Job/Education Suggestions?

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

I can go on with more examples, [/quote]

For each one of your examples I can list people who work significantly “harder” for less, and people who work significantly “harder” for much, much more.

I’ve been pretty clear I’m talking in generalities here, common denominators. And the common denominator is that for the most part, somewhere along the line, the person (even those who are just comfortable) worked their ass off to get where they are. And more often than not, anyone making real money, works more than 2080 a year. [/quote]

Good points.

What do you consider “real money”? Totally not trying to bust balls here, but just curious. As I said, and I try to remain general most of the time too, I haven’t seen many people earning above the 150K or so mark without putting in some serious hours somewhere along the line or currently or if not clocking those hours, putting up with LOADS OF SHIT that most can’t handle. So I agree with much of what you say. [/quote]

Depends on where one lives, time at that wage and lifestyle.

In some instances I’d say as low as 150k a year. Generally speaking outside of places like Manhattan I’d start around 200k-250k individually and 400 ish with a family.

Age plays a role too. At 30 the number is lower than at 50.

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

A 90 hour work week is foolish. And hopefully slightly exaggerated :P[/quote]

Don’t ever open a business then. [/quote]

I probably won’t but that doesn’t have anything to do with the discussion of reasonable hours. [/quote]

It certainly does. Reasonable hours for staff is different than reasonable management hours. Ownership is typically a 24/7 endeavor.

As for hair cuts and cloths shopping being included in work hours… direct costing vs indirect. Commute is a direct cost while a hair cut is indirect and beneficial outside of work. But if we want venture into absurd hyperbole then I’m game I guess.

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

I dont even know what you’re talking about, [/quote]

Tis quite apparent given your assumptive, childish, insulting conjecture that you continue to post.

You ignore entire things I say, because, well I have no idea really. Cognitive dissonance maybe…

And no, I wasn’t butthurt over your “reply” to Deb. I was simply pointing out you have the mentality of a child. And you continue to prove me right, so please, continue on. [/quote]

I ignore what you say, because you’re not saying anything. Why dont you get off the soapbox and make coherent point instead spouting off about 2080 hours, real money, and occupy cupcake street? [/quote]

You ignore entire sections of my posts, entire posts themselves… Admit it, and then actually have the audacity to think your description of what they contain is accurate or in any way anything other than your own projection and conjecture?

Well done chap.
[/quote]

your intelligence and superiority in life confound me to such a degree that i can not comprehend your profound argument for slaving life away for “real money”

good day sir. [/quote]

I truly hope, for your own sake, that you understand why I sigh at your posts here.

It will likely happen when you stop with the conjecture and remove “slave away” from all your descriptions of work.

[quote]debraD wrote:
showering because I think about work.

[/quote]

It’s rare I think about work outside of work. I do think about my career from time to time tho.

And I’ve “seen” lawyers bill for less, lol

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
But if we want venture into absurd hyperbole then I’m game I guess. [/quote]

This is rich (pun intended) coming from the guy who turned a thread in which OP inquired about jobs working 40 hours per week with some degree of outdoor labor and travel (with no stipulations about income) into several pages of ranting about Generation Cupcake and repeatedly stating that the only people making “real money” work significantly more than that. Can you show me the part of this thread where OP asked for your big-bucks salary in exchange for his less than 40 hours per week of labor?

Beans, you’re a really smart guy. But I am genuinely curious: why are you so against the idea that someone could be happy working 40 hours per week and living on roughly $50,000 yearly income instead of doubling the workload for a chance at the brass ring? Is someone who chooses modest hours, modest paycheck, and a life that allows significantly more enrichment outside of the workplace part of “Generation Cupcake” because they choose such a path over a more lucrative career that would require double the work?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]carbiduis wrote:
I could EASILY double my salary and work 80hrs/wk

all I’d have to do is find another full-time job, easy.[/quote]

You sir are a genius![/quote]

You know, you could work nearly 4 full time jobs a week if you just adopted the Uberman sleep schedule.[/quote]

Don’t be silly.[/quote]
As well as abandoning this thing called a personal life.

