5 ms·

Darn, it's all rather obvious. Personally, I could never sustain a regimented five-day workweek. That just left Saturday to decompress, and Sunday to be on the

Darn, it's all rather obvious. Personally, I could never sustain a regimented five-day workweek. That just left Saturday to decompress, and Sunday to be on the edge for going back. There's no time for actual life, especially in North America where people typically get shitty amounts of vacation time. Is that life? Personally, I'd rather be poor, at least defined by modern economic standards. And I did choose to be. And after having quit my high-paying job, I'm so much happier.

ericmcer 1y ago
Seriously my job is relatively relaxed, but I am still losing my mind because it is just an endless stretch of 5 day weeks for... 20 years? The only version of reality where I could accept that is if I had kids and family all dependent on my work, but without that I am unsure how people aren't filled with ennui when they look into that future.
- tayo42 1y ago
  Working from home makes it more bearable. It feels like I use my free time to make money instead of going to work. It's not like I do hobbies 16 hours a day I wish the job market was better so I could find a more engaging job.
  - vouaobrasil 1y ago
    Yeah, it's tough to find an engaging job that provides a balance because of the insane competition that will only get worse due to the increase in efficiency with AI. Efficiency up to a point implies comfort, and beyond that point implies wage-slavery.
  - Yeul 1y ago
    That's another thing about America. People work too far from their job so you are adding a long commute to your daily grind.
- vouaobrasil 1y ago
  Well, I think that's part of the lock-in. Not kids exactly, but the fact that society has made raising kids over time a hugely expensive activity (whereas once it was not in much earlier times). Because in modern society, having a family means paying for services to keep them functioning (extracurricular activities, romantic vacations for the parents, daycare), and that was encouraged by the system not because it makes us the most happy, but because it is the most efficient for technological innovation.
  - Qem 1y ago
    > because it is the most efficient for technological innovation Probably more efficient for rentism. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking It destroys the very conditions for the next generation of scientists being raised.
    - vouaobrasil 1y ago
      One does not necessarily need a healthy environment for the next generation of scientists if there is already a surplus of them willing to work in rather sordid conditions, and if there is a surplus of scientific discoveries that can be easily capitalized upon with few workers. Or if there is a surplus of science being done elsehwere. The system optimizes for short-term production and growth, and a good environment for science everyhere is not necessarily optimal for that.
- cedws 1y ago
  Kids play a part in trapping you in that lifestyle though. If you’re fortunate enough to have a job where you can save money, as long as you don’t have kids you still have the option of just packing your bags and pissing off somewhere for a while. Lifestyle creep is another way people get trapped in the rat race. Buying silly stuff like expensive cars on finance to show off.
  - vouaobrasil 1y ago
    That is true, I agree for sure. One of many reasons why I never want them....
- buuuuutee 1y ago
  [dead]
qwerpy 1y ago
I sustained a five day workweek for more than two decades, but now that I have young kids it's hard. Weekdays are work + childcare, then two hours of being a vegetable, then sleep. Weekends are childcare, then two hours of being a vegetable, then sleep. A 4 day work week would really help by giving me one day with 8 hours of me time, but that's not something any job here is going to provide. Fortunately, having sustained that 5 day work week for so long with "North America" compensation, I can comfortably go to a 0 day work week. It would be better for the economy if I continued to participate via a 3 or 4 day work week, but any job that would give me that would pay so little as to not be worth it.
- bdangubic 1y ago
  how many companies have you asked whether you can work 3 or 4 day workweek? and what was difference in salary for those that accepted?
  - qwerpy 1y ago
    Honestly I have not asked. I've poked around in the HR guidelines for companies I've worked for (big tech companies) and the provisions for less than full-time work are either non-existent or so full of unfriendly exceptions and approvals that I assumed it wasn't a realistic option. I have also never seen or heard of anyone doing it at those companies across the hundreds of people I have worked with. I'd love to hear if anyone at a FAANG pulled it off, how they did it, and what the financial impact was.
- vouaobrasil 1y ago
  > It would be better for the economy if I continued to participate via a 3 or 4 day work week Not necessarily even. Better for the GDP but not necessarily the long-term economy, which might actually be more likely to thrive in the long run with more happy, balanced people out there.

