U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-12-2016, 02:45 PM
 
1 posts, read 504 times
Reputation: 10

Advertisements

Hit up Ladera Heights

 
Old 05-12-2016, 05:34 PM
Status: "Certified Victim™ who walked away" (set 1 day ago)
 
Location: Laguna Niguel, Orange County CA
9,111 posts, read 6,773,176 times
Reputation: 7047
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
The people who work 60-80 hours a week are IDIOTS and FOOLS.

There are cases of people under 40 having HEART ATTACKS and STROKES because they worked too hard.

Slavishly following what some company tells you to do, at the risk of your health and possibly life is just stupid.

Nearly all people have some sort of interpersonal relationships, whether family, friends, lovers, children, or whatever. Allowing your job to totally destroy your life and/or chances at a family means the person is a spineless coward who couldn't stand up to his master/employer.

Lastly in the cases where men worked crazy hours at companies, the only way they were able to sustain it is if they had a wife (read unpaid MAID) who took care of everything for them at home, including cleaning, cooking, etc. Otherwise if you're working 80 hours or week or so, you don't even have time to do grocery shopping!

Anyone who works all the time should consider what they are getting out of "this work". It's not like they get to do anything for themselves but pay the bills.
There is a lot of truth in this post.
 
Old 05-12-2016, 07:10 PM
 
272 posts, read 177,842 times
Reputation: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
You supplied just anecdotal evidence yourself. Anecdotal evidence simply means cherry picked, btw. It isn't necessarily bad.

The industrial sector has been decimated in entire regions of the nation, particularly the Midwest and the Northeast.
Allow me to quote myself with the one instance in this thread that you specifically refused or simply could not find the evidence to refute the data, but chose to just believe that the world is flat and santa clause is coming to town:

Quote:
Originally Posted by peter_midnight View Post
More women than men are in college pursuing bachelor's degrees and now women are more likely than men to have a bachelor's degree:Women More Likely Than Men to Get College Degree

Where is the discrimination against women in 2016?

24% of married households have women as the primary breadwinner, the highest in the history of the country: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/30/bu...says.html?_r=0

The article goes on to say that the median income of women that are the primary breadwinner is $80,000. I hardly see this as being held back. Once this generation gets control from the baby boomers, you'll see the demographics reflect that. Not every company can have a young guy like Mark Zuckerberg as CEO.



You essentially made my point. Men don't want to work in daycare. Women don't want to work in the fields that are male dominated. As I said, we can't find women to work in outside sales in my company because they refuse to work the long hours without OT pay, be on the road for weeks if not months at a time (I spent 45 days in a row last year), having to take out clients on weeknights to dinner, and golfing on the weekend with clients or co-workers. Go read my links above. Women are DOMINATING college education and are becoming primary breadwinners in married couples at record numbers. You have a woman CEO at Pepsico, she's even a minority. Oprah is one of the most powerful people in entertainment. The CEO of Yahoo is a woman. Hell, women host Sportscenter these days. The highest paid MMA fighter for the last few years was Ronda Rousey. She made more money than any other MMA fighter in the world. Reddit's CEO was a woman until recently. Clearly women are succeeding in the workplace in 2016.

So Japanese automotive companies that manufacture cars and car parts in the US are no longer options? Just LOLOLOLOL
Now allow me to quote webster's and give my source: : based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers <anecdotal evidence>
Anecdotal | Definition of Anecdotal by Merriam-Webster

Nothing about cherry picking in there, but I did find cherry picking here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

"Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes. Where only one or a few anecdotes are presented, there is a larger chance that they may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases."

Is that where you got it from? I see no reputable source that uses this language (and no wikipedia is not a reliable source).

Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
The people who work 60-80 hours a week are IDIOTS and FOOLS.

There are cases of people under 40 having HEART ATTACKS and STROKES because they worked too hard.

Slavishly following what some company tells you to do, at the risk of your health and possibly life is just stupid.

Nearly all people have some sort of interpersonal relationships, whether family, friends, lovers, children, or whatever. Allowing your job to totally destroy your life and/or chances at a family means the person is a spineless coward who couldn't stand up to his master/employer.

