top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 75 points 5 months ago

And the union would have more justification for negotiating a new even higher wage then they currently have.

  • source
  • [–] 135 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    My thing is I don't want to be on top. I want to live in a society where I can be on the bottom and have a good life.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 76 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    I, too, wish I could be society's bottom...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    well I said can be at the bottom. Its polite to take turns.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 114 points 5 months ago (20 children)

    I’m a software developer. My old roomie is a truck driver. I’m devastated he makes almost as much as I do.

    He has to drive a truck 5 days a week the entire year, no matter the weather. He deals with accidents, annoying customers, breakdowns, tight spaces, heavy goods. Workdays often drag out, and sometimes he didn’t manage to get home and had to sleep in the truck or at a motel. People are dependant on his work, if his truck doesn’t arrive, a store might not get food, and the attached community will suffer. He takes half an hour to commute to work.

    I work from home. I have a few set meetings daily, but I schedule my time on my own. Three times a week I take some extra time to go for a run through the forest with my dog. I’m safe, my bed is always nearby. My commute is the thirty seconds it takes to crawl into clothes and to my office. If I miss my work we at worst have to delay a product launch by a little.

    I’m happy with my pay, no doubt, and I wouldn’t want a pay cut. My friend deserves much more though. It’s bananas to me that he doesn’t catch up with me despite all the overtime and such. It’s incredibly unfair.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Driving is the easy part. Finding a bathroom at 4 am on Sunday. Taking a break without someone asking you a question. Just seeing your family with energy after a 12 hour day. That's where trucking sucks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    I was not CDL driving but I hauled New York Times from the print site on one side of Ohio to a distribution hub on the other side. I spent a lot of hours on the road 6 days a week. You aren't kidding about trying to find a restroom at night and all the hassles from construction, other drivers, detours, ect. If it weren't for highway rest areas and truck stops, there would be basically nothing for drivers at night.

    I always had an overnight bag with me, but thankfully never had to use it. Nothing but respect for drivers, the nation runs on their backs, we really should be taking better care of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago*

    The truck driver's job is much harder to do day in and day out. It's also much more necessary. However, it's also significantly easier to train a truck driver than it is to train developers and there's no infinite upside potential for delivery like there is with software projects in some cases (unicorn startups) and there are so many other expenses to run a delivery company that a software company might not have that they need to run on pretty thin margins, otherwise we're all paying more for all of our food.

    First job where I worked as a dev, they took on 3 of us on the same time, all entry-level. One of us was a physicist who was laid off by the university since the government reduced spending on academia. Absolutely an intelligent person. Didn't last past the probationary period, he just didn't get things naturally on his own, he needed a lot of guidance. Over the years I've seen that nearly half the people hired into entry-level roles don't learn to become independent enough by the end of their probationary period to be retained after it. Sometimes it's seniors too, they've worked at a place that just cranks out very similar solutions day in and day out (e.g only done frontend and only with one framework, or only a bunch of CRUD applications in one single tech stack) for like 7 or 8 years, that place has a downturn and then they apply for a job elsewhere and they just don't adapt.

    Not everyone's cut out to be a truck driver either, but once someone has learned to drive trucks, they can drive trucks for another company too. Whether your new employee starts pulling in profit on the first week or you need 4 months to determine if there's a decent chance of them being a net benefit by the end of the first year has a lot of bearing on how badly you want to retain your existing talent.

    Anyway, in my country only the top talent at a couple of companies gets paid significantly more than truck drivers. A junior developer might make less than someone who just started driving a truck. Places like the US just have highly inflated salaries for devs because they're expected to work in high cost of living cities and compete like crazy for their jobs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 5 months ago* (13 children)

    Might want to edit your first line, where you say you're devastated that a trucker gets paid almost as much as a software dev. You resolve this as you go on, but I'm surprised you're not getting more kneejerk douchevotes from people who scan the first line and just infer the rest in the most negative way possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 5 months ago* (11 children)

    It was intentional. A sign of a skilled writer, even. Irony works.

