Support NeoGAF

[Darkmakaimura]

that news dude is a fucking smug cunt. don't fully agree with the guy from reddit but urgh.

His face is funny but that kid deserved every bit of it and even worse tbh.

 

[QSD]

That's how capitalism works. Why the hell would any business owner pay all his profits to employees? It's their risk and theyre management. And depending on the type of business, it can involve personal loans and his own money.

Employees have zero skin in the game because if the business fails, all they do is get severance pay and move to the next company that hires them. If you think of it, employees are no different than mercenaries working for the highest bidder and come and go when some other boss offers an extra $1000.

I think this is where one of the core problems lies with your thinking. If you treat employees fairly i.e. pay them good money (i.e. more than the least amount you can pay them) and generally view them as 'part of your team', a lot of them would not behave like mercenaries because they actually like you, have some kind of loyalty to you, the company and their colleagues. There is a complete dimension of human interaction and bonding you are missing because you are basically acting like a robot and solely focusing on money.
Sure, there will always be some people who feel no loyalty and act like mercenaries, working for the highest bidder always. Most people however value a positive, non-toxic work environment and will gladly let that count towards a decision to stay with a certain company.

 

[QSD]

Our management spends most if not all their time controlling what comes in and out of the plant. I get to go home and see my kids at a decent hour. Most of our management pull doubles to work off line maintenance or spend time calling suppliers to get chips so we can run cars.

We're a Japanese run company, so trust me our management earns their fucking money. They don't get stand around with their thumbs up their ass, they work. Who do you think gets on a line when we're short handed? Management. Hell the reason I'm at work today is because management (who is 80% Japanese mind you) was able to get parts in for us to run).
When I talk about loss I speck in terms of cars that could have been made in that time. I don't know how it works but when I started they told us down time results in $60,000 loss. I'm pretty sure that goes for every major automotive company.

As much as I would agree a robots would do much better. We have had robots shutdown and take hours to fix so idk what she was doing and if a robot could do it.

I forgot to answer to this, but just wanted to say that if this was the kind of management I was familiar with, I would have a lot less to complain about. I certainly respect it if a manager or someone in a leadership position leads by example.

Unfortunately my experiences have been much different. The higher-ups at the care provider I work for generally don't have much of a clue what goes on in the trenches and have never done the work they are currently managing. The policy proposals they come up with are beyond clueless and they seem completely superfluous to the actual functioning of the company.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I think this is where one of the core problems lies with your thinking. If you treat employees fairly i.e. pay them good money (i.e. more than the least amount you can pay them) and generally view them as 'part of your team', a lot of them would not behave like mercenaries because they actually like you, have some kind of loyalty to you, the company and their colleagues. There is a complete dimension of human interaction and bonding you are missing because you are basically acting like a robot and solely focusing on money.
Sure, there will always be some people who feel no loyalty and act like mercenaries, working for the highest bidder always. Most people however value a positive, non-toxic work environment and will gladly let that count towards a decision to stay with a certain company.

Tell that to the professor in the video making it sound like every $1 of profit is evil.

Companies pay people what they are worth and how much they can afford. That's why a Google guy can make $200,000 sitting at a slick desk coding SEO whatever and a bricklayer gets $40,000 sweating in the summer heat. Sounds fair to me. Dont like the pay? Then get a better job or negotiate for a higher wage. I got an extra $5000 when I got offered my current job and all I did was ask. They agreed so fast, I probably could had got $10,000 or $15,000 is I asked for more.

It's not hard getting a job that pays the country average of about $50k for US and Canada. My starting salary out of school was $40k and all I knew was how to use Lotus 123 and Wordperfect (ya, I didnt even use MS Office till I worked at a company). If someone is 40 and struggling to get a job that pays $25/hr, dont blame bosses or companies, blame yourself. And if they dont want to blame themselves, blame government for mandating $10/hr minimum wage instead of $30/hr.

It's their company and they'll pay what they want. Employees have zero skin in the game. That's the key reason why companies bank profits, especially small companies. Save for a rainy day. It's a one way street since when companies fail, no employees ever have to pay back. They just keep getting paid for doing a bad job.

So if people want one way streets of employees not having consequences and blaming management for bad results, then management can do the same and when it comes to profits they bank it because it's management's success.

Like anyone else promoting "fair pay" or "living wage", nobody can even define what that is. I already had this discussion about with Omega and he defined living wage as poverty line. Fine, poverty line is $14,000. State minimum wage already covers that (and more).

Your reco of paying more than the minimum is already done by probably 90%+ of jobs out there because only a small number of jobs are at or close to minimum wage. And if you are thinking a company should purposely pay an employee making $60000 to $80000 because they got money, that's your view, but like the "living wage" demand is a vague statement with no teeth because if that's your view how much should a company pay their employees more than they currently get?

 

[QSD]

Tell that to the professor in the video making it sound like every $1 of profit is evil.

Companies pay people what they are worth and how much they can afford. That's why a Google guy can make $200,000 sitting at a slick desk coding SEO whatever and a bricklayer gets $40,000 sweating in the summer heat. Sounds fair to me. Dont like the pay? Then get a better job or negotiate for a higher wage. I got an extra $5000 when I got offered my current job and all I did was ask. They agreed so fast, I probably could had got $10,000 or $15,000 is I asked for more.

It's not hard getting a job that pays the country average of about $50k for US and Canada. My starting salary out of school was $40k and all I knew was how to use Lotus 123 and Wordperfect (ya, I didnt even use MS Office till I worked at a company). If someone is 40 and struggling to get a job that pays $25/hr, dont blame bosses or companies, blame yourself. And if they dont want to blame themselves, blame government for mandating $10/hr minimum wage instead of $30/hr.

It's their company and they'll pay what they want. Employees have zero skin in the game. That's the key reason why companies bank profits, especially small companies. Save for a rainy day. It's a one way street since when companies fail, no employees ever have to pay back. They just keep getting paid for doing a bad job.

So if people want one way streets of employees not having consequences and blaming management for bad results, then management can do the same and when it comes to profits they bank it because it's management's success.

