Our generation's lack of work ethic and money skills.

[brianmanahan]

The way management throws out "jeans days" as such a big deal also makes me laugh hard. I just roll my eyes and carry on - I couldn't possibly care less if the do things like this but I do enjoy pointing and laughing.

i gotta agree with them on the jeans day - i despise wearing business clothes. luckily i only have to dress up maybe once a year. other than that, jeans and tshirt all day, erry day.

 

[Red Squirrel]

That's what I love about my job, can wear shorts/jeans and tshirt and it's fine. I even kick my shoes off and wear slippers as my feet sweat too much if in shoes all day.

At the other office I think people dress a tad more preppy but don't think they are all that strict about it there either.

Honestly it would take a pretty huge bump in pay for me to take a job that requires to dress up. Like it would have to be at least 100k.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

i gotta agree with them on the jeans day - i despise wearing business clothes. luckily i only have to dress up maybe once a year. other than that, jeans and tshirt all day, erry day.

There's no reason why every day can't be jeans day but that aside, I don't consider giving us extra jeans day any great reward. It's embarrassing the way these guys act as if it is a great reward.

 

[brianmanahan]

It's embarrassing the way these guys act as if it is a great reward.

true, the only rewards i really care about are ones with a direct monetary value

 

[RockinZ28]

That's what I love about my job, can wear shorts/jeans and tshirt and it's fine. I even kick my shoes off and wear slippers as my feet sweat too much if in shoes all day.

At the other office I think people dress a tad more preppy but don't think they are all that strict about it there either.

Honestly it would take a pretty huge bump in pay for me to take a job that requires to dress up. Like it would have to be at least 100k.

Yeah, sorely miss the lack of dress code at my last small business office. Every day was shorts and flip flops for me, at least until it started getting below ~20F. Then I switched to "winter flip flops" (slippers ) Would always joke that was the only reason I took the job. If only it paid more. Working in the field again now, have to wear damn jeans and safety toe shoes daily. I'd value the compensation package at 100-120k on top of what I was making before though, so suppose I can deal with it.

 

[Mai72]

I agree. Good book with a lot of great points. I think my key takeaway from that book was how he defines income, assets, expenses, and liabilities, and especially defining a house as a liability (which is a huge point of contention, but as it sucks money away for utilities, maintenance, property taxes, etc., it does fit his his definition). If more people revolved their budgets around that core matrix, it would help them understand their finances a lot more clearly.

Robert was pretty harsh on the popular notion that a home is an asset. The average home increases 1% per year, and has done so since the 1960s. Now, you can get lucky and have a real estate boom. I live at the shore in NJ. During the early 2000's we saw homes that were once being sold for $40-60k, were now being sold to developers for $400k. That was a 40-50 year time span though.

As Robert said, if buying a home is important to you than why not focus on investments first. And, then use those investments to purchase your home. So, instead of buying a house when you start making a little bit of money, invest it in something like real estate. When the money starts to come in you can use that passive income to make your purchases. The problem with that is it takes time and many people are impatient. Plus, many make purchases because they're ego driven. Gotta impress John and Sally next door neighbor.

 

[purbeast0]

I watched Office Space this weekend for the first time in a while and the past page reminds me of quite a bit from that movie.

 

[Fritzo]

Yeah, sorely miss the lack of dress code at my last small business office. Every day was shorts and flip flops for me, at least until it started getting below ~20F. Then I switched to "winter flip flops" (slippers ) Would always joke that was the only reason I took the job. If only it paid more. Working in the field again now, have to wear damn jeans and safety toe shoes daily. I'd value the compensation package at 100-120k on top of what I was making before though, so suppose I can deal with it.

I work at a successful small family IT consultant firm, and until 4 years ago, we had to wear ties, and jackets were required to meetings. They've laxed the dress code since then where collared shirts and dress pants are required, but I agree it gives a sense of professionalism when everyone is dressed well.

