What do you do?

So I graduated this year and am now working in the field I studied for. I've been in my new job for 2 months....

And I'm really not feeling it.. I don't spring out of bed saying 'fuck yeah" I'm going to work and loving it. more bemoaning having to get out of bed.

I have grand dreams of being a housewife and making scones, not sure I am cut out for this working lark.

Is this normal? Do people graduate then question wtf they did in making this career choice?

Welcome to being a grown up. Working for a living sucks balls.

And yes, people do that all the time.

I would expect that people asking themselves these kind of questions have chosen something they don't care for - the decison was made because of family expectations, money, status, pragmatism, some kind of ideal about themselves and thier motivations that is not real, etc, not because of a good understanding of yourself, your values, or what you really enjoy

I dunno what is normal specifically for graduates, but I think it takes a while to get used to work shit, although some people love their jobs. Is this more because they have a job they love or is it more because they have a disposition to love what they do? *shrug* Just think of the shit you can now afford. I miss being able to afford shit.

I can't imagine some noisy-cruddy-factory worker thinks they are cut out for this work thing either but one has to pay the bills.

Anyway, I chose to study something that is specific enough so as not to be like... I dunno, an Arts degree where you come out and start looking for jobs that you could have gotten anyway (and it still sucks) but not so vocational that I get stuck in a rut of one profession. I have already been there and I don't like it. Time will tell if it pays off but a) I think it most definitely will, and way before I'm even finished and b) it's a welcome change from the previous mindless drudge.

I just don't trust that I've grown up and can handle the responsibility of my role. I don't know if I underestimate myself, or truly shouldn't have picked this career path..

Theres so many other things I'd have liked to do.. but figured I had to pick 'something' I'm not bad at my job, just don't feel its where I fit

what you do is ...
because you've put so much time and effort into getting qualified you are kind of obliged to soldier on for a while and make the most of it and earn a living. A bit of a drink of toughen the fuck up as it were. And try and make the most of it in some way. See how that goes for a while while all the time evaluating your options on the basis that you have to pay the piper somehow, is there any immediately obvious better way, if not then stick where there is at least the potential of career growth in the longer run (given that you're working at some level as a skilled person).
...when you've put so much into a choice you have to stick with it for at least a reasonable while to give them it a fair go. fortitude.

unless of course it makes you absolutely miserable and then you discard and move on

Im not sure how many 22 year olds have a good understanding of themselves let alone 18 year olds who go to uni straight out of school.

Im not sure that you should expect to love a job in the first few months after graduating - most people dont get cool jobs till they prove themselves and anyway adjusting to work life after being a student is always a bit of a shock.

As for handling responsibility - if you dont want the responsibility you wont, if you do you will find a way. Ask for help where you need it and give it a go. Dont just sit there undecided half committing to something but not making a change.

Work ethic and attitude generally get you more places than just study but you sound like you want to give up on responsibility and stop working.

I didn't work out what I really wanted to do until I was 30 and spent a year just travelling and volunteering abroad. Up until that point I thought the corporate/captalist money orientated thing was exactly what I wanted ... but I've discovered I'm really a left wing hippy who just wants to do something where they feel like they're making some small difference to the crap world that we live in.

And now, I'm psyched about it! When I graduate I can imagine going to live in Central America, South America or South East Asia for a year. Who wouldn't be really excited about doing that?! Well, lots of people I guess, but for me it's just living the dream!

What are you qualifed as / doing missjess?

I love what I do.

For now I am absolutely happy to wake up and get on with my job each day

If you don't love what you do, change, if you can't be bothered changing, shut up.

big part of my enjoyment of work is those I work alongside.... a good bunch of people will make the most mundane crap job fun and enjpyable and a bunch of sad arses can destory what should be ya ideal job

its the people that count

rest is just career and money

It's interesting cause these used to be so important to me ... but now, I honestly couldn't give a fuck about either really. Someone once critiqued me online and said I was embracing mediocrity ... and maybe I am. I don't care that I'll never own an amazing place in Herne Bay or drive a late model European car. Honestly, couldn't care less and have never been happier

Well said and I have no doubt that this is true in many cases but not all.

