• psycho_driver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    11 months ago

    I left a private sector job where I did increasingly evil things for a good amount of money for a public works job where I’m doing something beneficial to society. I have to work a shit-ton of OT to make the same money but the OT is there for the working and I ultimately maybe work a hair more than I used to in my salary position.

  • Rory Butler Music@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I have a public service job.

    Can’t afford to live, get shouted at by callers irrelevant to my role each day just cos I am at a phone, can’t work from home despite the whole organisation doing so, higher paid people throw their workload at me cos they don’t want to do it.

    Feels no different from when i was in the private sector really.

    • atetulo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Can’t afford to live

      At what quality of life?

      I find it hard to believe you have a public service job that can’t pay for your peanut butter sandwiches and vegetables to stay alive.

      • kofe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        11 months ago

        Lol damn, God forbid someone want more out of life than scraping by getting basic needs barely met. I’ve been looking around while in school, and plenty of jobs are still paying $15-19/hr. That is barely enough to get by, depending where you live and rent may not even be enough, let alone take a vacation once a year or even think of raising a family.

        • atetulo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          What do you mean? He used the word ‘need’ and now you’re changing it to ‘wants.’

          Why are you conflating needs with wants?

          • kofe@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            It’s both. Humans need breaks, vacations, etc. I may want to take a vacation to South America but would settle for somewhere North, though.

            • atetulo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              Humans need breaks, vacations, etc.

              Woah woah woah. Breaks and vacations are very different things.

              It’s funny watching you people conflate needs and wants just like breaks and vacations, lol.

              You really need to brush up on your vocabulary!

              • kofe@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                Please do explain the difference, then, between why breaks are necessary but vacations shouldn’t be? You do realize study after study shows that 24-30 hour work weeks provide the most productivity? That family leave, healthcare, paid time off etc is associated with the happiest citizens? Is increased well-being not necessary in your worldview?

                • atetulo@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  between why breaks are necessary but vacations shouldn’t be?

                  One is literally necessary for survival while the other isn’t. This is the difference between a ‘need’ and a ‘want.’

                  Is increased well-being not necessary in your worldview?

                  Considering how many people are able to live a significantly lower quality of life than what you’re advocating for, no. It’s not a ‘need.’ It’s a ‘want.’ There’s no limit to ‘increased well being.’ There is a limit to what the human body can take before it can no longer go on living.

                  Might want to brush up on your vocabulary. This is a pretty simple concept that even 2nd graders have no problem understanding.

              • TheBeege@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                You’re arguing semantics while the intention is clear. Quit being pedantic.

                In our parents’ generation’s time, a public service job could fund a house, two kids, and annual vacations. We want that, or even more since we’re significantly more productive since those days. A job used to give us needs and a good amount of wants. Conflating the two in this context, while not perfectly precise, is irrelevant.

                • atetulo@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  Needs and wants are different things and should be described as such.

      • Rory Butler Music@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        The wording was a tad dramatic.

        I can afford to eat. But I can’t afford housing and any enjoyment comes with guilt from knowing itll have a knock on effect to my finances. I’m living with a parent (who similarly struggles to pay bills)

        It’s more a case of finding it hard to hit the bills and not being able to see a future where I’m comfortable.

        I’d say it’s mostly due to the cost of living rather than the pay. 10 years ago I’d be doing quite well, but the pay grades haven’t changed to meet inflation or accommodate for the high cost of living.

  • ieightpi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Mind elaborating on this rich tax? I’m honestly curious but also feeling skeptical. I’m starting to think this is just a joke since it’s in meme form.

    • ScrotusMaximus@lemmy.ninja
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      A grant (taxpayer money) funded company creating jobs that will eventually run out of money while having the double benefit of poors feeling empowered and forgetting/not caring who is siphoning off the value of the company slowly.

      Context: https://lemmy.ninja/comment/2180478

      • sebinspace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        11 months ago

        First rule of English: learn every word

        Second rule of English: Consistency is one of those words

        Third rule of English: Consistency does not apply to English

  • RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    A facebook meme that isn’t nuclear waste level toxic dogshit? Either this is breaking my brain or I’m misinterpreting it.

  • MiddleWeigh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ve been working at a rich ladies house the last few weeks.

    If you used her money to feed an entire town for a month, she wouldn’t even know.

    • bullant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      100% they mean average working class families. We all know the real rich don’t pay proper taxes

    • sebinspace@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      There are some thing that will always be dangerous and there’s nothing that can be done to mitigate risks. See also: linemen. Electricity is pretty goddam indifferent.

      However, if your union was not helping at all, then you need to have a word with union leadership or, maybe, replace them :)

    • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      There are very few guarantees ever.

      Not having a union guarantees having no power when the bosses stomp their boots over the faces of workers.

      A union is just workers agreeing and organizing among themselves that they prefer to fight back. United we can build the power we need to make meaningful advances.

      There is no reason simply to let the bosses take whatever they want just because no one tried to stop them.