Lastly in the cases where men worked crazy hours at companies, the only way they were able to sustain it is if they had a wife (read unpaid MAID) who took care of everything for them at home, including cleaning, cooking, etc. Otherwise if you're working 80 hours or week or so, you don't even have time to do grocery shopping!

Anyone who works all the time should consider what they are getting out of "this work". It's not like they get to do anything for themselves but pay the bills.
Are you also calling the owner of a small business a fool for working 80 hours a week? You do realize if it weren't for people working 80 hours a week, you wouldn't have many blue collar manufacturing jobs nor the goods that they produce and YOU USE, right? It's BECAUSE YOU USE THEM that people are "forced" to work these hours. Do you think oil is made only during 9-5? Do you think cars are made and designed 9-5? The lack of economic knowledge is so strong on this board.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taiko View Post
The political-economic argument being made is that the rate of men accepting that lifestyle with its attended strokes, heart attacks and lack of family life is high enough to skew the numbers so that the claim that one gender is paid less than the other is more a result of women being less likely to ignore kids to in an effort to earn more income to buy sexual and maid services
Nice try, but rather than address the issue at hand he changes the subject. I'm glad somebody gets it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYtoDC View Post
I believe the key is to work smart and not hard. Otherwise, we will end up like those factory workers in the movie Metropolis; just cogs in a machine working ourselves into an early grave. My friend (who is a software test engineer) has a great work-life balance. He makes six figures which is more than enough to get by. He only works 40 hours a week. In fact, pretty much everyone I know only works a 40 hour workweek and they are doing fine financially. Obviously, this will not work in every industry out there. Personally, I have chosen and will continue to choose to work in an industry that respects my need for a personal life as much as it does making a profit. I have no need to be filthy rich and I prefer to have my free time after work more than anything.
What does work-life balance have to do with this gender debate?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
Actually even some wealthy people work hard and smart. Millionaires in Hollywood, though while working on specific projects may have crazy hours, but in between projects they have a lot of downtime.

Also keep in mind people do inherit money. It's a huge myth that anyone well off worked themselves 80 to 90 hours a week. Wealth is often generational, as we discussed. Parental support goes a long way towards helping people get the education they need to work smart.
Adam Carolla lives in Hollywood and works weekends:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU0iZW9tVHE

Tom Leykis (former radio personality)also lives in Hollywood and works weekends. Just because you don't hear or see people's work in Hollywood, doesn't mean they're not working. Hell, for a Hollywood star just staying in shape is PART of the job. Dieting models that refuse to indulge are WORKING.

You say wealth is generational, but an entire book called the Millionaire Next Door pretty much refutes the idea that this is the norm.
 
Old 05-13-2016, 06:22 AM
 
44,577 posts, read 43,115,486 times
Reputation: 14376
Quote:
Originally Posted by highNmighty View Post
Hit up Ladera Heights
An affluent Black area.

Also, View Park-Windsor Hills.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_P...ls,_California
 
Old 05-13-2016, 07:34 AM
 
205 posts, read 106,098 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
Actually even some wealthy people work hard and smart. Millionaires in Hollywood, though while working on specific projects may have crazy hours, but in between projects they have a lot of downtime.

Also keep in mind people do inherit money. It's a huge myth that anyone well off worked themselves 80 to 90 hours a week. Wealth is often generational, as we discussed. Parental support goes a long way towards helping people get the education they need to work smart.
I would differentiate between working a fun "Hollywood" job and the regular Average Joe who works overtime at McDonalds or Macy's. There is a huge difference. Take Tim Ferris for example. He "works" long hours but his "work" consists of competing in ballroom dancing competitions and Judo matches. I'm sorry, but I just don't consider what many entertainers/Hollywood execs, etc. do as "work." They are working at jobs they love which enables them to put in extremely long hours. They are fortunate enough to get paid to do the work that they love. Most of us have to find something stable in order to pay our bills. Most likely, it isn't going to be our first career choice but something that is guaranteed to give us a check. This is why I am highly in favor of working no more than forty hour work weeks. I have to have time to work at my own endeavors on off time and hope that I will eventually be able to earn a living off of it. But, in reality, there are a lot of talented people out here who never get the chance to work in their desired profession (especially those who are talented artists).

