Poor and working class parents typically give advice like “think about what would make you happy”. Middle class parents tend to suggest staying upstream of abstractly desirable financial options (like in HS and college take strong math, take pre-med so you can be a doctor, and so on).
I am really surprised by this. Perhaps it differs per country/region. In my experience the poor are more like “get a trade, any trade, only a thin line separates you from the alcoholic homeless bum down the street or in prison and that thin line is an e.g. construction trade school”. And my middle-class experience is “do what makes you happy, even if you want to be a violinist, I have enough money to help you until you get your feet”
But it can be that it is the definition of poor and middle changes per region or culture. I am used to defining poor as trade school blue collars, literally working class. Perhaps you define as some kind of a welfare underclass who don’t even work or work the growing tide of McJobs learned on the job not in school… I define middle as white-collar, middle manager, or blue-collar turned entrepreneur like a guy owning his plumbing business employing 5 plumbers.
that defines your identity for the rest of your life, rather than thinking in terms of what to spend the next few years
Are these the two major options? I tend to see neither. Whatever you do slaving away for The Man just to be allowed to make a living cannot really define you—okay, I have exaggerated this and made it overly emotional, in order to try to convey a message accross, so feel free to subtract 75% from the emotional connotations of it, but I do think I and many people start from a position of ressentiment and suppressed anger for having to work for bosses in order to make a living instead of living some kind of an idealized existence when you just hunted or grew your food freely and independently, at the very least it is not romantic enough. And changing careers every few years can be very hard, because as you get older, people expect you want more money and is less flexible about overtime and travel (generally true), and if you are not already experienced in whatever work they want you to do why would they not hire someone young, cheap, more flexible, perhaps faster learner, and same way inexperienced? To me experience looks a lot like destiny. Once you did something, people don’t really hire you for something else. Or maybe it depends. Again location etc. but maybe a big corporation that has some kind of a strategic approach to HR would, but my experience in the small business sector is that they hire only when it is overdue and then there is no time to learn.
So I am very suspicious about this career change every 7 years thing. Maybe it depends on factors. Maybe it is a US-only thing or Silicon Valley only thing. Maybe it is for extroverts who get jobs from friends, not just applying for job ads and showing certifications. Maybe they mean under career change actually just doing a bit different field of the same career, like from accountant to auditor.
I am of a third opinion, that basically you owe 40 hours a week to the devil, and the rest is your life, the rest is you.
But it can be that it is the definition of poor and middle changes per region or culture. I am used to defining poor as trade school blue collars, literally working class.
“get a trade, any trade, only a thin line separates you from the alcoholic homeless bum down the street or in prison and that thin line is an e.g. construction trade school”.
The working class with secure jobs (government and some union) are quite a long ways from “the alcoholic bum”. I knew a guy who was a retired garbage man in his mid forties, living off his government pension with a home in a nice neighborhood.
I believe a lot of government jobs allow (allowed?) early retirement based on years of service. Maybe that’s getting more rare, but it’s still the case in the military. A little googling, and it seems that in the military 20 years is still standard and they’re even trying to downsize some guys and are offering them retirement benefits if they’ve been in for 15 years.
I am really surprised by this. Perhaps it differs per country/region. In my experience the poor are more like “get a trade, any trade, only a thin line separates you from the alcoholic homeless bum down the street or in prison and that thin line is an e.g. construction trade school”. And my middle-class experience is “do what makes you happy, even if you want to be a violinist, I have enough money to help you until you get your feet”
But it can be that it is the definition of poor and middle changes per region or culture. I am used to defining poor as trade school blue collars, literally working class. Perhaps you define as some kind of a welfare underclass who don’t even work or work the growing tide of McJobs learned on the job not in school… I define middle as white-collar, middle manager, or blue-collar turned entrepreneur like a guy owning his plumbing business employing 5 plumbers.
Are these the two major options? I tend to see neither. Whatever you do slaving away for The Man just to be allowed to make a living cannot really define you—okay, I have exaggerated this and made it overly emotional, in order to try to convey a message accross, so feel free to subtract 75% from the emotional connotations of it, but I do think I and many people start from a position of ressentiment and suppressed anger for having to work for bosses in order to make a living instead of living some kind of an idealized existence when you just hunted or grew your food freely and independently, at the very least it is not romantic enough. And changing careers every few years can be very hard, because as you get older, people expect you want more money and is less flexible about overtime and travel (generally true), and if you are not already experienced in whatever work they want you to do why would they not hire someone young, cheap, more flexible, perhaps faster learner, and same way inexperienced? To me experience looks a lot like destiny. Once you did something, people don’t really hire you for something else. Or maybe it depends. Again location etc. but maybe a big corporation that has some kind of a strategic approach to HR would, but my experience in the small business sector is that they hire only when it is overdue and then there is no time to learn.
So I am very suspicious about this career change every 7 years thing. Maybe it depends on factors. Maybe it is a US-only thing or Silicon Valley only thing. Maybe it is for extroverts who get jobs from friends, not just applying for job ads and showing certifications. Maybe they mean under career change actually just doing a bit different field of the same career, like from accountant to auditor.
I am of a third opinion, that basically you owe 40 hours a week to the devil, and the rest is your life, the rest is you.
The working class with secure jobs (government and some union) are quite a long ways from “the alcoholic bum”. I knew a guy who was a retired garbage man in his mid forties, living off his government pension with a home in a nice neighborhood.
It’s unusual (isn’t it?) for anyone to have a government pension in their mid-forties. Any idea how he managed that?
I believe a lot of government jobs allow (allowed?) early retirement based on years of service. Maybe that’s getting more rare, but it’s still the case in the military. A little googling, and it seems that in the military 20 years is still standard and they’re even trying to downsize some guys and are offering them retirement benefits if they’ve been in for 15 years.