3 ms·

> Im more inclined to believe the lazy mentality is from lifestyle and cultural stemming. Its cool to not care or try. And according to instagram if you're not

> Im more inclined to believe the lazy mentality is from lifestyle and cultural stemming. Its cool to not care or try. And according to instagram if you're not a millionaire by age 25 then you're a loser. So why even try? I'm assuming this is why you're being downvoted. It sounds like you're calling the new generation lazy, though I see now that it wasn't necessarily your intent. Personally I fully understand those who don't want to spend most of their time and energy at work. Most jobs aren't fulfilling. Some even downright encourage a dysfunctional system. I was impressed by tech companies in the late 2000s only to realize that they're not trying to "make the world a better place" and that they're just trying to make more money for their shareholders like every company before them. So why would anyone sacrifice their family time, friends and hobbies just to work on another app that puts scooters on cities' sidewalks and build more hardware that'll end up in a landfill? It has nothing to do with being cool or being a millionaire. It's just a generation that had their basic needs taken care of and are now getting their priorities straight.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
>It sounds like you're calling the new generation lazy, though I see now that it wasn't necessarily your intent. I think there is a lot of data that says the latest generation is the most cynical and jaded yet. There is some crossover between cynicism and motivation. Of course if you ask them, it isn't cynicism, it is realism. >It's just a generation that had their basic needs taken care of and are now getting their priorities straight. I think there are is a bit of wanting to have the cake and eat it too. A desire to live a dense urban life, but also have a quaint country home. A desire to be financially independent, but also follow their passions. In short, I think they have been taught and sold a contradictory set of ideals and desires.
- dutchCourage 3y ago
  I'm sure you'll find some overly idealistic people in the mix, but the article mentions clear trade-offs that young workers are willing to take. Some of them are willing to take a pay cut in order to work less, and they're being called lazy for it. My argument is that it's not laziness, it's the belief that they're better off fostering their personal relationships and passions than adding the extra money in their bank account.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    I don't disagree. My comment was more about the general malaise and Outlook in Generation Z. That said, I don't think the article really supports the idea that they would readily trade time for money. Only 13% of the respondents said that, which is pretty Slim. I wonder what the crossover is between those respondents and the top 10% earners.
- HappMacDonald 3y ago
  > but also have a quaint country home I have never heard a human being complain about wanting "a quaint country home", or pose any permutation of requirements that might approximate that. Perhaps the closest concern I have ever encountered on that front is "where do I put my stuff?" because US culture on average certainly does a lot more hoarding than nearly anywhere else in the world. But that's less to do with square footage of living space and more to do with square footage available to store hoarded items. EG: such folk (now narrowing perspective to anecdotes of room mates I've had) often wind up placated by access to space in the garage plus a rented storage unit that they literally never visit between when they move in with us and when they move back out perhaps a year or two later. Our place is a three bedroom unit within a triplex building built in the late 70s and falling apart. Its' rent has recently increased to close to half of all of our net incomes combined. We would like to live somewhere within walking distance (a mile?) of basic necessities, that we can afford, and if its not too much to ask perhaps also is not falling apart. Number of square feet holds no interest to us but number of bedrooms would be nice so that each adult can have one to sleep in. My apologies if that strikes you as too "quaint" and you'd rather force us to live 50 miles from the nearest store beyond the reach of basic utilities just because then the rent and/or mortgage payments would be half what we get here.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

>It sounds like you're calling the new generation lazy, though I see now that it wasn't necessarily your intent. I think there is a lot of data that says the latest generation is the most cynical and jaded yet. There is some crossover between cynicism and motivation. Of course if you ask them, it isn't cynicism, it is realism. >It's just a generation that had their basic needs taken care of and are now getting their priorities straight. I think there are is a bit of wanting to have the cake and eat it too. A desire to live a dense urban life, but also have a quaint country home. A desire to be financially independent, but also follow their passions. In short, I think they have been taught and sold a contradictory set of ideals and desires.

dutchCourage 3y ago
I'm sure you'll find some overly idealistic people in the mix, but the article mentions clear trade-offs that young workers are willing to take. Some of them are willing to take a pay cut in order to work less, and they're being called lazy for it. My argument is that it's not laziness, it's the belief that they're better off fostering their personal relationships and passions than adding the extra money in their bank account.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  I don't disagree. My comment was more about the general malaise and Outlook in Generation Z. That said, I don't think the article really supports the idea that they would readily trade time for money. Only 13% of the respondents said that, which is pretty Slim. I wonder what the crossover is between those respondents and the top 10% earners.
HappMacDonald 3y ago
> but also have a quaint country home I have never heard a human being complain about wanting "a quaint country home", or pose any permutation of requirements that might approximate that. Perhaps the closest concern I have ever encountered on that front is "where do I put my stuff?" because US culture on average certainly does a lot more hoarding than nearly anywhere else in the world. But that's less to do with square footage of living space and more to do with square footage available to store hoarded items. EG: such folk (now narrowing perspective to anecdotes of room mates I've had) often wind up placated by access to space in the garage plus a rented storage unit that they literally never visit between when they move in with us and when they move back out perhaps a year or two later. Our place is a three bedroom unit within a triplex building built in the late 70s and falling apart. Its' rent has recently increased to close to half of all of our net incomes combined. We would like to live somewhere within walking distance (a mile?) of basic necessities, that we can afford, and if its not too much to ask perhaps also is not falling apart. Number of square feet holds no interest to us but number of bedrooms would be nice so that each adult can have one to sleep in. My apologies if that strikes you as too "quaint" and you'd rather force us to live 50 miles from the nearest store beyond the reach of basic utilities just because then the rent and/or mortgage payments would be half what we get here.