5 ms·

>> All jobs provide purpose As some dude said: that's just, like, your opinion. You should get out more and meet people from different venues of life. Try tel

by v-erne 3y ago

>> All jobs provide purpose As some dude said: that's just, like, your opinion. You should get out more and meet people from different venues of life. Try telling this banality to my brother who used to be reposesion man and see what will happen. He has to go to therapy regullarly to get nightmares out of his head after years of literally taking money and stuff from crying people. No, some jobs are economically viable and current system likes them - its really convenient for everyones conscience to outsource debt handling to some specialized thug like characters. But saing that all people can find purpose in them - that's too much.

harvey9 3y ago
So his purpose in doing that job was, it appears, to keep himself fed and housed until he could find something better.
- msrenee 3y ago
  Sounds like it. Very fulfilling.
  - harvey9 3y ago
    It's not fulfilling, that's why I assumed he's looking for other work. But the person I replied to has added that this job requires a lot of study to get into - which means he would have to accept that study as a sunk cost.
    - msrenee 3y ago
      Sorry, that was sarcasm. You were replying to someone that thought people worked crappy jobs because of some other reason besides they literally can't get anything better. Kind of mind-blowing that someone could delude themselves to the point where they can believe folks work miserable jobs for any reason other than trying not to go broke.
- v-erne 3y ago
  As usual life is more complex than any idealistic simplification - I do not believe thath you can sum up his situation in one sentence. But it would be probably a lot easier on him if he did it becesue it kept him fed (that would at least give him feeling of necessity). The story of his tragedy began when he was finishing highschool and could not decide what to do with himself. He literally had no idea about future, so our father, a legal council of 30 years, choose for him - he paid for five year law degree. And after my brother finished the university, he still did not have any idea what to do, so my father forced him to take law application (I'm not sure how you translate this into english - in my country lawyers are legaly obliged to take additional high level degree after law degree to specialize in being legal council, judge, prosecutor or bailiff). There are yearly limits of applicants in my country and since my brother was quite bad at this whole law stuff (once again - this was not his thing, it was choosen for him) he could not get legal council application, so the father forced him to choose the only that left, the one that no one else wanted to do - bailiff application. So he did it and after two years of hard work he finished the application with bailiff title but without bailif practice (which is also limited here in Poland - you are literally nominated by the government to do this here, you are legaly forbiden to practice on your own without the nomination). Not having government nomination he had to work in local bailiff office (which was only possible because our father used to know some people) - once again this was not his own idea (he had no agancy of his own - from his perpective he would be glad to just sit and play games whole day). He worked there for five years, and the stuff he did, the people he met, the clients he had to handle, broke him. After office was closed due to his boss retiremen he could not get another job, because once again he was psychically devastated, and people who interviewed him could sense this. And for last few years he just lives with our parents and goes to thereapy and tries to gather what left of his life together. And the tragic part of all this if you look at cost of his education it would probably be a net gain for society, my parents, and my brother to just forget this whole law degree, bayliff application and few years of work at office and just lay down and play video games. Each time I think about all this forced idealistic stuff where we are all supposed to find purpose in jobs, because jobs are good (TM), I think about my brother and his wasted life. To warap this up, I just remembered a quote from song by Polish artist "Kazik" about steelworks worker who wasted his life in job in one of polish factories that were bankrupt from the get go (as the whole communistic system was also): "Cała jego ciężka praca, wszystko było c**a warte Gdyby leżał całe życie, mniejszą czyniłby on stratę" Which, according to ChatGPT, can be loosely translated to: "His entire hard work, everything was worth s**. If he lay his whole life, he would make a smaller loss to me."
than3 3y ago
That's a paraphrase, if you read what he said, that quote is not what he said. That's a major credibility hit there.
- v-erne 3y ago
  That's interesting, I'm not much of an english speaker, so I always interpreted this text as a cool way to disagree without getting into conflict (and I shortened this a bit because I believe the whole quote does not look good when written) What's your (correct?) interpretation of this quote? What dude meant retorting this way to Jesus?
  - hayst4ck 3y ago
    "That's just your opinion man" is kind of disrespectful. Jesus was disrespecting dude by saying "I'm gonna kick your ass," and dude was responding "you're wrong, but it's not worth a serious response." It's casually dismissive. If Jesus had gone on further, the next response by dude might have been an exaggerated eye roll or "uh hu, sure buddy" communicated sarcastically. It's like saying "your opinion isn't worthy of attention/response." It's appropriate if someone is being aggressive towards you, but not in a discussion and certainly not in any kind of setting where there's a hope to reach consensus or change someone's mind. Alupis isn't understanding that the slaves in the American south had a "job", it was being a slave. Anupis can't get past the idea that "job" is a description in the same way that "slavery" is a description and if you look at what it means to be a slave (to not have freedom), and what it means to have a job (to get things in return for work), you can get resources for your time (having a job) while also having no freedom (being a slave). The name for this is "wage slavery": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery The original post I was responding to made the assertion that all jobs are good, but failed to understand that wage is not a measurement of labor or value produced but a measure of relative power. The original post I was responding to was asserting that a laborers power increases as there are more jobs and therefore more demand for labor, which is true. They failed to understand that unionized labor has all the same benefits, but a better distribution of wealth and more freedom. Unionization values labor while "more jobs" framed discussions values capital. The top post in the thread was saying we are having a discussion with "job" based frame rather than a "labor" based fame. Does the job provide value, or does the labor provide value? If labor is where the value is then why is the value of labor so low? By choosing to frame the discussion around jobs, the person has chosen oppression of workers as a consequence whether they understand why that is or not.

