[itsmemattchung]

> The main warning I might just give to people is to keep proper distances between work and personal life

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. As a millennial, I've tied so much my self-worth into my career and recently, started questioning this belief and I think the next generation (i.e. Gen Z) might be on to something around quiet quitting, their generation placing extra emphasis on pursuing things that make them happy and viewing work as .... well, work.

[jraph]

Millennial too. Thought for thoughts then!

For me, paid work is a means to achieve what I personally want to achieve. If I can achieve what I want during work hours that's great, stars are aligned. If not, work is just a way of getting the money I need to achieve what I want, and should never drain me.

I don't care about career, I care about being paid enough to do what I want to do of my life. I won't sacrifice personal life for it.

Work is a good chunk of the time so it should also be enjoyable as best as possible.

Of course, advancing your carrier can help get paid even more / enjoy even better, if so it might be good thing to do. It's just that it's a means, not a goal, like it seemed to be for some of our parents or grand parents.

[flerchin]

LOL welcome to your thirties. Try to lean more towards the weird new hobby side of things, instead of the 20yo girlfriend side.

[swader999]

Sage advice.

[rejectfinite]

>around quiet quitting

Please do not use this phrase.

Working 9-5 is called "doing your job"

IT in Europe here and we work 8-5 with 1h lunch...

[yamtaddle]

> IT in Europe here and we work 8-5 with 1h lunch...

Similar in the US, I've never actually seen an office that works 9-5, despite that being the phrase. It's always 8:30-5 or 8-5.

It may once have been A Thing here in the US, with a 30-minute lunch and two 15-minute breaks coming out of a total of eight hours at work, since there are legally-mandated break periods for ordinary wage or hourly workers—but it seems like everyone's "exempt" now and so has far less legal protection, plus I'm sure enforcement's nearly non-existent. I assume it did actually exist, once, though, for "9-to-5" to have entered the language to begin with.

[BrandoElFollito]

9 to 18 in France, mostly. Time for lunch is usually in the 30-45 min but this is by choice.

Quite a lot of people stay after 18, mainly because of historical/ tradition reasons.

[komali2]

Millennial here as well, it's really excited to see our generation and the next generation reject "making money for someone else" as a way of finding meaning in life. I'm chewing on a lot of blog posts about this, regarding for example how the concept of "retirement" is terrifying. I was on a cruise recently and talking with a bunch of old people, and the subject often came up about how people were "finally taking the trips they always wanted to," or "finally exploring xyz hobby they never had time for."

How terrifying is that, busting ass from your 20s to mid to late 50s, and then getting hopefully another 30 years to "enjoy life?" I mean I'm sure many people find enjoyment along the way but damn that just seems so depressing.

Maybe it wasn't bad when that generation was working, I know many had a very nice quality of life for relatively less effort due to higher purchasing power and lower housing costs.

[autokad]

In their 20s and 30s, my siblings pursued their own interests and desires, but unfortunately, this approach did not lead to success. Now in their late 50s and early 60s, they find themselves lacking the necessary skills and experience to keep up with the rapidly changing job market. As a result, they are limited to unskilled labor, with no significant savings or retirement plans. Despite having pursued their dreams when they were younger, they are not particularly content.

They constantly ask me for money now.

[agubelu]

Then I would argue that it is a systemic issue that people who do "unskilled work" are not paid enough to be able to save money or access retirement plans (I assume you live in the US where there isn't a public pension system)

[autokad]

or ... there are consequences for never investing in yourself. if you treat work as work, that's all you will ever get out of it. a career is one of the most important things in a person's life and should not be taken as unimportant.

I'm also perplexed about the people who say things like 'why should I make someone else rich'. can you imagine that in an interview? yeah hire me, but you better not be making a profit on me. you better break even or lose money or I'm out! you should WANT people to make money off your efforts.

[itsmemattchung]

> How terrifying is that, busting ass from your 20s to mid to late 50s

Agreed. I'm all onboard with delayed gratification. I'm onboard with "putting in the work." But waiting (literally) decades before living it up... sounds totally backwards.

[4RealFreedom]

The flip side is there are people out there that do everything they want now. A couple people I know have been doing that for quite some time. They're getting older now - they've raided their retirement, they don't have much in terms of savings, no assets. Life is getting more difficult for them as they get older. My advice would be to find some balance. Go on some great adventures within reason. There's no reason to buckle down entirely until you're 60 but be smart about it.

[itsmemattchung]

> I'm chewing on a lot of blog posts about this

Care to share some of your favorite findings?

[komali2]

Sorry I meant I'm writing blog posts about this.

