Quote:

Original post by phantom Quote: Original post by tstrimp Everyone that I know who has ambition goes above and beyond what their job description calls for and get recognized for it. It's just that very few people want to put in the extra effort. I love lines like this because in my experience this isn't the case; for over two years I worked hard for the company I used to work for. Doing extra hours, working above my pay grade, figuring out things those paid more than me couldn't figure out, feeding back and working closely with the artists around me; on one project I spent alot of time getting the critical builds ready to ship for milestones. First round of redudancies for programmers came around and I was out the door*. We had 32 programmers, 11 had to go, 2 quit of their own accord and it still didn't save me; it also cost them money to get rid of me (two weeks pay + 10 days holiday owed and I was on garden leave for 4 out of my 6 weeks notice). Ultimately it worked out fine for me (as these things often do) as I'm now working for a better company, earning more money and working on better products but that experiance has taught me that going 'above and beyond' isn't worth all that much and while I'll still do the extra hours, work hard, etc etc, I'll ensure that I do full days so that I'll get them back later as TOIL. And I suspect I'm not the only one out there who was willing to put in the extra work only to not see it pay off and think "why did I bother?" (* Personally I think it was all down to my time on the last full product I worked on, as I was feeling burnt out and demotivated for a while, and that coupled with a god awful code base (seriously, it made me want to scream at times) meant I wasn't on top form for a few weeks; any company who let you go because of a few weeks after a couple of years of good service isn't worth it anyway.)

Certainly not all companies are smart enough to recognize those people. If you feel like your extra effort is not being recognized, why would you stay there for over two years? I have had to change jobs due to barriers at companies I've worked at, and it was always to a new company for more money.

Quote:

If I have to choose between my kid having food or a nice home to live in and them having a video game system at christmas the game system doesn't even enter my mind.

You don't have a kid. You don't have a family. You don't have to choose.

Quote:

Nothing is wrong with that if that's what they choose to do. They just have to face the consequences of those actions. They will likely never advance in their career. They will be the first on the chopping block for layoffs. They will be completely screwed when their industry no longer provides a viable career.

And that is how the Roman empire fell. No, really.

Quote:

Everyone that I know who has ambition goes above and beyond what their job description calls for and get recognized for it. It's just that very few people want to put in the extra effort.

Survivor bias. You are only around people like that, because those everyone else is not part of your immediate circle.

I also don't understand why people choose to not have servants. All the people I know have servants. And I hear some people choose to not marry purebloods. I'd consider nothing but virgins of royal line. And so do all the people I know. I really don't understand people who aren't willing to whip their servants if they fall out of line. I was just talking to this with my friends and family at our weekly polo match and they all agreed. I'll ask them tommorow when I go to Monaco to break in our new yachts. I hear rumors that some people don't like sailing and don't own boats. Or even worse, the CEO of some bank apparently couldn't afford a new 50m yacht this year. Incompetent idiot, we stopped inviting him. We can't afford lazy bums like him.

Quote:

If you feel like your extra effort is not being recognized, why would you stay there for over two years? I have had to change jobs due to barriers at companies I've worked at, and it was always to a new company for more money.

Ah! Here is the catch.

200 people applied to that position, but you were the best of them. The rest were "losers" simply due to lack of options. For every winner, there have to be losers.

Don't make the mistake of considering you are actually better. You were just "good enough" in that particular choice given that particular opposition.

Quote:

Certainly not all companies are smart enough to recognize those people.

What if they do, but cannot offer enough?

Thus begins the death spiral that will doom that entire company in the long run and affect all the employees.

And this system favors single survivor with no long tail. The end result is feudal system.

Quote:

Original post by Antheus You don't have a kid. You don't have a family. You don't have to choose.

not having to choose and not being able to make the choice are two entirely different things. Maybe I was blessed to have the luxury of parents who told me "no."

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp If you feel like your extra effort is not being recognized, why would you stay there for over two years? I have had to change jobs due to barriers at companies I've worked at, and it was always to a new company for more money.

