4 ms·

Sounds like there is a gap between what people actually want and what they say they want. People claim they want leisure but instead they work themselves into t

Sounds like there is a gap between what people actually want and what they say they want. People claim they want leisure but instead they work themselves into the ground. This is not the fault of technology. With humans it is better to watch what they do, not what they say.

bluntfang 7y ago
this conclusion is obtuse and shallow.
lotsofpulp 7y ago
Or, they recognize that if they don't keep up on the treadmill, they will fall further and further behind. If you don't spend enough to go to a good school, then you might be stuck with friends who don't earn much too, and are less valuable in your network. If you don't live in the burgeoning economic regions, then you reduce your chances of advancement in the future, and possibly put yourself at risk of losing income. If you don't live in the better school districts, then your children will have less chance of success. How much are you willing to stretch yourself to give them as much of a leg up as possible? This is the reality of a society that's had a widening wealth gap for decades now, and it's becoming more and more visible. And since wealth compounds, it's ever more important to not get left behind.
- mattkrause 7y ago
  Health insurance too. Most people in the US are a handful of unlucky mutations away from bankruptcy. Money may not buy happiness, but it certainly buys hospital care.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    Yes, I wouldn’t feel economically secure unless I had 2 years worth of family out of pocket maximum saved up (somewhere between $10k and $30k depending how generous one’s employer is), on top of other emergency funds. Which, realistically, I know the middle 30% to 70% probably can’t afford since they earn too much for government assistance and earn too little to save. A baby on a gold level insurance plan in a high cost of living area recently cost me $5.5k, but that’s only because everything went well and we’re lucky to have a family oop max of $5.5k due to generosity of employer. If the oop max was higher, it probably would have cost around $8k or so. I can luckily comfortably afford it, but I have no idea how others with household income in the $70k to $150k range can afford to budget for it. They must be giving up niceties such as vacation funds or skimping on essential savings, handicapping the growth of their retirement funds.
- pharke 7y ago
  I think you'd need to define what you consider success to be. A lot of people are happy with a stable income and living in a smaller city. Unless you're always trying to live beyond your means or chasing after bigger and better stuff you don't really need to grow your income beyond a certain point. Keeping up with inflation while having enough for savings will do. I don't disagree that there is a widening wealth gap but I think that is defined by a shrinking middle class, stagnant wages and the funneling of wealth to a smaller and smaller elite.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    > A lot of people are happy with a stable income and living in a smaller city. The stable income (that keeps up with inflation) in a smaller city (or town) is what doesn’t exist anymore, hence the flight to larger cities.
6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
Sounds like there is a gap between what people are willing to do and what they want. In a competitive environment, the former factor seems to dominate in a race to the bottom.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
eezurr 7y ago
Im thinking this may physiological problem. In the era of common manual labor, the body was exerted and signaled "rest time" after a days work. Perhaps the lack of this "rest time" trigger is what is causing people to work themselves into the ground. That is to say, they do want leisure, yet their body is never signaling it's time to satisfy that want. I have no educational background in this area and it is all speculation. Edit: meaning technology does play a role
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

bluntfang 7y ago

this conclusion is obtuse and shallow.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

Or, they recognize that if they don't keep up on the treadmill, they will fall further and further behind. If you don't spend enough to go to a good school, then you might be stuck with friends who don't earn much too, and are less valuable in your network. If you don't live in the burgeoning economic regions, then you reduce your chances of advancement in the future, and possibly put yourself at risk of losing income. If you don't live in the better school districts, then your children will have less chance of success. How much are you willing to stretch yourself to give them as much of a leg up as possible? This is the reality of a society that's had a widening wealth gap for decades now, and it's becoming more and more visible. And since wealth compounds, it's ever more important to not get left behind.

mattkrause 7y ago
Health insurance too. Most people in the US are a handful of unlucky mutations away from bankruptcy. Money may not buy happiness, but it certainly buys hospital care.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  Yes, I wouldn’t feel economically secure unless I had 2 years worth of family out of pocket maximum saved up (somewhere between $10k and $30k depending how generous one’s employer is), on top of other emergency funds. Which, realistically, I know the middle 30% to 70% probably can’t afford since they earn too much for government assistance and earn too little to save. A baby on a gold level insurance plan in a high cost of living area recently cost me $5.5k, but that’s only because everything went well and we’re lucky to have a family oop max of $5.5k due to generosity of employer. If the oop max was higher, it probably would have cost around $8k or so. I can luckily comfortably afford it, but I have no idea how others with household income in the $70k to $150k range can afford to budget for it. They must be giving up niceties such as vacation funds or skimping on essential savings, handicapping the growth of their retirement funds.
pharke 7y ago
I think you'd need to define what you consider success to be. A lot of people are happy with a stable income and living in a smaller city. Unless you're always trying to live beyond your means or chasing after bigger and better stuff you don't really need to grow your income beyond a certain point. Keeping up with inflation while having enough for savings will do. I don't disagree that there is a widening wealth gap but I think that is defined by a shrinking middle class, stagnant wages and the funneling of wealth to a smaller and smaller elite.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  > A lot of people are happy with a stable income and living in a smaller city. The stable income (that keeps up with inflation) in a smaller city (or town) is what doesn’t exist anymore, hence the flight to larger cities.

6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago

Sounds like there is a gap between what people are willing to do and what they want. In a competitive environment, the former factor seems to dominate in a race to the bottom.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

eezurr 7y ago

Im thinking this may physiological problem. In the era of common manual labor, the body was exerted and signaled "rest time" after a days work. Perhaps the lack of this "rest time" trigger is what is causing people to work themselves into the ground. That is to say, they do want leisure, yet their body is never signaling it's time to satisfy that want. I have no educational background in this area and it is all speculation. Edit: meaning technology does play a role

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]