Interesting News On Aging

[OrbWeaver]

Yeah, that's the simple "poor but happy" theory, which sounds great in a story but is mostly crap.

 

It is true in some places - one of the things I often hear from people who have visited "poor" countries is how friendly and relaxed the people are, compared to western countries where they are stressed out trying to hold down their jobs and "get ahead".

 

That happens usually if you let it happen. I'm in a similar position and my comanpy alos would like to pressure me in 60 hours or more, if I let them.

 

Fortunately in the EU there is an absolute maximum of 48 hours per week set out by law, unless you "opt out". If anybody asked me to work 60 hours a week (or even an extra hour for free) I would just laugh in their face.

[Order of the Hammer Bureaucrat]

If the working extra satisfies my perfectionist or obsessive side I'm willing to do it.

[SneaksieDave]

Yeah, that's the simple "poor but happy" theory, which sounds great in a story but is mostly crap.

Hmm, why crap? It can be seen out there, occasionally. Perhaps the distinction is, I'm talking about "not wealthy, but not on welfare either." I am not saying someone on food stamps is ecstatic to make fries at McDonald's all day - but I often see groundsmen (as in my example) and actually envy them. Their job has -zero- stresses and pressures, unless you consider "I have to ride this tractor and cut 19 acres of grass today" to be pressure. Part of me wants to become a park ranger, just so I can "do stuff out in nature" for a living, and to hell with the 50% pay cut.

 

It is true in some places - one of the things I often hear from people who have visited "poor" countries is how friendly and relaxed the people are, compared to western countries where they are stressed out trying to hold down their jobs and "get ahead".

Yes! Precisely. Happiness is internal, really, I mean as long as your basic needs are met. Starving won't allow you to be happy, but otherwise, it's how you see things. Maybe I've been reading too many Buddhism books lately.

 

That happens usually if you let it happen.

That, I agree with fully. Too many people allow it to happen, and then that starts the slippery slope of asskissing and competition and surrendering employee interests, and ends up screwing the guy who just wants work a normal week. When hourly, I aim for 40hrs, as it is the standard. That might mean plus a little here, or minus a little there, but too much plus, and I'd be bitching/revolting/whatever. Luckily I haven't come across that - seems managers want to push but only so far as you let them.

 

Now, I'm a contractor and hourly, so I track every... single... minute.

[OrbWeaver]

That, I agree with fully. Too many people allow it to happen, and then that starts the slippery slope of asskissing and competition and surrendering employee interests, and ends up screwing the guy who just wants work a normal week.

 

That's a problem with employer culture as well. My employer does not push me to work more than my contractual hours, but they do seem to have this expectation that my life's dream is to work for them, and I will play all their games, move up through the grades etc.

 

Actually all I want is a stable, stress-free job where I don't have to structure my entire personal life around "business needs". I'm not interested in competition or strutting around like a ponce, I just need to pay my bills and purchase food (and the occasional graphics card update hopefully).

 

Being a contractor is actually quite appealing because of the independence (and of course charging by the hour), but I doubt it would have much stability.

[sparhawk]

Fortunately in the EU there is an absolute maximum of 48 hours per week set out by law, unless you "opt out". If anybody asked me to work 60 hours a week (or even an extra hour for free) I would just laugh in their face.

 

That's theory. Why do you think that emploeyers don't want to have time controll for people with higher wages? In my comapny we have about 4000 employees, and most of them have a union contract where they have a timesheet and if they exceed their regular time, they can take it free time off as a compensation. For people that have salaries above the union contract, they get an individual contract and are not required to have a timesheet. In fact it is even not wanted, because they are expected to work more than the regular shift, and it would be a problem if they would track their time exactly because this law.

[sparhawk]

Hmm, why crap? It can be seen out there, occasionally.

 

Occassionaly, right. But fact is, that poeple with money have more fun, because they have more possibillities, they have more health, because contrary to popular believe you CAN buy health, and they have more rights, because you also CAN buy law. So all in all, there may be a lot of people who are happy DESPITE being poor, but I strongly doubt the "you are more happy if you are poor" phrase.