Ah, yes, well theres the rub; the various lead coders I'd worked under all recogised the work I was doing and were pushing for me to get prompted up a level right up until the point that lay offs where going to happen. With those I worked with I had a reputation as a hard worker, a "go to" guy and someone who will "get things done". I touched 8 projects in my time there, a couple of them by request of the lead coder who knew what I could do.

Beyond that I liked the people I worked with and the location I was living in; I was happy to advance up a bit at the company before looking to move on.

I probably would have been looking to move in a couple of years time anyway, they just forced my hand and my normal luck kicked in *shrugs*

Quote:

Original post by way2lazy2care Quote: Original post by markm Who was it that said "Americans are crazy... they haven't fed their people yet and already they want dessert?" that works pretty well on both sides of the argument tbh. When you can walk through the ghetto and see more HDTVs through living room windows than you do walking through the suburbs something is certainly wonky.

Willie Wonky? I don't think you know what the word wonk means. And since when do people walk through neighborhoods looking through people's windows to see what they own? Do you have any evidence to support your prejudice?

Quote:

Original post by way2lazy2care Quote: And what exactly is wrong with that? Specifically, what is wrong with people doing just enough to get by? Why isn't that good enough? Where does the notion that just getting by isn't good enough come from? There is no problem with that. The problem is people who do just enough to get by and expect the people who go above and beyond to subsidize it.

Why is that a problem? How is it that people with enough to get by are subsidized by people who go above and beyond? It seems to me that you're so driven to see others as moochers that you see everyone as a moocher.

Quote:

Original post by way2lazy2care I am totally ok with people not wanting to go above and beyond. I just don't like the, "crap we're out of money... well those people have lots of money lets pay for everything with their money" mentality that's growing currently. It's especially sucky because the work-hard attitude that used to be what made the US awesome seems to now be the exception rather than the rule.

The old illusion crumbles only to be replaced with a new illusion. Don't worry the work-hard attitude still reigns on main street. On wall street, however, it's all a con game. When money becomes the index of virtue, those with money spend money to convince everyone to see everyone else as a moocher.

The American Empire is going the way of Rome?

Darn, after all the work, all the years, to finally achieve an African-American President, one had such hopes that that might indicate those delinquent colonies might actually be starting to grow up. Oh well.

I'm glad Halifax's new game-industrialist's profile still indicates he is, after all, just an American, not a Haligonian. Maybe we'll get to see whether Halifax really can have a positive effect upon people. :)

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp Quote: Original post by LessBread And what exactly is wrong with that? Specifically, what is wrong with people doing just enough to get by? Why isn't that good enough? Where does the notion that just getting by isn't good enough come from? Nothing is wrong with that if that's what they choose to do. They just have to face the consequences of those actions. They will likely never advance in their career. They will be the first on the chopping block for layoffs. They will be completely screwed when their industry no longer provides a viable career.

That's a better answer, but somewhat heartless and incomplete. Where does the notion that just getting by isn't good enough come from?

What about the wreckage of their lives? Can the damage be contained?

Quote:

Original post by LessBread Quote: Original post by tstrimp Quote: Original post by LessBread And what exactly is wrong with that? Specifically, what is wrong with people doing just enough to get by? Why isn't that good enough? Where does the notion that just getting by isn't good enough come from? Nothing is wrong with that if that's what they choose to do. They just have to face the consequences of those actions. They will likely never advance in their career. They will be the first on the chopping block for layoffs. They will be completely screwed when their industry no longer provides a viable career. That's a better answer, but somewhat heartless and incomplete. Where does the notion that just getting by isn't good enough come from? What about the wreckage of their lives? Can the damage be contained?

But people who work on improving on their career are also just "getting by". Their fate in life is dictated by climbing the corporate ladder. They are just getting by if they are climbing up.

But corporations are a pyramid. Majority will fall out simply because pyramid gets narrower.

This is a very narrow and specific view of career society. Jennifer Government and John Nike. Career is only important to surprisingly few people. Only a tiny fraction identifies themselves or relies on it.

