Anonymous wrote:I’m 50. I’m finally at a point in my life where I can use the skills I learned in Big Tech in a do good company now. This is where I’ll stay until retirement. Without the skills or the best egg that I built up, this would not be possible. It would not have been an option at 22.

Ha! This is what most people want - a mentoring gig at a low professional wage supplemented by investment income. But, as you say, it's not really feasible at 20, especially when life's costs are ramping - getting married, buying a house, having children, saving for college and retirement. In essence, everyone wants a retirement gig - just enough foot in the work world that you have a platform, healthcare, and a wage, but little responsibility or stress.

I have a job that is both very rewarding and very lucrative. Why settle for less?

I’m 50. I’m finally at a point in my life where I can use the skills I learned in Big Tech in a do good company now. This is where I’ll stay until retirement. Without the skills or the best egg that I built up, this would not be possible. It would not have been an option at 22.

For many people, they spend enough time at work that it’s worth trying to find a job that’s fulfilling. It’s not so hard to make the money work when they’re young and single. And by the time they realize how much all jobs can be a bit of a slog and they’d rather have the money, it’s at a time in their lives where they have so much responsibility that it’s hard to just change.

Anonymous wrote:Because from Gen X on people have been shoveling the BS message that if you do what you love the money will come so people expect to basketweave or chant and become independently wealthy. Work is to provide income. If you enjoy it you are lucky, but ultimately it is to provide income.

+1

Anonymous wrote:I think living without the means to support yourself sounds way more soul sucking than investment banking or comms. I don’t understand why some people don’t actually consider the amount of money they feel they need in order to live the life they want. I think students need to focus on that aspect a little more when making career decisions.

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you agree that the options you suggested are soul-sucking and depressing? It’s unclear whether your answer to her is, “yep, they are totally soul-sucking, but you gotta pay the bills, snowflake,” or, “actually, they aren’t what they sound, and here’s why!”

Personally I think there’s a lot of truth to the latter. I’ve found various aspects of my career that sound soul-sucking to a naive humanities major (as I was, too!) are actually fascinating and compelling. The best thing I can do for kids seeking advice is help them to see that.

+1 and sometimes whether or not a particular job is soul-sucking or makes you feel like you are contributing to society is more about the organization you do it for. Does the larger mission of that org help or hurt the world, in your opinion. Maybe you have to make some compromises on that early in your career to build up experience but getting to a place you can feel good about is definitely a reasonable goal.

It is most certainly not a reasonable goal. Only the wealthy can afford to take do-gooder NPO jobs.

Anonymous wrote:Do you agree that the options you suggested are soul-sucking and depressing? It’s unclear whether your answer to her is, “yep, they are totally soul-sucking, but you gotta pay the bills, snowflake,” or, “actually, they aren’t what they sound, and here’s why!”

Personally I think there’s a lot of truth to the latter. I’ve found various aspects of my career that sound soul-sucking to a naive humanities major (as I was, too!) are actually fascinating and compelling. The best thing I can do for kids seeking advice is help them to see that.

+1 and sometimes whether or not a particular job is soul-sucking or makes you feel like you are contributing to society is more about the organization you do it for. Does the larger mission of that org help or hurt the world, in your opinion. Maybe you have to make some compromises on that early in your career to build up experience but getting to a place you can feel good about is definitely a reasonable goal.

I think living without the means to support yourself sounds way more soul sucking than investment banking or comms. I don’t understand why some people don’t actually consider the amount of money they feel they need in order to live the life they want. I think students need to focus on that aspect a little more when making career decisions.

Do you agree that the options you suggested are soul-sucking and depressing? It’s unclear whether your answer to her is, “yep, they are totally soul-sucking, but you gotta pay the bills, snowflake,” or, “actually, they aren’t what they sound, and here’s why!”

Personally I think there’s a lot of truth to the latter. I’ve found various aspects of my career that sound soul-sucking to a naive humanities major (as I was, too!) are actually fascinating and compelling. The best thing I can do for kids seeking advice is help them to see that.

Because from Gen X on people have been shoveling the BS message that if you do what you love the money will come so people expect to basketweave or chant and become independently wealthy. Work is to provide income. If you enjoy it you are lucky, but ultimately it is to provide income.

They have been misled. They also have been taught to criticize capitalism even though pretty much everything good in their life is a result of capitalism. This means they also don’t view work as much as a means to earn money. A lot of this is privilege. I grew up more MC/UMC and my goal was to make a lot of money some day.

Two reasons: 1) you spend a lot of hours at work, so it makes sense to find something that doesn't "crush your soul"; 2) popular and social media have made it a religion to self actualize. And, part of self actualizing is leading a celebrity-type lifestyle where you're "authentic," have money, work 4 hours a day, take long vacations, have a voice/say in the world, etc.

Work is the 'place' where you spend far and away most of your waking hours, week in/week out

"Why does't everyone want to spend the majority of their time dying inside, I wonder?"

I’m an alumni mentor for my college (an Ivy FWIW), and I keep seeing a misconception among the college students I’m assigned to mentee — that your job/career will bring you meaning or fulfillment in life.

For example, I was recently paired with a sophomore from my college who was in the same major as me (English). I’m guessing she’s from a low income background as her Linkedin says that she’s a Questbridge student. She reached out to me and asked for suggestions on careers for an English major that don’t require law school — I suggested software sales (my career), corporate communications, management consulting, and investment banking (the last two being more achievable if she double majors in Econ).

She told me that these options sounded “soul-sucking and depressing,” and that she was hoping to go into journalism or publishing. I told her that those are fields only for rich kids — poor kids like her shouldn’t touch those with a ten-foot pole.

I don’t understand why this generation expects work to be meaningful or fulfilling. Work is a way to make money for all but the wealthy. So why the navel-gazing and entitlement?