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
But if we want venture into absurd hyperbole then I’m game I guess. [/quote]

This is rich (pun intended) coming from the guy who turned a thread in which OP inquired about jobs working 40 hours per week with some degree of outdoor labor and travel (with no stipulations about income) into several pages of ranting about Generation Cupcake and repeatedly stating that the only people making “real money” work significantly more than that. Can you show me the part of this thread where OP asked for your big-bucks salary in exchange for his less than 40 hours per week of labor?

Beans, you’re a really smart guy. But I am genuinely curious: why are you so against the idea that someone could be happy working 40 hours per week and living on roughly $50,000 yearly income instead of doubling the workload for a chance at the brass ring? Is someone who chooses modest hours, modest paycheck, and a life that allows significantly more enrichment outside of the workplace part of “Generation Cupcake” because they choose such a path over a more lucrative career that would require double the work?[/quote]
Lol yes, let’s ignore the whole “I don’t want to do the work college takes” and “can’t have to much math” part of his post. Don’t get all revisionist like dude wasn’t clearly looking for golden unicorns who fart rainbows in terms of careers.

Op is the equivalent of the single guy on Craig’s list advertising that he is available for three ways with hot lesbian couples.

And enough with this bull shit notion that “choosing” a “lesser” pay and hours leads to a more enriched life. It is total hogwash. Miserable people work across all spectrums, same with those who feel fulfilled. I literally help people live their dreams, help put food in people’s mouths and assist in trying to generally improve the global economy. And that is just my time at work, forget about family time and my time and money donations in the community. You can enjoy your life and still work hard.

As for your question, people can do as they please but don’t bitch when inflation destroys your lifestyle, and social security barely pays your bills. Forget about other lifestyle limits and the stress financial insecurity puts on relationships.

Not everyone will retire making 300k, most won’t. But the more people who try (in an honest fashion) the better off society is as a whole. Economics 101.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
But if we want venture into absurd hyperbole then I’m game I guess. [/quote]

This is rich (pun intended) coming from the guy who turned a thread in which OP inquired about jobs working 40 hours per week with some degree of outdoor labor and travel (with no stipulations about income) into several pages of ranting about Generation Cupcake and repeatedly stating that the only people making “real money” work significantly more than that. Can you show me the part of this thread where OP asked for your big-bucks salary in exchange for his less than 40 hours per week of labor?

Beans, you’re a really smart guy. But I am genuinely curious: why are you so against the idea that someone could be happy working 40 hours per week and living on roughly $50,000 yearly income instead of doubling the workload for a chance at the brass ring? Is someone who chooses modest hours, modest paycheck, and a life that allows significantly more enrichment outside of the workplace part of “Generation Cupcake” because they choose such a path over a more lucrative career that would require double the work?[/quote]
Lol yes, let’s ignore the whole “I don’t want to do the work college takes” and “can’t have to much math” part of his post. Don’t get all revisionist like dude wasn’t clearly looking for golden unicorns who fart rainbows in terms of careers.

Op is the equivalent of the single guy on Craig’s list advertising that he is available for three ways with hot lesbian couples.

And enough with this bull shit notion that “choosing” a “lesser” pay and hours leads to a more enriched life. It is total hogwash. Miserable people work across all spectrums, same with those who feel fulfilled. I literally help people live their dreams, help put food in people’s mouths and assist in trying to generally improve the global economy. And that is just my time at work, forget about family time and my time and money donations in the community. You can enjoy your life and still work hard.

As for your question, people can do as they please but don’t bitch when inflation destroys your lifestyle, and social security barely pays your bills. Forget about other lifestyle limits and the stress financial insecurity puts on relationships.

Not everyone will retire making 300k, most won’t. But the more people who try (in an honest fashion) the better off society is as a whole. Economics 101.

[/quote]

I get what you’re saying but I think your argument doesn’t make sense all over. There are some need professions–law enforcement, transit, logistics, truck driving, nursing, teaching, firefighting, all kinds of manual labor, most “mid-skill professionals”–that simply don’t yield that sort of pay, regardless of how hard most in those fields work, yet most of those sorts of people do put in days of honest and hard work.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

I dont even know what you’re talking about, [/quote]

Tis quite apparent given your assumptive, childish, insulting conjecture that you continue to post.

