The Viral Economy

[Octavious]

The market won't die "Why this is bad for Biden and good for Trump".

[LordMortis]

The market won't die "Why this is bad for Biden and good for Trump".

Good is bad, bad is empowering, and acceptable is never good enough.

Why you should feel bad about your life and your prospects and how the GOP will make it better by directing your discontent...

I've made it a point to be happier today. Every one keeps selling how terrible every thing and how every thing will be. Is it a wonder we're so divided? It is it a wonder the GOP has always won the war of negativity since at least the 80s when I started to become more aware and affected by such things?

I will become the next Yellowking... I'm not sure how long it will take but I have memories of never getting too low. I know it's doable.

[Octavious]

If it wasn't for the horrifically slanted media there would be zero chance that Trump would still be a factor. And the democrats are terrible at fighting back. The dude lost millions of jobs, created a gigantic deficit. Killed millions and yet crickets. Whatever..I saw people 6 months into Bidens term complaining about inflation. What the f do you think he did in 6 months that would cause that? Sigh

[malchior]

The headline:

U.S. payrolls increased by 216,000 in December, much better than expected

The reality:

December’s jobs report showed employers added 216,000 jobs for the month while the unemployment rate held at 3.7%. Payroll growth showed a sizeable gain from November’s downwardly revised 173,000 [from 199K]. October also was revised lower, to 105,000 from 150,000, indicating a slightly less robust picture for growth in the fourth quarter.

...

The report, along with revisions to previous months’ counts, brought 2023 job gains to 2.7 million, or a monthly average of 225,000, down from 4.8 million, or 399,000 a month, in 2022.

Presumably when December is revised downward, it will be closer to, or even below, the consensus estimate of 170K but hey, HUGE BEAT for now!!!

You really trust the ADP estimate over the BLS don't you!?

[malchior]

If it wasn't for the horrifically slanted media there would be zero chance that Trump would still be a factor. And the democrats are terrible at fighting back. The dude lost millions of jobs, created a gigantic deficit. Killed millions and yet crickets. Whatever..I saw people 6 months into Bidens term complaining about inflation. What the f do you think he did in 6 months that would cause that? Sigh

All the media talking heads and several major doomsday economists spent the entirety of fall 2022 and most of 2023 telling us a recession was either here or nigh. And people believed it even when all the data suggested their earnings increases kept up with inflation, there were more people employed, there was more economic activity overall, etc. Ultimately the truth is that we live in a cloud of misinformation designed to make sure that the ownership class can keep looting the economy through multiple mechanisms:

• excessive profit taking - while blaming Biden for 'inflation'

• flat out tax avoidance - billionaires and centimillionaires sat on a record $8.5 TRILLION of unrealized gains in 2022

• rigging the tax game - permanent tax cuts for them when they actually realize gains compared to the sunset-ting tax cuts for the plebians

And it works because it's so hard to overcome the noise with actual signal. The one thing I'd align with Trump on? The whole thing is rigged. For people like him. It's amazing that they've managed to set up a neo-ancien regime here in America in plain sight and somehow the public is mad at Joe Biden about it. It's astounding.

[Zarathud]

Business was choppy last year — client payments are slowing but demand is high except real estate. But the need for workers is strong and companies are taking profits. The problem is anxiety, which is fed by political desire to see President Biden fail.

Trump is an agent of chaos not stability, which would be even worse.

[malchior]

The Vibecession rolls on at WSJ

It Won’t Be a Recession—It Will Just Feel Like One

The good news is the probability of a recession is down sharply, according to The Wall Street Journal’s latest survey of economists. The bad news is that, for a lot of people, it is still going to feel like a recession.

... snip because who gives a shit - it's all bullshit anyway

[Carpet_pissr]

The Vibecession rolls on at WSJ

It Won’t Be a Recession—It Will Just Feel Like One

The good news is the probability of a recession is down sharply, according to The Wall Street Journal’s latest survey of economists. The bad news is that, for a lot of people, it is still going to feel like a recession.

... snip because who gives a shit - it's all bullshit anyway

Maybe I should start reading The Atlantic's take on the economy...not sure what their track record is for finance-related matters, though. Definitely my go-to if I had to choose ONE news source that I trust.

[Smoove_B]

A study finds workers want to be in the office:

Office workers recently surveyed by an international architecture firm reported that they typically come into the office about half the time, but said they ideally needed to be there two-thirds of a typical workweek for their best productivity. The workers’ attitudes mark a change from the early months after the pandemic, when most said they got more work done at home.