Also life doesn't always hand you exactly what you want, sometimes you just have to make the best of a bad situation.

It's taken me most of my life to figure out what I am good at and enjoy either because I didn't have the confidence to try or was never presented with the opportunity to find out.

And I think you can have a real passion for certain kinds of work but that doesn't always mean you should do it for a job, some things are just not as much fun when the primary goal is making money. Creative types often become disillusioned when faced with this reality.

As many have said, when a bad choice has been made it becomes pretty important to tough things out. But that shouldnt stop you from planning a better move. You gotta realise that when it comes to work most of us are socialised into being cogs and slaves in somebody elses system. The personal knowledge needed to understand what you really want is typicaly hard won.

If you really aren't sure that you will want to be doing this in 5 years, my advice is don't ever do anything that will put you in a position where your ability to get out of what you are doing is compromised.

Edit: fixed the typo that would have Itchy fuming.

I've found that like many things in life - the grass is greener. I think it would be pretty hard to have a job which you love absolutely 100% of the time.

Every job will have its hard parts, if it didn't I'm not sure it would be a job.

Stick it out a bit longer - review what other positions are available within the same industry, perhaps there is a move sideways or a different role that you can transfer skills to. And don't put pressure on yourself to have to absolutely love your job right this moment, make sure you enjoy your life outside of work, and perhaps you'll find your next move that way.

Perhaps the idea is not to try and find your true happiness through your work and your work only.

Being just shy of 25 years now and having experienced alot in my short life, I feel worried that I don't feel in the right place. Perhaps its more common these days to not understand what you want at my age... (or perhaps that dreaded quarter life crisis). I left school at age 16, worked full time, started university at 19 years...

Itchy - graduated with a Bachelor of Social Work and currently doing a post grad diploma in education (guidance studies)

I feel that I have become quite disillusioned with this - you spend your life working, so true happiness should have something to do with your working life, yes?

It should be something you can live with and perhaps enjoy sometimes and offers other rewards, like perhaps not interfering with the rest of your life. If you can do something you love then cool though.

Unless you can find a way out of the rat race.

<3 waiting till 25 to decide what to do Love what I am studying now

If I had a dollar for everytime you found your calling.

missjess- What field are you in? Childhood? Mental health? Drug and alcohol?

You'd have like $3 dollars ?

Not if I include smashed declarations along those lines.

missjess, one of my besties studied Law and Arts for 5 years - in her 5th year she was struggling with the fact that she had chosen Law, but still worked in Family Law for a year. She haaaated it.
She has chosen a paycut and is now working for a publishing firm that deals with some sort of Law portfolio types - Loves her job despite the long hours she puts in, and she's super happy she chose something that is more 'her'.
So, her degree has still come in useful. maybe there are other career ops you could utilise with yours?

Youre hardly alone in this Jess. Millions and millions of people end up in jobs that dont suit them because they never bothered or thought to analyse their own intrinsic drivers when selecting a career path. By the time they realise their mistake they have aquired responsibilities like children and mortgages that make a change in career path almost impossiible. They then spend a significant portion of their lives doing something that doesnt give them satisfaction. Its a fkn tragedy really

I think what resist has done is more advisable. You need to give yourself a chance to really know yourself. Studies of highly successful people show they nearly always chose a career they were passionate about. Work out what you are passionate about. Do that. (within reason obv)

does she work for lexis nexis? took a pay cut from a first year lawyer's salary?!?!? lexis nexis must pay pretty bad...heh

i've had heaps of friends drop out of law. studying law teaches you critical and analytical thinking. as can studying other subjects.

everything has its pros and cons. i sometimes wonder why i am doing what i do, but in the end, i do enjoy it - aside from sometimes feeling like a total slave to the billable unit, recording each and every 6 minute portion of your day during which you do billable work. it was waaay easier working for the government. haha

Some of you really should not give advice at all.

missjess, all successful people do what they love doing. Your aim in life should be to do what you love doing. Real world can be harsh and you might not start where you want to be. But learn to look at the big picture. If what you're doing now is entry level to what you really want to do, then accept this and just work your ass off until you achieve that goal.

