Young people in China are becoming more rebellious, questioning their nation’s traditional expectations of career and family

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    10 months ago

    They have an interesting strategy where they workout expenses for the year if they lived minimal. It might be 9k. So they work for a few months and save up that money then quit their job and “lay flat” for the rest of the year.

    • rynzcycle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Honestly, that sounds amazing, and illustrates why, “can you explain this gap on your resume” is such a bull shit interview question.

      • Coreidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        10 months ago

        What? This illustrates exactly why it’s an important question.

        If you’re responsible for hiring are you going to hire someone who has gaps in their resume or someone that’s been consistently working?

        The person with gaps on their resume is more likely to quit on you. You aren’t going to hire someone who looks like they will quit.

        • BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          The actual solution is to figure out why work sucks so hard that people find loopholes like this to get around it. If i can work 4 months out of the year and take care of myself, why would you want to eork any more?

          • Coreidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Agreed but employers don’t care. They are the ones with the power. Having you work 60 hours a week is a means of control. If you quit there is a line of people out there that’s willing to take the job. Employers know this and exploit it.

            If you think you can change this power dynamic then go for it, but there are too many desperate people out there for that to happen.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          10 months ago

          one of the problems of modern work environments is that workplaces get saturated with people who actually should leave but don’t. It is a bullshit question even if (like many modern problems) it would make sense if we were still in an era where corporations valued long term employees and mutual loyalty was a thing that existed.

          • Coreidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Loyalty or not employers aren’t going to bother hiring someone they know is going to walk out in a month or two. That’s why they ask the question. It isn’t rocket science.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        “well I work for a short time and then just quit and do nothing.”

        I can see why they might ask the question. I don’t expect people to put the business above themselves, but I certainly would be less likely to hire someone if I knew they were just going to quit after a few months because they have no ambition.

    • buzz86us@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t blame them… The older generations really screwed the pooch for the younger generation. Basically made China inhospitable for foreign investment so all these young people are left high and dry with fancy degrees and no jobs.

      • LavaPlanet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s kinda not really the older generations, though, it’s more capitalism. Where does that start and end?

          • LavaPlanet@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Eh, I think we have to agree to disagree on that point, friend. I’ve seen a lot of quotes closer to the turn of the last century warning about capitalism, it’s been going for quite a while. All through the industrial booms and a few wars were essentially fuelled by capitalist reasons. All that happened in India, British empire stuff, essentially capitalism. I could deep dive and find dates, but if you are interested, there’s just so much to read about it, I wouldn’t know where to start. You might find some fascinating (and troubling) stuff, once you start scratching the surface. I feel like I am only just scratching the surface. I’m looking for a good book to read on the subject so I have a more indepth understanding.

      • Dinsmore@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Wait, the problem in your mind with China is that it’s not as safe for multinational companies to exploit their populace?

        • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          China’s own megaconglomerates aren’t doing any better. They openly steal from their populace, and exploit their workers in inhumane ways. Just look at the mass embezzlement of peoples life savings in the housing market by ultra mega sized publicly traded corporations. China is basically a hyper capitalist corporatocracy, with extra authoritarianism sprinkled in with no upside.

          • Dinsmore@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Agreed that the problem is capitalism, but I don’t know about “no upside.” The poverty rate in China has continually decreased. While we in the west might argue that living under authoritarian rule might not be worth the tradeoff, that certainly is an upside.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Although this only works when you’re not living a minimal existence, paycheck-to-paycheck.

      The next step will be to pay them less.