“That has been a surprising evolution,” said Elizabeth Brink, a workplace expert at architecture firm Gensler. “People find they are more productive at the office.”

More details:

In its international survey of 14,000 workers in 10 industries last year to help its clients make design decisions, Gensler found the biggest gap between what employees do and what they say they should do is among younger generations. Gen Z and millennial workers in their 20s and 30s — more than their older counterparts — value the office as a place to focus on their work, socialize with colleagues, be part of a community and grow professionally.

“I am always learning new things in the office,” one millennial polled by Gensler said. “Whether it’s from my colleagues, my manager, or from training courses, it’s important for my growth and development.”

I guess maybe it's possible as perhaps international corporate offices aren't hellscapes like here in America, but even still, this sounds wrong.

[malchior]

All I see is another "study" based on data from a firm that literally builds offices. It could be accurate but it's probably bullshit. How about we next ask the beef council to run a study asking if people prefer beef over chicken?

[Smoove_B]

Yeah, maybe. I was really trying to be open minded because it was "international", but you're probably right.

[Kraken]

It seems plausible that millennials and zoomers lack some skills and habits that us old folks picked up by osmosis in day-to-day office work. Plus, free donuts.

[stessier]

All I see is another "study" based on data from a firm that literally builds offices. It could be accurate but it's probably bullshit. How about we next ask the beef council to run a study asking if people prefer beef over chicken?

[pr0ner]

It seems plausible that millennials and zoomers lack some skills and habits that us old folks picked up by osmosis in day-to-day office work. Plus, free donuts.

As someone stuck training some of these millennials and zoomers while they work at home full time, I find there is some truth to your statement.

[Smoove_B]

When the history of COVID-19 is written, I hope they dedicate an entire chapter to Zients:

White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients is ratcheting up pressure on Cabinet secretaries and agencies heads to bring their workforce back into the office, telling them to "personally track" their progress and develop "concrete plans" to achieve their goals.

Why it matters: Zients is convinced that the federal government will work more efficiently and effectively when employees are in the office at least 50% of the time.

...

In August, Zients started to push the federal workforce to transition away from permanent remote work. With over 2.2 million employees, the federal government is the largest employer in the country. Zients's approach to bringing the federal workforce back into the office – born of his firm belief that in-person contact leads to better teamwork — involves carrots and sticks.

Of note:

The bottom line: In the corporate world, that battle over return-to-office appears to have died down. Just 6 out of 158 U.S. CEOs said they'll prioritize bringing workers back to the office full-time in 2024, according to a new survey released by the Conference Board, Axios reported.

[Kurth]

It seems plausible that millennials and zoomers lack some skills and habits that us old folks picked up by osmosis in day-to-day office work. Plus, free donuts.

As someone stuck training some of these millennials and zoomers while they work at home full time, I find there is some truth to your statement.

As someone who has been opposed to in-office mandates, I still think there’s a ton of truth to the statement.

Even in the legal field where we’re not exactly hands-on collaborating, remote work is not great for professional development.

[Smoove_B]

Even in the legal field where we’re not exactly hands-on collaborating, remote work is not great for professional development.

I think you're missing the shift in attitude.

Jesuthasan said: "I think they have more of an attitude of work to live as opposed to live to work that many of us grew up with. This is particularly true in the West. They have seen the legacy of all these broken promises. In the old days and in many parts of the West, they would promise you if you worked for 30 years, you have this defined benefit pension, you have retiree medical care, etc. None of that exists today.

[YellowKing]

I know my attitude changed with my company's recent layoffs. Having worked in stable work environments for over 20 years, I was very accustomed to going the extra mile. Working after hours, working the occasional weekend, whatever it took to get the job done. And I didn't mind it.

Then our company gets bought out and I went from a stable environment that felt like family to what felt like living in an abusive household where you were always walking on eggshells. When they suddenly just outsourced our entire department to India 3 weeks before Christmas, I knew the company gave zero fucks about any of us.

So literally overnight I went from "above and beyond" to giving zero fucks about *them".

The best gift they ever gave me was taking the veil off my eyes and showing me what corporate America really thinks of its workers. So damn right, I'll be work to live from now on, and not the other way around. I'll take every vacation day, I'll take every break, I'll start work at 8 and I'll end work at 5. Anything above and beyond that they can fuck off.