On the other hand if you saw the role you want to end up in and did not like it, move on. Don't waste your time with stuff you dislike. It will never be beneficial for your career or your employer, so everyone loses.

codpiece - no

I worked in IT for years then decided I'd rather be raped up the anus with a rusty pole than take another job in that industry again, so went to uni. Now I'm doing a BSc in Chem and Biotech. Bit of a change.

I wouldn't worry about not liking your first job. It'll take a while to find the right role. The important thing is to not make any sudden changes without having a good think what the next move is.

If you work for a private enterprise, of course you feel shit.

All you're doing - whether you're in IT, marketing, or selling sandwiches - is making someone rich.

Public service is the only way to feel like you're doing something worthwhile. Whether you're a teacher, a nurse, a park ranger, or even a faceless Wellington bureaucrat.

Wow I'm pretty sure that is the biggest load of bullshit you have ever written.

Got to be a troll.

Not a troll.

(And I largely agree, minus the Vadinho hyperbole)

I don't see how that's a troll at all.
The purpose of private enterprise is to make a profit. Period.
If you find that admirable, good on you, but I think people are more than just greed.
It reaches its ultimate idiocy when people working for Telecom snipe at people working for Vodafone and vice versa. When they're making millions/billions of dollars in profit. Wow! I can help people get richer.

Personally, I'd rather help people with their health problems. Educate them. Keep them safe. Protect the environment.

You may feel those particular jobs are more worthwhile but that in no way excludes those who work for private enterprises from feeling their work is worthwhile. After all we are only talking about 'feelings' here not facts, though I would contest both.

Private enterprises often carry out work that cannot be handled by the government for different reasons and that work is often very important.

Private enterprise exists to make the owners of said enterprises rich. No other reason. Helping people, or doing important work is purely incidental. Their aim is to make money.

Vads is totally correct.

^ The facts there, in a nutshell, yes, that's correct...what is wrong with his post is him impossing his own "feelings" onto other people in relation to what they do and how worthwhile they feel about it...who the fuck is he to say someone can't feel that what they do is worthwhile to them, personally?

And that aside, some private enterprises are in the industry of helping people/animals...sure, they true to make as they do it, but that doens't take away the fact that they're helping people.

Lots of jobs for private enterprises can be spun to have some worthwhile effect on other people...I work for a dirty oil company...I help make roads across the country, I help keep infrastructure growing, I help make peoples daily journeys simpler, faster, more efficient...but according to you dickwads, there's not "worth" in that and I'm disallowed from taking any personal satisfaction in my work?

Suck a fucking cock, you bell ends

Vadz is running Marx's theory of alienation.

First time i've heard it on biggie (that i can recall). Of course in this day and age business enterprises all subscribe to the "find yourself through work" theory (or deceit), and try more or less to make that real.

But I would imagine that in the current recessionary environment that in many workplaces everyone understands the reality is much more a case of perform or get out.

I doesn't really matter if the public good is incidental or not though, it's still public good.

you're just a slave working to make some guy rich (and as a bonus you're helping to destroy the planet)

If you've drunk deep enough from the Kool-Aid to be able to convince yourself that you're doing something worthwhile then well done.... that level of self delusion is not easily achieved.

There's a reasonable case to made along these lines ... although in this instance you undermine yourself quite effectively by starting off with saying "can be spun"

So you are saying that any scientific research that came out of a private enterprise is not worthwhile?

Fucking hippie psuedo-intelletual bullshit...you're confusing charity work with public service, all public service industries are in the business of making money for someone, too, else they do not survive to keep helping the people they're serving, even if the profits are returned to the business to keep things going, still gotta make money or you fail...you're still just a cog in industry, nothing more, nothing less...unless you're giving your time freely, kindly blow a fucking goat, you cock smokers

Why do they make roads?
To make MONEY
you realise if they could make more money killing kittens legally, they would do exactly that, right?
As neil_a said, any social good is entirely incidental

totally, but that's the point, it's a persons choice to do what they do and take from it what they will, just coz these two utopian-biased morons think what they do can't possible have any worth, doesn't make it so.

