• Dave V@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is what happens when history is forgotten. Obviously we’ve had inflation B4. Don’t read all the negative sh*t out there. And don’t let other people with their agenda run your life.

    • BigPotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      We’ve had inflation before and, on a historic timescale, we’ve had revolutions to correct that inflation. France existed for almost a thousand years before they had the big one.

    • bean@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Once they have everything, then what happens next? If there is nobody to buy things

    • Pacmanlives@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Why we are not having kids or even getting married can’t collect my debit when I am dead and have nothing. Just go full nihilist

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      On the other hand, some of them just refuse to do any overtime or aim for promotion. It won’t get them any closer to their goals so why bother. It’s quiet quitting by default.

      • Anise (they/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Quiet quitting is just middle management’s manipulative language for people doing their jobs adequately but then not putting in a bunch of unpaid extra effort. When there is no incentive to go above and beyond, why should anyone? It is the job of management to create those incentives, but if they are unwilling to pay for that, complaining about people’s work ethic to try to guilt them into doing unpaid work is their next strategy. It isn’t very effective.

      • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’ve never understood “quiet quitting” as a term. When did just doing your job become something that needs a term? “Working adequately” seems more apt, but I can’t imagine the context that would be worthy of discussion outside an employee review.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I can give you a real answer if you’re sincere, but this tends to disappear into downvote oblivion.

          Quiet quitting is a sudden and noticeable shift, not in reduced performance, but engagement and morale. Increased negativity, pessimism, criticism, etc. It adversely affects team morale, often resulting in reduced performance of others. It’s more effective than you may think.

          A good manager would address this with questions to better understand the sudden change in job satisfaction, and meet those concerns with change. Most seem to be complaining that they don’t have a reason to fire the team member, which is why you always read about “continuing to meet performance expectations.” If a manager told me the latter, I’d address it as a failure of their leadership skills.

          • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re either lying or you’re simply misimformed. You didn’t mention staying late and doing extra work, which is what most people have meant when using that term to denigrate workers that do their job well but leave immediately after work is completed.

          • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Ah, that makes sense. I’m in the military, and we have a similar thing for people who are either due to transfer or retire in the next couple months: FIIGMO. It means “Fuck it, I’ve got my orders.” (For clarification, orders in this context are travel/Primary Change of Station/Retirement Orders, a written and signed document saying they’ll be leaving)

            It seems like a weirdly deliberate term for something that has been around forever and typically just attributed to low morale. It makes it seem like a person unhappy at work but just doing their job is somehow sticking it to their boss/company. I’ve dealt with a lot of people like that, both as a peer and a supervisor, and it was never them doing anything intentionally, just being unhappy (and most of the time it had nothing to do with the pay or conditions, just not being suited to the job or general attitude toward life). They could often be a blight on morale, though, so I see how it could be frustrating for supervisors (and peers, they made work miserable for everyone).

          • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            I started quiet quitting after it came to light that the new hires with zero experience were being paid more than I was, someone who had been there for over a year, and already had 5 years of experience. I no longer give a shit about the company, because they made it clear they don’t give a shit about my contribution. If you want people to put in extra effort, you have to give them extra money. Once you cheat an employee, they’re not gonna get over it because of a pizza party. fucking pay them.

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Again, it’s not about effort or results, but morale. Unequal pay is an absolutely justifiable reason for low morale.

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s about creating a negative connotation with doing your job, so you’ll either feel guilty about not doing more than your job, or feel anger at those who do more than you.

          You know, keeping the plebes angry at each other so they don’t think too hard about the wealthy.

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          They used to say “give it 110%”

          In that context, here is a little decades old joke about that.

          If: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z is represented as:

          1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26.

          Then:

          H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K

          8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%

          and

          K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E

          11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = 96%

          But,

          A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E

          1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%

          And,

          B-U-L-L- S-H-I-T

          2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%

          AND, look how far ass kissing will take you.

          A-S-S-K-I-S-S-I-N-G

          1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7 = 118%

          So, one can conclude with mathematical certainty that while Hard work and Knowledge will get you close, and Attitude will get you there, it’s the bullshit and Ass kissing that will put you over the top!

          • eran_morad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Lolbruh. Yeah, I made the poor decision of getting a phd. At least it was in the hard sciences, so I learned some transferable skills. I BSd my way onto a high-paying career track. You gotta BS.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Unfortunately not much better elsewhere, if at all. What would make me move is the idiotic healthcare system.

    • astreus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It’s not just America though.

