode (as insulting as I find them) for one single reason: I don't want to work forever. So I agree with some other comments here. No it's not really a choice. Choosing to earn less and hope for a lottery ticket win l…

> I can't earn the same as you all can because I don't live in the US, but if I did I would grind all the leetcode (as insulting as I find them) for one single reason: I don't want to work forever.

I work from home for a mid-sized company for I could probably retire even earlier if I were willing to enter the rat race, but I'd rather be there for my kids' childhoods than resurface from the grind just in time to send them off to college.

In other words, it's absolutely possible to choose to avoid it, and it doesn't even require much sacrifice.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#330

Post by argiopetech »

neogodless wrote: post #266
argiopetech wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not necessarily maximizing money, but maintaining lifestyle. It's extremely common for people to increase their standard of living as their means increase, and reducing that requires significant effort in some cases (e.g., people tend to buy as much house as they can afford, so any significant salary reduction could necessitate selling the house and uprooting your family). It's a minimal sacrifice in the face of…

Right. > extremely common for people to increase their standard of living That was a choice. But the opposite is "not a choice"? You choose to spend so much money that you are forced into work you may despise to support the spending choices you make, so there's no option to... not make those spending choices?

I'm unsure why you've quoted "not a choice", as I never said any such thing. I said it's difficult for many to decide to change their lifestyle to afford a less lucrative but more enjoyable job.

You've also got the cause and effect backward. You do the work you can be employed to do with the promise of (in your opinion, and relative to your skill and responsibility) competitive compensation. Years go by, you get used to living with that salary (plus yearly raises), and then you realize your job sucks. Now what do you do? Soldier on at BigCo1, switch companies to an effectively isomorphic position at BigCo2, or spend low 5 figures moving to and outfitting a new house for a 20% pay cut and a job you love? All three are choices, but #3 has the highest barrier to decision.

Post reply on HN