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

Please Jobhop as much as Possible

angryasian.posterous.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#51

Post by roc »

gaius wrote: post #41
philk wrote: post #34

It's important to remember that Calacanis and Suster are writing advice from a selfish standpoint. Of course they want the people they hire to keep working for their companies no matter how shit the conditions are. If I were them I'd be writing about how the best way to get ahead was to come and work for me for free. It doesn't mean it's actually useful advice for someone who wants to get ahead.

Yeah, Calcanis had this weird turn of phrase in his original blog entry "set his career back 5 years to get his salary ahead by 3 years". WTF does that even mean?

It means Calcanis is thinking in terms of seniority and "years of service" being the keys to career advancement and compensation. The decade's-old management mindset that gives us things like SLOC and butt-in-seat quotas.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#52

Post by gaius »

jdminhbg wrote: post #39
pw0ncakes wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interest rates were high because there was an inflation problem in the 1970s. Also, house prices then would be considered a bargain by today's standards-- you could buy a middle-class house in Seattle or San Francisco for what would be about $200-250k today. I am certainly not saying that the 1960s and '70s were a perfect era. They were far from that. What I'm saying is that it wasn't nearly as difficult to advance.…

"Interest rates were high because there was an inflation problem in the 1970s." Of course they were, that's the point. That was the crappy economic situation that generation lived under; it was worse than today's, at least from a home-buying perspective. And again, you still don't have any actual evidence for your other idyllic depictions.

Well, yes and no. Inflation eroded their debts too remember. That's why there are so many Boomers living in nice houses that their kids could never afford at the same age.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#53

Post by cousin_it »

driekken wrote: post #8
exit wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what makes it possible to be loyal to a country? a country is just a bureaucratic + economic entity you randomly get assigned to.

I agree with both you and davidw that loyalty towards a country is wrong from a formal point a view, but since humans are not entirely rational beings one cannot deny that the random entity you happen to get born into shapes a big part of who you are. Hence, the loyalty to the group of other people 'like you', whatever that means.

Then loyalty to the random people who happened to have the same parents as you is also irrational. Wait, this can't be right...

This whole discussion is off track. Terminal values can't be rational or irrational, they just are.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#54

Post by pw0ncakes »

gaius wrote: post #52
jdminhbg wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Interest rates were high because there was an inflation problem in the 1970s." Of course they were, that's the point. That was the crappy economic situation that generation lived under; it was worse than today's, at least from a home-buying perspective. And again, you still don't have any actual evidence for your other idyllic depictions.

Well, yes and no. Inflation eroded their debts too remember. That's why there are so many Boomers living in nice houses that their kids could never afford at the same age.

Right. Inflation is far less vicious than house-price inflation for most people.

It's bizarre that so many people have adopted the "rising house prices = good" mentality, since housing is something on which people naturally have a short position (a need). Renters are obviously short housing, single-home owners are theoretically neutral (they own housing equal to their need) but actually short as well, since they're paying real estate costs every time they shop. So 90+% of us are actually in a short position with regard to housing; our lives get better if real estate becomes cheaper. The important, high-value land is held by a few.

This is why it's odd to hear people rage against inflation or rising gas prices but cheer on housing bubbles. They have the perception that rising energy prices benefit "other people" but that they somehow are making money when real estate gets expensive-- and unless they own a lot of it, this isn't true.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#55

Post by Kilimanjaro »

roc wrote: post #50
Kilimanjaro wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Surely the answer isn't the guy who was super productive for a year and then moved on." I've been that guy for my whole life, and not a single employee has tried to convince me to stay with better perks, none. A couple of times I stayed and got not even enough to compensate for inflation, so fuck em, I moved on. If you want better perks, every year you have to move on. ps. But you have to be good, and I mean real go…

> "I've been that guy for my whole life, and not a single [employer] has tried to convince me to stay with better perks, none." Immaterial. You never take the counter-offer. An employer who refuses to reward you until you're at the point of looking elsewhere is not worth remaining at. Further, you'll wind up on the short-list of problem employees and in the event that they do need to reduce headcount you will be disp…

Absolutely, I agree with you 100%.

