Reddit r/antiwork

[Tempname23]

 I like to be a contrarian when I comment in the r/antiwork section of reddit. I often see it as a bunch of whiny brats that want everything now. I must admit we saved and made it to a high net worth coming from lower income families and earning middle, middleclass income, well under $100,000.
  Lots of complaints about earning $15 an hour, neither my wife nor I ever earned that much, (but yes, inflation).
  The conversation got off on a tangent about it all being Reagan's fault.
Here's a link, but is is a long thread so I'll quote a bit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/t1s6ge/thoughts_on_this_found_on_facebook_and_comments/hyieqxu/?context=8&depth=9

"I blame Reagan for everything. Even Russian aggression…."

"Except for California Public Schools funding. He cut that drastically as governor, and was the primary reason my Mom (republican) didn't vote for him."

"He did it to save America’s global businesses. We were being edged out by Germans and Japanese companies. But I agree he made this country worse for the average worker."

"He did it to maintain the profit margins of America's global businesses."

And then the contrarian!

"You all are starting to wear on me, my best earning and saving years were when Reagan was president. I was about 30 yrs old. I did well, and the economy prospered for years after he left. I'm retired now, but I keep hearing all these young people whine about how hard it is. Maybe it is, the standard is different now, my wife and I earned $18,000 in 1982 and saved $6,000, the inflation adjusted numbers would be, earn $54,000 and save $18,000. The difference is we didn't try to keep up with the Jones's. We had used cars, no cell phones, didn't eat out much, mowed our own lawn, no boat, no snow mobile or 4 wheeler, we didn't have social media that showed how well others are doing. We didn't show a picture every time we went out to eat. We saved something from every check, we invested in the stock market, we didn't have BTC to gamble on. I just don't know if it is really that much harder to make it now or, if it is just people want, want, want, and so complain about what they think others have. I follow other groups of hard working people saving as much as they can and so then they can retire early. I'm sure they don't love their jobs, it is a means to an end. They just keep plugging away with a whole different attitude. I think that is the difference, they believe there is a better future and are working and saving for it, others just see a bleak future and, here we are. It might turn out OK, some of my generation were the hippies and turned out good."

"Full time at $15 an hour is $30,000 per year. Adjusted for inflation, you’re already more than 50% ahead on gross income alone. 20% of the population makes less than that. The idea that someone can save 1/3 of their income when housing alone can be almost half is the kind of self-centered boomer logic that falls apart before you’re even done establishing the premises. The “fuck you, I got mine” attitude really gets old after your generation spent decades dismantling everything that allowed you to succeed. You pulled the ladder up after yourselves, and are now standing atop the cliff calling us lazy for failing to fly up and join you."

Contrarian again.

"The only thing you missed is that the $54,000 was with both me and my wife working so, now, two making $30k each is 11% over what we earned. To bring that back to par 20% of the population earns less than $60,000. Meaning if you lived like that 20%, you could be saving money and building a nest egg. There is always an excuse as to 'why you can't', how about jumping on the 'why we can' bandwagon."

[wageslave23]

What was the response to your second response?

They can complain all they want but it won't change anything. The fact that they would rather look to place blame for their situation instead of working to make themselves more valuable indicates that they aren't really looking for solutions. Trying to convince them otherwise seems like an exercise in futility.

[trc4897]

I have heard of this subreddit before but have stayed away since I know a lot of the posts will bother me. I definitely agree that "keeping up with the Joneses" accounts for a lot of their troubles (but not all, of course). A generally negative attitude towards working doesn't help either! But maybe that's just my eternal optimist talking lol

[Tempname23]

What was the response to your second response?

 It's been a month and there has been no response.

[wageslave23]

If you would like, you can tell them if anyone is actually interested in a solution, you can tell them that they can move to IL and enter a trade union near Chicago.  Houses in the suburbs cost about $300,000 for a very nice home.  Mortgage will run you $2,000/mo and after 4 year apprenticeship you are guaranteed to make $100,000+.  No degree required, but you might have to move out of your parents' basement, wake up before 9am, and break a sweat.  Or you can wait for some benevolent politician to come along and save you from the big bad world.

[Tempname23]

I have heard of this subreddit before but have stayed away since I know a lot of the posts will bother me. I definitely agree that "keeping up with the Joneses" accounts for a lot of their troubles (but not all, of course). A generally negative attitude towards working doesn't help either! But maybe that's just my eternal optimist talking lol

 Yes indeed, the whole negative attitude of the thread can be frustrating. The section is just one person embracing another's feelings that it is all stacked against us, so why work.
 I do consider myself lucky with my kids, one is just 64 days from graduating dental school and will have a great income, the other a late bloomer, has a chemistry degree, has 9 months at a job with a decent income. Counting my blessings! Both are as you say, "eternal optimists" As are we.

[Tempname23]

If you would like, you can tell them if anyone is actually interested in a solution, you can tell them that they can move to IL and enter a trade union near Chicago.  Houses in the suburbs cost about $300,000 for a very nice home.  Mortgage will run you $2,000/mo and after 4 year apprenticeship you are guaranteed to make $100,000+.  No degree required, but you might have to move out of your parents' basement, wake up before 9am, and break a sweat.  Or you can wait for some benevolent politician to come along and save you from the big bad world.

  "wake up before 9am, and break a sweat" Deal Breaker. Complaining is much easier.

[DadJokes]

There's no point in commenting in those threads. They aren't looking for solutions, just other people to complain to. It's easier to place blame on others than to take responsibility and do something to improve your life.

I did get a kick out of the Fox News interview with a former mod from that subreddit. She checked about every box for what you might picture as a stereotypical Reddit moderator.

[Tempname23]

There's no point in commenting in those threads. They aren't looking for solutions, just other people to complain to. It's easier to place blame on others than to take responsibility and do something to improve your life.

I did get a kick out of the Fox News interview with a former mod from that subreddit. She checked about every box for what you might picture as a stereotypical Reddit moderator.

  Any link for that?