      Where I’m from:

      UK average income before tax) £34,963 - £27,911 after tax (assuming NO student loan and NO pension) (for context: a band 3 nurse with 3 years experience makes £24,336 before tax or £20,631.51 after with no pension)

      England average house price: £375,131

      Approx ratio after tax: 13:1

      Minimum deposit: 5% - £18,756.55

      Tax: 0% on first time buyers

      Fees: about £1,000 - £5,000

      Total cost to get going: Approx £21,750 - nearly a years wage.

      Now let’s look where I live: Spain!

      Turns out Spain really is a load of countries wearing a hat so getting unified stats is not easy. Let’s try Barcelona:

      Average income before tax: €33,837 - €25,470 after tax

      Average house price: €376,399

      Approx ratio after tax: 15:1

      Minimum deposit: 10% - €37,639.90

      Purchase tax: 10% - €37,639.90 (plus 1.5% for new builds)

      Fees: 2 - 5% - 7,527.98 - 18,819.95

      Total cost to get going: €82,807.78 - €94,099.75

      Turns out treating housing as a market to speculate on might just be the problem all along.

      • djsoren19@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, I hate this American-centric idea of “Oh, only my country is experiencing this totally unique problem, I’ll just go somewhere else.

        As if late-stage global capitalism would somehow be a problem that is unique to a single country.

        • pantyhosewimp@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yep.

          The theatre is closed. There is no place else to go.

          And by “theatre” we mean the theatre of conflict not the cinema.

          It is time to stand and fight.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          The fediverse is a lot more multinational than That Other Site, and I’m seeing the same sort of articles from all over the place.

      • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Just to add to this, there’s zero chance you’re getting a 13x mortgage. For a 375k house on a 25k salary you’re going to need something more like 250k to start.

        • astreus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          To add to this, the rule of thumb in the UK is your maximum loan is 4.5x your salary.

          The average worker could borrow about £157,000.

      • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        To be fair, the UK is essentially aiming to be America 2.0

        Many countries are trending more expensive (Belgium went up 30% house price in 4 years) but the UK is on another level of the wealthy literally owning all property and purposely leaving tens of thousands of houses empty just to spite the working class.

        • astreus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I knew someone would say this, which is why I also used Spain where the houses are as expensive, the pay is worse, and the tax is higher!

          It doesn’t matter where you go in the West, the dream of liberalism is dead

  • BigTrout75@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is true, I asked a new-ish employee about getting/saving for a house and she was like, “why bother? They cost to much.”

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      the price of homes goes up faster than anyone can save. that’s the problem.

      housing prices used to rise at or below inflation. now they rise at like 3x inflation.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Even you are thinking too far ahead. I’m spending rent money every month that obviously could be saved to someday buy a house… But on top of that my rent has increased faster than my income. Every place I’ve lived. By renting, you’re guaranteeing you’re going to be priced out of affording to shelter. And most young people have to rent, to start out. The rich have us fucked at every turn…

  • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    🙋‍♂️ That’d be me. Keep moving the goalposts society. I’m over it. I’ll wait for my mom to die to get her house. Idgaf anymore. Don’t need a house.

    • fishpen0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Better hope you live in a state that doesn’t let Medicaid take the house or that you adequately used foresight to move the house into a trust 5-10 years before she enters assisted living, disability, or dies. Or that she didn’t take out a second mortgage at any time without telling you.

      Otherwise I have bad news for you

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Same. My dad dying and leaving me his house is the only way I was able to afford to stop renting and stop living paycheck to paycheck. A perk of being an only child I suppose.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    By brother in Satan, high inflation makes you spend money now. It’s either that or going to hell.

    Im saying that this bs is out of some relative comparison of how much generations are saving/investing. Everyone tried saving. But with low relative wages ofc ppl wont save as much as eg boomers - they didn’t give up vacations or buying whatevers, but still saved money. Younger gens are just left with no money after that.

    And also falling relative wages (inflation) makes you buy things asap to actually save money.

    • freebee@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      If you would have bought a basement full of canned food somewhere shortly before corona or shortly before the russians went full loco in ukraine, it would have been a top tier investment. And if it wouldn’t have been, they don’t go bad fast and you can still eat them :') In high inflation environment, buying stuff instead of stacking money can make sense indeed.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Why grind when production is way higher than needed.

        Just eat the rich.

        Historically it always led to an era of prosperity.

    • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s literally cheaper to buy things I know we’ll need at some point (assuming we have the space to store the thing) using a rewards credit card that’ll give us 1-3% back than it is to save and buy those things later when they’re even more expensive. (Paying off the CC before it accrues interest, of course.)

