3 ms·

> the only way out is to quit and just live life how I want Could you expand on how you want to live your life? I am curious. Sometimes, it's possible to get c

> the only way out is to quit and just live life how I want Could you expand on how you want to live your life? I am curious. Sometimes, it's possible to get closer to the life you want to live without being so drastic as that.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
I really just want my time back. My commute is too long, my workday is too long. There are a limited number of "things I want to do" that I can squeeze into the time I'm left with after the "things I have to do" that aren't work are done. As I said, I've been looking for alternative work so I can have more time and it is dreadful and depressing. If you know something I can make an even remotely livable amount doing for less than 50hrs a week commitment (including commute) and provides some level of healthcare such that I won't starve to death if I break a leg, then let me fucking know.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Get a job at Walmart part time, go on Medicaid and SNAP. You can break a leg and not starve. My guess is the standard of living you want is higher than the job you have can provide on 40 hr per week. Managing lifestyle is the most controllable part of the equation
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    Looks like a low-level Walmart employee makes maybe as much as $12/hr in my area. Let's say I work 25hrs a week and never take any time off, so that's $1300/mo before taxes. Average apartment rent in my area is $1341/mo according to RentCafe, but 30% of rents are below that so lets say I go with one that's only $700/mo, leaving me $500/mo. That's for food, utilities, and oh yeah, the taxes I didn't take out at the beginning of this calculation. So yes, I could theoretically just barely scrape by until some unforeseen incident leads to job loss, then I'm fucked. > My guess is the standard of living you want is higher than the job you have can provide on 40 hr per week. Managing lifestyle is the most controllable part of the equation I'd like to maintain a standard of living not too much below what I have. My salary easily covers my lifestyle even with savings, Roth IRA, 401k, and mortgage. I could probably maintain my current lifestyle on less than half of my salary if only it were in any way possible to simply get half the money for half the time. Sadly the world doesn't work like that. But your point is taken that I really shouldn't have said "even remotely livable".
    - giantg2 5y ago
      I agree. I think my only issue was with the starving from a broken leg and liveable amount stuff. Companies are always trying to squeeze more hours or extra responsibility out of workers.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago

I really just want my time back. My commute is too long, my workday is too long. There are a limited number of "things I want to do" that I can squeeze into the time I'm left with after the "things I have to do" that aren't work are done. As I said, I've been looking for alternative work so I can have more time and it is dreadful and depressing. If you know something I can make an even remotely livable amount doing for less than 50hrs a week commitment (including commute) and provides some level of healthcare such that I won't starve to death if I break a leg, then let me fucking know.

giantg2 5y ago
Get a job at Walmart part time, go on Medicaid and SNAP. You can break a leg and not starve. My guess is the standard of living you want is higher than the job you have can provide on 40 hr per week. Managing lifestyle is the most controllable part of the equation
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  Looks like a low-level Walmart employee makes maybe as much as $12/hr in my area. Let's say I work 25hrs a week and never take any time off, so that's $1300/mo before taxes. Average apartment rent in my area is $1341/mo according to RentCafe, but 30% of rents are below that so lets say I go with one that's only $700/mo, leaving me $500/mo. That's for food, utilities, and oh yeah, the taxes I didn't take out at the beginning of this calculation. So yes, I could theoretically just barely scrape by until some unforeseen incident leads to job loss, then I'm fucked. > My guess is the standard of living you want is higher than the job you have can provide on 40 hr per week. Managing lifestyle is the most controllable part of the equation I'd like to maintain a standard of living not too much below what I have. My salary easily covers my lifestyle even with savings, Roth IRA, 401k, and mortgage. I could probably maintain my current lifestyle on less than half of my salary if only it were in any way possible to simply get half the money for half the time. Sadly the world doesn't work like that. But your point is taken that I really shouldn't have said "even remotely livable".
  - giantg2 5y ago
    I agree. I think my only issue was with the starving from a broken leg and liveable amount stuff. Companies are always trying to squeeze more hours or extra responsibility out of workers.