[mizzourah2006]

If you would like, you can tell them if anyone is actually interested in a solution, you can tell them that they can move to IL and enter a trade union near Chicago.  Houses in the suburbs cost about $300,000 for a very nice home.  Mortgage will run you $2,000/mo and after 4 year apprenticeship you are guaranteed to make $100,000+.  No degree required, but you might have to move out of your parents' basement, wake up before 9am, and break a sweat.  Or you can wait for some benevolent politician to come along and save you from the big bad world.

Yup, I have plenty of friends in their mid 30s that aren't college educated, living in Saint Louis working in the trades. All are making "good money" for Saint Louis. My guess is with some overtime they are all pulling in between $80-$100k. All part of the union. It's not exactly glamorous work, but hey it pays the bills and they seem to not hate it. All have what I would consider middle to upper middle class homes, spouses, children in private schools, etc. But, yes I am in a group chat with them and they are blowing my phone up by 6 AM most weekdays, lol.

[Sibley]

There's no point in commenting in those threads. They aren't looking for solutions, just other people to complain to. It's easier to place blame on others than to take responsibility and do something to improve your life.

I did get a kick out of the Fox News interview with a former mod from that subreddit. She checked about every box for what you might picture as a stereotypical Reddit moderator.

That interview really pissed off the subreddit as well. In theory, they kicked out that mod. In reality, it's probably the same person, new account.

There's a lot that is wrong with work and the system overall. There's also a lot of people who are just complaining and want a free ride. That doesn't excuse the real problems that exist.

Tempname - I'd like to point out that you are, by definition of your age, privileged. I'm 36. I'm one of the lucky Millennials - I graduated just in time to get a good job, and I was lucky enough to have chosen a major that allowed me to keep that job when the economy melted down. (And by the way, the economy melted down in large part because of the actions and inactions of those decades older than me - and you're one of those people.) Then I was lucky enough to be able to buy a house BEFORE the housing market went insane. My sister is 2.5 years younger than me and it took her a full decade longer to get to the same starting point I had at 21. I'm still ahead of her even now.

You grew up and started working in a dramatically different set of circumstances. It makes a difference. You're not really appreciating the full meaning of that difference. You think you are, but you're not. It's not "but inflation". It's war and economic collapse and global pandemic and the odds are stacked against you - and btw you're just trying to figure out how to be a grownup while the rug is being pulled out from underneath you, over and over.

Take a step back, really look at how your life went and compare it the reality that exists for people in their 20s and early 30s now. Draw a timeline of major events if you need to. Do some research about the costs and available of housing, food, medical care, education, child care, both when you were 20 and now.

But yeah, that subreddit is trash. There are some good memes that come out of it sometimes, but that's about it.

[Edubb20]

I get their frustration. I don't think they always get their own frustration.

Here's what I see the majority of posts understanding:  1.Wealth inequality is a problem. 2. It has gotten worse in the last 4 decades. 3. Young peoples prospects are worse than their parents. 4. Our society has an unhealthy relationship with our work where we believe jobs are important because jobs are important. 

I agree with all of these.

The problem is, the majority of their posts are "I quit" porn about how they told the manager at Arby's to fuck off.  Yes, their manager may be an ass and may deserve to fuck off, but that isn't going to solve the problem for why 70% of jobs in the us are basically unnecessary and solely exist to keep you too busy to think.


They keep attacking your $20.00 assistant manager or under 100K net business owner. They are being distracted and solutions won't come from any form of poverty vs. middle class warfare.


I don't blame them for struggling to be more productive though, we have a TON of interwoven systems set up too keep at least a majority of people (in the U.S.) indebted.  Education system, healthcare system, childcare system, housing system, etc.

[MMMarbleheader]

I still want to find these parents who signed off on their kids assuming this massive debt and punch them in the face. No is obligated to pay for their kids tuition but they should be obligated to educate themselves on how the system works and steer their kid to the school that offers the best ROI or is the cheapest, not the one that has the coolest gym. The lack of parental involvement that I saw when I was in school was truly stunning. The schools are complicit too especially when students want to transfer in or change majors. But come in parents, time to adult here.

[PDXTabs]

I still want to find these parents who signed off on their kids assuming this massive debt and punch them in the face.

Plenty of children go to college after coming out of foster care. At this point they are considered adults by the Federal government for FAFSA purposes. Feel free to punch any elected official in the face. I will happily contribute to your legal defense fund.

As for r/antiwork I'm personally (more of less) opposed to spending years of your life doing something that doesn't advance society. To the extent that many jobs do not advance society (or even harm it) I'm totally onboard with r/antiwork. Of course, in an ideal world you would try hard to find a job that does advance society. But then sometimes the bullshit (or evil) job pays twice as much.

[OtherJen]

I still want to find these parents who signed off on their kids assuming this massive debt and punch them in the face. No is obligated to pay for their kids tuition but they should be obligated to educate themselves on how the system works and steer their kid to the school that offers the best ROI or is the cheapest, not the one that has the coolest gym. The lack of parental involvement that I saw when I was in school was truly stunning. The schools are complicit too especially when students want to transfer in or change majors. But come in parents, time to adult here.

Thank you. Usually I see complaints that the kids should have known better. Teenagers still need guidance. Most people who apply to colleges are not yet legal adults and don't have the experience to know a bad financial deal (this is why credit card companies target freshmen with cheap tokens and promises of easy spending money).

I know exactly how fortunate I was because my parents were able to pay my undergrad costs (in-state) not covered by scholarships. Not having tens of thousands of dollars of debt before getting my first career position was a huge step up. It meant that I could afford to take a low-paying entry-level job in my field that set me up for a better job and then grad school, and I could afford to take a pay cut to attend grad school on a full scholarship. It meant that 19 years ago, my husband (whose parents also covered his undergrad tuition) and I were able to scrape together a 5% down payment (all of our non-401K savings at the time) on a tiny fixer-upper house when our annual total household salary was $45K. We barely had money for anything else at the time, but our total housing + utilities payment is still under $1000 per month, while local rental costs have increased to often double that. We were able to purchase and pay for used cars before the supply chain issues of the last two years caused even the prices of used vehicles to skyrocket. We have enough money to buy food in bulk, space and money to run a second-hand freezer, and the leeway to handle inflated food costs.

[Tempname23]

As for r/antiwork I'm personally (more of less) opposed to spending years of your life doing something that doesn't advance society. To the extent that many jobs do not advance society (or even harm it) I'm totally onboard with r/antiwork.