[LordMortis]

In the old days and in many parts of the West, they would promise you if you worked for 30 years, you have this defined benefit pension, you have retiree medical care, etc. None of that exists today.

This more than anything else I can think of defined my relationship to work. Even after close to 30 years, where I cared for many of my fellow employees, I saw the layoffs, I saw what I would get when I left, and I rejected the "we're a company name family" that upper management always talked about. (For me) Family are the exact people you count on when everything goes wrong. Work is the exact thing that will kick you to the curb when everything goes wrong. Pensions and lifelong medical care define how much you are a resource to be exhausted and disposed in the best economic fashion possible. This was established for me straight out of college in the 90s, well before the viral economy.

[Blackhawk]

Deathbed test: You're laying there. Do you want to say, "I really worked", or "I really lived."

Acknowledging, of course, that either requires a portion of the other.

[Kurth]

Deathbed test: You're laying there. Do you want to say, "I really worked", or "I really lived."

Acknowledging, of course, that either requires a portion of the other.

Fair enough. But then let’s dispense with some of the moaning and gnashing of teeth when you're “really living” from your parent’s basement.

There are consequences to not leaning into your work. If you are cool with those, power to ya.

[Blackhawk]

Deathbed test: You're laying there. Do you want to say, "I really worked", or "I really lived."

Acknowledging, of course, that either requires a portion of the other.

Fair enough. But then let’s dispense with some of the moaning and gnashing of teeth when you're “really living” from your parent’s basement.

There are consequences to not leaning into your work. If you are cool with those, power to ya.

Did you read the second sentence?

[Kurth]

Deathbed test: You're laying there. Do you want to say, "I really worked", or "I really lived."

Acknowledging, of course, that either requires a portion of the other.

Fair enough. But then let’s dispense with some of the moaning and gnashing of teeth when you're “really living” from your parent’s basement.

There are consequences to not leaning into your work. If you are cool with those, power to ya.

Did you read the second sentence?

I did, and that wasn’t meant to be a criticism of what you were saying. Just that - and I don’t think we disagree - it’s a sliding scale: Balance is what I think most people should be aiming for.

I think my response was more geared to the “attitude” shift Smoove was talking about a couple posts before.

I’ve been seeing more and more young lawyers who are happy to take their $200K starting salary but don’t want to come into the office or work that hard and then are frustrated that they’re not advancing in their careers. I’m not saying that everyone needs to shut up and pay their dues because that’s how my generation did it or any of that bullshit. There are certainly better ways to do things, and they should be explored.

But I definitely get a “cake and eat it, too” vibe out of a lot of younger people today embracing this “attitude” shift. I don’t think that works.

[Blackhawk]

Fair enough - I took that as pointed at me.

It's absolutely a balance, and far too many people fail to strike that balance, either working to the exclusion of joy, or kicking back to the point that they can't afford the joys they desire. Where 'balance' falls depends on the person (do you want more free time with fewer options, or more resources, but less time to enjoy them?)

As I've said before, being disabled gives me a different perspective from most, as I've never really had the opportunity to try and strike that balance - what I have is what I get. Which is fine, but it really makes it stand out when I see so many people either wasting their opportunities by not making an effort, or wasting their lives by making that effort in a way that excludes all else.

[hepcat]

I have a friend who issues the same type of bon mots and it irritates me at times. There's an insinuation that people who work are suckers for working. Meanwhile, she was constantly borrowing money off everyone to survive. Very, very, very few people have the option to do what they love and survive.

p.s. I'm not directing this at BH, mind you. He's explained he doesn't mean it that way. It's just a pet peeve of mine that this reminded me of.

[Smoove_B]

I’ve been seeing more and more young lawyers who are happy to take their $200K starting salary but don’t want to come into the office or work that hard and then are frustrated that they’re not advancing in their careers. I’m not saying that everyone needs to shut up and pay their dues because that’s how my generation did it or any of that bullshit. There are certainly better ways to do things, and they should be explored.

But I definitely get a “cake and eat it, too” vibe out of a lot of younger people today embracing this “attitude” shift. I don’t think that works.

I'm glad you clarified because I thought you were going to swerve into the "prison sex" mentality for work, which (I think) is what people are finally pushing back against.