It works very well for select individuals and is good as selection. But it does nothing to address the wider social issues - that is where the government needs to kick in. It needs to ensure that the physical world in which careerist exist doesn't crumble.

Because it's these rejects and outcasts that are the sole revenue generators for big corporations. Rich people don't buy at Walmart.

That is the irony - wellfare of the rich relies on not having poor population. And right now, they are increasingly breaking this contract. Nor does complete socialism work. A society where everyone is completely equal is incredibly volatile (in land of the blind...).

The drive for this "equality" today isn't about destroying rich or eliminating poverty. It is about maintaining a healthy balance across all levels that is eroding.

Quote:

Original post by Antheus Quote: Everyone that I know who has ambition goes above and beyond what their job description calls for and get recognized for it. It's just that very few people want to put in the extra effort. Survivor bias. You are only around people like that, because those everyone else is not part of your immediate circle. I also don't understand why people choose to not have servants. All the people I know have servants. And I hear some people choose to not marry purebloods. I'd consider nothing but virgins of royal line. And so do all the people I know. I really don't understand people who aren't willing to whip their servants if they fall out of line. I was just talking to this with my friends and family at our weekly polo match and they all agreed. I'll ask them tommorow when I go to Monaco to break in our new yachts. I hear rumors that some people don't like sailing and don't own boats. Or even worse, the CEO of some bank apparently couldn't afford a new 50m yacht this year. Incompetent idiot, we stopped inviting him. We can't afford lazy bums like him.

I don't think it is anything like that at all. I grew up in a poor family in a poor town. I worked my way out of it and so did my parents. My father did it by becoming a long haul truck driver and being gone for weeks at a time. He had an exemplary driving record and was offered a position to teach at the trucking school for the company he worked for.

My mom was mostly a low income office drone but she always did above and beyond what the job required. Eventually that paid off when her work was noticed by the owner of the company and she was promoted to manage the office she worked at.

Quote:

200 people applied to that position, but you were the best of them. The rest were "losers" simply due to lack of options. For every winner, there have to be losers.

Due to lack of options? Maybe they should have spent as much time programming and learning the trade in their off time as I have. I have no problem beating out people with a LOT more experience than I have. It's pathetic how many "programmers" are out there who have only ever worked in one language because that is all their job required. Of course they are going to have problems finding new positions, if you don't stay current on technology (even if it has to be on your own time) you really don't belong in this field.

I've hired four programmers in the last six months (and fired two) and it is amazing how many terrible developers are out there. I was looking specifically for .NET developers and the vast majority of them had no knowledge of any .NET tools and frameworks that were released past 2.0. They had no idea what design patterns were and had only basic understanding of what object oriented programming is. Never mind code smells, refactoring, or source control that is something other than Visual Source Safe.

Quote:

What if they do, but cannot offer enough?

If the company legitimately has financial problems that preclude them from upping your salary, then that company likely isn't in a good place anyway and you should consider bailing out. If you like the work environment and or the company culture, maybe it's worth the risk to try to see them through the tough times, but is an individual call.

Quote:

Original post by LessBread Willie Wonky? I don't think you know what the word wonk means.

Quote:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/wonky wonky [ˈwɒŋkɪ] adj -kier, -kiest Brit informal 1. shaky or unsteady 2. not in correct alignment; askew 3. liable to break down or develop a fault [variant of dialect wanky, from Old English wancol]

do I not?

Quote:

And since when do people walk through neighborhoods looking through people's windows to see what they own? Do you have any evidence to support your prejudice?

Whenever I walk down the street I generally glance into open windows. Am I supposed to stare at the street the whole time? Am I not allowed to look around?

Quote:

Why is that a problem? How is it that people with enough to get by are subsidized by people who go above and beyond? It seems to me that you're so driven to see others as moochers that you see everyone as a moocher.

I definitely don't see everyone as a moocher. I am just cognizant of the fact that there are a lot of moochers. Especially in the sub-25 age group.