  Not sure how highfalutin advancing society needs to be,
I'm happy their is someone to make and serve my burger, otherwise...
  Although, the service I got yesterday, no greeting, no thank you, absolutely flat affect. Plus, I ask for Ketchup, lettuce and onions only, they got it wrong. The only good thing was, I got a code for a $5.39 burger for filling out a survey to tell them about the poor service. Would have got the burger free without a complaint, but hopefully they will make some changes.

[CodingHare]

I think /r/antiwork has some good points.

1. Wages have stagnated while productivity and CEO bonus have risen.  We work more hours for less buying power than our parents.
2. Unions are a good check to unfettered corporatism and abusive management.
3. Capitalism goes both ways, if you can't find labor you need to increase wages, benefits, or hours.  Or your business is unsustainable.
4. On the individual level, since labor has more bargaining power right now, quit jobs until you find one that pays and treats you well.
5. Healthcare being tied to employment leads to a huge power imbalance.

Agreed that it becomes very depressing reading very quickly.

[Arbitrage]

I think /r/antiwork has some good points.

1. Wages have stagnated while productivity and CEO bonus have risen.  We work more hours for less buying power than our parents.
2. Unions are a good check to unfettered corporatism and abusive management.
3. Capitalism goes both ways, if you can't find labor you need to increase wages, benefits, or hours.  Or your business is unsustainable.
4. On the individual level, since labor has more bargaining power right now, quit jobs until you find one that pays and treats you well.
5. Healthcare being tied to employment leads to a huge power imbalance.

Agreed that it becomes very depressing reading very quickly.

Yes, I agree that there are some good points behind the subreddit, and I followed it for a bit to get a kick out of some of the corporate abuses being posted or to nod along to posts about how a job is merely an agreement to trade labor for pay rather than a subservience contract over your entire existence.  However, it is so bogged down with whining about how they deserve the moon for anything they do that I couldn't take it anymore. 

[mozar]

When my dad graduated from college in 1976 he made 50k a year. He works at a similar agency now, and starting salaries are, you guessed it, 50k a year. He was able to support a wife and child.
When people say you get 15 an hour and 30k a year that assumes that the employee is allowed to work 40 hours a week. That’s not often the case anymore. Employers will only give part time hours so that don’t have to pay health insurance.

I graduated from college in 2004 with 130k in debt. I paid off every cent. But no one should have to go through that. I support colleges having the same subsidies that baby boomers got to have.
I’m really glad that people have started to realize how bad things have gotten.
My response to anyone who says that young people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps is to say hey, until the world becomes the better place we’re not having children anymore. Enjoy not having any young people to tell to get off your lawn.

[DadJokes]

I still want to find these parents who signed off on their kids assuming this massive debt and punch them in the face. No is obligated to pay for their kids tuition but they should be obligated to educate themselves on how the system works and steer their kid to the school that offers the best ROI or is the cheapest, not the one that has the coolest gym. The lack of parental involvement that I saw when I was in school was truly stunning. The schools are complicit too especially when students want to transfer in or change majors. But come in parents, time to adult here.

Thank you. Usually I see complaints that the kids should have known better. Teenagers still need guidance. Most people who apply to colleges are not yet legal adults and don't have the experience to know a bad financial deal (this is why credit card companies target freshmen with cheap tokens and promises of easy spending money).

I know exactly how fortunate I was because my parents were able to pay my undergrad costs (in-state) not covered by scholarships. Not having tens of thousands of dollars of debt before getting my first career position was a huge step up. It meant that I could afford to take a low-paying entry-level job in my field that set me up for a better job and then grad school, and I could afford to take a pay cut to attend grad school on a full scholarship. It meant that 19 years ago, my husband (whose parents also covered his undergrad tuition) and I were able to scrape together a 5% down payment (all of our non-401K savings at the time) on a tiny fixer-upper house when our annual total household salary was $45K. We barely had money for anything else at the time, but our total housing + utilities payment is still under $1000 per month, while local rental costs have increased to often double that. We were able to purchase and pay for used cars before the supply chain issues of the last two years caused even the prices of used vehicles to skyrocket. We have enough money to buy food in bulk, space and money to run a second-hand freezer, and the leeway to handle inflated food costs.

I don't know if y'all were anything like me as a teenager, but my father did try to give me guidance to make college cheaper. He suggested that I attend community college in town and then go to the big university 30 miles away. I thought that he was an idiot and decided to move far away (but still in-state) for college.

Granted, if I had a better life situation at home, I might have been more inclined to take his advice, but I didn't even stay in that house long enough to finish high school. There was no way I was going to stay two more years for community college and then live nearby for university. I would have done anything to get out of west Texas.

I eventually wised up and figured out a way to get through college debt-free, but I don't think that's the case with many people. Like teenage me, they probably didn't listen to their parents, just like they're not receptive to internet advice on how to actually improve their lives.

We can argue all day whether or not things are harder for young people than they were for previous generations. That doesn't matter, because systemic change isn't likely to happen. All anyone can do is find a way to make the system work for them (while advocating for change if you like), or complain about how life isn't fair. I think the FIRE crowd has chosen the former while the anti-work crowd has chosen the latter.

[Arbitrage]

When my dad graduated from college in 1976 he made 50k a year. He works at a similar agency now, and starting salaries are, you guessed it, 50k a year. He was able to support a wife and child.

Are you sure about those numbers?  50k in 1976 is about $250k in today's dollars.  That's a crazy salary right out of college.  If he made that much, he was way up in the 1%, especially back then when the 1% wasn't quite so far ahead of the rest of us.

[Tempname23]

I support colleges having the same subsidies that baby boomers got to have.

 What are those?

[Sibley]

I support colleges having the same subsidies that baby boomers got to have.

 What are those?

They're called taxes. Public universities used to be largely subsidized by taxes. Income taxes primarily. This is a matter of public record.

[OtherJen]

I still want to find these parents who signed off on their kids assuming this massive debt and punch them in the face. No is obligated to pay for their kids tuition but they should be obligated to educate themselves on how the system works and steer their kid to the school that offers the best ROI or is the cheapest, not the one that has the coolest gym. The lack of parental involvement that I saw when I was in school was truly stunning. The schools are complicit too especially when students want to transfer in or change majors. But come in parents, time to adult here.