by v-erne 3y ago

harvey9 3y ago

So his purpose in doing that job was, it appears, to keep himself fed and housed until he could find something better.

msrenee 3y ago
Sounds like it. Very fulfilling.
- harvey9 3y ago
  It's not fulfilling, that's why I assumed he's looking for other work. But the person I replied to has added that this job requires a lot of study to get into - which means he would have to accept that study as a sunk cost.
  - msrenee 3y ago
    Sorry, that was sarcasm. You were replying to someone that thought people worked crappy jobs because of some other reason besides they literally can't get anything better. Kind of mind-blowing that someone could delude themselves to the point where they can believe folks work miserable jobs for any reason other than trying not to go broke.
v-erne 3y ago
As usual life is more complex than any idealistic simplification - I do not believe thath you can sum up his situation in one sentence. But it would be probably a lot easier on him if he did it becesue it kept him fed (that would at least give him feeling of necessity). The story of his tragedy began when he was finishing highschool and could not decide what to do with himself. He literally had no idea about future, so our father, a legal council of 30 years, choose for him - he paid for five year law degree. And after my brother finished the university, he still did not have any idea what to do, so my father forced him to take law application (I'm not sure how you translate this into english - in my country lawyers are legaly obliged to take additional high level degree after law degree to specialize in being legal council, judge, prosecutor or bailiff). There are yearly limits of applicants in my country and since my brother was quite bad at this whole law stuff (once again - this was not his thing, it was choosen for him) he could not get legal council application, so the father forced him to choose the only that left, the one that no one else wanted to do - bailiff application. So he did it and after two years of hard work he finished the application with bailiff title but without bailif practice (which is also limited here in Poland - you are literally nominated by the government to do this here, you are legaly forbiden to practice on your own without the nomination). Not having government nomination he had to work in local bailiff office (which was only possible because our father used to know some people) - once again this was not his own idea (he had no agancy of his own - from his perpective he would be glad to just sit and play games whole day). He worked there for five years, and the stuff he did, the people he met, the clients he had to handle, broke him. After office was closed due to his boss retiremen he could not get another job, because once again he was psychically devastated, and people who interviewed him could sense this. And for last few years he just lives with our parents and goes to thereapy and tries to gather what left of his life together. And the tragic part of all this if you look at cost of his education it would probably be a net gain for society, my parents, and my brother to just forget this whole law degree, bayliff application and few years of work at office and just lay down and play video games. Each time I think about all this forced idealistic stuff where we are all supposed to find purpose in jobs, because jobs are good (TM), I think about my brother and his wasted life. To warap this up, I just remembered a quote from song by Polish artist "Kazik" about steelworks worker who wasted his life in job in one of polish factories that were bankrupt from the get go (as the whole communistic system was also): "Cała jego ciężka praca, wszystko było c**a warte Gdyby leżał całe życie, mniejszą czyniłby on stratę" Which, according to ChatGPT, can be loosely translated to: "His entire hard work, everything was worth s**. If he lay his whole life, he would make a smaller loss to me."

than3 3y ago

That's a paraphrase, if you read what he said, that quote is not what he said. That's a major credibility hit there.

v-erne 3y ago
That's interesting, I'm not much of an english speaker, so I always interpreted this text as a cool way to disagree without getting into conflict (and I shortened this a bit because I believe the whole quote does not look good when written) What's your (correct?) interpretation of this quote? What dude meant retorting this way to Jesus?
- hayst4ck 3y ago
  "That's just your opinion man" is kind of disrespectful. Jesus was disrespecting dude by saying "I'm gonna kick your ass," and dude was responding "you're wrong, but it's not worth a serious response." It's casually dismissive. If Jesus had gone on further, the next response by dude might have been an exaggerated eye roll or "uh hu, sure buddy" communicated sarcastically. It's like saying "your opinion isn't worthy of attention/response." It's appropriate if someone is being aggressive towards you, but not in a discussion and certainly not in any kind of setting where there's a hope to reach consensus or change someone's mind. Alupis isn't understanding that the slaves in the American south had a "job", it was being a slave. Anupis can't get past the idea that "job" is a description in the same way that "slavery" is a description and if you look at what it means to be a slave (to not have freedom), and what it means to have a job (to get things in return for work), you can get resources for your time (having a job) while also having no freedom (being a slave). The name for this is "wage slavery": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery The original post I was responding to made the assertion that all jobs are good, but failed to understand that wage is not a measurement of labor or value produced but a measure of relative power. The original post I was responding to was asserting that a laborers power increases as there are more jobs and therefore more demand for labor, which is true. They failed to understand that unionized labor has all the same benefits, but a better distribution of wealth and more freedom. Unionization values labor while "more jobs" framed discussions values capital. The top post in the thread was saying we are having a discussion with "job" based frame rather than a "labor" based fame. Does the job provide value, or does the labor provide value? If labor is where the value is then why is the value of labor so low? By choosing to frame the discussion around jobs, the person has chosen oppression of workers as a consequence whether they understand why that is or not.