Like anyone else promoting "fair pay" or "living wage", nobody can even define what that is. I already had this discussion about with Omega and he defined living wage as poverty line. Fine, poverty line is $14,000. State minimum wage already covers that (and more).

This post is so symptomatic of the difference between you and me. I make a post literally telling you 'there is a complete dimension of human interaction and bonding you are missing because you are basically acting like a robot and solely focusing on money.' and you answer it with another post... focusing on money.
If you are monomaniacally obsessed with money, then it's no wonder you view your employees as mercenaries. That's called projection.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I forgot to answer to this, but just wanted to say that if this was the kind of management I was familiar with, I would have a lot less to complain about. I certainly respect it if a manager or someone in a leadership position leads by example.

Unfortunately my experiences have been much different. The higher-ups at the care provider I work for generally don't have much of a clue what goes on in the trenches and have never done the work they are currently managing. The policy proposals they come up with are beyond clueless and they seem completely superfluous to the actual functioning of the company.

If thats your experience, well you got shitty bosses with zero experience in your sector. Not all companies and bosses are bad or like that. Nor cheap either. Pretty hard to call my company cheap when SFAs (sr finance analysts) get paid around $100k and most of them arent even that great at it. Every boss I've had comes from similar companies so they know right away how it works. The company nuances and systems might be different, but the core job is the same.

Also, the point of a boss isn't to go into the trenches all the time to fix things or know exactly what person a or b does all the time. No boss knows everything an employee does. As I said in one of my old posts, if SAP goes down hard (SAP is a complex program doing a combo of financials and shipping etc..), my finance boss would have no clue how to get the program back up and running, nor would he know exactly what I do with SAP on a daily basis. He knows I analyze numbers from various programs, but he wouldnt know what I do with these programs.

Bosses might be able to dig in deep if they got experience doing it, but the purpose of a manager is to get their team doing what it's supposed to do, ensure the team gets along and help facilitate solving any issues they have - and that can mean exactly knowing what to do or helping find out who knows how to help.

 

[The Cockatrice]

Looks like more drama over there. The new subreddit that they set up to migrate from /r/antiwork has already been compromised by more communist agenda pushers, causing another fracture and more drama.

Links from this image can be found here and here

How fucking deep does the agenda pushing on reddit go exactly? Holy shit.

Unless the mods are from shitposting or holup or some other random nonpolitical funny nonwoke shit, most exeprienced/old mods on reddit are subhumans/trash that prolly think communism is great.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

This post is so symptomatic of the difference between you and me. I make a post literally telling you 'there is a complete dimension of human interaction and bonding you are missing because you are basically acting like a robot and solely focusing on money.' and you answer it with another post... focusing on money.
If you are monomaniacally obsessed with money, then it's no wonder you view your employees as mercenaries. That's called projection.

It's called being realistic. And when it comes to jobs (especially with people talking money and capitalism) in this thread, money is the key factor being discussed.

The problem is it sounds like you work for a crap company with crap bosses, so you got that anti-work attitude.

I can say the exact opposite. Every company I've worked at bosses are good, coworkers are even better, it pays well, even low end functions pay well (summer students were getting $20/hr here and all they had to do was help out with some excel and ppts, with zero expectations to work OT) and my hours have always been 9-5 aside from occasional OT or working from home on a laptop to finish something.

I'm in process of interviewing for a new job. Called up my old boss and she knows people at the company I applied for and she referred me as she knows the person I'm talking to. See? Not all bosses are bad.

 

[Diatribe1974]

If they don't want to work, let them not work. Don't give them any public assistance though. They'll figure out what's important when they start to get hungry.

 

[jason10mm]

This post is so symptomatic of the difference between you and me. I make a post literally telling you 'there is a complete dimension of human interaction and bonding you are missing because you are basically acting like a robot and solely focusing on money.' and you answer it with another post... focusing on money.
If you are monomaniacally obsessed with money, then it's no wonder you view your employees as mercenaries. That's called projection.

He is right though. The type of thing you are espousing, developing personal relationships and fostering company loyalty through higher pay and benefits what presumably return the investment through increased productivity, fewer HR issues, less turn over, and perhaps a willingness to work above and beyond during hard times, really only exists in a rather narrow range of companies that are small enough and specialized enough for this sort of approach to lead to company success. A massive factory structure like amazon has tens of thousands of employees and can't do it. A little ice cream shop that only has a married couple minding the store in the winter and hires high school kids for the summer has no incentive to do it either and probably not the margins unless their little summer ecosystem demands increased wages all around (and resulting increased pricing of ice cream which washes out the wage increase for those same workers).

So on the grand level, all of these little personal touches are washed out by the MILLIONS of jobs in competing industries, leading to ruthless wage levels for skill sets. This is why that nonsense that women earn 80% of men is so silly. If it were true, EVERY JOB would be filled by a woman because saving 20% on labor is a MASSIVE win for virtually every industry except sports and this would be preached to the high heavens by every corp economist guru on the planet. Instead, women provide less labor compared to men thus ON AVERAGE, they earn a bit less because they work a bit less.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

He is right though. The type of thing you are espousing, developing personal relationships and fostering company loyalty through higher pay and benefits what presumably return the investment through increased productivity, fewer HR issues, less turn over, and perhaps a willingness to work above and beyond during hard times, really only exists in a rather narrow range of companies that are small enough and specialized enough for this sort of approach to lead to company success. A massive factory structure like amazon has tens of thousands of employees and can't do it. A little ice cream shop that only has a married couple minding the store in the winter and hires high school kids for the summer has no incentive to do it either and probably not the margins unless their little summer ecosystem demands increased wages all around (and resulting increased pricing of ice cream which washes out the wage increase for those same workers).

So on the grand level, all of these little personal touches are washed out by the MILLIONS of jobs in competing industries, leading to ruthless wage levels for skill sets. This is why that nonsense that women earn 80% of men is so silly. If it were true, EVERY JOB would be filled by a woman because saving 20% on labor is a MASSIVE win for virtually every industry except sports and this would be preached to the high heavens by every corp economist guru on the planet. Instead, women provide less labor compared to men thus ON AVERAGE, they earn a bit less because they work a bit less.