 

Their job has -zero- stresses and pressures, unless you consider "I have to ride this tractor and cut 19 acres of grass today" to be pressure. Part of me wants to become a park ranger, just so I can "do stuff out in nature" for a living, and to hell with the 50% pay cut.

 

You are assuming this, and there are certainly people who are like that. You would have to look at their whole lives to know wether this is true or not.

 

Too many people allow it to happen, and then that starts the slippery slope of asskissing and competition and surrendering employee interests, and ends up screwing the guy who just wants work a normal week.

 

That's exactly the effect. In my last office my manager cam about at 10:00. I was in early (usually between 8:00 and 9:00), so he saw me earliest at 10:00. Since I came early I also went early (about 17:00), but my manager also went later, because he came later. So the effect was that he noticed me earliest at 10:00 but noticed that I went rather early, while all the others went much later. In fact if you came at 12:00 and the manager went at (let's say 18:00) you could go at 18:15 (to make sure) and had only six hours worked. But the psychological effect was that the manager noticed that this guy was still there when he himself was already going and that must mean he is hard-working while I was considered to be lazy because I went earlier then the others. I even talked to some collegue about this and he confirmed this. He said that he also came early in the beginning, but because of the problems he started to came much later. And I noticed this effect not only in my last company, but also in my current one. But luckily my direct superior comes in rahter early, so the effect is not as strong, and I also keep a timesheet for myself to prove it in case.

 

When hourly, I aim for 40hrs, as it is the standard. That might mean plus a little here, or minus a little there, but too much plus, and I'd be bitching/revolting/whatever.

 

Correct. If there are some urgent tasks I don't mind staying longer to fix it, but this is not the general rule.

[Maximius]

I dream of escaping the death trap of the modern first world work environment. I see myself in a small cottage with a bit of land, doing a little farming and some simple aquaculture, maybe she works maybe I do, I dont care. I just want to take my life/time back from the Machine. Wake up on a Monday morning and realize that I dont have to rush anywhere. I could care less about being rich, I just want get away form the insanity. One of the reasons Ive considered moving to Canada is that they enjoy socialized health care. I realize its not a perfect system but compared to the nightmare of U.S. healthcare its the best thing around.

 

Currently my work as an adult education teacher gives me a lot of leeway, my hours are reasonable, low stress in office, supervisor sends you home early cause the Sun is shining outside. I love my job, and just got a raise, which is why the Powers that Be have decided that the programs funding will probably be cut come June. Jesus H. Crabcakes, can I get a break?

[Vadrosaul]

Canada's not much better of than the States. In fact, the waiting lists are tremendous for simple operations. People who can pay for their operations go to the States in droves anyways, and there is a lot of consideration for a 2 tier system here.

[Maximius]

Canada's not much better of than the States. In fact, the waiting lists are tremendous for simple operations. People who can pay for their operations go to the States in droves anyways, and there is a lot of consideration for a 2 tier system here.

 

Thats sad to hear. Id still rather take my chances with the a low probability of healthcare than a zero possibility of it though. As a veteran, I get healthcare through the Veterans Administration hospital system, which means wildly underfunded hospitals with one E.R. doctor on, nine hour E.R. waits, and occasionally dentists performing simple surgeries outside of dentistry. At least Canada has a socialized network of healthcare in place, with all its problems. Its something that could be fought for politically. Here its nearly impossible to get affordable insurance, let alone supported healthcare. Try fighting the wealthy and incredibly influential insurance industries. Not to mention that healthcare in the U.S. is shoddy anyway. Witness:

 

http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/wb/xp-57493

 

Im not saying its heaven on earth in the Great White North, but holy crap its insane down here. You pay for insurance that doesnt seem to pay for a whole lot of what it is supposed to. I have coverage through my aforementioned job, but if I get something done it will still mean a big bill for me. Insurance companies are constantly trying to find ways to push more of the cost back onto the consumer while demanding ever rising rates be paid. They have a term in the industry for when a company has to pay out monies to cover the cost of a patients care. They call that a "loss."

 

Canadians who call for a fully privatized health care are either misinformed or can afford the private care and dont give a hoot who cant. I would even say that a two tiered system would be the wrong way to go. Instead, bolster the resources of the socialized system, fix it up, build more hospitals.