So if I try to shoot you in the head, but I miss and the bullet rebounds and skims the back of some guy's head and somehow cures his blindness, i've done a 'good job'? fantastic. intent is obviously completely irrelevant in your world view

Who, exactly, do schools/police forces/armies/public hospitals/parks make money for?

While the products of the research might be worthwhile by, e.g., developing a new drug, using that product as weapon to extort money under threat of death in morally reprehensible....

No, it is to make a profit - that is not the same as becoming rich.

And it is not incidental - many people start businesses because they see a need that isnt being met. In order to meet said need the business needs to not lose money in which case it needs to cover its costs and reward the owner for said time/ idea. That needs may be from the range of things people might consider a good service - audio book translations for the blind or at the other end a fear based marketing like hairloss treatments.

There is a certain biggie who started a business to meet a worthwhile societal need - does the business need to cover its costs - of course.

You may as well be honest and say that working for money/ selling private property you no longer need/ doing anything where you gain money is at the same level as owning a private enterprise. Its fine to point out the excesses but I don't believe many people would stomach the extreme socialism you believe in with the lack of choice in pretty much everything that it entails.

If you say so...I've said my piece, and I'm not going to bother arguing with you, you're the most hyper-opinionate, "one eyed" mother fucker on the internet, no one will ever be able to make you see something from another persons perspective because you're blinded by your own ignorant arrogance (where as I can entirely see the point you're getting at, I'm just open minded enough to know it's not that black and white and think it's retarded for you to be foisting your personal-feelings based opinion on other people like it's some God given fact)

Have a nice day, dickwad

What about companies who release research / technology to the public domain?

bob if you re-read my post I did say "if people think greed is all, then that's fine."
I have no issue with that. I have no problem with people saying "I love my job because it makes me rich and thus I can afford whisky and hookers." That's cool.
But people trying to pretend somehow that what Telecom or Vodafone does is somehow morally admirable - making a profit - goes beyond the pail. Like I said, business goes where the money is. If a business does a social good, it's more luck than intent.

Not a good line of argument from insanity but the short answer is the govt - ask people how long they will pay taxes for when they dont get any services for it.

Time/resources/infrastructure = money. Its just a concept that eases transactions.

What do you propose to replace the current system with in the end?

I don't propose to change anything! i think social democracy rather than socialism works well.
I simply want people to stop being hypocrites. Same as what I say about moving overseas etc. Do it, cool, but don't pretend you're acting out of anything other than self interest.

As Gordon Gecko said - "greed is good." But admit it. When you say "I work for Telecom because they pay me" then you're free. When you say "I work for Telecom because they're way better than Vodafone" you're just rationalising.

And I disagree with your statement that public services make money for the government in that people won't pay taxes if they don't get services. That's a flawed, business-type argument. Governments decide to provide public goods that it then charges for. It's a subtly different, but still quite distinct, approach. The government is not focused on PROFIT it is focused on PUBLIC GOOD.

I have to admit there is one flaw in my argument - not for profits that contract for government services.

Sure - large corporates exist to make money but that is not the same as all private enterprise, not by a long shot.

I believe there is a need for large companies to do large projects - can you imagine every country in the world having to replicate all the skills required to provide modern infrastructure? Do I enjoy my time dealing with large corps? Of course not but theres lots of things I dont like about the world; I just dont think I am 'right' about it objectively.

So if the government owned all companies that would make it all OK, yeah?

Edit: Just saw your post above. Fair enough.

I have no problem with a degree of social democracy - but having just come back from Germany I have to tell you there are some unbelievably stupid situations there.

Totally this.

EDIT Although now I've read the rest there is some pretty god arguments for both. If you think your position is doing good somewhere, who really cares that you're making someone else rich? You may also be helping others become better off.

Too many academics will argue "But...but... what about CAPITALISM?!" But really hey, change the world or stfu imo.

Are are seeking to do that but I dont believe many do it in an honest way. Its always easy to point out issues with the system but if you believe in evolution there is a reason things are the way they are.

To me the heart of the matter is you get more of what you reward and less of what you don't reward/ punish. Specifically if you dont reward people they will stop trying. Beyond a certain point (~survival) money is not the main reward most people seek.

I was watching a TED talk the other day that summed this up pretty well. In a study they found that bonuses etc actually served as more of a DEmotivator more than actually motivating anyone, and some of the biggest motivators were things like Google's 20% time.