Exactly.

Never mind all jobs being filled by woman as much as possible to save a buck.

All jobs being filled first by new grads who will take $40,000, and the most ruthless bosses with whips who dont care if they all quit in the first month so a rotating ship of new cheap grads comes in.

No companies do that.

As a whole, the majority of companies will pay a competitive wage (for that job and sector) and do it's best to keep employees because no company wants a revolving door of employees. And to prevent that, you pay them decently and treat them well so they dont leave. Now, you might have some scummy Activision sex abuse going on at companies that pisses everyone off, but I'd say just about every job I've had (even going back to high school PT jobs) bosses and coworkers have been fine. Some better than others, but let's not pretend here that every company and boss is Scrooge looking to kick you out the door to save $5000.

 

[QSD]

It's called being realistic. And when it comes to jobs (especially with people talking money and capitalism) in this thread, money is the key factor being discussed.

The problem is it sounds like you work for a crap company with crap bosses, so you got that anti-work attitude.

I can say the exact opposite. Every company I've worked at bosses are good, coworkers are even better, it pays well, even low end functions pay well (summer students were getting $20/hr here and all they had to do was help out with some excel and ppts, with zero expectations to work OT) and my hours have always been 9-5 aside from occasional OT or working from home on a laptop to finish something.

I'm in process of interviewing for a new job. Called up my old boss and she knows people at the company I applied for and she referred me as she knows the person I'm talking to. See? Not all bosses are bad.

I mean, there's just no point talking if we are talking past one another. If you only want to talk about money, not working conditions, not employer-employee relations, than we're done talking. The constant self aggrandizement is extremely off putting as well. I work for a company with shit management, but I like my colleagues and the actual work I do.

He is right though. The type of thing you are espousing, developing personal relationships and fostering company loyalty through higher pay and benefits what presumably return the investment through increased productivity, fewer HR issues, less turn over, and perhaps a willingness to work above and beyond during hard times, really only exists in a rather narrow range of companies that are small enough and specialized enough for this sort of approach to lead to company success. A massive factory structure like amazon has tens of thousands of employees and can't do it.

I'd say that if the scale of a company is thus that personal relations no longer matter, the company is just too big to offer a healthy non-toxic work environment where you are treated like a human being, not a cog in a machine.

A little ice cream shop that only has a married couple minding the store in the winter and hires high school kids for the summer has no incentive to do it either and probably not the margins unless their little summer ecosystem demands increased wages all around (and resulting increased pricing of ice cream which washes out the wage increase for those same workers).

I don't understand why positive interpersonal relationships wouldn't matter here. If the married couple fosters a good relationship with the kids working for them, they will no doubt be more conscientious in minding the store.

So on the grand level, all of these little personal touches are washed out by the MILLIONS of jobs in competing industries, leading to ruthless wage levels for skill sets. I

...which is why capitalism sucks, it completely does away with the human level of analysis in an ever accelerating pursuit of MOAR PROFITSSS
there is no value system other than money, which is no way to organize a society.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I mean, there's just no point talking if we are talking past one another. If you only want to talk about money, not working conditions, not employer-employee relations, than we're done talking. The constant self aggrandizement is extremely off putting as well. I work for a company with shit management, but I like my colleagues and the actual work I do.


I'd say that if the scale of a company is thus that personal relations no longer matter, the company is just too big to offer a healthy non-toxic work environment where you are treated like a human being, not a cog in a machine.


I don't understand why positive interpersonal relationships wouldn't matter here. If the married couple fosters a good relationship with the kids working for them, they will no doubt be more conscientious in minding the store.

...which is why capitalism sucks, it completely does away with the human level of analysis in an ever accelerating pursuit of MOAR PROFITSSS
there is no value system other than money, which is no way to organize a society.

I never said it's only about money. Who wants to work at a place with crap bosses and coworkers?

But since people here have been talking wages, poverty lines, the video with professor talking profits and capitalism is a very money/profit focused term, then we'll talk money.

As I said before, your view on corporate life is biased due to bad bosses. And that's something on you. If you want to stick around and complain about bosses, that's your call. You can also leave and find another job.

I can counter and say bosses I've had going back to high school have been pretty good. I speak to many of them still, one I went to his wedding, and I always use some for job references which they always say yes.

I dont really care if you want to quit discussing because I'm not the one miserable with bad bosses and complains about people should be paid more than they are worth.

 

[jason10mm]

I'd say that if the scale of a company is thus that personal relations no longer matter, the company is just too big to offer a healthy non-toxic work environment where you are treated like a human being, not a cog in a machine.

Welcome to the modern age. It's been like this since pharaohs were building pyramids.

I don't understand why positive interpersonal relationships wouldn't matter here. If the married couple fosters a good relationship with the kids working for them, they will no doubt be more conscientious in minding the store.

The ice cream store CAN'T overpay, their margins are just too thin. You ever work a summer job? It's a total crap shoot who you can get to work, it's only a few months, and the time is usually when you make all the money you can to live off for the rest of the year. Creating a warm cuddly working environment is nice but it is a distant priority to getting product through the door so you can pay your house mortgage.

...which is why capitalism sucks, it completely does away with the human level of analysis in an ever accelerating pursuit of MOAR PROFITSSS
there is no value system other than money, which is no way to organize a society.

Well, you are welcome to head out into the Alaskan wilderness and go at it alone or with a small group of comrades, making all of your own tools, harvesting all of your own food, and being internally self sufficient.

Make a show of it to sell to NatGeo and you might even earn a few bucks

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Welcome to the modern age. It's been like this since pharaohs were building pyramids.

The ice cream store CAN'T overpay, their margins are just too thin. You ever work a summer job? It's a total crap shoot who you can get to work, it's only a few months, and the time is usually when you make all the money you can to live off for the rest of the year. Creating a warm cuddly working environment is nice but it is a distant priority to getting product through the door so you can pay your house mortgage.