You ignore entire things I say, because, well I have no idea really. Cognitive dissonance maybe…

And no, I wasn’t butthurt over your “reply” to Deb. I was simply pointing out you have the mentality of a child. And you continue to prove me right, so please, continue on. [/quote]

I ignore what you say, because you’re not saying anything. Why dont you get off the soapbox and make coherent point instead spouting off about 2080 hours, real money, and occupy cupcake street? [/quote]

You ignore entire sections of my posts, entire posts themselves… Admit it, and then actually have the audacity to think your description of what they contain is accurate or in any way anything other than your own projection and conjecture?

Well done chap.
[/quote]

your intelligence and superiority in life confound me to such a degree that i can not comprehend your profound argument for slaving life away for “real money”

good day sir. [/quote]

I truly hope, for your own sake, that you understand why I sigh at your posts here.

It will likely happen when you stop with the conjecture and remove “slave away” from all your descriptions of work. [/quote]

I truly hope, for your own sake, that you understand why I sigh at your posts here.

It will likely happen when you’re on your death bed trying to remember what you did with your life and youll only come up with “i worked hard for money”.

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
80-90 hour work weeks aren’t that bad. I did 80-90 hours for six months. Partied at night, and work up at 3 to go the gym. [/quote]
Then I question what you mean by ‘work.’

[/quote]

I’ve often wondered this for those who say they work 70 to 90 hours per week. Is there even quality work being done past the 50 hour mark? [/quote]

It depends. When I was younger me and another guy started a tree service and did 80-90 hr. weeks for the first few years. The quality had to be high as we were building on reputation and word of mouth. Same when I was doing concrete, because you simply cannot screw up a pour. Thats the benefit of youth and vigor.

Moving on in life I was doing 60-72 for a couple of years welding and fitting at 38-40 yrs. old, but it really took its toll. The quality still has to be there though because there is some stuff that is just ridiculous to fix once screwed up, and the production schedule waits for no one- so the quantity is a factor too. The big problem with that type of environment is that after a certain point safety suffers badly and people get mangled (literally- loss of life and limb).

Through it all the balance of life/health/happiness does get destroyed though. It may be different in professional environments, but no one in heavy industry will ever say otherwise unless they are utterly deranged.

I am (and my wife is) a lot happier at this point with me doing a straight 40, modest paycheck and all. Having the evenings to spend with my son and being able to enjoy them is hard to put a number on.

AND now a break:

An American investment banker was taking a much-needed vacation in a small coastal Mexican village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. The boat had several large, fresh fish in it.

The investment banker was impressed by the quality of the fish and asked the Mexican how long it took to catch them. The Mexican replied,Only a little while.The banker then asked why he didn’t stay out longer and catch more fish?

The Mexican fisherman replied he had enough to support his family’s immediate needs.

The American then asked But what do you do with the rest of your time?

The Mexican fisherman replied, I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siesta with my wife, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine and play guitar with my amigos: I have a full and busy life, senor.

The investment banker scoffed, I am an Ivy League MBA, and I could help you. You could spend more time fishing and with the proceeds buy a bigger boat, and with the proceeds from the bigger boat you could buy several boats until eventually you would have a whole fleet of fishing boats. Instead of selling your catch to the middleman you could sell directly to the processor, eventually opening your own cannery. You could control the product, processing and distribution.

Then he added,Of course, you would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Mexico City where you would run your growing enterprise.

The Mexican fisherman asked, But senor, how long will this all take??

To which the American replied, 15-20 years.

But what then?? asked the Mexican.

The American laughed and said, That’s the best part. When the time is right you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich. You could make millions.?

Millions, senor? Then what??

To which the investment banker replied, ?Then you would retire. You could move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos.

Back to our feature presentation.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
80-90 hour work weeks aren’t that bad. I did 80-90 hours for six months. Partied at night, and work up at 3 to go the gym. [/quote]
Then I question what you mean by ‘work.’

[/quote]

I’ve often wondered this for those who say they work 70 to 90 hours per week. Is there even quality work being done past the 50 hour mark? [/quote]

It depends. When I was younger me and another guy started a tree service and did 80-90 hr. weeks for the first few years. The quality had to be high as we were building on reputation and word of mouth. Same when I was doing concrete, because you simply cannot screw up a pour. Thats the benefit of youth and vigor.

