4 ms·

Another article that confuses majority opinion with facts. Sure, 37% of people might think their job needs to exist but why do we think they would know? It pres

Another article that confuses majority opinion with facts. Sure, 37% of people might think their job needs to exist but why do we think they would know? It presumes they can design an economy top down that doesn't need it. But it evolved and was designed by the people that own those companies. How many company execs would say they're just employing 37% of people for the no reason? And are there any economists out there foolish enough to think they could top-down design an economy that could cut out those jobs? As long as those jobs exist, we have no choice but to assume they include needed work.

Kadin 10y ago
I've worked some bullshit jobs from time to time. It's pretty easy to tell that you could disappear and nothing would effectively change. But at the same time, it's also generally pretty easy to justify your existence if you need the paycheck, too. The existence of most of those jobs relies on the risk intolerance of executives. They don't know for certain which people in their organization are basically bullshitting and could be fired tomorrow, and they're not willing to take the risk of firing the wrong person and screwing the entire company/team/organization. So they let things go, as long as they're making money (or, really, as long as their neck isn't personally in a noose for not making money). Periodically, companies will try to determine which employees can really be cut when money is tight, but it's surprisingly hard to determine even from one or two management levels above a particular employee whether they are really adding value or just creating the appearance of it. All you really need to do as an employee in a "bullshit job" is create just enough doubt as to whether or not you're somehow important, on some level or in some situation, so that nobody is willing to take the risk of firing you. That's it. I'm glad I don't have one of those jobs right now, but if push came to shove and it was between collecting a paycheck for a bullshit job or getting my house foreclosed on, I'd do it again. As I suspect most people would, and probably will depending on how many of the "everything will get automated" predictions come true. In a workplace with a lot of opaque automation, it wouldn't be especially hard to create the appearance of adding value just by not screwing anything up, and/or occasionally screwing something up on purpose only to "fix" it and demonstrate value (or give an implied threat of what might happen if you were fired).

Kadin 10y ago

I've worked some bullshit jobs from time to time. It's pretty easy to tell that you could disappear and nothing would effectively change. But at the same time, it's also generally pretty easy to justify your existence if you need the paycheck, too. The existence of most of those jobs relies on the risk intolerance of executives. They don't know for certain which people in their organization are basically bullshitting and could be fired tomorrow, and they're not willing to take the risk of firing the wrong person and screwing the entire company/team/organization. So they let things go, as long as they're making money (or, really, as long as their neck isn't personally in a noose for not making money). Periodically, companies will try to determine which employees can really be cut when money is tight, but it's surprisingly hard to determine even from one or two management levels above a particular employee whether they are really adding value or just creating the appearance of it. All you really need to do as an employee in a "bullshit job" is create just enough doubt as to whether or not you're somehow important, on some level or in some situation, so that nobody is willing to take the risk of firing you. That's it. I'm glad I don't have one of those jobs right now, but if push came to shove and it was between collecting a paycheck for a bullshit job or getting my house foreclosed on, I'd do it again. As I suspect most people would, and probably will depending on how many of the "everything will get automated" predictions come true. In a workplace with a lot of opaque automation, it wouldn't be especially hard to create the appearance of adding value just by not screwing anything up, and/or occasionally screwing something up on purpose only to "fix" it and demonstrate value (or give an implied threat of what might happen if you were fired).