Well, you are welcome to head out into the Alaskan wilderness and go at it alone or with a small group of comrades, making all of your own tools, harvesting all of your own food, and being internally self sufficient.

Make a show of it to sell to NatGeo and you might even earn a few bucks

The thing too is QSD is someone who likes chummy workplaces where everyone acts like a family (hence bringing up married couples with kids). I do too. I like fun coworkers and bosses as well. But I can totally understand a place that ca be more cold. You just got to adjust. I know my job working by myself on a production line in summer heat was the most anti-social job I had. I basically only spoke to people during breaks and lunch and the boss was a hothead half the time when he'd show up once per day checking the shop floor whats going on. Who the hell cares.

But not everyone is even like that. Some people just want to show up to work, do what they need to do and go home. The less they interact with coworkers the better. Not chatty, doesn't want to go out to lunch with people and never shows up for after work pubbing (even if the company pays for it).

 

[InfiniteCombo]

The thing too is QSD is someone who likes chummy workplaces where everyone acts like a family (hence bringing up married couples with kids). I do too. I like fun coworkers and bosses as well. But I can totally understand a place that ca be more cold. You just got to adjust. I know my job working by myself on a production line in summer heat was the most anti-social job I had. I basically only spoke to people during breaks and lunch and the boss was a hothead half the time. Who the hell cares.

But not everyone is even like that. Some people just want to show up to work, do what they need to do and go home. The less they interact with coworkers the better. Not chatty, doesn't want to go out to lunch with people and never shows up for after work pubbing (even if the company pays for it).

As far as the overall conversation of the thread, I'm obviously very much on the same team that you and J jason10mm are on.

As much as I disagree with QSD on everything else, on the particular point of humanity at work I do think that he brings up something reasonable. Yes, the reality of the situation is that wages, climbing the ladder, and cutthroat competition rule the day in the corporate world. But that's at the MACRO level. At a micro level, there's still room to foster the things that QSD is talking about: treating people like humans. You can work in a large company where a CEO and VPs don't personally care about you (nor should they). But within that company, managers of small teams (say, anywhere between 2-20 employees) can still do a lot to foster camaraderie, collaboration, bonding, and grow all the "human" elements in the team. Because it IS true that a happy employee is a more efficient and effective employee.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

As far as the overall conversation of the thread, I'm obviously very much on the same team that you and J jason10mm are on.

As much as I disagree with QSD on everything else, on the particular point of humanity at work I do think that he brings up something reasonable. Yes, the reality of the situation is that wages, climbing the ladder, and cutthroat competition rule the day in the corporate world. But that's at the MACRO level. At a micro level, there's still room to foster the things that QSD is talking about: treating people like humans. You can work in a large company where a CEO and VPs don't personally care about you (nor should they). But within that company, managers of small teams (say, anywhere between 2-20 employees) can still do a lot to foster camaraderie, collaboration, bonding, and grow all the "human" elements in the team. Because it IS true that a happy employee is a more efficient and effective employee.

Agreed.

I'll agree with QSD about the part about not being treated like crap at work. Who wants to drilled into the dirt by managers or work in backstabbing offices? I don't.

But for the money part (which is the main topic discussed lately, especially with that professor video), I hold to what I've said about companies making profit and paying what they pay. You can tell government doesn't even support higher pay as poverty line thresholds and minimum wages are low.

 

[Decontamination Silo]

Shame about work reform sub. Is it true that jannies do it for free?

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

I just posted it since Omega said people shouldnt be paid under the poverty line. And the poverty line is $14,000 ($7/hr). Every state pays more than this. So it solves it.

As for any country's min wage and poverty lines they set, that's their call. If you think their $14,000/yr poverty line is bad, what do you think it should be?

Mmmm, I doubt poverty line is fixed for all states. But if it is that is a surprise. I do know that in NY garbage truck drivers can make six figures, and I doubt that puts them in the wealthy category.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Mmmm, I doubt poverty line is fixed for all states. But if it is that is a surprise. I do know that in NY garbage truck drivers can make six figures, and I doubt that puts them in the wealthy category.

Not sure about other states. I did a quick google. I dont know if this is accurate but NY State is $24,000 (which is $12/hr). The minimum wage according to google is $13-15/hr depending which city you live in (if I interpreted an article correctly). $13-15/hr is similar to $26,000 - $30,000 per year. So those are above the $24,000.

I'm not saying living at minimum wage or poverty lines is great or anything. Just saying poverty level numbers are really low, similar to a state's min wage. Those two numbers seem to be really lose to each other set by gov.

 

[Ragnarok]

who even pays minimum wage anymore? here the minimum wage is $7 and fast food joints have billboards up saying they’ll start you at $14/hr. Warehouse work starts at 18/hr with full benefits. I believe any sort of minimum wage job these days is meant for slackers who are just trying to not get kicked out of their parent’s basements.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

who even pays minimum wage anymore? here the minimum wage is $7 and fast food joints have billboards up saying they’ll start you at $14/hr. Warehouse work starts at 18/hr with full benefits. I believe any sort of minimum wage job these days is meant for slackers who are just trying to not get kicked out of their parent’s basements.

The image portrayed by low level service workers is they all get paid at or close to minimum wage. And restaurant workers in the same boat as hourly wage get hardly any tips because every place has cheap customers.

The whoa is me lowest common denominator image.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

I'm not saying living at minimum wage or poverty lines is great or anything.

As someone who previously lived at the poverty line, I can tell you, it is NOT great

But also, the fact that is not great is in itself a huge motivator to work hard and rise far away from the poverty line. And I'm gonna make a controversial statement: not everyone is willing (or even able) to rise above the poverty line. We aren't a unicorn utopian world where everyone sings Kumbaya under a rainbow -- differences DO exist between people in terms of motivation, ability, etc. It's the fucking hard reality of life, and trying to force equality across the board is a fool's errand.

