ertyu wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:27 pm
white collar loser reporting for duty
Yeah this article struck a nerve. We work so hard to climb to the top of the heap and it gets you a place in the robot army. Paid biweekly not quarterly. Big difference there. Ownership versus being owned.
My friends are top of the meritocracy. They did well in K-12, then went to top universities and then obtained graduate, law and medical degrees. Worked their asses off to be “the best of he best of the very best-sir!” Some make household incomes of $500,000 but that is chump change in my old Bay Area suburb. Congratulations you can now afford the monthly payments on a $3,000,000 home on a postage stamp of land. After life choices like private kids schools, vacations, mandatory spa treatments and counseling, they cannot save much. They’re stressed to the eyeballs and it’s work work work all the time.
A wealth manager in my town said there actually wasn’t all that much wealth to manage among most of the residents. The owners took their money to the investment banks. He was left with the managerial class which shockingly had little in investable assets. He broke it down for me between their homes and lifestyles and they basically were unable to save much aside from their home equity.
These were the top grads from the top schools occupying middle management positions in Silicon Valley. They’d worked really hard to get a seat there but somehow it wasn’t all that great for them. I opted out of this path pretty early and refused to follow.
I guess worse off are the academics mentioned in the article. They work really hard and the best get paid very little. What’s with the shot about academics vs. Trump voters in there? Is this some kind of right wing publication?