> And you didn’t answer the question - is there any amount of money you could be offered to work at Twitter?
I'd do it for $1024/hour on a 1099 contract with guaranteed time and a half for overtime.
As for the question in the headline: my wife lost her job just before COVID. She hasn't been back to work since because I make more than enough for both of us and by not working we were able to get rid of a car, cut various expenses in half, and have more time together since I was working from home. We went from DINK to SINK: single income, no kids.
I can honestly say that I wouldn’t work for Twitter for any amount. This isn’t because I’m “rich”. But we make enough to be comfortable. Why would I subject myself to that?
Even before I fell into my current role at $BigTech, we had our big house in the burbs in “the good school system” built when I was making only 115K in 2016. Why would I be willing to suffer now that I make twice as much? Making more money wouldn’t affect my lifestyle.
Going from local enterprise dev to working remotely for $BigTech didn’t really change anything in our lifestyle
Good. What a student says outside of school ought to be none of the school's business. Likewise, what an adult says outside the workplace ought to be none of their employer's business unless they have explicitly identified themselves as their employer's representative.
Do you want to carve out employers and schools as special exceptions because otherwise this seems like breaks the freedom of (non)-association in general. This specific case only works because it’s a public high school.
Because how could it be legal for me as a customer or employee to choose not to visit or work for a business or terminate a contract or my own employment because I don’t like that they’re anti-suffragists but then the other party be prohibited from doing the same thing?
In the case of work the employer is the buyer and for schools they’re the seller so it isn’t that. How do you not accidentally outlaw boycotts?
An employer is not a buyer. They are an employer. The direction of money transfer is similar but the law doesn't categorize entities strictly by direction of money transfer.
Okay and an employee is not a seller but I still have the right to quit because the owner is a racist outside of work. So sure, you’re right but it doesn’t really affect the argument.
I called out schools and employers because of the inherent power imbalance. Students are compelled by law to go to school. Workers are generally compelled by necessity to work for somebody; you aren't free when the invisible hand of the market has a knife to your throat.
What you as a customer or an employee do is your own business, but I do not regard employers as customers for rented labor.
She should have brought a gun, and forced this asshole to put aside his self-righteousness and do the job for which he was being paid on pain of death. Give these fucking Christians who mistake mockery for persecution something to cry about.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Comments like these should result in at the very least a suspension, if not an outright ban. You’re calling for someone’s death quite liberally. Take a break from HN for your own sake.
That's dang's decision, and he is welcome to act accordingly. Until then I will speak from the heart; I honestly believe that women, LGBTQ people, non-white people, non-Christians, and neurodiverse people should arm themselves, learn tactics, and be prepared to enforce their human rights with violence -- since the law will not uphold them on their behalf.
Yeah, so probably most of us came here really hating the pharmacist but you've taken such a wildly extreme position that suddenly I'm concerned about the safety of the pharmacist more than the woman in question. Not good.
Which is fine when the extremism is effecting the change you're looking for, but when it's just a distraction from the cause it's more about you and your needs than the cause itself.
I feel like there’s gotta be a minimum face to face communication threshold for remote teams..a status meeting is a good reason for that. In the olden days when everything was in person meeting, I’d totally agree.
I totally agree. With everyone work remotely (in my teams), there's huge scope for becoming isolated and disconnected. We have a daily status meeting, but it is specifically set up so that the 50% of the time is for talking shit.
When you check in with how you're going, you're allowed to say anything except "Good". "Good" means you didn't think about your answer...
> "Good" means you didn't think about your answer...
Bullshit. I gave my answer plenty of thought, and came to the conclusion that, "Mind your own business. Let's focus on work." would be counterproductive.
Face to face only makes sense when everybody is working in the same location, not when they're scattered across the width of a continent, and to me face to face isn't worth the hassle of commuting when I don't get paid for the time, expense, and risk to life and limb that driving to work entails.
This seems like delusion unless you can connect it more directly to the question at hand, or explain the mechanism by which the nuclear family is forced upon the “ruled”. Or otherwise provide an alternative, ideal structure to replace the nuclear family.
It isn't too much of a stretch given the article. Real wages have been dropping for decades. If current wages returned to the amounts of the past, when the nuclear family was the norm, the ruling class profits would drop instead.
Perhaps this is due to Walmart and Amazon killing small merchants? Would be interesting to know what sectors of small businesses were affected the most or if it was systemic across all sectors.
Obligatory C. S. Lewis: "When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
What the olds don't seem to get is that when young people grow up, it becomes their turn to decide for themselves what it means to be a grownup.
If I want to spend a night doing what uptight people deride as "kid's stuff" after I've put in a solid day's work at my day job, that's what I'll do. Likewise, if I want to dress in jeans, band t-shirts, and Doc Martens in my 40s when I'm not in the office then that's what I'll do. There is fuck-all anybody can do to stop me because this is America, bitches.
If Ben Sasse doesn't like it, he can kiss my ass. And he better put some heart and tongue into it.
I'd do it for $1024/hour on a 1099 contract with guaranteed time and a half for overtime.
As for the question in the headline: my wife lost her job just before COVID. She hasn't been back to work since because I make more than enough for both of us and by not working we were able to get rid of a car, cut various expenses in half, and have more time together since I was working from home. We went from DINK to SINK: single income, no kids.