By way of example, I have someone I know (real well) that is mandated to be in a corporate office 3 days a week now. This person is a manager and they manage a team of people that are all remote workers. In addition, their boss was just replaced and that person is currently living in another state. So everyone this person is in charge of or reports to is located in different states or at different locations in our state. However, this person travels to their work office 3 days a week and has fully remote meetings from their private office instead of our, I mean, their house. It's absurd.

And yes, I get that's not what you're entirely saying - that there is potentially a mindset of worth/value and that overwhelmingly the current crop of new workers believes they are worth more than they're being paid (they are), but they're not seeing it. I think the difference now is that they're not going to stick around and "grind" for an eventual salary increase. Instead, they're going to take what's being offered and then just leave without thinking twice about it when a better offer comes along.

If your company isn't investing in the workers - providing them with opportunities to learn soft skills, providing amenities that help them balance work/life, demonstrating that they have value, I don't think just telling them to "put in the work, it'll come in time" is going to help anymore. Or if you (collective) are telling everyone they must come in to work and produce things face-to-face because there's just no other way work/networking/relationships can happen. It's clearly not true and I think that's what they're (correctly) railing against.

I guess I'm rambling here a bit, but I interact with a lot of 20-somethings starting work and I can confirm they're not messing around with employers; they seem to have a better sense of their own worth. They're still not getting what they're worth, but they're also not tolerating it like I remember doing at their age.

[YellowKing]

We also have to keep in mind that it's not like the old days when your job market was limited by the jobs in your immediate vicinity. I have people living next door to me on the east coast that work for a company in California. I know this isn't true for all professions, but there are a lot of professions - particularly in the tech sector where a lot of young people are working - where this is true. Young people know this, and they know they don't necessarily need to put up with their company's bullshit when there are hundreds of other companies hiring all over the country.

[Octavious]

On the flip side when you apply for a job you are competing against the entire freaking country. My wife is feeling the pain of that right now. Just getting picked from the pile let along getting an interview is rough.

[Blackhawk]

I have a friend who issues the same type of bon mots and it irritates me at times. There's an insinuation that people who work are suckers for working. Meanwhile, she was constantly borrowing money off everyone to survive. Very, very, very few people have the option to do what they love and survive.

p.s. I'm not directing this at BH, mind you. He's explained he doesn't mean it that way. It's just a pet peeve of mine that this reminded me of.

FWIW, I have only asked people for money once (for my car about eight years ago when my kids were still in school and transportation wasn't just a convenience), and when offered to me, I've turned it down far, far more often than I've accepted it (most of the times I've accepted help it has been a surprise that I didn't know about until after the fact.) And yeah, I know you weren't referring to me, but on something like that? I want there to be no doubt, including from others reading along.

My position is best summed up when I said that where the balance falls depends on the person.

Not working and still expecting things that require money (or begging money) is a good example of not keeping your work and life in balance. My father-in-law was a good example of the other side - he worked, then he worked, then he worked. When he was sick, he worked. When he was dying, he worked. He felt like if he wasn't working, he was a failure, so he worked even more. And he ingrained his kids (including Michelle) with that attitude, and I've seen just how damaging it can be.

[Kurth]

Oversimplifying and generalizing to some extent, what I hear you guys talking about here sounds a little bit to me like a model that converts all/most work into a “gig economy” model. Young workers will stick with an employer and a job only until the next better offer comes along. I get how that might be a benefit and give workers more power/leverage in the short run, but I’m not convinced that’s a model for young people to be successful in the long run. Seniority and institutional knowledge count, sometimes a lot.

If you’re basically just a young mercenary bouncing from one gig to the next, I don’t think that’s a recipe for success or stability.

I sound so old.

[Blackhawk]

Young workers will stick with an employer and a job only until the next better offer comes along. I get how that might be a benefit and give workers more power/leverage in the short run, but I’m not convinced that’s a model for young people to be successful in the long run. Seniority and institutional knowledge count, sometimes a lot.

It sounds to me that young people are treating companies the same way that companies treat them. That's not saying it's a good idea, but I can at least understand why they would choose to.

I’m not convinced that’s a model for young people to be successful in the long run.

That's one of the things that I think is starting to change - people are defining 'success' differently. It used to mean money and position, and anyone who didn't have that wasn't 'successful.' That's one idea that seems to be dying. Thankfully.

[Kurth]

Young workers will stick with an employer and a job only until the next better offer comes along. I get how that might be a benefit and give workers more power/leverage in the short run, but I’m not convinced that’s a model for young people to be successful in the long run. Seniority and institutional knowledge count, sometimes a lot.