The topics are

1. Capitalism takes away your ability to be bored, at least mostly. You'll spend the majority of your time at work. You can be bored there, but not in a very productive way. Your boredom is a function of the company's failure to extract maximum value from you every hour you're there. My gf got laid off with a severance, her boredom is a gift, she can sit and be bored and in that way think about what her purpose is, why she likes being alive and what she wants to do with it. In that way capitalism steals purpose: your purpose day to day is to drive profits for a company. It's not explicitly evil or bad feeling when that happens, because the system rewards you in a million ways when you do tie your purpose to a company's profits. In what ways can people escape this to explore what their purpose might actually be? This isn't necessarily a new thought, I just wanted to explore it.

2. That "retirement" exists as a concept is terrifying for so many reasons, as listed above. It also creates a kind of cultural expectation of sacrificing the bulk of your life to "earn the right" to leisure... but some people are born into that right. That sucks.

3. Capitalism may have weaponized and pillaged the desire to be a part of something greater. Similar to 1, there's probably a natural human desire to "be a part of something greater" (heard in countless interviews of people that do otherwise kinda strange things like join violent militaries or participate in cults or allow themselves to be hazed to join frats). When you join a company, that desire is cannibalized to feed the needs of the corporation. Your day to day energy to spend on being a part of your local community is instead directed to the needs of a company who is possibly transnational and who even could be directly harming your community, by for example dumping trainfuls of harmful chemicals in your backyard. Corporations and corporate culture have been very good at directing the desire to have a common goal and be working together on something, but did they invent these techniques or just pillage them? Is project management something unique to capitalism? What happens if you get a big group of people who aren't having these energies directed by a profit minded project manager, what will they do in their own communities to find meaning? What happens when you take a highly skilled project manager and put them in a situation where there's no profit to be made, what kind of projects and organization will they dream up? This because I do a lot of anarchistic direct action and communal work and am always thinking about managing goals, projects, tasks, needs, and etc in situations where there's no profit motive.

I'm also working on a blog post about how tf to get the 80 different web dev aligned emacs major modes to all respect a .editorconfig file and another one journaling my family's visit to Taiwan so realistically I'm spinning way too many plates....

[swader999]

A human life is barely the time it takes at a stop light when you consider we live for eternity. Learn how to love, don't try to gratify the ego.

[moremetadata]

> busting ass from your 20s to mid to late 50s, and then getting hopefully another 30 years to "enjoy life?"

Its just slavery which the older generations thought was appropriate, much like having a large family to look after you was a thing before family sizes came down.

It sounds cliched, but have a bucket list of things you want to do and try to do some of them. Put yourself first and your job second because the days of businesses looking after their staff and a job for life is long gone as every recession demonstrates.

[DrThunder]

How is working for money slavery?

Do you believe food just magically appears on your plate, water cleans itself, your plumbing just happens to work, medical services operate autonomously etc.?

The problem here, is you're an elitist. For you, your boring desk job is slavery so you want the freedom to go about doing whatever you want while the peasants provide you the means to continue being fat happy without providing anything back to society.

You're speaking from a small minded subset of white collar society that has the inability to understand how society operates as a whole. What you want is to subject a certain class to "slavery" to support your endeavors.

[komali2]

> Do you believe food just magically appears on your plate, water cleans itself, your plumbing just happens to work, medical services operate autonomously etc

Every politician I meet I ask the same question: what do we do when automation has driven the value of nearly all human labor down to pennies? None have an answer. Nobody that's a big fan of the current system has given me an answer other than "it'll never happen," but it seems inevitable to me.

The usa already subsidizes food non productivity to maintain stable prices for agriculture. So why don't they just stop doing that so food does magically appear on my plate? Is maintaining broken market dynamics in every aspect of life so important that it justifies some going hungry, some working two jobs, all of us working 40 hours a week until we're 60?

[DrThunder]

You realize food rots right?

[komali2]

Not exactly sure your point. Sure, yes, food rots. Glad we can agree?

[moremetadata]

> How is working for money slavery?

Its not, but the way the money is distributed and created is. For example during the 2008 crisis because the velocity of money fell, banks were desperate to get people spending again so interest free £million were offered to the rich in order to get them to spend money in the economy, reinforcing the trickle down concept.

> is you're an elitist.

What gave you that impression?

> that has the inability to understand how society operates as a whole.

So explain it then? Explain society.

> want is to subject a certain class to "slavery" to support your endeavors.

I think you are further from the truth, if I could take a pill or an injection to end my live in a non barbaric way today, I would take it. Unfortunately thats not on offer because society dictates I need to be tortured to support it.

My life has already been stolen, and there isnt the science to replace it.

[DrThunder]

I did explain it to you. YOU want a certain class of people to continue working and providing the sustenance it takes to maintain your modern standard of living while not contributing at all yourself. SOMEONE will have to maintain emergency services, food, and water. Why do you think you alone should get to opt out of the system?

You CANNOT obtain the lifestyle you're going on about with out a sub-class of individuals that do have to continue working these supposedly "slave labor" jobs you're talking about. This makes you an elitist. You think you deserve to live a care free life while others are forced to maintain that for you.

