Comment by rockyj | Hacker News Reader

Comment by rockyj | Hacker News Reader

People here will not understand but there is a lot of background and culture behind this. There was another case where a McKinsey consultant (IIT+IIM postgrad) who joined the firm and commited suicide (https://www.consultancy.in/news/4168/young-mckinsey-consulta...).

The story starts way back. In general the schooling syllabus in India is very broad and deep (I can say this now since I live outside India). Then due to the large population - around 30 million students complete school every year. After that there are not many good universities (you may have heard of IITs or NITs), only around 100-200K get into good unis. The competetion to get in is therefore intense. Preparation for these "entrance exams" can start at age 15 (or even earlier).

If someone makes it somehow, graduation, postgrad and MBA is another similar struggle. Now you think you surely made it. The last 7-8 years of intense work and hardship are over, this is doubly true if the person is not from a well off family in India (which is very common). Preparation schools, hostels, being away from family etc. has its mental costs.

Then you land a job and it hits you, as a new joiner in the hugely competitive Indian job market you are treated like sh* and all this while you thought "you made it" but the real struggle has just started. Long working hours, immense pressure and then the thought that all the hardwork you did in the past can come crashing down with one bad review. Combine that with the real stuggles of life as you move to a new city, manage finances, support family back home etc. it creates a huge amount of pressure. Some unfortunately are not able to handle it, they are in a position they feel that all was futile and no one can understand their situation.

We see this here in the U.S. as well (and I’m sure in other countries, Japan’s “salaryman” culture comes to mind.). It’s far more industry-specific though.

There are two things to consider:

- when technical ability amongst competitors is high across the board those become “table stakes” and the competition shifts to social signaling, i.e. who can appear to be the most committed? Examples are: Who can show up to work earlier and leave later? Who will respond to texts the fastest? In an environment with an unrestrained management there will be no limits and can become very toxic.

- Individuals have different stress tolerance. Hyper-competitive environments weed out those who are less adept at managing the stress, meaning that new “untested” individuals learn the hard way just how bad it can be, sometimes with very bad results. While stress tolerance can be increased in individuals it’s not limitless, so ultimately responsibility lies with management to set hard limits on what is within bounds.

In my experience, "table stakes" is bizword signaling used by demanding, ahole managers use to insist on severe work-life imbalance while simultaneously waxing about work-life balance and the mission statement, making them either intentionally dishonest or willfully cognitively dissonant.

Really can't fault people for coming to a conclusion that it's futile if they don't work for something except work. You need a life to look forwards to - otherwise what are you working your ass off for?

I'm very surprised that there haven't been any very bloody mass revolts yet in countries with work culture like this. I think it's inevitable some day because it has happened in most European countries somewhere in their history. It's kinda proven to be basically the only way to make a meaningful change. As you say, it doesn't make sense to keep living like this. Even farming for food only and forgoing access to any modern world amenities is better than this.

People usually still have bread and circuses and the circuses of today are very good. Have you tried farming or even just growing something to eat in a pot? For most people an office job is better than subsistence farming.

I grew up on a farm in the 90's in Poland (In 89' Poland dissolved PPR/PRL - basically just got rid of communism so villages were quite poor) and I did have to work in the field as that was our main source of food (honestly probably a lot of that was because of the culture, not poverty - everyone grew their own stuff and our grandparents which lived through WW2 still remembered even worse times and did not trust the economy at all).

Honestly - it was not that bad. For your own sustenance (literally when you don't sell much) you do not need that much land and the work is not 24/7 every day. There are a couple of tough weeks in the year but much more downtime than you might realize (like, you barely need to do almost anything entire winter and most of the other seasons actually. 1-2h tops to feed the livestock and bring some wood/coal to the furnace). It would be a different story if farming was our business and we wanted to raise money for something significant - but if you don't have any ambitions like that - village life is pretty easy.

I guess it depends on the type of said office job, but currently I work as a senior dev contractor in the city and it's barely better, if it is at all (I still can't really make up my mind if I'm happier). All of my extra money goes to mortgage (I "own" an apartment, not a house) and after work I do the exact same things I did when I worked on the farm to unwind (read, play games, nap, listen to music) because that's all the energy I have. And then we need to add all of the extra stress and competitiveness that comes with this line of job, wile "on the farm" I was already "at the bottom" and didn't stress much. There are a lot of scenarios on the farm where something is very urgent sure but they are not really stressful. If some farmer says they are - he did not experience real stress (legal threats, danger of losing not only the source of food but entire house + going into debt, long economy downturns without hope of things getting better [as compared to temporary stuff like the weather destroying the current year's crops], lots of stuff).

> Have you tried farming or even just growing something to eat in a pot?

Yes, and it’s extremely gratifying work. Much more so than sitting in front of a screen. And you can hold the result of your labor, see it, feed it to your family. It’s awesome. I wasn’t aware of how hurt I was by all my labor being abstracted away from me.

I still make my living as an information worker, but I’m actively weaning myself off the income. Less money, more happy.

I've been moving the same way, but still working so I couldn't buy 4 acres in the country (need reliable internet), but I was able to find a (somewhat expensive) half way solution where I have internet (but well and septic), a wood burning stove, and enough land for prairie, bees, chickens, and a few garden plots (adding an additional 4x8 plot each year).

We also belong to a CSA less than a mile away.