Moving on in life I was doing 60-72 for a couple of years welding and fitting at 38-40 yrs. old, but it really took its toll. The quality still has to be there though because there is some stuff that is just ridiculous to fix once screwed up, and the production schedule waits for no one- so the quantity is a factor too. The big problem with that type of environment is that after a certain point safety suffers badly and people get mangled (literally- loss of life and limb).

Through it all the balance of life/health/happiness does get destroyed though. It may be different in professional environments, but no one in heavy industry will ever say otherwise unless they are utterly deranged.

I am (and my wife is) a lot happier at this point with me doing a straight 40, modest paycheck and all. Having the evenings to spend with my son and being able to enjoy them is hard to put a number on.[/quote]

Thanks for this.

That’s a brutal work schedule. I’ve heard of some oil guys up north putting up 12 hour days in crumby conditions for like 14 days straight. You guys are made of steel.

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
80-90 hour work weeks aren’t that bad. I did 80-90 hours for six months. Partied at night, and work up at 3 to go the gym. [/quote]
Then I question what you mean by ‘work.’

[/quote]

I’ve often wondered this for those who say they work 70 to 90 hours per week. Is there even quality work being done past the 50 hour mark? [/quote]

It depends. When I was younger me and another guy started a tree service and did 80-90 hr. weeks for the first few years. The quality had to be high as we were building on reputation and word of mouth. Same when I was doing concrete, because you simply cannot screw up a pour. Thats the benefit of youth and vigor.

Moving on in life I was doing 60-72 for a couple of years welding and fitting at 38-40 yrs. old, but it really took its toll. The quality still has to be there though because there is some stuff that is just ridiculous to fix once screwed up, and the production schedule waits for no one- so the quantity is a factor too. The big problem with that type of environment is that after a certain point safety suffers badly and people get mangled (literally- loss of life and limb).

Through it all the balance of life/health/happiness does get destroyed though. It may be different in professional environments, but no one in heavy industry will ever say otherwise unless they are utterly deranged.

I am (and my wife is) a lot happier at this point with me doing a straight 40, modest paycheck and all. Having the evenings to spend with my son and being able to enjoy them is hard to put a number on.[/quote]

Thanks for this.

That’s a brutal work schedule. I’ve heard of some oil guys up north putting up 12 hour days in crumby conditions for like 14 days straight. You guys are made of steel. [/quote]

You always have to be just a little harder than the work. Thankfully, I’m working with aluminum now in a nice cozy shop environment. You can throw that stuff around all day and feel fine.

It’s funny though. Today there was a kid in the shop who is looking for a job. He’s currently enrolled at one of the local universities for manufacturing engineering and wants to work part time to help pay his way. He’s a qualified machinist but no one will hire part time anymore. I shared with him my observation that if you can’t put in 40 or preferably 60hrs/wk. places won’t even hire you. That definitely struck a chord with him because he was puzzled at being shut down as much as he has recently.

I’m guessing he’ll be starting with us shortly. No need to let a decent worker languish when there is plenty to do.

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I get what you’re saying but I think your argument doesn’t make sense all over. There are some need professions–law enforcement, transit, logistics, truck driving, nursing, teaching, firefighting, all kinds of manual labor, most “mid-skill professionals”–that simply don’t yield that sort of pay, regardless of how hard most in those fields work, yet most of those sorts of people do put in days of honest and hard work.

[/quote]

Without question, you are correct. It takes all kinds to make the world go round.

Part of the issue is as a society we place odd value on things. I could argue, and in some cases would argue, that particularly in urban areas garbage collectors provide more benefit to there community than I do through their work. But, the pay is low, because it is generally unskilled labor and we, as a people, would rather give egotistical lunatics millions of dollars to “play” in front of a camera with a bunch of makeup on. (I like movies, I think acting is work, and sometimes a lot of work, but I think we pay entertainment people way more than they are worth because our values are out of whack.)

The main factor in what I mean isn’t necessarily the amount one is paid, but the amount of effort one puts in. It’s the main reason collectivist societies (socialism, communism, etc) tend to implode on themselves over time.