It is not the counter-offer which counts, that in my book is too late. It is the end-of-year reward which should be AUTOMATICALLY adjusted per inflation plus at least a 5% increase if you overperformed. So I always expect a 10% incease WITHOUT asking for it, or else I'll move on.

On my side, I always overperform more than 10% so I deserve what I expect. The employer? not much, they don't care. They will never care. Their book forbids 10% increase for every employee.

Key point, not EVERY employee deserves 10% increase. Only overperformers. HR guys need to understand that and learn to differentiate and reward accordingly, which they don't. They are also collecting their winnings every month.

ps. I am not talking about food a la carte, or gym towels. I am talking about money and vacation time. Everything else is a welcomed addition to the perks.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#56

Post by brg »

pw0ncakes wrote: post #23

When older people complain about supposedly whiny, entitled, self-centered and disloyal young people, exactly one work comes to mind: Projection. We came of age while society fell apart. We're in our 20s and won't be able to own a house or have children until our mid-30s, due to the still-absurd housing costs, absent job security, and lack of a decent health care system. The Boomers were born into an affluent, forwar…

You are not making any sense, and seem to be too defensive. Where was "decent" healthcare system 40 years ago? Where was job security during the dust-bowl, depression, the beginnings of the industrial revolution?

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#57

Post by roc »

Kilimanjaro wrote: post #55
roc wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I've been that guy for my whole life, and not a single [employer] has tried to convince me to stay with better perks, none." Immaterial. You never take the counter-offer. An employer who refuses to reward you until you're at the point of looking elsewhere is not worth remaining at. Further, you'll wind up on the short-list of problem employees and in the event that they do need to reduce headcount you will be disp…

Absolutely, I agree with you 100%. It is not the counter-offer which counts, that in my book is too late. It is the end-of-year reward which should be AUTOMATICALLY adjusted per inflation plus at least a 5% increase if you overperformed. So I always expect a 10% incease WITHOUT asking for it, or else I'll move on. On my side, I always overperform more than 10% so I deserve what I expect. The employer? not much, they…

Ah, I misunderstood; I definitely agree.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#58

Post by [deleted] »

philk wrote: post #34

It's important to remember that Calacanis and Suster are writing advice from a selfish standpoint. Of course they want the people they hire to keep working for their companies no matter how shit the conditions are. If I were them I'd be writing about how the best way to get ahead was to come and work for me for free. It doesn't mean it's actually useful advice for someone who wants to get ahead.

[deleted]

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#59

Post by JanezStupar »

Alex63 wrote: post #45
gaius wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more relevant that the Boomers had 10 workers per retiree whereas we have 3 workers per retiree. The Boomers took the next two generations prosperity and used it all up themselves.

Sorry, I may be missing your point, but how do you blame the Boomers (of which I'm at the tail end) for this situation? Shouldn't you be blaming the "Greatest Generation" (parents of the Boomers) for setting up a system that depended on maintaining a high ratio of workers to retirees?

Well its the boomers that "didn't reproduce enough" (I'm not serious about this one).

However the boomers are the ones that deregulated the shit out of the world, bankrupted the pension funds, built houses and luxuries on credit (they didn't invest much into infrastructure). They are also underqualified and sitting on many positions from which they are screwing their children (that's at least how it works in my country), while simultaneously taking it out on us - for supposedly being lazy and incompetent - to create families and build homes.

While we stand on streets - well educated and eager to take on challenges, but we're unable to because boomers don't allow us the privilege. And I mean quite literally - don't just whip around mortgage rates. I don't know about USA - but I'm certain that it's a lot harder and costlier to start and run a business in a lot of the world nowadays than 40 years ago.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#60

Post by BrandonM »

pw0ncakes wrote: post #54
gaius wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yes and no. Inflation eroded their debts too remember. That's why there are so many Boomers living in nice houses that their kids could never afford at the same age.

Right. Inflation is far less vicious than house-price inflation for most people. It's bizarre that so many people have adopted the "rising house prices = good" mentality, since housing is something on which people naturally have a short position (a need). Renters are obviously short housing, single-home owners are theoretically neutral (they own housing equal to their need) but actually short as well, since they're p…

This is a very insightful comment. Did you read something that gave you this notion, or was it an insight that you had on your own?
Post reply on HN