Thank you. Usually I see complaints that the kids should have known better. Teenagers still need guidance. Most people who apply to colleges are not yet legal adults and don't have the experience to know a bad financial deal (this is why credit card companies target freshmen with cheap tokens and promises of easy spending money).

I know exactly how fortunate I was because my parents were able to pay my undergrad costs (in-state) not covered by scholarships. Not having tens of thousands of dollars of debt before getting my first career position was a huge step up. It meant that I could afford to take a low-paying entry-level job in my field that set me up for a better job and then grad school, and I could afford to take a pay cut to attend grad school on a full scholarship. It meant that 19 years ago, my husband (whose parents also covered his undergrad tuition) and I were able to scrape together a 5% down payment (all of our non-401K savings at the time) on a tiny fixer-upper house when our annual total household salary was $45K. We barely had money for anything else at the time, but our total housing + utilities payment is still under $1000 per month, while local rental costs have increased to often double that. We were able to purchase and pay for used cars before the supply chain issues of the last two years caused even the prices of used vehicles to skyrocket. We have enough money to buy food in bulk, space and money to run a second-hand freezer, and the leeway to handle inflated food costs.

I don't know if y'all were anything like me as a teenager, but my father did try to give me guidance to make college cheaper. He suggested that I attend community college in town and then go to the big university 30 miles away. I thought that he was an idiot and decided to move far away (but still in-state) for college.

Granted, if I had a better life situation at home, I might have been more inclined to take his advice, but I didn't even stay in that house long enough to finish high school. There was no way I was going to stay two more years for community college and then live nearby for university. I would have done anything to get out of west Texas.

I eventually wised up and figured out a way to get through college debt-free, but I don't think that's the case with many people. Like teenage me, they probably didn't listen to their parents, just like they're not receptive to internet advice on how to actually improve their lives.

We can argue all day whether or not things are harder for young people than they were for previous generations. That doesn't matter, because systemic change isn't likely to happen. All anyone can do is find a way to make the system work for them (while advocating for change if you like), or complain about how life isn't fair. I think the FIRE crowd has chosen the former while the anti-work crowd has chosen the latter.

My parents barely graduated high school. They didn't have a lot of input beyond "you're not allowed to go out of state" and "get good grades and a scholarship." Like I said, I was fortunate enough that dad's good union factory job and mom's comfortable secretary job meant that they were able to cover what my scholarships didn't. That was a huge privilege. Graduating from high school in 1996, before tuition rates really ramped up, and having a scholarship that covered most of tuition was another privilege. It would be disingenuous of me not to recognize that.

It actually does matter whether things are harder for young people now than they were 40 or 50 years ago. Logically, if they ARE harder, then it seems ridiculous to hold today's young people to the same standards. We can argue all day about that. We can also argue all day about whether the average 17- or 18-year-old has the maturity and life experience to be solely in charge of decisions that will affect their finances for the next 20+ years. I'd argue that they don't, and maybe there's a flaw in the system that drives so many of them to make such bad decisions.

[nessness]

I support colleges having the same subsidies that baby boomers got to have.

 What are those?

They're called taxes. Public universities used to be largely subsidized by taxes. Income taxes primarily. This is a matter of public record.

Yep. When my mom was in college in the 70s, UCs were all free for in-state students. Now in-state tuition is about $14k/year. Even in-state community college tuition is about $1300/year now, which is out of reach for many low-income people.

[eyesonthehorizon]

... I'd argue that they don't, and maybe there's a flaw in the system that drives so many of them to make such bad decisions.

This exactly. Nobody is born with financial savvy; despite the best odds of history, the average Boomer retirement account is slim to slimmer. Things are measurably much harder for kids now, inequality is steep & increasing, parents who lucked into the middle class by dint of being born between 45-65 didn’t expect a decline in their kids’ prospects & generally told them all that investment in education was guaranteed to pay off - plus student debt is profitable to sell.

Gen X parents were disillusioned but also saw the writing on the wall that things were headed for greater divisions between haves & have-nots, plus the crumbling of union protections under right-to-work legislation, plus the erosion of public & corporate-funded services & safety nets in a wave of privatization, so they were if anything more desperate to get their kids into school wealth safety. Hence the furious extracurricular scheduling & helicopter/ Tiger Mom parenting.

Sure, there are plenty of wish-fulfillment posts - they get the most upvotes & engagement so they rise to the algorithmic “top”, you can avoid clickbait by sorting by New instead of Hot. A huge influx of casual users typically dilutes the core tenets of a sub(culture), as we’ve seen here too.

There are more posts by minimum wage workers because they’re numerous (the growth of inequality again) plus broadly seen as disposable trash & most prone to be abused - they also risk the least from burning bridges. That’s what steep inequality creates, disillusionment, which I’d rather not see resolve into guillotines vs Pinkertons. Why shouldn’t they want to tear it down? As someone who worked very hard to get where I am, I would like systemic change in their favor. It shouldn’t be this hard or this ugly, nor does it have to be; the studies all show it costs less to just install a floor below which people can’t fall than deal with the harm after the fact. Practically everyone benefits, as the middle decades of the last century in America show, as the last few decades in Scandinavia show. Higher pay correlates with higher engagement among employees & better work done. (It does not have to correlate with higher prices in most cases, with modern technological capacity & leadership enough to not require 200x the pay of frontline workers.)

Most of what they have to say, if you get past the dollar figures (distorted by missing historical/ regional context & often by financial illiteracy, which is common when you’ve never had any money) is simply that they don’t want their futures constrained by rising costs & depressed wages into a cycle of hand-to-mouth meaningless “hustle” & tedious bullshit. (Good for them, that’s why we’re all here. Plenty of user overlap with the FIRE subreddits, so it’s not as if they’re all laying about waiting to be saved - they’re just more honest about the bullshit than has been fashionable in the preceding years.) They want a life not centered around work, the absolute gall!

If you aren’t in with MMM’s ethos that optimizing for happiness is the only rational decision I’m not sure what to say; is what I’m hearing actually anger that they want a solution beyond their own individual circumstances? Or just crab-bucketing?  It seems hilariously ironic to grumble “youngsters just don’t want to work these days” in a forum dedicated to not having to work all your youth.