If someone would make a masterful plumber, but instead chooses to be an artist, which she would be awful at, the market, society, will reject her art by not buying it, and she will have to “fall back” on being a plumber, which society will pay a premium for. If society were to subsidize her art, because she chose to be “more fulfilled” not only is society worse off because they are paying for things they don’t want, her shitty art, and losing out on her skills as a plumber, but she is worse off too as she isn’t reaching her potential.

Now if it is a small portion of people that are doing the above, and choosing the road of least effort, fine. It won’t matter. But as the population of people that can’t find fulfillment in their skill set increases, and the choose paths that aren’t allowing themselves to flourish, the worse the situation gets.

Just because the people you mention don’t make a lot fo money, doesn’t mean they don’t provide valuable contributions to society. Nor does it mean they don’t maximize their skill set. Shit, as long as they put in the effort half the battle is won already.

Complacency is slow death spiral, and to use weight lifting as an example, it is like people who don’t ever try and add weight to the bar, lose any fat, get bigger muscles or try and improve themselves at all. People that have the motivation and desire to go to the gym, but just don’t put any effort into it once there. It’s a waste of time. They would be better off home reading a book or something. Not everyone has to go to the gym, not everyone should work towards an elite total, but if you are going to try at something, try your best ffs.

Hobby or passion, job or family, just try and be better than you were yesterday, challenge yourself a little, and the entire world benefits.

[quote]Aggv wrote:

It will likely happen when you’re on your death bed trying to remember what you did with your life and youll only come up with “i worked hard for money”.
[/quote]

Lmao, you continue on with these failed attempts at being clever that amount to silly projection. I say projection because at this point it can’t be conjecture as I’ve outlined more than once what the situation is. So it is either you knowingly being disingenuous and lacking any intellectual integrity in your replies or you are projecting. I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming the latter.

As to your statement, that won’t happen:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I literally help people live their dreams, help put food in people’s mouths and assist in trying to generally improve the global economy. And that is just my time at work, forget about family time and my time and money donations in the community. You can enjoy your life and still work hard.

[/quote]

I could die tomorrow and my biggest regret would be all the time I wasted being a lazy shit, smoking a ton of weed and thinking I was “fighting the power, fuck the Man”.

I do an audit for an organization that quite literally saves children’s lives. No hyperbole, no flowery language. These people raise money and transport sick and injured children from all over the world into Boston hospitals so those kids have a chance to survive.

The last event they had I left work, had dinner with my family, played, put my daughter to bed, and went to the event. All the money I spent on drinks, cigars, tickets and raffles went to save a life. Then when it was done I hung around with the members of the organization and helped clean up chairs, dishes, etc…

Had I not worked as hard as I have, gone through what I did, I wouldn’t have been on that audit, nor in a position to meet who I did. I wouldn’t have joined a sister organization that provides needs for poor local school children, and I wouldn’t be in a position to have given the ridiculous amount of bags my wife recently gave to the Wish Project…

So when I’m laying dying, I’m sure I’ll regret smoking and have zero problems with the hours and career that allowed me to provide for my family, and afforded me the opportunity to give back not just outside of the office, but with my daily “work” as well.

I’m nothing but sincere when I say I hope you find something to do for a living that allows you to be happy and feel fulfilled by your work. But, if it makes you feel better, continue to convince yourself that fulfillment can only happen outside of one’s career, and that I’ll die miserable because of my choices.

[quote]maverick88 wrote:
Millions, senor? Then what??

To which the investment banker replied, ?Then you would retire. You could move to… [/quote]

…Where ever the hell you wanted to. You could provide for the next 4 generations of your family, at least. You could become a philanthropist and give life and happiness to millions. You could spend your time trying to rid this beautiful country of the drug cartels that slaughter and enslave your countrymen.

You could consult for other companies and teach them how to be more efficient, how to prevent over fishing, and contribute to saving a little bit of nature.

You could write a novel, raise your daughter to be President. You could buy all the land in this village and allow the people to stay, ensuring the next generations a place to live.

Or you could be realistic and stop romanticizing the life of a small fisherman in an impoverished and corrupt country that is one major storm away from starving in the street, with almost zero healthcare and oppressive government.