    (Even if it does undercut the trucker roommate a bit. The double irony of privilege.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (10 children)

    Not sure how you know what was intentional without being the writer, but ok.

    edit: based on the douchevotes, a lot of lemmites either believe in psychic powers or don't realize comments have usernames.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    Because we all read the post their comment was responding to and understood quickly & easily that they were setting up the same reversal of expectations as the lineman in the OP. Context my friend, context.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Not sure how you know they weren't but ok.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (6 children)

    Because comments have usernames on them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    You could tell they aren't using the first line as a rhetorical device because their username is Leon?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)

    No, I could tell one person didn't write the comment they were making a pronouncement about because the two comments had different usernames. I did assume it wasn't one peson using two accounts, so my bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

    OK. So how does that help with you knowing OP didn't write it like that on purpose?

    See all those upvotes OP is getting? It means people understood why he wrote "devastated" because they read the entire comment. I think your heart was in the right place, but in the end your concern was completely unwarranted. It's a shame you got downvoted just for caring about OP's wellbeing :(

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    I don't get why all these questions and challenges are necessary - it was just a minor editorial criticism and then a reply to somebody claiming to know what the writer was thinking. Have it any way you guys want.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago

    How do I "know" that you have a mind and have conscious experiences and aren't just a zombie?

    For arguments sake let's say I don't "know." But I can still assume so. I wrote and write under the assumption that such is the case then and now.

    Does one need to know x--whatever "know" means--to state "that x"?

    I don't believe so, certainly not as a blanket rule. Do you? Is that why the standard was applied to what I wrote?

    A can of worms. What's the point? Plenty abound in backyards, internet forums (elsewhere), and politicians' brains apparently.

    Ultimately, the bar--or standard of proof--for acknowledgement and praise, which could have been reasonably inferred from my comment, is low. E.g., when a student does well on a test (in-person, lol), we do not need to "know" that they are perspicacious or precocious. Nor do we need to "know" that they didn't cheat or simply "guessed" and got lucky. Regardless of (or even in spite of) experience or plausibility, I strongly hold that it is by default fine to assume they did a good job and are a good student. That's good faith.

    How can anyone make friends or have a good life without having some good faith for "strangers," even if that "vulnerability" can be abused from time to time?

    Good luck on the path ahead.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    I understand what you mean, but it seems like this post is filled with people that are willing to engage rather than be judgemental. Like the other person said, it is a sign of a good writer - to engage with the readers.

    Of course, there are other cases within this site where people are jerks, but in this case you gotta understand that your own anger is spilling into situations where the only jerk is you.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 56 points 5 months ago (23 children)

    It's kind of sad that people are so motivated by jealousy. Like why would I care if other people have it better?

  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (11 children)

    I think jealousy gets a bad rap. It tells you what you want, and what you personally or society could work toward.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Jealousy and envy are not the same thing, although the nuance is subtle. What you're talking about is closer to envy. You can be envious of something or someone without the hostility that turns it into jealousy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    I disagree. I believe that you choose for it to be envy or jealousy by your definition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    What my friend was conveying is that envy is the want for something--usually that another has--and jealousy is the fear of losing something that one already has.

    The interchangeable usage, e.g. by teenagers, based on a vague understanding is just that (for adults it crystalizes into something normative though they're probably unaware of it, ego defense mechanisms lol).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    It's not my definition. That is the subtle difference between the two words. But, most people use both words for the same thing, and most people only use the word jealousy for both things.

    Merriam Webster has an interesting paragraph on the page for jealousy about it: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jealousy

    You can also check the definitions of jealous and envious yourself, you'll see that one is defined through hostility of some sort.

    The nuance is usually clear through context no matter which word you use, though. But I think that when you use it in a generic manner like you did, using the right word is best.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Again, both words are responses to the emotion and a choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    Everyone loves Nietche but no one is actually living Nietche. Sure it's a useful tool if you stop, analyze this emotion and built from it but how many people are actually capable of this in practice? Instead people just get captured by the emotion and never progress.