Can you explain what you mean here re evolution?

Probably that things evolve in the most fitting ways. If greed wasn't successful, it wouldn't exist. you have to admit he has a point here
evolution is morally neutral. "fitting" is not the same as "good."

I wouldn't call it greed, though it does apply in some cases, its more self interest. If people act (rationally) in their self interest then things will tend towards some sort of equilibrium. The extension of that is that it is in peoples self interest to make sure society works.... to an average or best fit.

Its a nice idea eh... I dont claim it works perfectly but it appears to be the best fit so far.

for instance?

profit which gets taxed to help pay people in public service

vadz , doesnt the govt dept make the roads?

bob, greed is self interest
we're all greedy to a certain extent - given the finite nature of resources in the universe, just staying alive is 'greedy' in that resources i use to stay alive are resources others can't use. and we have to give people the right to exist.

and i NEVER SAID TI DOESNT WORK!! Im just saying people need to be honest about it.

What do you mean? I thought they hired private contractors?
Sure, if PEat Inc builds roads, that's a social good. But your motive for doing so is profit - the social good is incidental. If I offered you more profit to sell fatty fast food or wage corporate takeovers you'd do it.
Companies go where the $s are. If the $s and the social good match, all good. If not, well, that's reality.
Public services, on the other hand, go where the social good is.

I know a fully qualified civil engineer who was on the unemployment benefit for 10 years because he lived in a small town where there was no work and they wouldnt make him travel/ move. He had not motivation to because the unemployment benefit is so generous.

If you are ill/stressed/fat in Germany you are entitled to a 3 week retreat every 3 years (or so). They teach you to eat/exercise/live properly. While I loosely agree with this the cost is huge and they are struggling to pay for it.

Germans do things properly, even to the point where the *city* of Berlin is something like 60Billion Euros in Debit.

Semantics perhaps but I believe greed is excess self interest.

Firstly, there are some people who dont care at all what they do for money but I suspect they are in the minority. I certainly wouldnt work for a tobacco and I would have trouble working for a fast food company unless they were making changes... but then I would probably have trouble working for the IRD too.

But businesses are a reflection of the society we live in. Fast food businesses wouldn't exist without people voting for it with their greed earned money.

The Public service exists to carry out direction from the govt, which was voted in by society based on greed earned votes. They dont necessarily get it right and anyone who has had to deal with them will tell you its the same as dealing with corporates. They are there to follow the rules which may or may not be in your interest and often make no logical sense at all.

Most people I know have some sort of a conscience and interest in society. Sometimes (I believe) it is misplaced, both the righties and the lefties have some absurd ideas about how the world works/ should work. Increasing Socialism necessitates an increased degree of limitations of choice, its a balancing act of course. While there are lots of specific issues I have with the system the way it is now they are relatively minor tweaks to rewards systems not wholesale changes and I dont believe NZ can afford to be as much of a Social democracy such as Germany; the rest of the has too big an affect on us.

ummm private enterprises can and often do provide public services.

ie doctors (access to services in relation to health), lawyers (access to justice), pharmacists (access to medicine)...to name but a few.

did you even bother reading this thread, or just that post?
Very simply, private enterprises provide public services incidentally to their primary focus, which is MAKING A PROFIT

Culture mediates behaviour as much as evolutionary processes, so saying that capitalism can be attributed to evolution is pretty bogus. Is contraception good for evolutionary fitness?

And even if we are going to invoke evolution for sometihng like this, we can't ignore group-selection processes, in which greed and blind self-interest lower evolutionary fitness.

But yeah, invoking evolution to explain the status quo is just entirely bogus imo...

sure but public services value their output against the input. It cost $100million to build that bridge which will give an expected return to the economy of $200million over the next 20 years not to mention other non measurable benefits.

profit is simply a measure of utility.

Explain why evolution didnt get us to this point? And i dont just mean genetic evolution although that is the underlying framework.

We went from small scale owner operators to large scale companies and shareholders; even the evolution of countries that people are happy living in - look at the soviet block.. (im not saying its better now but socialism comprehensively failed there).