In fact, two years back we scored a financial firm in Chicago on that point. They commented on every other firm they interviewed had employees that looked like they "just rolled out of bed". We still joke about that

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I work at a successful small family IT consultant firm, and until 4 years ago, we had to wear ties, and jackets were required to meetings. They've laxed the dress code since then where collared shirts and dress pants are required, but I agree it gives a sense of professionalism when everyone is dressed well.

In fact, two years back we scored a financial firm in Chicago on that point. They commented on every other firm they interviewed had employees that looked like they "just rolled out of bed". We still joke about that

I miss working from home fulltime, where I literally DID just roll out of bed and start working.

Regardless, I'm pretty fed up with IT in general and am so looking forward to retirement. If they want to coddle millenials, fine. If they want to put clueless MBAs in charge, fine. However, the thing that killed IT for me more than anything is probably the rise of the incredibly clueless and useless PM. I'm on a project now that has gone like this:

PM: "Please provide a task list for each environment of the migration project."
ICF: <provides task list>
PM: <sends spreadsheet with task list> "Here is the task list for the project. Please fill out columns C-J for each task: C) Status D) Duration E) Work (hrs) F) Start Time G) End Time H) Predecessor I) Successor J) Assigned Resource."

So let me get this straight and please, ATOT, tell me what I'm missing:

1. I provided the task list for the project plan
2. I receive the "project plan," which is literally a paste of the task list I sent.
3. I'm supposed to provide C) Status D) Duration E) Work (hrs) F) Start Time G) End Time H) Predecessor I) Successor J) Assigned Resource for each task.
4. From what I can tell from items 1-3 above, I'm actually developing the ENTIRE project plan. What is the "PM" supposed to do exactly?

Suffice it to say, I'm providing column E and he can figure out the rest and if he can't, well, too damn bad.

 

[Kaido]

Robert was pretty harsh on the popular notion that a home is an asset. The average home increases 1% per year, and has done so since the 1960s. Now, you can get lucky and have a real estate boom. I live at the shore in NJ. During the early 2000's we saw homes that were once being sold for $40-60k, were now being sold to developers for $400k. That was a 40-50 year time span though.

As Robert said, if buying a home is important to you than why not focus on investments first. And, then use those investments to purchase your home. So, instead of buying a house when you start making a little bit of money, invest it in something like real estate. When the money starts to come in you can use that passive income to make your purchases. The problem with that is it takes time and many people are impatient. Plus, many make purchases because they're ego driven. Gotta impress John and Sally next door neighbor.

I think because he looks at it as more of a risk as to whether or not you will actually make money on it when you go to sell it, which is different from a specific long-term investment in real estate (statistics are something like the average American movies 11 times in their lifetime). Plus when you couple in the cost of running a house (property taxes, homeowner's insurance, replacement parts like broken windows or defective water heaters, maintenance equipment like lawnmowers, repair costs - especially for emergencies like burst pipes, monthly utility bills, etc.), it's not like it's a business you own & operate where you put money in & make an ongoing profit, it's a diceroll as to whether or not you'll get a profit after the accumulated maintenance cost during all of those years of owning & operating your live-in residential home, unlike a business where you lease or buy a space and use that to generate money to cover that cost. Which is why it's such a big point of contention defining it that way in the financial community. From the author's perspective, you're paying money every month to keep that home & do the upkeep on it, therefore per his definition being a liability being anything you have that costs you money, it is a liability, not an asset. Personally, I prefer to look at it that way too, because it's not a guaranteed thing like bank interest or stock dividends - because if you're say forced to relocate due to a job change and it's a buyer's market, then you stand to lose money, but meanwhile, every day, week, monthly, and year that you live in that house, it's cost you money out of pocket to stay there.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I miss working from home fulltime, where I literally DID just roll out of bed and start working.