But for capable and motivated people, being at/below the poverty line is supposed to be a transient state; it's not meant to be permanent. And I do very much agree with you and especially with J jason10mm that here in the US we have enough tools to climb out of poverty situations.

So those saying that McDonald's or Starbucks or Walmart employees don't get paid enough... Not only is it driven by the market, but the relatively low pay is supposed to make anyone go, "wait a minute, this sucks; I don't want this as a permanent career." As in, it's only meant to be a stepping stone to greater things. And a lot of people use those jobs in that manner! But the thing is, it WILL be a career for some people, due to lack of motivation or lack of capability. And that's COMPLETELY fine. It should be; I'd rather have humans doing those jobs, than machines. (Who the fuck knows what's gonna happen when machines and AI start taking over all of those low skill jobs; but that's a different conversation for a different day).

Anytime the government forces a monetary/financial policy, it ends up in a bad situation. We have an almost infinite number of examples from the 20th century of the government trying to force financial planning at a mass scale. And EVERY time, it has been a catastrophic failure.

 

[QSD]

The image portrayed by low level service workers is they all get paid at or close to minimum wage. And restaurant workers in the same boat as hourly wage get hardly any tips because every place has cheap customers.

The whoa is me lowest common denominator image.

ok so I'll get back to the serious stuff later but you made me laugh streets bro

It's "woe is me" but your equestrian version sure is funny

 

[InfiniteCombo]

Oh, another thing: as someone who has lived at the poverty line in my original home country AND in the United States, I can tell you that being poor in the United States is fucking LUXURY compared to being poor in my home country (I won't speak for all 3rd world countries in case people come at me...).

The problem with a lot of these anti work and others of their kind is that they lack perspective.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

ok so I'll get back to the serious stuff later but you made me laugh streets bro

It's "woe is me" but your equestrian version sure is funny

Ah. Thanks for being forum spell checker. Arguably the first thing you've done right in life. lol

 

[QSD]

Ah. Thanks for being forum spell checker. Arguably the first thing you've done right in life. lol

jeez man, what's with the personal shade? I make a lighthearted joke, you give me this...?

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Oh, another thing: as someone who has lived at the poverty line in my original home country AND in the United States, I can tell you that being poor in the United States is fucking LUXURY compared to being poor in my home country (I won't speak for all 3rd world countries in case people come at me...).

The problem with a lot of these anti work and others of their kind is that they lack perspective.

Totally.

And that comes down to entitlement. They see what people have and the first thing they want is what Bob down the street has. Well, if you want what he has, go get a job, make enough money and buy it yourself. He did.

Similar to milleneals who might have a decent starting job. But they look back and always bring up "Well, how come I can't get a house like my parents did in 1982 for $120,000?"

Well, too bad. It's a different time. Wages go up, prices go up, interest and loan rates are rock bottom. Some things go up in price more than others, while something like a 2L bottle of Pepsi I can still buy on sale for 99 cents like it's 1999.

Places like Canada and many European countries is even easier because something like healthcare is covered. So you can literally never work in your life even making $1 but still get hospital visits and surgery for free.

Dont get me wrong, I'm all for universal healthcare (even though I almost never get sick and need a doctor's visit), but there's a lot of existing services too that help bail out people with no money. Yet, instead of being grateful for some free stuff unlike other countries (like you said) where you get shit all, they criticize and want more so they can play catch up to other people higher on the ladder while not putting in the time or skills like Bob a rung higher.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

Similar to milleneals who might have a decent starting job. But they look back and always bring up "Well, how come I can't get a house like my parents did in 1982 for $120,000?"

Yup, because of a piss-poor understanding of basic economics. (I blame the educational system for that.) Just the same way a lot of people have a very poor understanding of civics and don't know how our government -- at both the federal and state levels -- is even supposed to work. And this lack of understanding leads to a lot of nonsense, some of which we see in this very thread.

One thing I would love is the return of prominence of trade/vocational schools. The focus on 4-year universities and useless degrees is killing us.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

As someone who previously lived at the poverty line, I can tell you, it is NOT great

But also, the fact that is not great is in itself a huge motivator to work hard and rise far away from the poverty line. And I'm gonna make a controversial statement: not everyone is willing (or even able) to rise above the poverty line. We aren't a unicorn utopian world where everyone sings Kumbaya under a rainbow -- differences DO exist between people in terms of motivation, ability, etc. It's the fucking hard reality of life, and trying to force equality across the board is a fool's errand.

But for capable and motivated people, being at/below the poverty line is supposed to be a transient state; it's not meant to be permanent. And I do very much agree with you and especially with J jason10mm that here in the US we have enough tools to climb out of poverty situations.

So those saying that McDonald's or Starbucks or Walmart employees don't get paid enough... Not only is it driven by the market, but the relatively low pay is supposed to make anyone go, "wait a minute, this sucks; I don't want this as a permanent career." As in, it's only meant to be a stepping stone to greater things. And a lot of people use those jobs in that manner! But the thing is, it WILL be a career for some people, due to lack of motivation or lack of capability. And that's COMPLETELY fine. It should be; I'd rather have humans doing those jobs, than machines. (Who the fuck knows what's gonna happen when machines and AI start taking over all of those low skill jobs; but that's a different conversation for a different day).

Anytime the government forces a monetary/financial policy, it ends up in a bad situation. We have an almost infinite number of examples from the 20th century of the government trying to force financial planning at a mass scale. And EVERY time, it has been a catastrophic failure.

For sure. I worked at my share of shitty summer jobs for some pocket money. I didnt even have to do it because I know my parents wouldnt really care if I stayed home even though they would bug me to go get a summer job. But I did it to get some experience and there's only so much sitting around all summer you can do before being bored to hell.

But looking at those jobs, you got to have some bad skills or a bad resume or simply lack ambition to do more than bagging nuts and putting them into cardboard boxes. One job was working at a food wholesaler so we'd get big bulk boxes of ingredients or cookies or whetaver and then repackaged it into smaller units and sell those to stores and hotels. And every once in a while I drive the forklift.

If someone is going to work here for 10 years that's on them.