ericmcer 1y ago

Seriously my job is relatively relaxed, but I am still losing my mind because it is just an endless stretch of 5 day weeks for... 20 years? The only version of reality where I could accept that is if I had kids and family all dependent on my work, but without that I am unsure how people aren't filled with ennui when they look into that future.

tayo42 1y ago
Working from home makes it more bearable. It feels like I use my free time to make money instead of going to work. It's not like I do hobbies 16 hours a day I wish the job market was better so I could find a more engaging job.
- vouaobrasil 1y ago
  Yeah, it's tough to find an engaging job that provides a balance because of the insane competition that will only get worse due to the increase in efficiency with AI. Efficiency up to a point implies comfort, and beyond that point implies wage-slavery.
- Yeul 1y ago
  That's another thing about America. People work too far from their job so you are adding a long commute to your daily grind.
vouaobrasil 1y ago
Well, I think that's part of the lock-in. Not kids exactly, but the fact that society has made raising kids over time a hugely expensive activity (whereas once it was not in much earlier times). Because in modern society, having a family means paying for services to keep them functioning (extracurricular activities, romantic vacations for the parents, daycare), and that was encouraged by the system not because it makes us the most happy, but because it is the most efficient for technological innovation.
- Qem 1y ago
  > because it is the most efficient for technological innovation Probably more efficient for rentism. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking It destroys the very conditions for the next generation of scientists being raised.
  - vouaobrasil 1y ago
    One does not necessarily need a healthy environment for the next generation of scientists if there is already a surplus of them willing to work in rather sordid conditions, and if there is a surplus of scientific discoveries that can be easily capitalized upon with few workers. Or if there is a surplus of science being done elsehwere. The system optimizes for short-term production and growth, and a good environment for science everyhere is not necessarily optimal for that.
cedws 1y ago
Kids play a part in trapping you in that lifestyle though. If you’re fortunate enough to have a job where you can save money, as long as you don’t have kids you still have the option of just packing your bags and pissing off somewhere for a while. Lifestyle creep is another way people get trapped in the rat race. Buying silly stuff like expensive cars on finance to show off.
- vouaobrasil 1y ago
  That is true, I agree for sure. One of many reasons why I never want them....
buuuuutee 1y ago
[dead]

qwerpy 1y ago

I sustained a five day workweek for more than two decades, but now that I have young kids it's hard. Weekdays are work + childcare, then two hours of being a vegetable, then sleep. Weekends are childcare, then two hours of being a vegetable, then sleep. A 4 day work week would really help by giving me one day with 8 hours of me time, but that's not something any job here is going to provide. Fortunately, having sustained that 5 day work week for so long with "North America" compensation, I can comfortably go to a 0 day work week. It would be better for the economy if I continued to participate via a 3 or 4 day work week, but any job that would give me that would pay so little as to not be worth it.

bdangubic 1y ago
how many companies have you asked whether you can work 3 or 4 day workweek? and what was difference in salary for those that accepted?
- qwerpy 1y ago
  Honestly I have not asked. I've poked around in the HR guidelines for companies I've worked for (big tech companies) and the provisions for less than full-time work are either non-existent or so full of unfriendly exceptions and approvals that I assumed it wasn't a realistic option. I have also never seen or heard of anyone doing it at those companies across the hundreds of people I have worked with. I'd love to hear if anyone at a FAANG pulled it off, how they did it, and what the financial impact was.
vouaobrasil 1y ago
> It would be better for the economy if I continued to participate via a 3 or 4 day work week Not necessarily even. Better for the GDP but not necessarily the long-term economy, which might actually be more likely to thrive in the long run with more happy, balanced people out there.