Regardless, I'm pretty fed up with IT in general and am so looking forward to retirement. If they want to coddle millenials, fine. If they want to put clueless MBAs in charge, fine. However, the thing that killed IT for me more than anything is probably the rise of the incredibly clueless and useless PM. I'm on a project now that has gone like this:

PM: "Please provide a task list for each environment of the migration project."
ICF: <provides task list>
PM: <sends spreadsheet with task list> "Here is the task list for the project. Please fill out columns C-J for each task: C) Status D) Duration E) Work (hrs) F) Start Time G) End Time H) Predecessor I) Successor J) Assigned Resource."

So let me get this straight and please, ATOT, tell me what I'm missing:

1. I provided the task list for the project plan
2. I receive the "project plan," which is literally a paste of the task list I sent.
3. I'm supposed to provide C) Status D) Duration E) Work (hrs) F) Start Time G) End Time H) Predecessor I) Successor J) Assigned Resource for each task.
4. From what I can tell from items 1-3 above, I'm actually developing the ENTIRE project plan. What is the "PM" supposed to do exactly?

Suffice it to say, I'm providing column E and he can figure out the rest and if he can't, well, too damn bad.

They basically want you to fill out the project task list with assigned resources in MS Project for them. Sounds pathetic - which is no surprise, it's ultimately work that they should be gathering.

Project managers are like a position equivalent of HR - they are ultimately a useless position, they are (admittedly) worth having in some cases depending on how stupid the teams are - some teams need someone to hold their hand and talk to other teams, other people understand how to do their own due diligence.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I think because he looks at it as more of a risk as to whether or not you will actually make money on it when you go to sell it, which is different from a specific long-term investment in real estate (statistics are something like the average American movies 11 times in their lifetime). Plus when you couple in the cost of running a house (property taxes, homeowner's insurance, replacement parts like broken windows or defective water heaters, maintenance equipment like lawnmowers, repair costs - especially for emergencies like burst pipes, monthly utility bills, etc.), it's not like it's a business you own & operate where you put money in & make an ongoing profit, it's a diceroll as to whether or not you'll get a profit after the accumulated maintenance cost during all of those years of owning & operating your live-in residential home, unlike a business where you lease or buy a space and use that to generate money to cover that cost. Which is why it's such a big point of contention defining it that way in the financial community. From the author's perspective, you're paying money every month to keep that home & do the upkeep on it, therefore per his definition being a liability being anything you have that costs you money, it is a liability, not an asset. Personally, I prefer to look at it that way too, because it's not a guaranteed thing like bank interest or stock dividends - because if you're say forced to relocate due to a job change and it's a buyer's market, then you stand to lose money, but meanwhile, every day, week, monthly, and year that you live in that house, it's cost you money out of pocket to stay there.

99.9% of assets depreciate in value when used over time, so I don't think it's quite as easy to call it an asset either since the majority of homes will appreciate in time.

 

[OverVolt]

If you need rich dad poor dad, you're probably already screwed.

Anyway I've had a savings/debt free/investing mindset for a long time. Why? Because I actually have assets and a positive net worth.

I think millennials invest in "themselves" on food, education, fashion, etc because they have no assets. They are in horrible, horrible debt up to their eyeballs. Mistakes were made.

Its a completely different mindset to have wealth to protect vs being $100k-$200k in the hole in PERSONAL debt, not even a mortgage.

I don't really blame them... but they will be poor despite appearances. Appearances are all they have now.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

If you need rich dad poor dad, you're probably already screwed.

Anyway I've had a savings/debt free/investing mindset for a long time. Why? Because I actually have assets and a positive net worth.

I think millennials invest in "themselves" on food, education, fashion, etc because they have no assets. They are in horrible, horrible debt up to their eyeballs. Mistakes were made.

Its a completely different mindset to have wealth to protect vs being $100k-$200k in the hole in PERSONAL debt, not even a mortgage.

I don't really blame them... but they will be poor despite appearances. Appearances are all they have now.

I feel like the real mind games are that plain looking worker types = have money

Trendy, fashionable, people who give the impression they are self-actualized (they are not) = broke as $%&# lower class. I personally am not fooled, but many are.

And it takes 10 yrs or so for this type of thing to become common knowledge and for the trends to change.