Theres a difference between whether evolution caused something and whether that evolution is an ideal fitness - it just beat the other options.... so far.

I don't know what you mean by evolution, but what you're saying seems to be either incoherent or tautological

no, i didn't read anything after that post. i saw your post then immediately quoted.

and why is making a profit from providing a service to the public such a bad thing? in the end, if you're working long and hard hours in what can be a difficult and challenging job, you should be rewarded, and if a 'private enterprise' has to make a 'profit' to do so, then so be it.

don't teachers, nurses, radiographers (to use a recent example), doctors etc sometimes go on strike to try and negotiate a better 'reward' for their efforts?

wages aren't profit

You're really not reading the thread, or if you are, you've missed his point totally.

if a business earns more, it can choose to increase its employees wages/salary. if a business earns more because of the hard work of its employees who provide a public service, it might be more likely to recompense the employee appropriately for that hard work.

i have to admit, working for the government in the role i was previously in, is a total breeze compared to what i am now doing (in terms of time pressure, stress etc) 'privately' but which is mainly funded through 'government funding'

I disagree. He's saying that whatever social framework we have today has developed through an evolutionary process. There's no moral judgement to that. We moved from feudalism to capitalism etc. because those succeeding social frameworks were more "fitting." A society that is capitalist will beat a society that is feudal etc.
Marx himself has an evolutionary perspective on this bro.

thats right
to any good capitalist they are an expense ;+)

but nowadays (there wasnt always income tax) they are taxable hence they generate revenue for the government so that the Ministry of Transport can pay private contractors to build roads.
Vadz it doesnt matter who builds roads, its who pays for them that matters and how they got the money to do so.

So are we arguing for/against removing private enterprise altogether and doing away with profit or just going round in circles?


Company profit rewards being good at something as voted by people in the economy. If we remove that how do you propose to allocate resources?

so just tautological then.

I'm not arguing for anything other than a little self-reflection...

You expect me to believe that?

Like I said at the beginning - there should be some honesty involved.

No it is posing the question - if something else was objectively better why didnt it win?

You are very short on substance and arent making any points yourself.

What exactly do you propose?

Which is why I asked bob to clarify what he meant by evolution. A common misconception is that capitalism is an inevitability of biological evolution, which just isn't true.

edit: bob, i also don't really understand your line here... is evolution just 'change over time' to you? (which is a perfectly legitimate definition)

if that's the case then saying X is due to evolution is really an empty claim.

perhaps competition would be a better term then.

so....................

people in the private sector feel shit due to working for profit driven organisations then?

Not at all.
He is saying that, throughout history, multiple potential social arrangements have competed/contested. Those that have a competitive advantage succeed. Feudalism succeeded whatever was pre-feudalism. Capitalism succeeded feudalism.
It's a perfectly accurate way of looking at it. We see it in business too - the most fitted businesses succeed. Then, more fitting businesses follow those businesses.

So, capitalism is here today because it beat socialism etc. There's NO moral judgement there at all - no more than saying that mammals beat dinosaurs.

Jesus bob I never said we should change the current system.
I think overall it works. However, like I said, ACCEPT selfishnes.

No, but they should. They're self deluding.

To me, it sounds like bob is saying, those organisational structures of the past were succeeded by organisational structures that came later.


also, mammals didn't beat dinosaurs. Mammals were just better suited to the environmental changes that were happening at the time.

It was a matter of geography, climate, available resources etc. Not because as bob would put it, because mammals are objectively better than dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were beaten by the environment. Not mammals.

To my mind, "better suited" is BEAT. Objectively better means the same as being better suited to the environment.

Let's use an analogy of sports. If the Tigers beat the Titans in a game of rugby league, it's because the Tigers are better suited to the environment of rugby league (at that time). Our language choices don't actually mean anything different - just altered perspectives.

Or another one. If an army with guns beats an army with spears, that's because physics etc - the external environment - favour a force that can fire projectiles long distance in extremely high speeds etc. If we use your perspective, we could say "it was a matter of physics, not because one army is objectively better than the other" because we could analogise another universe in which guns are actually inferior to spears. Maybe they have shields like in Dune, where high speed objects get blocked.