You need an attitude adjustment and you need to put some perspective in place before it's too late. You're not thankful for what you've got.

[komali2]

Why not robots?

[Mountain_Skies]

The leading edge of Gen Z has taken to concepts like quiet quitting, but they still seem to have tied their personal lives to their jobs, often having few physical world friends outside of the workplace and still falling for the "we're a family" line, even if now they want to play to part of kid who doesn't take out the trash if their allowance isn't high enough (which it might not be). Doubt that's healthy and seems a lot like the recreation of a dysfunctional family.

[autokad]

The success of this approach hinges on the assumption that no one else is doing it. However, even those who quietly quit still rely on others to provide the goods and services they desire. There is a concern that this could lead to a snowball effect and result in food scarcity and famine, but the timeline for such an outcome is uncertain.

In terms of adding extra items to improve their happiness, it appears that this strategy is generally ineffective. Despite their efforts, the quiet quitters I met do not appear to be any happier

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

Millenials still had cause to buy into the Regan-era story of hard work and hyper capitalism leading to a glorious future for the common person. Zoomers have never been able to buy into that lie because they were born into a world where it is so obviously untrue.

[DrThunder]

Zoomers aren't even old enough to determine that yet. They're in their early 20's at most and no one that age has the experience to definitively say anything regarding this.

The alternative to hard work is doing nothing and that certainly will get you no where at all. The idea that a younger generation might have had it slightly better (which I think is pretty subjective anyway, previous generations have all had their fair share of bad shit) so you won't do anything to get ahead is just asinine.

[red-iron-pine]

> The alternative to hard work is doing nothing and that certainly will get you no where at all.

This is a false dichotomy. I put in a solid 40-50 hours at work. If I have to put in double that just to stand a shot -- not get, but have a shot at -- the lifestyle that my parent's had while only putting in 40 hours a week, then the system has failed me.

And that was 40 hours a week with one person working and the other staying at home.

No one is suggesting you get to have stuff for free, but it is painfully clear that even with dual incomes the average American is failing to maintain their parents' standard of living.

It's a broken system, and the Zoomers can easily see that -- they've had smartphones since they were like 8.

[DrThunder]

No, your argument is a straw man. I'm not referring to your personal work ethic here. The general idea that you will get ahead by doing less is just bullshit. You seem to have a narrow focus on the white collar workplace as it pertains to you. I'm speaking about life in general.

"It's a broken system, and the Zoomers can easily see that -- they've had smartphones since they were like 8."

If you're referring to the poor decision making on raising kids with smartphones I'd agree with you, but that's a lack of good parenting and bad moral judgement. It has nothing to do with capitalism or modern work ethic.

The irony and cognitive dissonance in this statement. That means by every economic measure they were doing quite well at age 8. Did boomers get cell phones when they were 8? How about survivors of the Great Depression... do you think they had anything close to the equivalent of a cell phone at the time? The other issue here is that you believe constant negative influx of media as always truthful.

The issue with you is that you assume that a generation having slightly less than the previous means we need to scrap the whole system and it doesn't work. You need to put some things in perspective and maybe realize that the life you had growing up was WAY above average so a slight decline to a lifestyle that's still magnitudes better than what the average world citizen deals with isn't all that big of a problem. There are generations and generations of people that died to give you what you got, went through world wars, civil wars, great depression, pandemics. I'm sure they'd have loved to be "slaving away" in your climate controlled office environment with a smartphone.

"And that was 40 hours a week with one person working and the other staying at home."

You can blame feminism for that. It tricked the average woman into thinking they would have more meaning working in an office 40 hours a week than they would doing the most important job in the world... raising kids. It turns out that when everyone starts having a higher average family income, the market adjusts to that. And, the staying home and raising kids part is key, they weren't just sitting at home doing nothing while their partner worked.

[namaria]

You're putting forward a false dichotomy. Not buying into the ethics of 'work hard for a company, they make money, you make money and that is a self evident net positive' is quite reasonable. There is no need to resort to name calling for people who don't buy into this narrative. There is quite a lot more to live, and to being a good person, then pouring your all into paid work. And it is plain to see there was a nice party from 1960 to 1980s and we're the cleanup crew. A working person could support a family, buy a home before 30 and have hobbies 50 years ago. Now that sounds like a bad joke.

[DrThunder]

You're putting forth a strawman. Where did I mention anything about a company??? Who did I call names?

"A working person could support a family, buy a home before 30 and have hobbies 50 years ago."

Try not living on the coast near your favorite coffee shop and you too can achieve this. It's almost like those generations didn't expect to have a beach front condo in LA with every tech gadget available.

That's because one person worked. What do you think happens economically when both parents in a family start working? This is basic economic principle.