    I don't think pop culture will ever view jealousy as a positive emotion until we collectively learn emotions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago*

    Seeing what someone else has and taking that as information to then decide what you want is not jealousy. Jealousy is seeing what someone else has and hating them for it. It deserves a bad rap.

    You’re talking about ambition, or something else.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    The US was build on the "fuck you I got mine" mentality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    If you consider the monarchies it came from, this was a big improvement. To even open up the possibility of someone “getting theirs” without any birthright to it was a revelation in its time. But now we’re ready for the next thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

    The crab will legit only escape and live if it gets enough other crabs under it to reach the rim of the bucket. I guess you’re saying people act like that even when they don’t need to?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

    The metaphor is derived from anecdotal claims about the behavior of crabs contained in an open bucket: if a crab starts to climb out,[3] it will be pulled back in by the others, ensuring the group's collective demise.[4][5][6]

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    I don't think it is fair for a person dedicating years of life towards higher education and becoming a professional to earn the same as someone who doesn't. Its not jealousy, its just unfair. If earnings are flat, what motivates someone from getting educated and growing as a person?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    Lots of people get degrees in lower-earning fields because they value working on things that are interesting or meaningful to them more than they value the income tradeoff. Growing as a person is its own reward.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 33 points 5 months ago

    Anybody that's offended by burger flippers making as much as them should be pointing that anger in the right direction. Towards their employer.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 5 months ago

    When the minimum wage was instituted, the intention was one full-time worker would be able to support the family of four suburban lifestyle. They've been gaslighting us for a long time.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 5 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    The ONLY risk of a minimum wage or Living Wage is that companies that highly skilled workers earning the same might move to less skilled jobs. For this, the only rational action is to pay your skilled workers accordingly. FAIR PAY is not difficult when an executive team earn millions or billions.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 5 months ago* (19 children)

    If a bunch of burger flippers started making what I make I would demand a raise. If my raise was denied I'd go get a job as a burger flipper and probably be a lot less stressed out than I am currently.

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    If fast-food workers began earning wages comparable to electricians, I wouldn't necessarily expect electricians to become poorer. I'd expect employers who depend on skilled labor to increase compensation to remain competitive. The question then becomes whether those higher labor costs come from reduced profits, increased prices, greater productivity, or some combination of all three.

    Anyway, it is better for all workers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    what you'd actually see is increased unemployment, because that's the most effective regulator of salaries. the system requires a mass of people without jobs in order to balance itself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    the system requires a mass of people without jobs in order to balance itself.

    I don't know where you got this idea, it seems more like the system requires desperate people and lack of jobs does help in causing that. However, fuck the system

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago*

    it's pretty simple; given offers of two identical jobs with different benefits, you'd pick the better one. if there isn't enough people to fill all open positions, employers need to compete by raising benefits. in short, price follows demand. the more people that are looking for jobs, the lower employers can push salaries and still hire someone.

    when neolibs campaign on how "everyone should have a job" and use that as an excuse to cut unemployment benefits, that's them trying to distract from the fact that unemployment is necessary for the system they built to function. as unemployment approaches zero, salaries approach infinity.

    so yeah, fuck that system.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

    A few percent of job seekers as structural unemployment supports a healthy economy where people change jobs and careers to match changes in labor needs.

    That doesn't mean an increase in minimum wage increases unemployment. There are hundreds of academic studies investigating that question, and it seems the increased economic activity of low-income people having more money generates enough new jobs to at least balance whatever job cuts happen due to the higher labor costs (low-income people tend to spend all their money, so they are more effective agents of short term economic stimulus than higher-income households that tend to save some of it).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    i was more thinking the other way round, that an increase in unemployment decreases wages.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (1 child)