[clifp]

When my dad graduated from college in 1976 he made 50k a year. He works at a similar agency now, and starting salaries are, you guessed it, 50k a year. He was able to support a wife and child.

Are you sure about those numbers?  50k in 1976 is about $250k in today's dollars.  That's a crazy salary right out of college.  If he made that much, he was way up in the 1%, especially back then when the 1% wasn't quite so far ahead of the rest of us.

I call BS. I graduated in 1981,with an electrical engineering degree from a top school, and my ten plus job offers ranged from 21-24K.   My salary was in the top 20% according to a survey I saw from IEEE a year or so later.   24K is 78K in 2022 dollars and the average salary for a new college grad with a computer engineer degree is around $72K.

So unless your dad graduated from medical school, or had a PHd in Engineering with a few patents, he simply didn't make that kind of money.

[DadJokes]

It actually does matter whether things are harder for young people now than they were 40 or 50 years ago. Logically, if they ARE harder, then it seems ridiculous to hold today's young people to the same standards. We can argue all day about that. We can also argue all day about whether the average 17- or 18-year-old has the maturity and life experience to be solely in charge of decisions that will affect their finances for the next 20+ years. I'd argue that they don't, and maybe there's a flaw in the system that drives so many of them to make such bad decisions.

I never said anything about holding today's young people to the same standards. Of course there's a flaw in the system; there are a lot of flaws. My point is that complaining on the internet into an echo chamber does jack shit to help them. Instead, it just creates a negative feedback loop where they decide not to take any agency for their own future. When you expect other people to fix your problems for you, you're going to have a bad time.

[Ron Scott]

I support colleges having the same subsidies that baby boomers got to have.

 What are those?

They're called taxes. Public universities used to be largely subsidized by taxes. Income taxes primarily. This is a matter of public record.

Yep. When my mom was in college in the 70s, UCs were all free for in-state students. Now in-state tuition is about $14k/year. Even in-state community college tuition is about $1300/year now, which is out of reach for many low-income people.

I support free public education and was hoping for federal support at least through the community college level. Since that looks untenable now I’d like to see education supported for low income families.

But I’m not getting how this relates to the topic of people who just don’t want to work. Where is the money for education going to come from?

I don’t want workers to work for people who just don’t want to work. What am I missing?

[Sibley]

I support colleges having the same subsidies that baby boomers got to have.

 What are those?

They're called taxes. Public universities used to be largely subsidized by taxes. Income taxes primarily. This is a matter of public record.

Yep. When my mom was in college in the 70s, UCs were all free for in-state students. Now in-state tuition is about $14k/year. Even in-state community college tuition is about $1300/year now, which is out of reach for many low-income people.

I support free public education and was hoping for federal support at least through the community college level. Since that looks untenable now I’d like to see education supported for low income families.

But I’m not getting how this relates to the topic of people who just don’t want to work. Where is the money for education going to come from?

I don’t want workers to work for people who just don’t want to work. What am I missing?

Well, we could start with taxing the hell out of the corporations that are making billions of dollars a year. Case in point: oil and gas companies RIGHT NOW are making money hand over fist. We could also work on taxing the hell out of the billionaires, because seriously no one needs that much money.

[DadJokes]

I support free public education and was hoping for federal support at least through the community college level. Since that looks untenable now I’d like to see education supported for low income families.

It's probably easier to advocate for on the state level than federal. Community college is free for all residents in Tennessee. I can't speak for how it's impacted student loan debt across the state (would love to see a study on it after it's been around a while), but I imagine it's been a net positive and that other states will do the same.

[Edubb20]

I'd love to see free or near-free higher education.

I'm not a big fan of people talking about loan forgiveness for the masses... UNLESS... they simultaneously force lenders and universities to cap the amounts the can lend/charge. If we pour money into the loans now, without fixing the problem, we're just feeding the beast.

[Chris Pascale]

What was the response to your second response?

 It's been a month and there has been no response.

People are more often there to post, not engage.

Mustachians would be more inclined to enjoy the r/overemployed posts.

[ltt]

I think /r/antiwork has some good points.

1. Wages have stagnated while productivity and CEO bonus have risen.  We work more hours for less buying power than our parents.
2. Unions are a good check to unfettered corporatism and abusive management.
3. Capitalism goes both ways, if you can't find labor you need to increase wages, benefits, or hours.  Or your business is unsustainable.
4. On the individual level, since labor has more bargaining power right now, quit jobs until you find one that pays and treats you well.
5. Healthcare being tied to employment leads to a huge power imbalance.

Agreed that it becomes very depressing reading very quickly.

This.  Points 1 through 5 are spot on.  Antiwork really isn't about not wanting to work, it's about all of these points listed.  Another point in Antiwork is that they don't want to be strung along by recruiters or misleading job ads that will not post salary information up front.  They also will post those job ads wanting a candidate with a master's degree and 20 years of experience with a wage of $12 per hour.  I'm not sure what employers are thinking in that regard.

[goodmoneygoodlife]

I think with any thread, there's good and the bad.

I'm all for antiwork due to:
- Lack of meritocracy in a lot of companies.
- Black swan risk of a 9-5 job.
- Companies are incentivized to squeeze max value out of you
- Your net worth increase YoY decays drastically after a decade.

So I think these points are worth looking at and are good points. But I also think complaining and doing nothing is useless. I don't mind people that complain IF they're doing things to counteract the things that they're complaining about. For example, if you think a 9-5 is dangerous (like I do), then you'd better be scrambling to find some other sources of income instead of just smoking a joint before and after work, spending all your time complaining about life and watching Netflix. As opposed to reinvesting the time to actually fix the underlying issues.

[sonofsven]

I think with any thread, there's good and the bad.

I'm all for antiwork due to:
- Lack of meritocracy in a lot of companies.
- Black swan risk of a 9-5 job.
- Companies are incentivized to squeeze max value out of you
- Your net worth increase YoY decays drastically after a decade.