To get out of that hole (unless they love doing it), you either change skills and job or you beg or wait for the company or government to boost wages out of the blue.

Now if you cant, then that's on them. Expecting a company to just arbitrarily boost you up to $15 or 20/hr (back then min wage was like $6 here) to be nice guys is asking a lot. Especially from this kind of business which was so small the warehouse was 2 people. A shipping/warehouse manager and the warehouse guy on a forklift 90% of the time. Cant squeeze money out of a rock.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

One thing I would love is the return of prominence of trade/vocational schools. The focus on 4-year universities and useless degrees is killing us.

I agree, but that's a tough slog as the trend the past 20 or 30 years is white collar academia or tech jobs.

But you can make good money doing trades if you got a steady stream of work. My furnace went out a few years ago. I have no idea how to fix it. Called a guy over and he said the pilot light was out. He fixed it with a new one and charged me I think $180. Took the guy like 15 minutes.

Tradesmen who have a good business going probably laugh at guys like me who dont know how to fix shit. But hey if it works and can make good money, that's ok. That keeps the economy going and I'm never going to learn how to fix a furnace ever.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

I agree, but that's a tough slog as the trend the past 20 or 30 years is white collar academia or tech jobs.

I agree with you, and I'm starting to get well beyond my realm of knowledge here -- but to me, it seems much more beneficial to society as a whole if someone gets a plumbing or electrical certificate, as opposed to some sort of useless college degree.

Because when my kitchen sink spontaneously explodes (), I would feel much more confident calling a certified plumber than some inner city hipster asshole with an English literature or Japanese medieval history degree.

 

[Alebrije]

Oh, another thing: as someone who has lived at the poverty line in my original home country AND in the United States, I can tell you that being poor in the United States is fucking LUXURY compared to being poor in my home country (I won't speak for all 3rd world countries in case people come at me...).

The problem with a lot of these anti work and others of their kind is that they lack perspective.

Yep. being poor in the U.S. lets you eat and have a roof. The economy is on another level, that is why middle clase in the U.S. would be Rich people in Mexico.

And that is why a person can live fine walking dogs as a job while in Mexico this would be an activity for extra cash.

Think this is good and bad at the same time since lets a lot of people live fine but the problem is that a part of that people gets old doing the same "basic" job like the guy interviewed and they expect more from society because think his role is as important as a nurse or a police officer, etc.

On all societies are people that has lack of learning , schools are not for them , this people is not lazy but their IQ is not enought to.get a degree so is great tha in the U.S. that people.can live fine or at least better than most of countries and that is good...But also there a lazy people that want the same car than the guy that worked for it. Think this is the main problem in the U.S. lazy people with a computer and internet bitching about how rude is the system while doing a litte effort to improve themselves.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I agree with you, and I'm starting to get well beyond my realm of knowledge here -- but to me, it seems much more beneficial to society as a whole if someone gets a plumbing or electrical certificate, as opposed to some sort of useless college degree.

Because when my kitchen sink spontaneously explodes (), I would feel much more confident calling a certified plumber than some inner city hipster asshole with an English literature or Japanese medieval history degree.

Agreed.

The thing about the college and university degrees that people pigeon hole as floaty and hard to find jobs, someone who wants to stick to a white collar job doesn't even have to do hardcore science and engineering kinds of paths. Those are tough. I couldnt handle them. Whatever bridge I design will collapse an hour later. I'm no med student either. Probably wouldnt qualify for med school.

Do a business program like me or some kind of other in between program that has a mix of some numbers and verbal. There's so many roles that pay well in business it's absurd. All the textbook shit you read is like 5% of what's out there. You dont even have to focus on numbers. You can focus on marketing communications or PR which is going to be more style to an arts programs where people have good writing skills. Companies also hire psych or sociology students too.... often for marketing. So the jobs are out there. Many of the marketing managers at work have an arts degree not a business one. But hey, if they dont want to work for a business then you just cut off a ton of jobs opportunities.

 

[jason10mm]

The problem with college these days is that they are TOO accessible. The massive influx of students with nigh infinite loans has bloated colleges into the mess they are today. Used to be colleges were where already well off kids were parked to get a well-rounded education to make them intersting at cocktail parties, learn a specific white collar skill so they could help run daddies business, and hopefully darling Jill meets some nice boy at the right sorority/frat mixer.

Real skills were learned at trade schools or in apprenticeship gigs, or on the job.

But now anyone can get into college since academic scholarships are no longer the coveted prize for the less fortunate and colleges went from finishing schools for the elites to money sucks for the masses. A college degree has almost no inherent value now since the education behind it can vary so widely. Can you write coherently? Can you do basic calculus? Are you familiar with the bedrock classics of society so you can participate in a shared culture? Can you manage your time, handle challenging assignments under pressure, work in groups, train yourself to absorb new info quickly and accurately? None of these things are guaranteed now with a diploma.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The problem with college these days is that they are TOO accessible. The massive influx of students with nigh infinite loans has bloated colleges into the mess they are today. Used to be colleges were where already well off kids were parked to get a well-rounded education to make them intersting at cocktail parties, learn a specific white collar skill so they could help run daddies business, and hopefully darling Jill meets some nice boy at the right sorority/frat mixer.

Real skills were learned at trade schools or in apprenticeship gigs, or on the job.

But now anyone can get into college since academic scholarships are no longer the coveted prize for the less fortunate and colleges went from finishing schools for the elites to money sucks for the masses. A college degree has almost no inherent value now since the education behind it can vary so widely. Can you write coherently? Can you do basic calculus? Are you familiar with the bedrock classics of society so you can participate in a shared culture? Can you manage your time, handle challenging assignments under pressure, work in groups, train yourself to absorb new info quickly and accurately? None of these things are guaranteed now with a diploma.

And also with the million online programs from "University of ABC", who knows what kind of education you get from this. Or if HR gives a shit about it. I don't even know if they even have admissions tests or mandatory requirements. Or if anyone who applies online and pays $5000 gets in no matter what. That can be a lot of wasted time and money if no company sees value in it.