It sounds to me that young people are treating companies the same way that companies treat them. That's not saying it's a good idea, but I can at least understand why they would choose to.

I’m not convinced that’s a model for young people to be successful in the long run.

That's one of the things that I think is starting to change - people are defining 'success' differently. It used to mean money and position, and anyone who didn't have that wasn't 'successful.' That's one idea that seems to be dying. Thankfully.

Sure, BH, but “money and position” leads to a lot of desirable opportunities. Like, supporting a family. Paying for an education. Buying a decent house. Taking care of aging parents. You know, most of the things that come with adulting.

[Blackhawk]

Young workers will stick with an employer and a job only until the next better offer comes along. I get how that might be a benefit and give workers more power/leverage in the short run, but I’m not convinced that’s a model for young people to be successful in the long run. Seniority and institutional knowledge count, sometimes a lot.

It sounds to me that young people are treating companies the same way that companies treat them. That's not saying it's a good idea, but I can at least understand why they would choose to.

I’m not convinced that’s a model for young people to be successful in the long run.

That's one of the things that I think is starting to change - people are defining 'success' differently. It used to mean money and position, and anyone who didn't have that wasn't 'successful.' That's one idea that seems to be dying. Thankfully.

Sure, BH, but “money and position” leads to a lot of desirable opportunities. Like, supporting a family. Paying for an education. Buying a decent house. Taking care of aging parents. You know, most of the things that come with adulting.

Not many people are 'adulting' by paying for an education or buying a house these days, either. Those are no longer part of being an adult for most young people.

[YellowKing]

I also think it's either going to work out for them...or it isn't. If it doesn't work out, then attitudes will have to shift. At some point there will be some sort of equilibrium. Whether it's good, bad, or somewhere in-between for society at large probably remains to be seen. I don't feel qualified to judge while we're still in the middle of the experiment.

[Blackhawk]

Qualified to judge? No. But qualified to debate? Hell, yeah!

[hepcat]

I look forward to the future Star Trek has promised me in which we don’t need to work, but we choose to because we enjoy it.

Which always made me wonder, is there a large contingent of people in the Star Trek universe who have never worn anything but sweat pants and have seen every episode of Friends like 7 times?

[Blackhawk]

That would be the Wall-E Quadrant.

[Kraken]

Those who put in the extra time and effort will always rise to the top. If someone wants to work to contract and is satisfied with their base salary, more power to them. Drudgery makes the world go 'round. Just don't complain about how unfair it all is when you can't have nice things.

[Blackhawk]

Or learn to redefine what constitutes 'nice things.'

I just generally object to the idea that wealth/position = successful, and the lack of same = not successful. Even in this thread we have variations of "If you want to be a success, you have to put in the hours...", which is complete and total bullshit. If your goal is to excel in a particular field, or to hold a certain position, or to be wealthy, then absolutely. But those are not the only goals that one can strive for. And if we, as a society, consider any goal other than wealth/position to be inferior, then we've got yet another thing that's seriously broken.

Not everyone needs to be obsessed with clawing their way to the top.

I am not, in any way, saying that young people shouldn't work, or that they shouldn't put in an effort, or that they should slack off and let someone else take care of them. That's also bullshit. Money doesn't buy happiness, but, up to a certain amount, money buys reduced stress. Being able to pay your bills, not being deep in debt, being able to afford the food you prefer to eat, not having to go without the things you enjoy - that all takes money and therefore work.

Hell, before I was on disability, I actually really enjoyed the elements of working that weren't directly related my disability, and I think longingly of the days when I was putting in 40-50 hours per week on a salary. There's a satisfaction, to me, in excelling at something and having the respect of my peers, and I miss that. But I'm not going to judge someone else because their goals in life are different than mine.

[gbasden]

If you’re basically just a young mercenary bouncing from one gig to the next, I don’t think that’s a recipe for success or stability.

I sound so old.

As a tech person working during the dot com boom times, I can tell you that is exactly what everyone did. You learned as much as possible then jumped ship to another company that gave you options to learn something better and paid you more. Rinse, repeat. For the first 15 years of my career, I never stayed at a job longer than 3 years and some as little as 1. Then I got a job with the right employer and I've been here for 15 years. There is nothing virtuous about blind loyalty and nothing wrong with being loyal to an employer who treats you well.