There is a difference between people who want to be wealthy, and those that want to be perceived as wealthy on Facebook. One of the two is healthy, the other leads to a long dark depressing life. I know which one I picked.

That said, I wish I could live like them at some point, now I have to contemplate shit like getting umbrella insurance to protect my assets should a simple incident occur (e.g. Car-wreck where I am at fault and the victim wants to sue me into oblivion). If you don't have assets, no one is going to come after you because it's like to trying to extract blood from rocks.

 

[Kaido]

99.9% of assets depreciate in value when used over time, so I don't think it's quite as easy to call it an asset either since the majority of homes will appreciate in time.

Yeah, there will always be overlap, but for simplifying things, I like his approach: if it makes you money, it's an asset, and if you want to be wealthy, buy assets because those are what make you money.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

They basically want you to fill out the project task list with assigned resources in MS Project for them. Sounds pathetic - which is no surprise, it's ultimately work that they should be gathering.

Exactly, and I'm not doing it.

Project managers are like a position equivalent of HR - they are ultimately a useless position, they are (admittedly) worth having in some cases depending on how stupid the teams are - some teams need someone to hold their hand and talk to other teams, other people understand how to do their own due diligence.

I understand the benefit on huge project involving multiple departments spread over multiple regions or something like that. But otherwise, they're worthless impediments.

 

[vi edit]

I miss working from home fulltime, where I literally DID just roll out of bed and start working.

Regardless, I'm pretty fed up with IT in general and am so looking forward to retirement. If they want to coddle millenials, fine. If they want to put clueless MBAs in charge, fine. However, the thing that killed IT for me more than anything is probably the rise of the incredibly clueless and useless PM. I'm on a project now that has gone like this:

PM: "Please provide a task list for each environment of the migration project."
ICF: <provides task list>
PM: <sends spreadsheet with task list> "Here is the task list for the project. Please fill out columns C-J for each task: C) Status D) Duration E) Work (hrs) F) Start Time G) End Time H) Predecessor I) Successor J) Assigned Resource."

So let me get this straight and please, ATOT, tell me what I'm missing:

1. I provided the task list for the project plan
2. I receive the "project plan," which is literally a paste of the task list I sent.
3. I'm supposed to provide C) Status D) Duration E) Work (hrs) F) Start Time G) End Time H) Predecessor I) Successor J) Assigned Resource for each task.
4. From what I can tell from items 1-3 above, I'm actually developing the ENTIRE project plan. What is the "PM" supposed to do exactly?

Suffice it to say, I'm providing column E and he can figure out the rest and if he can't, well, too damn bad.

Was this a consulting firm PM or one employed by the company?

 

[fleshconsumed]

I just started working at this company 3 months ago, so I don't have all the history but I do believe that you're correct in that they hired HR "consultants" (I almost choked on laughter typing that) who told them to do things like this. The way management throws out "jeans days" as such a big deal also makes me laugh hard. I just roll my eyes and carry on - I couldn't possibly care less if the do things like this but I do enjoy pointing and laughing.

Praise is cheap. So is jeans day. I'd do the same thing if I was the manager and it kept people happy.

If millennials are happy with just praise and jeans day, I think it speaks volumes of just how shitty the world has been to them up until that point. It's like an abusive relationship - you just need to throw a few crumbs here and there to keep your subjects happy. Hardly a thing to harp on millennials about.

 

[bshole]

Its a completely different mindset to have wealth to protect vs being $100k-$200k in the hole in PERSONAL debt, not even a mortgage.

I don't really blame them... but they will be poor despite appearances. Appearances are all they have now.

Maybe so but you will be every as bit as dead as they are in the end. The only part of life worth living is youth, you should be spending as much of the money you have then on pleasing yourself. When you get old, life really really does suck and money is cold comfort. The truest statement ever made is "life sucks and then you die".

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Praise is cheap. So is jeans day. I'd do the same thing if I was the manager and it kept people happy.