 

[QSD]

Welcome to the modern age. It's been like this since pharaohs were building pyramids.

An excellent example to make my point for me, since that's one of the earliest examples of organized mass slave labour

The ice cream store CAN'T overpay, their margins are just too thin. You ever work a summer job? It's a total crap shoot who you can get to work, it's only a few months, and the time is usually when you make all the money you can to live off for the rest of the year. Creating a warm cuddly working environment is nice but it is a distant priority to getting product through the door so you can pay your house mortgage.

yeah sure plenty of summer jobs, but mostly for companies/employers that operate throughout the year (one I remember I quite vividly is sealing packs of school books for a book distributer), mostly I just worked in supermarkets and the like. The point I was making is that even a seasonal ice cream bizz can benefit if they foster decent work relations. Might be tough if you're employing high school students who don't really understand the meaning of responsibility, but that's also a choice.

Well, you are welcome to head out into the Alaskan wilderness and go at it alone or with a small group of comrades, making all of your own tools, harvesting all of your own food, and being internally self sufficient.

Make a show of it to sell to NatGeo and you might even earn a few bucks

The problem with these discussions is that IMHO it should be possible to criticize capitalism without being called a communist or being ousted from society (LOL). I'm trying to draw attention to the fact that under capitalism, there's no value system outside of money. Even positive work relations get re-cast as good for productivity (= profit) while I'd say that they should be viewed as having value in and of themselves.

 

[QSD]

As far as the overall conversation of the thread, I'm obviously very much on the same team that you and J jason10mm are on.

As much as I disagree with QSD on everything else, on the particular point of humanity at work I do think that he brings up something reasonable. Yes, the reality of the situation is that wages, climbing the ladder, and cutthroat competition rule the day in the corporate world. But that's at the MACRO level. At a micro level, there's still room to foster the things that QSD is talking about: treating people like humans. You can work in a large company where a CEO and VPs don't personally care about you (nor should they). But within that company, managers of small teams (say, anywhere between 2-20 employees) can still do a lot to foster camaraderie, collaboration, bonding, and grow all the "human" elements in the team. Because it IS true that a happy employee is a more efficient and effective employee.

Well I do appreciate the note of agreement. I think one reason this problem (of work environment/conditions) has become more pressing recently is that people otherwise are living far more insular lives. People are broadly speaking experiencing a lack of sense of community. People live in big cities, far fewer of them go to church, etc etc. One thing that all people still DO have in common is that they all need to work for a living. This puts a lot more pressure on the work environment as a provider of a sense of community. Irrespective of whether you think it's appropriate, people experiencing an emotional need will look to fulfill that need somehow.

 

[M1chl]

It's a hot take with hyperbole as a response to "in america upward mobility is a myth" but it is certainly based in fact. The US has more foreign born immigrants than the next three COMBINED and that doesn't account for first and second generation that are living a successful life. Plenty of folks can immigrate and do ok if they have to settle for their second, third, or fourth choices, just imagine what they could have done if they settled here

Countries With the Most Immigrants

The United States has the highest immigration population in the world. Learn about other countries that have large immigrant populations.

www.worldatlas.com

Size of the country definitely has nothing to do with it, per 100k native people the Germany have around the same immigration numbers.

 

[QSD]

Agreed.

I'll agree with QSD about the part about not being treated like crap at work. Who wants to drilled into the dirt by managers or work in backstabbing offices? I don't.

But for the money part (which is the main topic discussed lately, especially with that professor video), I hold to what I've said about companies making profit and paying what they pay. You can tell government doesn't even support higher pay as poverty line thresholds and minimum wages are low.

Well, finally a note of agreement. The video you found so bothersome is Richard Wolff, one of the only real out-of-the-closet marxist professors in the US. I (as a moderate leftist) actually find him kind of annoying as he has a petulant tone and he always feels like he's talking down to you, making it seem like complex economic problems are actually simple.

one thing I do agree with you on is why the fuck don't we teach more kids a trade...? Hell, teach them ALL a trade, have them work a couple of different apprenticeships, pick one to stick with for a couple of years, and THEN let them decide whether they want to pursue further education. I think that would be massively healthy for their development. It certainly would have changed my perspective when I was 18-20. We need people who can fix stuff, we're always gonna need them, and it's just good to know how to fix stuff.

 

[jason10mm]

An excellent example to make my point for me, since that's one of the earliest examples of organized mass slave labor.

Sorry to deflate your point, but the "story we tell ourselves" of history has a new spin on the pyramids.

Pyramids built by paid labourers, not slaves - Daily Commercial News

Discovery of 4,000-year-old tombs believed to belong to people who worked on the Great Pyramids of Giza is debunking ideas that slaves built the ancient monuments.

canada.constructconnect.com

So it's an early example of how paid labor welded to a unique vision can built something near eternal. Not really capitalism but definitely far above the level of a commune's effort.

 

[QSD]

Sorry to deflate your point, but the "story we tell ourselves" of history has a new spin on the pyramids.

Pyramids built by paid labourers, not slaves - Daily Commercial News

Discovery of 4,000-year-old tombs believed to belong to people who worked on the Great Pyramids of Giza is debunking ideas that slaves built the ancient monuments.

canada.constructconnect.com

So it's an early example of how paid labor welded to a unique vision can built something near eternal. Not really capitalism but definitely far above the level of a commune's effort.