    Increased unemployment can lead to decreased wages, depending on other factors. I had read your post above as claiming a multipart chain of higher minimum wage -> increased unemployment -> decreased wages, and my post was intended to address the first link (higher minimum wage -> increased unemployment), not the second.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    Fast food work is pretty stressful, IMO.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    It can be but it's a different kind than what I'm dealing with though. It's repetitive busy work and stupid scheduling bullshit vs. big projects that go on for months with deadlines and coordination between vendors and half a dozen internal teams where nobody wants to take ownership of anything. Fast food work never kept me up at night.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    This. Having homework is stressful. Being responsible for the uptime of systems and the inevitability of getting calls in the middle of the night is stressful. Having stuff follow you home is a different kind of added stress.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    Get a union job, and you won't have to take your work home either

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    We take our work home because we're thinking about the problems and how to solve them all the time, some of my best solutions came to me in the shower.

    I have a home lab and I often carry what I learn from my lab to work, I'm not working my job when I'm working on my lab, but there mental overlap is there.

    I can't imagine I'll be solving many burger flipping problems in the shower.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    Fair enough, if that works for you.

    I enjoy the work/life balance too much, and love being able to leave my work at work. And being in a union makes that a reality for me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    If the floor were higher for everyone, I wouldn’t see a problem with some jobs earning more necessarily. What you’re describing will probably always be with us: some work is just harder or less pleasant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago

    Yes, to be clear I'm saying the floor being raised would be a benefit to me and others like me as well. Either I make more money or I can go to a less stressful job without losing income. Regardless of if it benefits me or not everyone should make a living wage for a full days work.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    if they started making what I make, I'd see if they were hiring!!!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago

    I'm an EE with utility clients. If a lineman/wireman started making the same as me, I would feel the same way.

    All the money is sucked out by equity holders.

    This economy makes me think of Hamilton's "Dragon", where everyone sank most of their paycheck back into the company to get a high enough "stake", to even get a chance at a meaningful job, at said company.

    I'm not even sure when this good little Republican became radicalized. I've done pretty well for myself and yet I would happily watch it all burn down to the fucking ground if it meant everyone actually got a meaningful standard of living and healthcare.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    If the rising floor makes things cramped, it is time to raise the roof not break the floor.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I'm retired from a union IT job with a college. And now that I've got mine, I will go to the wall to help Gen Z and Alpha get theirs too.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    If you want them to flip burgers for you, pay them what you'd want to make flipping burgers for them.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    And I'll even say, I don't want to flip burgers. The thing I want to do most is my job, and other people can do other jobs. I feel like there's always this fear, oh, who will do the skilled/educated jobs! Like, smart folks will not suddenly be like "Eh, I don't want to be a doctor anymore because people can survive on flipping burgers."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    I get it, I love my career, but burning out is a real problem in high skill labor as is. This is especially the case for medicine. But I think the bigger concern is people dropping out of the education. Engineering school was brutal, and there were points I considered dropping out, but stuck around because it offered a better life than anything I could hope for if I dropped out. Medical school is even worse for that. Trades are physically difficult, often dangerous, and require education.

    I don't think even most people would drop their career in that scenario, but I do think we'd find ourselves in a position where there's very little competition for jobs like these and a lot of competition for currently low wage jobs, though that would probably push more people into training for more stable employment.

    Minimum wage still needs to be livable though

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago

    Well I come from a long line of bucket crabs

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    The fact that they managed to convince the US that people working a fast food job don't deserve a living wage while CEOS are making millions to billions is utterly insane.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    I remember all the conversations I've had that started with the other person saying, "Can you believe so-and-so gets paid $x million dollars for playing [sport]?!?" and ended quickly with me asking, "Can you believe the owner makes $X million dollars for doing NOTHING"?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    While inflated CEO pay is certainly outrageous, it's the people who own the businesses that we should reserve our most vitriolic hate for. After all, at least CEOs do work that marginally contributes to the running of enterprises. Shareholders do nothing except siphon profit away from the people who create it. Not saying CEOs are good, but let's not get shortsighted here: the entire system of private ownership of the means of production is what needs to change for things to get better.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›