I agree with the inheritance statement as well. Most successful people (e.g. Ivanka Trump or the Rockefellers) have had a leg up on everyone else out here from birth. This is why they usually go on to achieve even greater success than their parents. This is why I am such a huge advocate of two parent households (making good income) and proper parental planning (no more than 0-2 children for the middle class). This is the only way to break out of poverty.
 
Old 05-13-2016, 07:44 AM
 
205 posts, read 106,098 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter_midnight View Post
Allow me to quote myself with the one instance in this thread that you specifically refused or simply could not find the evidence to refute the data, but chose to just believe that the world is flat and santa clause is coming to town:



Now allow me to quote webster's and give my source: : based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers <anecdotal evidence>
Anecdotal | Definition of Anecdotal by Merriam-Webster

Nothing about cherry picking in there, but I did find cherry picking here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

"Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes. Where only one or a few anecdotes are presented, there is a larger chance that they may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases."

Is that where you got it from? I see no reputable source that uses this language (and no wikipedia is not a reliable source).



Are you also calling the owner of a small business a fool for working 80 hours a week? You do realize if it weren't for people working 80 hours a week, you wouldn't have many blue collar manufacturing jobs nor the goods that they produce and YOU USE, right? It's BECAUSE YOU USE THEM that people are "forced" to work these hours. Do you think oil is made only during 9-5? Do you think cars are made and designed 9-5? The lack of economic knowledge is so strong on this board.



Nice try, but rather than address the issue at hand he changes the subject. I'm glad somebody gets it.



What does work-life balance have to do with this gender debate?



Adam Carolla lives in Hollywood and works weekends:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU0iZW9tVHE

Tom Leykis (former radio personality)also lives in Hollywood and works weekends. Just because you don't hear or see people's work in Hollywood, doesn't mean they're not working. Hell, for a Hollywood star just staying in shape is PART of the job. Dieting models that refuse to indulge are WORKING.

You say wealth is generational, but an entire book called the Millionaire Next Door pretty much refutes the idea that this is the norm.
Work-life balance factors in heavily for women. If a woman doesn't have kids, maybe not so much, but the majority of women do. Just because a woman has children that she needs to care for, she should not be penalized with lower pay. If Mary works for an hour just like Johnny, she deserves the same $30/hr that Johnny gets (if they are doing the exact same job and have the exact same skill set). An alternative is instead of rewarding single mothers with welfare/section 8, the government could reward two parent (married) households that have 1-2 children with a monthly payment similar to Social Securiy while the child is between the ages of 0-5. This way, singles would be discouraged from having children out of wedlock and a mother who chooses to care for and teach her child at home during the most critical developmental stage could be rewarded with well deserved pay. I would be all in favor of that. I don't come from a place of bias because I don't have children myself but I do know as a former teacher how much work goes into helping a child reach their full potential.
 
Old 05-13-2016, 07:59 AM
 
Location: Elysium
5,813 posts, read 3,090,163 times
Reputation: 4046
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYtoDC View Post
Work-life balance factors in heavily for women. If a woman doesn't have kids, maybe not so much, but the majority of women do. Just because a woman has children that she needs to care for, she should not be penalized with lower pay. If Mary works for an hour just like Johnny, she deserves the same $30/hr that Johnny gets (if they are doing the exact same job and have the exact same skill set). An alternative is instead of rewarding single mothers with welfare/section 8, the government could reward two parent (married) households that have 1-2 children with a monthly payment similar to Social Securiy while the child is between the ages of 0-5. This way, singles would be discouraged from having children out of wedlock and a mother who chooses to care for and teach her child at home during the most critical developmental stage could be rewarded with well deserved pay. I would be all in favor of that. I don't come from a place of bias because I don't have children myself but I do know as a former teacher how much work goes into helping a child reach their full potential.
They are getting the same pay what is happening that they are not working the 9th -16th hours at premium pay at the same rate that men are so the total compensation gender charts get skewed.
 