So I think these points are worth looking at and are good points. But I also think complaining and doing nothing is useless. I don't mind people that complain IF they're doing things to counteract the things that they're complaining about. For example, if you think a 9-5 is dangerous (like I do), then you'd better be scrambling to find some other sources of income instead of just smoking a joint before and after work, spending all your time complaining about life and watching Netflix. As opposed to reinvesting the time to actually fix the underlying issues.

I think so much of the complaining on the Internet is done just because it's there. Everyone can do it. It bothers me, too: I stopped posting on a fishing forum because it seemed like non stop complaining.
But I always run into this conundrum: that I'm essentially complaining on the internet about other people complaining on the internet.

[DoneFSO]

In my first job in 1995, I made $4.25/hr as a busboy.  In my first salaried job out of grad school in 2006, I made $28,000/year as a “Program Analyst.”  I was living in a group home in the DC area in 2006, paying about $400 for my room.  The cost of a one-bedroom apartment on a metro line, even back then, was at least $1,500.  I am in Western Mass now, and fast-food restaurants in my town are advertising wages of $17/hour with tuition assistance.  That would have been a nice compensation package for me when I got out of grad school in 2005.

I don’t recall ever feeling resentful about my compensation.  I have lived in LCOL and HCOL areas, and I have always felt that I was paid fairly.  I lived well on my $28k salary post grad-school in the DC area.  My student loan payments were low, my rent was low, and I didn’t live extravagantly.  And yet I was a yuppie in the city, living with other yuppies, going out, working out at the gym, etc.  In my memory, it was a full, fun life of youth in the city.  A year later, I got a job paying over $80k, and I felt rich.  I have felt abundantly, decadently rich ever since.   

One reason I have never seen any sense in complaining – or in feeling resentful – is that I never saw myself as trapped or as doing something against my will.  I’ve had crappy jobs, but I have always firmly identified as a free individual with agency.  I always felt like I had chosen, or at least accepted, my situation, and that it was up to me to change things if I were unhappy with my situation.  If I wanted to make more money or to have better benefits, for example, then it was up to me to make that happen.  What would there have been for me to resent? 

Perhaps that’s another reason why I never saw any sense in complaining -- I knew I would be moving up, so what was there to complain about in any given present moment?  I eventually got the $80k job because it felt like the right move.  I then joined the Foreign Service because that felt like the right move.

Was it an easy path for me?  At moments of my life, I’ve been heartbreakingly under-resourced and under-supported – sometimes at critical moments and in ways that felt bitterly unfair.  At other moments, I have been fortunate and blessed.  Sometimes, I passed up opportunities out of laziness or foolishness; sometimes, I seized opportunities granted to me; and sometimes, I didn’t get the opportunities that I would have liked to have had.  Through it all, I think, I never worried too much about what others were doing or what they had.  It struck me as more fruitful to concentrate on myself and my own path. 

[mathlete]

Lol I got banned from antiwork for being "contrarian".

That sub frustrates me for the same reason a lot of the internet frustrates me; people have generally good ideas there about how the balance of rewards has shifted too far towards capital holders and away from people who labor. Instead of taking actionable steps in the real world though, they see everything through the lens of a conspiracy against them.

Recently, there was a thread about how school starting so early in the morning was "capitalist conditioning." This is just silly. School start times are determined on a district by district basis, and it's no surprise that most public services (and businesses for that matter) try to sync their schedule to daylight. If it makes sense to start school later, you can petition your school board to do that. You can get friends and neighbors on board and show up to the meetings. Ten people talking on a local issue in front of the right people has an impact. Making 10,000 posts on social media never helped anyone, but it gives the petitioner the wide audience they crave.

[Sibley]

Lol I got banned from antiwork for being "contrarian".

That sub frustrates me for the same reason a lot of the internet frustrates me; people have generally good ideas there about how the balance of rewards has shifted too far towards capital holders and away from people who labor. Instead of taking actionable steps in the real world though, they see everything through the lens of a conspiracy against them.

Recently, there was a thread about how school starting so early in the morning was "capitalist conditioning." This is just silly. School start times are determined on a district by district basis, and it's no surprise that most public services (and businesses for that matter) try to sync their schedule to daylight. If it makes sense to start school later, you can petition your school board to do that. You can get friends and neighbors on board and show up to the meetings. Ten people talking on a local issue in front of the right people has an impact. Making 10,000 posts on social media never helped anyone, but it gives the petitioner the wide audience they crave.

Well, regarding school start times, that's a holdover from when the majority of the country were farmers. If you get up at dawn, do your chores, then go to school - that's going to be around 7-8am. Then you let out about 2-3pm, go home, do your afternoon chores, have supper, do your evening chores, go to bed. Summers off of course because that's the growing season and you were needed on the farm.

However, we aren't a country of majority farmers anymore, so I do find it slightly ridiculous that we are held to a farmer's schedule. Particularly since there's plenty of scientific evidence that starting school so early is actively detrimental for children and teens.

[DadJokes]

Lol I got banned from antiwork for being "contrarian".

That sub frustrates me for the same reason a lot of the internet frustrates me; people have generally good ideas there about how the balance of rewards has shifted too far towards capital holders and away from people who labor. Instead of taking actionable steps in the real world though, they see everything through the lens of a conspiracy against them.

Recently, there was a thread about how school starting so early in the morning was "capitalist conditioning." This is just silly. School start times are determined on a district by district basis, and it's no surprise that most public services (and businesses for that matter) try to sync their schedule to daylight. If it makes sense to start school later, you can petition your school board to do that. You can get friends and neighbors on board and show up to the meetings. Ten people talking on a local issue in front of the right people has an impact. Making 10,000 posts on social media never helped anyone, but it gives the petitioner the wide audience they crave.

Well, regarding school start times, that's a holdover from when the majority of the country were farmers. If you get up at dawn, do your chores, then go to school - that's going to be around 7-8am. Then you let out about 2-3pm, go home, do your afternoon chores, have supper, do your evening chores, go to bed. Summers off of course because that's the growing season and you were needed on the farm.

However, we aren't a country of majority farmers anymore, so I do find it slightly ridiculous that we are held to a farmer's schedule. Particularly since there's plenty of scientific evidence that starting school so early is actively detrimental for children and teens.