Yeah so I heard about this a while ago, but the last thing I remember hearing was a podcast where some dude was kind of debunking this again. (sorry to be so vague, it's been a few years since I've listened to or read anything about this) Anyway it made me google, and it seems the consensus is indeed that they were not slaves, they were seasonal workers (farmers) who built during the time when farming was impossible due to flooding. They even got premium healthcare (the same as nobility). But they lived a life of hard labor (according to the bones) with a life expectancy of 10 years less than nobility. One thing that's not clear to me is whether they were actually free to choose to participate, or whether they were simply 'conscripted' by the pharaoh.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Well, finally a note of agreement. The video you found so bothersome is Richard Wolff, one of the only real out-of-the-closet marxist professors in the US. I (as a moderate leftist) actually find him kind of annoying as he has a petulant tone and he always feels like he's talking down to you, making it seem like complex economic problems are actually simple.

one thing I do agree with you on is why the fuck don't we teach more kids a trade...? Hell, teach them ALL a trade, have them work a couple of different apprenticeships, pick one to stick with for a couple of years, and THEN let them decide whether they want to pursue further education. I think that would be massively healthy for their development. It certainly would have changed my perspective when I was 18-20. We need people who can fix stuff, we're always gonna need them, and it's just good to know how to fix stuff.

I agree on that.

Even though I have no interest in trades jobs, I find it more valuable than learning another history class. Also, toss in a finance/budgeting class. When I went to school, we had mandatory Family Studies (home ec) and Industrial Arts (shop) classes in I think grade 7 and 8. I dont remember if it continued to high school grade 9. But no way it was mandatory later in high school where it's mostly academic. There was a shop room in my high school so I'm guessing some kids took it, but it wasnt mandatory from what I remember. Doing some shop stuff in middle school is pointless because we are so young and dont know what the hell we are doing it doesn't hit home. The stuff I made was junk and didnt really care. I tried to make a backgammon board with wood trim on the borders and we'd karate chop the pieces. I don't think I ever made it even though all I had to do is take a piece of wood, file it, glue some border and paint it.

Only problem is most schools would have to hire more trade teachers and adjust their classes by adding more giant shop classes than more boring desk classrooms. And given how teaching is a very academic kind of career, you dont really get shop kinds of teachers around. But you can always find a million math and english teachers which all do double duty maybe teaching gym or history too. But a shop teacher seems kind a role that is specific to being a shop teacher.

 

[QSD]

I agree on that.

Even though I have no interest in trades jobs, I find it more valuable than learning another history class. Also, toss in a finance/budgeting class.

There's a lot of useful life info we don't teach kids, budgeting is definitely one of them, I'd throw in a kind of psych101 class just to teach kids some kind of emotional awareness/management skills, how to avoid pointless rumination, how to deal with anger and frustration/setbacks, how to deal with feelings of depression, etc etc.

When I went to school, we had mandatory Family Studies (home ec) and Industrial Arts (shop) classes in I think grade 7 and 8. I dont remember if it continued to high school grade 9. But no way it was mandatory later in high school where it's mostly academic. There was a shop room in my high school so I'm guessing some kids took it, but it wasnt mandatory from what I remember. Doing some shop stuff in middle school is pointless because we are so young and dont know what the hell we are doing it doesn't hit home. The stuff I made was junk and didnt really care. I tried to make a backgammon board with wood trim on the borders and we'd karate chop the pieces. I don't think I ever made it even though all I had to do is take a piece of wood, file it, glue some border and paint it.

we used to get 'technology' class in primary school, mostly I remember soldering some wire structures together, learning to use a hammer, saw etc etc. That's probably the closest thing. Oh and we had a pretty forward thinking school so they also taught us how to program some BASIC I think on MSX computers. I agree that it doesn't hit home when it's taught too young btw.

Only problem is most schools would have to hire more trade teachers and adjust their classes by adding more giant shop classes than more boring desk classrooms. And given how teaching is a very academic kind of career, you dont really get shop kinds of teachers around. But you can always find a million math and english teachers which all do double duty maybe teaching gym or history too. But a shop teacher seems kind a role that is specific to being a shop teacher.

The way I was thinking about it wasn't really teaching it in school (though that might work for some things too) but rather maybe make high school a year shorter and put that last year into 3 3 month internships at a company. Can be anything - plumbing, construction, IT, care, sport shoe store, italian restaurant, you name it.

 

[NomadicAsiatic]

A 30 year old works 20-25 hours per week as a dog walker and even that is too many hours as he/she wants to work less hours. At first, I thought based on the image it as some 20 year old college drop out having issues with career path. But 30!

And this weirdo says he/she wants to teach philiosophy. That requires getting a degree and then working school hours, including more time marking papers and prep work.

Well, that's the lazy modern age of people. And these are the kinds of people no doubt wanting universal income payouts. Doreen gets that and even the dogwalking job will be dropped.

You're not going to see people immigrating to countries after WWII being this lazy.

This level of boomer logic makes me physically sick. I can just hear the clicking of wingtips on a marble floor.

"It's too hard, so I'm not going to try generation." Then they create this alternate history when we were all given cheap houses and lots of money easily, all we had to do is just sign up and it was easy street.

That’s kinda sorta what happened several decades though…

Everyone starts at the bottom. Most people move up. More people are able to move up now than at any other time in history, and somehow it is the worst of all systems? Smh.

Maybe not the worst…no, scratch that; definitely the worst.

This is painfully bad. I can't believe we've come to this point where people like that are being enabled more. That's not how this country was built.

And yes, politics aside, the country was built on a lot of hard work without wokeness or lazy tendencies. Could do without thenracism and hate but man, seeing this is worrying.

Yes, that’s exactly how this country was built.

What's with all these Nu-Commies thinking The Party will just let them consume without contributing?

They will be the first to get sent to the farms, to either work the fields or eventually become part of of them.

Pls b jokin

 

[Torrent of Pork]

Pls b jokin

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." - Karl Marx

Under the 'glorious revolution' when there is a need for hard labor, and you have no other relevant skills, then guess what happens when a man with an assault rifle comes to inform you of your new profession.

 

[NomadicAsiatic]

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." - Karl Marx

Under the 'glorious revolution' when there is a need for hard labor, and you have no other relevant skills, then guess what happens when a man with an assault rifle comes to inform you of your new profession.

Sounds like totalitarian stuff and not communism to me

 

[DeepBreath87]

Sounds like totalitarian stuff and not communism to me

There is no Communism without compulsion.

 

[Torrent of Pork]

Sounds like totalitarian stuff and not communism to me

 

[Torrent of Pork]

Your daily reminder that Communists aren't people.