Hacker News Reader

Comment by wccrawford | Hacker News Reader

"Hard Work" isn't just "spending a lot of time at work". You have to actually do good work, consistently.

Most of the people I've met who don't believe in "hard work pays off" are the type that want something for nothing.

Most of the people that I've seen hard work pay off for are those who were self-motivated to do good work, and it eventually worked out for them.

But you also have to stop working for companies that abuse you and find one that appreciates its employees. Many people don't even believe those companies exist and won't try to find a better company. Even getting people to look for a new job is nearly impossible. They come up with a ton of excuses and just never do it.

View on HN

Wow, you truly live in some kind of bubble.

You're talking about a group of people who are marginally skilled for the jobs they have in industries that are racing to replace them with automation. You say they won't even _try_ to find a better company? Could it be because they're afraid that even by looking, they're going to be fired? Or maybe it's that they're working 12-14 hours a day at their current job, and can't run off to interviews to move out or up? And this is assuming they've even ever seen an example of a person moving upward due to hard work! If all you ever saw around you were poor people struggling all their life to scrape by, what would motivate you?

Have you been doing software engineering all your life? It would serve you to try doing other things less charmed before you assume the nature of other peoples' plights.

Alternatively, people work hard at the wrong thing. Being the best fry cook doesn't mean you're the best candidate for running a shift. It takes different skills, personality traits, etc. People think they work hard at what they're doing they deserve to get to that next step promotion. But the truth is you have to work hard at the next thing, not the current thing.

And a lot of the people who talk about "working hard" spend all day on FB and HackerNews but they are so busy. We all have our own delusions.

I feel like the phrase "working hard" should be changed to "providing the most value." But that sounds mean to people who don't make much money while probably "working hard."

- providing the most value

Which for software development usually means how many people jobs can you replace with automation.

If you grew up in a neighborhood where the only thing working hard got you was it made you a target, where the only successful people were criminals or white people who had the police and zoning laws on their side, what would you think?

Point me to this area with a large minority population and all white leadership/business owners.

Ferguson Missouri comes to mind.

Crown Heights, Brooklyn

majority black (mainly Carribean) neighborhood. > 90% of the buildings in the neighborhood are owned by absentee landlords, who are typically either Hasidic Jews in South Brooklyn or faceless development corporations based out of Manhattan. most of the businesses in the neighborhood, besides the requisite black barber shops and hair braiding shops and bodegas on the corner, are either corporate chains owned by a national conglomerate, or they are owned by white entrepeneur transplants that just moved in to the neighborhood a few years ago.

This shitty system thrives because of people that think like you.

Firstly, you mention some magical words like "good work", which mean nothing. Secondly, you wrongfully label a large group of people as wanting "something for nothing".

This holds, of course, if we agree that "paying off" means more than managing to survive, which is the only thing most people get for "working hard".

I agree. Poor people are poor because they are lazy, if you really think about it.

If you're being sarcastic, I would ask you stop using this statement as such. If not, and for those that think this is true, no. This statement is not only totally wrong but disrespectful and destructive.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/03/08/...

http://www.socialworkdegreecenter.com/10-common-misconceptio...

http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-pol-poverty-poll/

And there's plenty more research to go along with this. Please stop spreading this lie, even if it's just a joke.

Have you talked to poor people lately?

I'm consistently shocked at how they choose to watch TV, do drugs, and quick to blame other people.

I try to help people and share opportunities that seem in line with their experience and skills... yet they do not leave their damn couch. Anectodal, yes

We really shouls just put a good UBC plan together and call it a day.

The #1 cause of bankruptcy in this country is medical bills. Nothing to do with being lazy.

I would reframe this as the cause being lack of health insurance and an emergency fund capable of paying the deductible on said insurance plus 6 months of expenses in the event you're not able to work. Those two things don't guarantee not going bankrupt, but I would imagine it would be a lot harder.

Another way to frame it is how well people can bounce back from a medical emergency. The poorer you are, the harder it is to come back to even where you were before the incident.

Medical bills get out of hand but blue collar workers often find themselves out of work, fired because they couldn't make it to work through no fault of their own.

Our society punishes people for being poor and it's disgusting that it's so hard to even get people to acknowledge this, much less try to fix it.

Yea, that's what the E-fund is for. What percentage of the people declaring medical bankruptcy had health insurance and an E-fund to cover the deductible plus 6 month's expenses?

Sometimes this is true. But there are large external factors that determine this other than how hard a person works. The dot-com crash and the recent financial crisis for example.

You should look into learned helplessness. When individuals have tried repeatedly to no avail, it's no wonder they sometimes stop trying.

Because rich people don't watch TV, don't do drugs, and NEVER blame the government/their boss/poor people for anything.

Almost all the rich people I've known have spent a significant portion of their lives doing coke, eating in fancy restaurants, being on holiday and hosting orgies.

Many of them are genuinely lovely people.

Are those four qualities what make them lovely people?

>I'm consistently shocked at how they choose to watch TV, do drugs, and quick to blame other people.

Much of this was mentioned in Hillbilly Elegy as well (he also brought sources). As well as a much higher rate of domestic problems which can affect kids and hinder their chances of escaping poverty.

so you went and had personal conversations about life and work ethic with the 45 million Americans that live below the poverty line?

Perhaps the better way of saying it is that most lazy people end up being poor, rather than most poor people end up being lazy.

I'm sorry but do the rich really work that hard ?

First of all, for the rich work is optional, which means they get to choose the work they do. That's why rich people tend to be actors and artists. Maybe at times they do work hard, but it's for their vanity and mental health not of necessity. Their hard work isn't why they're rich, they were born rich.

Rarely do you find rich people cleaning old-peoples arses in hospitals.

Most hard-working normal people earn just enough to get by and most rich people were born that way.

While technically true, "most lazy people end up being poor" is still misleading. Most lazy people stay where they are, and there are already more poor people than rich ones. Statements about the resulting correlation aren't as constructive as statements about causation would be. "Most lazy people don't advance" is probably about as close as one can get to the original statement without being offensive.

I was making fun of the douchebag parent comment. Agreed

Wow, there's just so many things wrong with this sentiment. Must be trolling.

There is no direct correlation between being poor and being lazy. Laziness is evenly distributed across all wealth classes, it's not concentrated to just poor people.

How do you even measure laziness to make such a counterpoint?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com