If millennials are happy with just praise and jeans day, I think it speaks volumes of just how shitty the world has been to them up until that point. It's like an abusive relationship - you just need to throw a few crumbs here and there to keep your subjects happy. Hardly a thing to harp on millennials about.

There is nothing wrong with saying "Good job, Jim" when something goes well. In fact, I think managers SHOULD tell their employees things like that.

It is entirely different when you're going to absurd lengths like this company has. I realize some folks may need it, but I think most of us just roll our eyes, do our jobs, and would appreciate management just saying "great job" to us in private rather than doing these embarrassing public displays.

 

[Svnla]

For the people that just skate by in life. What will happen later in life (30 - 40 years from now)?

Your parents/supporters/enablers are long gone.
The house that you live in rent free is falling apart and needing some serious repairs => big money in which you do not have.
You do not have any money to set aside because you barely made enough to pay for your entertainment/gaming/out with the boys/girls because after all YOLO.
You lose a lot of money from the compounding power of money if you did have some money set aside when you were in your 20s.
Your health is falling so you will not be able to do menial physical part time work anymore and your costs (especially health care) are rising.

And so on.

In other word, you will be in a world of hurt and by then, it will be too late.

 

[Kaido]

If you need rich dad poor dad, you're probably already screwed.

Anyway I've had a savings/debt free/investing mindset for a long time. Why? Because I actually have assets and a positive net worth.

I think millennials invest in "themselves" on food, education, fashion, etc because they have no assets. They are in horrible, horrible debt up to their eyeballs. Mistakes were made.

Its a completely different mindset to have wealth to protect vs being $100k-$200k in the hole in PERSONAL debt, not even a mortgage.

I don't really blame them... but they will be poor despite appearances. Appearances are all they have now.

Nah, most people get zero formal financial training growing up from their parents (often because they don't know how to budget either) or school or whatever, and everyone has to start somewhere, whether it's with a budget or Dave Ramseys or Rich Dad Poor Dad or whatever. Anything that can increase your knowledge & further your education is good to start out with! We have a ridiculously large amount of debt in America because of that lack of training (really understanding how things like credit works, developing the habits from a young age, setting up a personal system to manage your money in a way that suits you, etc.); total household debt was at like $12.58 trillion at the end of 2016. That fact that you even have any assets at all (which a lot of people don't, other than a day job) AND a positive net worth says that you've put in the time to figuring out the basics of finances and that you've setup a system where you have worked to own assets & put yourself in a good financial position, which puts you ahead of the game. But you're right, with easy credit it's a hard trap for young people not to fall in. But everyone needs to start somewhere, and as the saying goes, if you only have a dollar, manage that dollar!

 

[urvile]

Project managers are like a position equivalent of HR - they are ultimately a useless position, they are (admittedly) worth having in some cases depending on how stupid the teams are - some teams need someone to hold their hand and talk to other teams, other people understand how to do their own due diligence.

Ah yes. Try working with project managers who don't understand software development and agile. "What do you mean you can move requirements implementation around in the schedule based on client feedback? The schedule has been base lined so you cannot do that." You can either fight them or just ignore them. Either way they are a waste of space at that point.

I should point out that we would typically run projects ourselves (with no PM because really you don't need them) but within certain contexts the company felt it was necessary to burden us with a project manager from the IT infrastructure part of the company.

 

[destrekor]

This is not new nor unique to any particular generation. With global communication, it's just a little easier to find.

edit:

bah. Didn't realize it was an old topic revived.

 

[JEDI]

Ah yes. Try working with project managers who don't understand software development and agile. "What do you mean you can move requirements implementation around in the schedule based on client feedback? The schedule has been base lined so you cannot do that." You can either fight them or just ignore them. Either way they are a waste of space at that point.

I should point out that we would typically run projects ourselves (with no PM because really you don't need them) but within certain contexts the company felt it was necessary to burden us with a project manager from the IT infrastructure part of the company.

oh god Agile.
proj mgmt. run on chaos.

and if they're not green belts, at min, then why the F are you having them do Agile?!