I’m sure the fisherman has found happiness in life, but lets look at real life here. One of his kids gets the runs and it is a very real possibility that child will die.

Yeah, that sounds like a great time. Pardon me while I work, so I can walk over to CVS and grab some pedialite.

[quote]debraD wrote:

Often times the folks putting in the long hours have problems with efficiency. A talented person can often get the same work done without the OT. And some just like to milk it or make heroes of themselves. But if you actually analyze the work done you can often see they are just not getting the work done in the time they should.

[/quote]

My wifes cousin is in sales of cutting edge medical devices and was briefly working in a division in France. He was putting in major hours and everyone else was leaving early. He asked one of his fellow salesmen why everyone else was working as hard as him and he was told that if you couldn’t get your job done in the allotted time you were viewed as inefficient.

When I used to work major hours I found that you adjust your output to match your schedule. No way you can work as hard for twelve hours as you can for eight.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]maverick88 wrote:
Millions, senor? Then what??

To which the investment banker replied, ?Then you would retire. You could move to… [/quote]

…Where ever the hell you wanted to. You could provide for the next 4 generations of your family, at least. You could become a philanthropist and give life and happiness to millions. You could spend your time trying to rid this beautiful country of the drug cartels that slaughter and enslave your countrymen.

You could consult for other companies and teach them how to be more efficient, how to prevent over fishing, and contribute to saving a little bit of nature.

You could write a novel, raise your daughter to be President. You could buy all the land in this village and allow the people to stay, ensuring the next generations a place to live.

Or you could be realistic and stop romanticizing the life of a small fisherman in an impoverished and corrupt country that is one major storm away from starving in the street, with almost zero healthcare and oppressive government.

I’m sure the fisherman has found happiness in life, but lets look at real life here. One of his kids gets the runs and it is a very real possibility that child will die.

Yeah, that sounds like a great time. Pardon me while I work, so I can walk over to CVS and grab some pedialite. [/quote]

It’s Easy to agree with both sides since both are making straw-man arguments. Most people will make OK money, while working OK hours ~40/wk (agree?)

“Cupcake Generation” vs. “dying on your deathbed looking back and wishing you didn’t spend all your time working”

the arguments are getting ridiculous.

More hours don’t always result in more dollars. I could spend 60hrs/wk at my job (twiddling my thumbs most of the time cause there just isn’t enough work right now) and I would still get the same pay if I showed up 5min later everyday and left 5min early and was a complete fuck up.

I would love to work 50-60/wk and get a 10% raise for it, but that opportunity just isn’t there, so I put in 40/wk and get my 3% raise.

What am I to do? (I’m looking for a different job as you may know) Does this make me a cupcake?

And no I don’t agree with the others arguing the liberal side of things, the emotional arguments are BS as always. One needs to be able to survive comfortably and have money for their WANTS beyond their NEEDS.

The answer is somewhere in the middle (for most).

[quote]carbiduis wrote:

I would love to work 50-60/wk and get a 10% raise for it, but that opportunity just isn’t there, so I put in 40/wk and get my 3% raise.

What am I to do? (I’m looking for a different job as you may know) Does this make me a cupcake?

[/quote]

Does that make you a cupcake? Nope. You’re moving forward, trying to improve and generally putting in the effort to both better yourself and the world around you. You’re not looking for the easy way out, you’re not complacent, you’re generally trying. (If you were 50 with kids and had “put in your time” the entire thing takes on a different perspective understand.)

As an aside, I have no idea if you care or not, but I’ve been wanting to say that you have matured a lot IMO since I first noticed you posting here, and I tip my hat to you for it. Whether or not my opinion on the matter means anything to you aside, it is the truth, and I generally see you on a good path in life, from what I can see on the internet. So, good for you.

(God I hope you aren’t killing hookers and plotting the demise of some locality as hobbies and just playing normal dude on the internet, lol)

[quote]carbiduis wrote:
Most people will make OK money, while working OK hours ~40/wk (agree?)

[/quote]

Depends on the industry and the individual, but generally, no. I don’t agree.

Like I’ve said, somewhere down the line, you’re going to have to put effort in over and above.

Maybe I just spent too much of my life poor, or otherwise limited by finances. I’m not interested in getting caught like that again if I can help it.