It's still based around the average workday for adults. If you have to be at work by 9:00, you need to drop your child off at school before work, so an earlier start time makes sense in that regard.

[GuitarStv]

As for r/antiwork I'm personally (more of less) opposed to spending years of your life doing something that doesn't advance society.

And yet . . . as a society we pay tremendous amounts to athletes and fund managers.  :P

[Spiffy]

I still want to find these parents who signed off on their kids assuming this massive debt and punch them in the face.

Plenty of children go to college after coming out of foster care. At this point they are considered adults by the Federal government for FAFSA purposes. Feel free to punch any elected official in the face. I will happily contribute to your legal defense fund.

I just want to mention here that children who have been in the foster care system get tuition waivers in most states. In my state, Texas, they can go to public universities for free...no tuition or fees. Something like 34 states are set up that way. Other states have varying degrees of help for kids coming out of foster care. I am sure there are lots of hurdles for these kids to get through college, but tuition isn't one of them.

[Arbitrage]

It's still based around the average workday for adults. If you have to be at work by 9:00, you need to drop your child off at school before work, so an earlier start time makes sense in that regard.

I'm dubious - when I lived in Southern CA, school schedules seemed engineered for near-maximum inconvenience to parents.  Start times too late for normal work schedules, which are quite early in the area (my company was 7:15; I didn't know anyone who worked somewhere that started after 8, but school start times were after 8).  End times too early.  Random days off for teacher work days or training.  Extra holidays.  Early-out days every single week, and during various weeks they would be every day of the week.  Oh, and no school bus service.

Basically, it was nigh impossible to make it work with young children unless you had a nonworking (or perhaps part-time flexible working) parent or other family member such as a retired grandparent, had a parent who worked in the school system, or paid for before- and after-school care. 

I think that parent convenience got almost no consideration; only teacher/staff convenience did.  The most powerful teachers' union in the country could have something to do with it. 

[EvenSteven]

It's still based around the average workday for adults. If you have to be at work by 9:00, you need to drop your child off at school before work, so an earlier start time makes sense in that regard.

I'm dubious - when I lived in Southern CA, school schedules seemed engineered for near-maximum inconvenience to parents.  Start times too late for normal work schedules, which are quite early in the area (my company was 7:15; I didn't know anyone who worked somewhere that started after 8, but school start times were after 8).  End times too early.  Random days off for teacher work days or training.  Extra holidays.  Early-out days every single week, and during various weeks they would be every day of the week.  Oh, and no school bus service.

Basically, it was nigh impossible to make it work with young children unless you had a nonworking (or perhaps part-time flexible working) parent or other family member such as a retired grandparent, had a parent who worked in the school system, or paid for before- and after-school care. 

I think that parent convenience got almost no consideration; only teacher/staff convenience did.  The most powerful teachers' union in the country could have something to do with it.

Everywhere I have lived, school start times have been constrained by bussing. There are fewer buses than bus routes, so start times need to be staggered, usually with older kids with earlier start times. School would start anywhere between 7:30 and 9 depending on grade.

[MaybeBabyMustache]

It's still based around the average workday for adults. If you have to be at work by 9:00, you need to drop your child off at school before work, so an earlier start time makes sense in that regard.

I'm dubious - when I lived in Southern CA, school schedules seemed engineered for near-maximum inconvenience to parents.  Start times too late for normal work schedules, which are quite early in the area (my company was 7:15; I didn't know anyone who worked somewhere that started after 8, but school start times were after 8).  End times too early.  Random days off for teacher work days or training.  Extra holidays.  Early-out days every single week, and during various weeks they would be every day of the week.  Oh, and no school bus service.

Basically, it was nigh impossible to make it work with young children unless you had a nonworking (or perhaps part-time flexible working) parent or other family member such as a retired grandparent, had a parent who worked in the school system, or paid for before- and after-school care. 

I think that parent convenience got almost no consideration; only teacher/staff convenience did.  The most powerful teachers' union in the country could have something to do with it.

Everywhere I have lived, school start times have been constrained by bussing. There are fewer buses than bus routes, so start times need to be staggered, usually with older kids with earlier start times. School would start anywhere between 7:30 and 9 depending on grade.

California just passed a law requiring all schools to start later. I believe high schools cannot start before 8:30. Unfortunately, there's a lot of complications behind that. My kids play school sports (tennis & soccer). Our school is in one of the lowest funded districts in the state, and can't afford  lighted courts/fields. Which means that the games have to start pretty early, and the kids get out of school 60-90 minutes before school ends. With the new schedule change, I'm not sure what will happen, but it will actually mean more missed academic time for athletes at any underfunded school, and that doesn't feel like the outcome they were looking for.

[turketron]

I think the people on /r/antiwork who are actually anti-any-sort-of-work-entirely is a small but vocal minority of posters. They're the ones who created the subreddit (and hence the unfortunate name) which has existed for years and only picked up steam in the past couple years when the current employment situation arose. There's a similar subreddit (/r/workreform) that spun off after that disastrous Fox News interview that I think does a better job of encapsulating the "average" employee sentiment with the current culture of work.

"Work Reform" is a much better stance that I think most people would be on board with.

We can also argue all day about whether the average 17- or 18-year-old has the maturity and life experience to be solely in charge of decisions that will affect their finances for the next 20+ years. I'd argue that they don't, and maybe there's a flaw in the system that drives so many of them to make such bad decisions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiqKK4ysI7g
I agreed to give them $120,000 when I was 17 years old, with no attorney present! They tricked me like Brendan Dassey on Making a Murderer!

[Sibley]

Lol I got banned from antiwork for being "contrarian".

That sub frustrates me for the same reason a lot of the internet frustrates me; people have generally good ideas there about how the balance of rewards has shifted too far towards capital holders and away from people who labor. Instead of taking actionable steps in the real world though, they see everything through the lens of a conspiracy against them.

Recently, there was a thread about how school starting so early in the morning was "capitalist conditioning." This is just silly. School start times are determined on a district by district basis, and it's no surprise that most public services (and businesses for that matter) try to sync their schedule to daylight. If it makes sense to start school later, you can petition your school board to do that. You can get friends and neighbors on board and show up to the meetings. Ten people talking on a local issue in front of the right people has an impact. Making 10,000 posts on social media never helped anyone, but it gives the petitioner the wide audience they crave.

