• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Many US employees feel overworked, stressed....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
54,093
7,485
126


<<

<< Sorry, but it is the responsibility of the individual to manage his own stress. Also, if you're going to have kids, it's YOUR responsibility to care for them... not the state's responsibility, not your employer's responsibility, YOUR responsibility. >>



Agree with you here. And as a full time employee, I see my employer as a resource for daycare and stress reducing programs. My company already offers these things as benefits. BTW, when did I ever mention the govt. getting involved?



<< Maybe more parents could stay home, if we weren't forced to pay for all this nanny-state crap in the first place, eh? >>



I don't disagree with you here either. What is your point?
>>



My point was companies that charge their employees nothing for daycare, effectivly making the childless pay for the daycare of others. Some do, some don't.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
54,093
7,485
126


<<

<< Sorry, but it is the responsibility of the individual to manage his own stress. Also, if you're going to have kids, it's YOUR responsibility to care for them... not the state's responsibility, not your employer's responsibility, YOUR responsibility. >>



Agree with you here. And as a full time employee, I see my employer as a resource for daycare and stress reducing programs. My company already offers these things as benefits. BTW, when did I ever mention the govt. getting involved?



<< Maybe more parents could stay home, if we weren't forced to pay for all this nanny-state crap in the first place, eh? >>



I don't disagree with you here either. What is your point?



<< OK, fine. If the employees who use it pay for it, and the ones who don't use it pay nothing, I'm fine with that. But the reality is often quite different. EVERYONE pays, and the ones with kids benefit. >>



Take healthcare. Having a company-sponsored program benefits everyone by keeping per capita costs down. And if you don't want healthcare, you don't have to pay for it, either. And there are several different plans to choose from. You could make the daycare thing something similar. Calm down just a bit before you break out the flamer, people are agreeing with you here.
>>



I'm fine with that, so long as the ones who use it are the ones who pay for it. No flamer here :D
 

wyvrn

Lifer
Feb 15, 2000
10,074
0
0


<< My point was companies that charge their employees nothing for daycare, effectivly making the childless pay for the daycare of others. Some do, some don't. >>



Oh so this is an individual company policy then? Ok so move companies, you aren't stuck in glue.

Ok good we agree then :)
 

StaR2002

Member
Mar 7, 2001
128
0
0
hmm i am over stressed over a guy. :( it's been 2 months. i need to get him off my chest and move on with my life. errr HELP~!
 

Total Refected Power

Diamond Member
Oct 13, 1999
3,899
0
0
My point was companies that charge their employees nothing for daycare, effectivly making the childless pay for the daycare of others. Some do, some don't.

More like the shareholders!!!!!!!!!!
 

Khameleon

Senior member
Apr 12, 2001
337
0
0
I agree that it really has more to do with what people expect their quality of life to be than whether or not the companies want to overwork their employees. The real trend here is that people want more and more money and toys and are willing to sacrifice their families for it. When an employee doesn't take their allotted vacation time, how is that the company's fault? It really isn't that hard to schedule in advance and plan ahead to insure that projects get done and work flows smoothly. Why is it so difficult for people to live within their means, instead of busting their asses for more and more and more money so they can &quot;live the good life?&quot; Champagne tastes on a beer budget, folks. It can be done. So you don't get to buy your kids $150 sneakers, or buy that $40,000 SUV you've been eyeing. Is that crap really more important than your health, sanity, and family?
 

Total Refected Power

Diamond Member
Oct 13, 1999
3,899
0
0
Is that crap really more important than your health, sanity, and family?

Of course not. But preparing for retirement, college tuition, caring for aging parents etc are expenses that many people are not prepared for. Each of these issues can be financial back-breakers.
 

Khameleon

Senior member
Apr 12, 2001
337
0
0
TRP, I'll concede that point. My point is that the majority of people complaining of being overworked are probably the same people who are constantly &quot;keeping up with the Jones's&quot;. We live in a time when efficiency and producivity are supposed to ease our lives. Instead, people always seem to be going for more and more luxuries rather than using their time to focus on the things that are truly important, like education, retirement planning, family, etc.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
TRP

I'd think people would be comforted by the fact that all they have to worry about is saving for retirement. It used to be that you retired when you were dead.

There's something to be said for having moved beyond the subsistance phase. Sure there's still stress, but you don't have to worry about running out of food during the winter.
 

Soccerman

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,378
0
0
lol, I can't believe you guys don't see this.

first of all, I did a small essay on how computers are making people's lives more miserable, but after thinking about it, it's not the COMPUTER, but really the quickening product cycle.

When we work, we work to help our company beat out the other companies that compete in the same market as us. This CAN lead to products/services becoming:
-cheaper,
-higher quality (though normally that's not the case),
-and released more often.

So, as a result of you working for a company that competes, your effective wages DECREASE becuase of competition (you don't get a big enough raise to compensate for the value of the dollar decreasing), becuase of the above results of competition. if a product/service is cheaper, the company has to sell more units to get the same profit. when you have competition, of course your market it split.

Higher quality, can mean many things. More features in a product/service often occurs (requiring more time to build or create the product/service), but the quality/reliability often goes down to allow profit margins to stay high. So, the company may or may not be recieving the same amount of money as beforehand, but still the value of the dollar plummets.

The kicker is the product cycle. Becuase of competition, cycles become shorter and shorter to out-sell the competition (perfect example nVidia vs 3dfx) with 'new' products. Becuase of this, the amount of money that is made on any one product is reduced considerably, becuase a new product will be out soon which had it's own R&amp;D put into it. Basically the faster products are sold the better, but the faster the product cycle is, the worse for the worker (who consequently is the consumer). So, profit margins DECREASE, and workers get paid less for the SAME amount of work that they would have done in the 1960s (one Full time job would support a family then).

So, you see, it's the SPEED at which the economy moves that reduces the actual money (or rather it's value) that you recieve for an hour's work.

And going further into this, who benefits from this? well the middle class certainly doesn't (they want to buy the latest and greatest, so they spend more, and make less per hour, requiring more hours of work), and the Upper class probably doesn't change too much. so we get a seperation of the classes, which is DEFINETLY not a good thing.

Better yet, Federal Piggy could stop bleeding families dry so that both parents are forced to work just so one of those incomes can pay the taxes.

Russ, I think you need to realize that it isn't the feds (at least, not all the time), it's the competition for things such as being your provider of electricity, health care, and other services/products that are the killers.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY