I think yes and no. I think in general the economy as we know it depends on people wanting more. For people to want to be materially better off then their neighbors. For people to want to make more money so they can be materially better.
It would be terrible for corporations if we all collectively decided to be minimalists that lived in small paid off houses and rode bikes.
At the same time, your employer likely wants to pay individual workers the lowest amount they can.
I think I am less motivated by material things than most people. I am not immune to wanting things though. It is something that I think I am naturally inclined towards (being a bit less materialistic), and I try to reinforce that tendency.
I could see myself moving out to a small cabin in the woods or something. Having more time to pursue interests. Maybe writing about the industrial revolution and itās consequences. Joking about that last part lol. There is a weird dude at my gym that has some interesting tee shirts. One says Kaczynski was right. He has another expressing his doubts about the existence of birds. I am pretty sure he is mocking these things, but you never know.
Bikes are often a better option. We would save on health care as well.
I am not against unions. I think people should be able to collectively bargin.
I am a student of W Edwards Deming. It was his philosophy to pay the workers as low as the employer could, but enough to keep them from looking elsewhere for more pay. In the 1970ās and '80ās it was commonly known that the fastest way to get a raise was to change employers.
It got so bad at my employer that they tried to get a written contract with the employee before sending them to technical training that they would stay at least 10 more years. Example: We would send our best employee to a Westinghouse combustion turbine school and the employee would be offered a job with a considerably better salary.
The second part is important. I think things like the post office have that principle figured out. Their employees on average stay a long time. Iāve heard postal employees call it āgolden handcuffsā. Not as much money as they would like, but on the whole with benefits pretty hard to beat.
My previous employer didnāt understand this concept (I donāt think). When I was coming into the company as a new grad, they were in process of letting go of a decent percent (50+%) of senior and principle engineers, and replacing them with new grads. They could pay two new grads less than one principle engineer. The issue is they lost a ton of product knowledge, and the new grads are probably 90% gone by now (10 years later). They knew that more money was easier to get by switching jobs.
IDK here? If you work really hard (or have that as a perception of you) and are around average talant, I think that will beat out talent most of the time for progression.
Issue is that standing out as working really hard in many corporate settings is very difficult. Lots of people are putting in an extra 10 hours a week. I have a buddy that has been climbing the ladder very quickly. He makes a lot of money in his mid 30s. But he works 70 hours a week. He wakes up at 5 am on Saturdays to work.
Since I am not that material goods driven, I spend more time on things I enjoy and am okay with my salary and more free time.
There was an interesting survey that showed cognitive dissonance in many employees. They asked employees something like would you choose to be the most obese employee with the highest pay in the company or the fittest employee with the mean pay. Almost everyone choose the latter. Their actual decisions aligned a lot closer with the former (they made decisions that lowered health like working more hours for possible advancement).
False. Employers pay as little as they can, even to management. What real talent are the workers at Starbucks missing? How many positions are open to climb the ladder? Should this be the only way to get a better living? What if the employees came into work early, went beyond their duty to climb the ladder? Would there be enough positions for employees to climb the ladder and get a raise?
Hard work beats talent, when talent doesnāt work hard.
Perception is important, but production matters most of all. You can rely on perception only getting you so far before the rubber meets the road and your ability to produce becomes apparent.
Funny enough, trucking companies usually have very good health insurance offerings. Of course, before taking my current job I made my demand on an insurance package as part of my offer.
I pay $200 a month for 2 kids, wife, and myself, $1000 deductible per year, no referrals needed, $20 copay across the board.