Well, regarding school start times, that's a holdover from when the majority of the country were farmers. If you get up at dawn, do your chores, then go to school - that's going to be around 7-8am. Then you let out about 2-3pm, go home, do your afternoon chores, have supper, do your evening chores, go to bed. Summers off of course because that's the growing season and you were needed on the farm.

However, we aren't a country of majority farmers anymore, so I do find it slightly ridiculous that we are held to a farmer's schedule. Particularly since there's plenty of scientific evidence that starting school so early is actively detrimental for children and teens.

It's still based around the average workday for adults. If you have to be at work by 9:00, you need to drop your child off at school before work, so an earlier start time makes sense in that regard.

If it were really based around the average workday, then school wouldn't let out until 5 or 6pm.

[DadJokes]

Lol I got banned from antiwork for being "contrarian".

That sub frustrates me for the same reason a lot of the internet frustrates me; people have generally good ideas there about how the balance of rewards has shifted too far towards capital holders and away from people who labor. Instead of taking actionable steps in the real world though, they see everything through the lens of a conspiracy against them.

Recently, there was a thread about how school starting so early in the morning was "capitalist conditioning." This is just silly. School start times are determined on a district by district basis, and it's no surprise that most public services (and businesses for that matter) try to sync their schedule to daylight. If it makes sense to start school later, you can petition your school board to do that. You can get friends and neighbors on board and show up to the meetings. Ten people talking on a local issue in front of the right people has an impact. Making 10,000 posts on social media never helped anyone, but it gives the petitioner the wide audience they crave.

Well, regarding school start times, that's a holdover from when the majority of the country were farmers. If you get up at dawn, do your chores, then go to school - that's going to be around 7-8am. Then you let out about 2-3pm, go home, do your afternoon chores, have supper, do your evening chores, go to bed. Summers off of course because that's the growing season and you were needed on the farm.

However, we aren't a country of majority farmers anymore, so I do find it slightly ridiculous that we are held to a farmer's schedule. Particularly since there's plenty of scientific evidence that starting school so early is actively detrimental for children and teens.

It's still based around the average workday for adults. If you have to be at work by 9:00, you need to drop your child off at school before work, so an earlier start time makes sense in that regard.

If it were really based around the average workday, then school wouldn't let out until 5 or 6pm.

Once kids are in extra-curriculars, they are "occupied" until 5 or 6pm.

Keeping kids in school for ten hours isn't going to accomplish much. Eyes glaze over after so much time in a classroom. Teachers also need time to grade and do lesson plans, so keeping kids in school until 5 or 6 means teachers are working from 7-8am until 8-9pm.

I'm no fan of my teacher wife having to wake up at 5am so that she can be at school at 6:30am, but it's more convenient for most parents that school start earlier. And if it wasn't, then parents could successfully petition school boards to change start times.

[RetiredAt63]

When my dad graduated from college in 1976 he made 50k a year. He works at a similar agency now, and starting salaries are, you guessed it, 50k a year. He was able to support a wife and child.

Are you sure about those numbers?  50k in 1976 is about $250k in today's dollars.  That's a crazy salary right out of college.  If he made that much, he was way up in the 1%, especially back then when the 1% wasn't quite so far ahead of the rest of us.

I started a college level teacher's job (an M. Sc. was the minimum requirement) in 1975 and my salary was $9,200 Canadian.  And that was considered a GOOD salary.   I don't think $50K in 1976 in US$ was a starting salary in anything.

[Sibley]

Lol I got banned from antiwork for being "contrarian".

That sub frustrates me for the same reason a lot of the internet frustrates me; people have generally good ideas there about how the balance of rewards has shifted too far towards capital holders and away from people who labor. Instead of taking actionable steps in the real world though, they see everything through the lens of a conspiracy against them.

Recently, there was a thread about how school starting so early in the morning was "capitalist conditioning." This is just silly. School start times are determined on a district by district basis, and it's no surprise that most public services (and businesses for that matter) try to sync their schedule to daylight. If it makes sense to start school later, you can petition your school board to do that. You can get friends and neighbors on board and show up to the meetings. Ten people talking on a local issue in front of the right people has an impact. Making 10,000 posts on social media never helped anyone, but it gives the petitioner the wide audience they crave.

Well, regarding school start times, that's a holdover from when the majority of the country were farmers. If you get up at dawn, do your chores, then go to school - that's going to be around 7-8am. Then you let out about 2-3pm, go home, do your afternoon chores, have supper, do your evening chores, go to bed. Summers off of course because that's the growing season and you were needed on the farm.

However, we aren't a country of majority farmers anymore, so I do find it slightly ridiculous that we are held to a farmer's schedule. Particularly since there's plenty of scientific evidence that starting school so early is actively detrimental for children and teens.

It's still based around the average workday for adults. If you have to be at work by 9:00, you need to drop your child off at school before work, so an earlier start time makes sense in that regard.

If it were really based around the average workday, then school wouldn't let out until 5 or 6pm.

Once kids are in extra-curriculars, they are "occupied" until 5 or 6pm.

Keeping kids in school for ten hours isn't going to accomplish much. Eyes glaze over after so much time in a classroom. Teachers also need time to grade and do lesson plans, so keeping kids in school until 5 or 6 means teachers are working from 7-8am until 8-9pm.

I'm no fan of my teacher wife having to wake up at 5am so that she can be at school at 6:30am, but it's more convenient for most parents that school start earlier. And if it wasn't, then parents could successfully petition school boards to change start times.

I can buy that for high schoolers, and maybe even middle school. I don't buy that it's universal however. And it doesn't apply to elementary school, unless they have after school programs designed to provide child care for working parents - but that's not officially part of the school day.

I completely agree that kids shouldn't be in class from 8 am until 6pm. There should be multiple hours of time set aside for rest, play, and independent activities. There should also be more teachers, and more teacher's aides and other supporting staff. You don't need a teaching license to supervise a bunch of kids on the playground, or to oversee a quiet room where kids can lie down for a bit or read.

The point that I'm making is that our school times are based around a daily life that hasn't been the majority for decades, if not longer. The after school activities have evolved in part to try to solve that problem.