      The only move that is ‘smarter’ is to be risky with our money and invest in some way. Which then either makes me a part of the corporate enrichment cycle or a member of the rentier class.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        The only move that is ‘smarter’ is to be risky with our money and invest in some way. Which then either makes me a part of the corporate enrichment cycle or a member of the rentier class.

        Online savings accounts also exist.

        • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          A solid suggestion.
          I often discount those because I think of them in terms of cable TV pricing, that you have to hop around on to get the maximum benefit. It seems that there’s no trustworthy info to find online these days, so I don’t really know how they stack up, or even if my assumption about them is correct.

          Something to add to the vast hopper in my brain labeled “things to research if I ever find enough time.”

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Ymmv but I’ve found Ally Bank to be good and the rates fluctuate with the baseline rates. I think you get over 4% interest right now. I’ve seen them go up and down just as the fed makes movements, unlike my ing direct account (which became capital one or something) where the rates only ever went down.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Investing isn’t that cheap, especially if you want to be moral about it (no shadow pools, company screening, etc). Coz you know, you are just fueling the same problem you are solving.

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Well, you gotta be asleep to believe the American Dream, so maybe this means a lot of people are waking up.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Every time I read the phrase ‘the American Dream’ I think of the part of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas when, after spending the whole novel trying to find the American Dream, they’re given directions, only to find the remains of a burnt-down nightclub, “a huge slab of cracked, scorched concrete in a vacant lot full of tall weeds.”

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think of the Carlin bit… It’s the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe in it.

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Thompson rightly concludes that the American dream is already dead by the 70s.

      If you look west you can almost see the place where the wave broke and rolled back…

      • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Thompson rightly concludes that the American dream is already dead by the 70s.

        Important context for that is that the novel is a famous, and relatively early meditation on the failures of the 1960s counterculture movement and the intense, if ultimately unfocused vision for a better future for the nation that was central to it.

    • Anise (they/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Fear and Loathing should be required reading in schools. A lot of the meaning gets lost in all of the drugs, but in the midst of that haze one can find a lot true things about America.

      • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Never read it because I assumed it was just a funny story about guys on drugs with his characteristic cool writing style, but if it had actual things to say about America, maybe I’ll read it sometime. Or watch the movie lol.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          The movie actually takes all of that out unfortunately and makes it much more of a funny story about guys on drugs. I still like the movie, but the book is so much deeper and more meaningful.

          • toofpic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            I liked the book and I was surprised how close to it was the movie, the part tgat got there. And yes, they left out many things, but it’s understandable, because the movie was planned as a “funny movie”, not a “socio-economical movie”. So the book was like “drugs-capitalism-drugs-Vietnam-drugs”, tgey cut out all the “boring” parts, leaving only drugs.
            The movie is cool though, but It’s just me always trying to appreciate what is shown to me, and not trying to compare with another media.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              It’s definitely not a bad movie or even a terrible adaptation of a book. Like you said, it just had a different goal with the same story. That’s fine.

  • lagomorphlecture@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    The headline reads like big retail trying to squeeze more profits. Of course people aren’t saving as much, they have to buy groceries.

    • NightAuthor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      No, but even for those of us with some extra money… we’re not building a savings pile for a house or anything… we’re just spending the extra on doing things and buying stuff beyond our needs.

      • StaySquared@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        we’re just spending the extra on doing things and buying stuff beyond our needs.

        That’s one of many problems and majority of the people who fit this category like to point the finger at anything and everything else… when the problem is themselves and their spending habits.

        • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Itty bitty savings will never lead to wealth either. The working class and “middle class” that remains has a low enough income to recognize this.

          • Ullallulloo@civilloquy.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            It depends on what you call “itty bitty” and “wealth”. Saving $1,000/month is doable for many people and will make you a millionaire by retirement age, even adjusting for inflation.

            • sgtgig@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              $1,000/mo in savings is pretty difficult for most people.

              $300/mo, invested earning 8% for 40 years, does get to a million though (10% rate of return + 2% interest safe assumption.) This is as $60k/yr job, contributing 3% to a 401k with an employer match, not something that’s particularly rare.

              I know prices are high and people are hurting… but there’s a lot of people who are just not really trying.

            • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Bro, what?! Who the fuck can save $1000/month with current rents and home prices? 🤣

              I thought you were serious for a second! Good one.

            • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              lol. It’d actually be kinda disrespectful if it wasn’t clear you’ve never met a struggling American in your life

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The wonderful thing about debt is, if you have enough of it, it suddenly becomes somebody else’s problem.