5 ms·

i have some bad news for you: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs jobs and what you are payed are in no

i have some bad news for you: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs jobs and what you are payed are in no way related to the value you produce. if anything, you should be payed more. a 10 hour work week is doable but will never happen because capitalism and controlling the masses of people. what do you think people would do if all of a sudden they had to work 20 hours instead of 40? people with free time are one of the most dangerous things to the “ruling” class. re: 60hours/week. Do you really have a lifestyle at that point? Do you even have a life?

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
> re: 60hours/week. Do you really have a lifestyle at that point? Do you even have a life? I mean, this comment basically proves my point. You appear to be saying "60 hours a week is basically inhumane", but many eager young people are willing to work far longer and harder, and, importantly, not because they are worried about starving, but specifically because they want to get ahead: think doctors (in 2003 in the US physician residents had their hours limited to just 80 hours a week - i.e. they were working far longer than that), and bankers (e.g. Goldman Sachs bankers recently asking for an 80 hour cap: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56452494 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56452494). Point being, there are plenty of people willing and desiring to work hours you consider "inhumane", and those people will certainly desire a far greater share of the "pie" than those working much less.
- rantwasp 5y ago
  nope. someone being able and willing to do “insane” things for a bigger piece of the pie should not make this the norm. should people that are one paycheck away from being homeless be okay with the 80hours? gonna ask again: at this point do you have a life?
- danaris 5y ago
  They're not eager to do it for its own sake. They're eager to do it because they think it's their only shot at a comfortable lifestyle. There's no reason this should be the case. There's no reason anyone in this country should have to worry about having a less-than-comfortable lifestyle, given how much food, energy, and various necessary and luxury products we're able to produce. It's only the case because of the massive income inequality we have today.
  - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
    > they think it's their only shot at a comfortable lifestyle. That is patently ridiculous if you've ever known any Goldman Sachs interns or medical residents. These folks all have plenty of much easier options for having a comfortable lifestyle, and they know it, but it would be a comfortable lifestyle with certainly less luxury and prestige than GS banker or doctor. That is basically my whole argument, that there are a subset of people who will work super hard just because they want to be at the top of the totem pole. Arguing that these type A folks think that working 80-100 hour weeks is "their only shot at a comfortable lifestyle" is laughable.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

> re: 60hours/week. Do you really have a lifestyle at that point? Do you even have a life? I mean, this comment basically proves my point. You appear to be saying "60 hours a week is basically inhumane", but many eager young people are willing to work far longer and harder, and, importantly, not because they are worried about starving, but specifically because they want to get ahead: think doctors (in 2003 in the US physician residents had their hours limited to just 80 hours a week - i.e. they were working far longer than that), and bankers (e.g. Goldman Sachs bankers recently asking for an 80 hour cap: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56452494 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56452494). Point being, there are plenty of people willing and desiring to work hours you consider "inhumane", and those people will certainly desire a far greater share of the "pie" than those working much less.

rantwasp 5y ago
nope. someone being able and willing to do “insane” things for a bigger piece of the pie should not make this the norm. should people that are one paycheck away from being homeless be okay with the 80hours? gonna ask again: at this point do you have a life?
danaris 5y ago
They're not eager to do it for its own sake. They're eager to do it because they think it's their only shot at a comfortable lifestyle. There's no reason this should be the case. There's no reason anyone in this country should have to worry about having a less-than-comfortable lifestyle, given how much food, energy, and various necessary and luxury products we're able to produce. It's only the case because of the massive income inequality we have today.
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  > they think it's their only shot at a comfortable lifestyle. That is patently ridiculous if you've ever known any Goldman Sachs interns or medical residents. These folks all have plenty of much easier options for having a comfortable lifestyle, and they know it, but it would be a comfortable lifestyle with certainly less luxury and prestige than GS banker or doctor. That is basically my whole argument, that there are a subset of people who will work super hard just because they want to be at the top of the totem pole. Arguing that these type A folks think that working 80-100 hour weeks is "their only shot at a comfortable lifestyle" is laughable.