We can a bit, too. It _is_ rewarding and nothing beats a sun-warmed fresh tomato. Or cooking potatoes you grew.

> I wasn't aware of how hurt I was by all my labor being abstracted away from me.

This is so fundamental, but so rarely spoken about in explicit terms. For reasons.

I would guess because alienation of labor is considered "marxist thought" and that makes americans start foaming at the mouth

It's especially stupid to work extremely hard without gaining equity and profit sharing where they can just fire you for any reason. Employee-owned consultancies would make a lot more sense for the worker.

> no one can understand their situation.

so there's no bonding at work? is it because, those who do understand and could empthatize are incentivized to instead show no mercy and try to push out the newcomers? how come managers are not "entourage building"?

IMHO, when there are millions struggling for limited resources it creates a culture of competition. You can see this is every facet of life in India. In my time in India, I met my fair share of toxic managers (e.g. leaving at 6 PM we were asked why were we leaving for "half-day"), probably had very few genuinely nice and kind managers. See also - https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/narayana-murthys-70-hour-wor...

I believe this is more universal than just India.

I was born and lived most of my life in Brazil, the same dynamics apply over there, a bit less brutal and gruesome but the competition for limited resources create a work culture of overwork, of management abuse, of constant fear of losing your job, of anxiety someone else is working longer and harder than you so you need to compensate for that.

It's also similar on the education path, there are a few of very good Brazilian public universities (usually they are much better academically than private ones), entrance is through exams and most of my education was focused on passing those exams. Curriculum is tailored for what might be asked on the entrance exams, preparation for these exams (including mock exams) start also around age 15, etc.

I venture to say this is reality in most of the developing world, even more on countries on the middle income bracket like Brazil, India, etc., which aren't so poor that there are no opportunities but are poor enough that good opportunities are few and far between, competition for those spots is insane.

I don't think anyone growing up in developed countries can emotionally understand that, even though there's high competition for great universities, top jobs, etc., you can still live a very fulfilling and decent life without getting into Harvard, MIT, Columbia, Oxford, and so on. That's not really an option in poorer places, you either make it or you will live in some limbo where you earn enough to sustain yourself but don't have access to much else, it's a constant state of surviving to work without seeing upwards mobility.

> I don't think anyone growing up in developed countries can emotionally understand that, even though there's high competition for great universities, top jobs, etc., you can still live a very fulfilling and decent life without getting into Harvard, MIT, Columbia, Oxford, and so on. That's not really an option in poorer places, you either make it or you will live in some limbo where you earn enough to sustain yourself but don't have access to much else, it's a constant state of surviving to work without seeing upwards mobility.

I'm from Poland. 20 years ago, a friend of mine went to US for the summer to do menial jobs (we were both students at the time) and came back with all sorts of stories. His biggest shock though was "OMG I lived next to this guy who was a postman, and he could live a completely decent live on just his postman salary!". Whereas, in Poland back then, with 20%+ unemployment and depressed wages that come from that, you needed to be extraordinary just to be able to afford an ordinary life.

This reminds me of some of Alan Watts writings where he tells this story of people going through school then college thinking they have made it only to have the goal posts moved.

Some where around mid-life you start to catch on to the whole scheme.

There's a fraction of Big 4/MBB associates who dream of becoming partners and this is the hazing ritual the culture has established to select who will get to stop 3-4-5 / 80 hr work weeks and pivot into something a little less insane with more money. The problem is: there aren't that many positions for project leaders through director compared to the number of associates. They'd probably be better off winning the lottery or going to work for one of their clients so they can have a life now rather than the nebulous promise of one at some point in the future.

Not all 30M of graduates attempt to get to these schools, so the ratio will be much lower.

We have a similar process in France for specific elite schools where French students go through a 2-stage exam system (first you need to get to a preparatory school, then there is a national exam). The work during these two preparation years is insane and the entrance ratio is about 3% (depends on the school).

This system is completely surreal (though the ones who go through it often like it) and different from other European systems.

As a side note, it is much easier to get to the school if you are not French, which did not help in some students relations.

For all of its warts the American system is the most forgiving and I think the best. You have many options for continuing education and it is now moving away from a filtering function. There should be a huge market for online education in India and even Europe. Or perhaps the countries should invest in higher education and build more research universities. The number one predictor of economic success is proximity to a tier 1 research university.

My dream system would be American universities (all get the same high school degree, take a test to see which uni you can join) mixed with the German trade system (proper standardized apprenticeships that are paid with further education for anybody be it plumber or electrician at Siemens, Bayer or BMW).

We have more or less this in France with all the other schools (universities, engineer schools, vocational schools, ...) where the last 2 or 3 years can be done as apprenticeship. Very sought after.

I always have 1 or 2 apprentices in my teams, at very technical and engaging positions. They are happy, I am happy.

The Australian system is really flexible with entrance requirements, you don't need to have completed high school to get in. You can get in through a variety of alternative pathways, like professional experience, special entrance programmes, etc. Age is no particular barrier either, and it's pretty common to have older students.

It's recommended by a lot of people not to go straight into uni, especially if you're unsure what direction you want to go in. Spend a year or a few, work some hospitality jobs, and just enjoy yourself first, then go do uni in your 20s.

Claiming 100-200k is huge, considering even IITs and NITs together have around 40k seats, and not all branches offer good pay or job prospects.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com