Old 05-13-2016, 11:07 AM
 
23,252 posts, read 16,063,944 times
Reputation: 8534
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter_midnight View Post
Allow me to quote myself with the one instance in this thread that you specifically refused or simply could not find the evidence to refute the data, but chose to just believe that the world is flat and santa clause is coming to town:



Are you also calling the owner of a small business a fool for working 80 hours a week? You do realize if it weren't for people working 80 hours a week, you wouldn't have many blue collar manufacturing jobs nor the goods that they produce and YOU USE, right? It's BECAUSE YOU USE THEM that people are "forced" to work these hours. Do you think oil is made only during 9-5? Do you think cars are made and designed 9-5? The lack of economic knowledge is so strong on this board.


You say wealth is generational, but an entire book called the Millionaire Next Door pretty much refutes the idea that this is the norm.
Nice try. But in France by law they shortened the work week to 35 hours a week. All the companies have to do is hire a few more workers and they could easily have all the workers work 40 hour shifts. Whether 9 to 5, 5 to 12 or 12 to 7.

Most workers in manufacturing by the way do not work 80 hour weeks. Many of those jobs are union and they definitely fought to reduce worker hours. People in manufacturing do have families and lives to deal with.

As for whether the owner of a small business is an idiot for working 80 hours, yes he is. Clearly he's not that efficient if he has to work those hours. And the only sex or relationship he will get is having a prostitute come over for a quick screw to do him in his businesses bathroom if he is working those hours. Doesn't sound like an appealing life to me.


So I stand by statement, people who work 80 hours a week are FOOLS.
 
Old 05-15-2016, 02:31 PM
 
272 posts, read 177,842 times
Reputation: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYtoDC View Post
Work-life balance factors in heavily for women. If a woman doesn't have kids, maybe not so much, but the majority of women do. Just because a woman has children that she needs to care for, she should not be penalized with lower pay. If Mary works for an hour just like Johnny, she deserves the same $30/hr that Johnny gets (if they are doing the exact same job and have the exact same skill set). An alternative is instead of rewarding single mothers with welfare/section 8, the government could reward two parent (married) households that have 1-2 children with a monthly payment similar to Social Securiy while the child is between the ages of 0-5. This way, singles would be discouraged from having children out of wedlock and a mother who chooses to care for and teach her child at home during the most critical developmental stage could be rewarded with well deserved pay. I would be all in favor of that. I don't come from a place of bias because I don't have children myself but I do know as a former teacher how much work goes into helping a child reach their full potential.
Taiko pretty much echoed my response to this. And no, the government taking tax money and giving it away to people that CHOOSE to have kids is not the answer to anything. And your line about well deserved pay sounds like you do not know economics 101 at all.
 
Old 05-15-2016, 02:39 PM
 
272 posts, read 177,842 times
Reputation: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
Nice try. But in France by law they shortened the work week to 35 hours a week. All the companies have to do is hire a few more workers and they could easily have all the workers work 40 hour shifts. Whether 9 to 5, 5 to 12 or 12 to 7.

Most workers in manufacturing by the way do not work 80 hour weeks. Many of those jobs are union and they definitely fought to reduce worker hours. People in manufacturing do have families and lives to deal with.

As for whether the owner of a small business is an idiot for working 80 hours, yes he is. Clearly he's not that efficient if he has to work those hours. And the only sex or relationship he will get is having a prostitute come over for a quick screw to do him in his businesses bathroom if he is working those hours. Doesn't sound like an appealing life to me.


So I stand by statement, people who work 80 hours a week are FOOLS.
How many items do you buy or use that are manufactured from France? Don't worry, I'll wait.

There is not one manufacturer in the southern United States or in the Japanese automotive manufacturing market in the US that is unionized that I am aware of (by state law or company policy). Many plant workers work 40-50 hours per week, but there isn't an engineer I know in this industry that puts in less than 50 plus hours per week. Manufacturing isn't just about assembly, you have to have a person design the things that get assembled too and that doesn't get done in 40 hour work weeks.

Go ahead and run a business and let me know how long you last running it on 40 hours per week. Also, many billionaires work these hours and have relationships (can't comment on sex life, but I imagine they have it since they do have kids) so your conclusion couldn't be more wrong.

The only fool here is the teacher that does not understand economics 101 or business 101. As they say, those who can do, those who can't teach.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 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, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top