The company I work for is losing all of its humanity, I don't know where to go

6/5/2026 at 8:09:47 PM

I feel Your pain. And I have a advice: take a deep breath and leave. Because burn-out is real, because there is nothing that can compensate damages of Your mental health.

You are still a human. You are intelligent. Yes - you are, this is demonstrated by the ability to think critically and independence of your views. So - You are capable to adapt into new environment and into new tech. Search for anything and switch job. Don't wait for a toxic environment to destroy your confidence.

by aniou

6/5/2026 at 7:06:02 PM

Your company is laying people off because they need something to do. They’re goalless in the extreme and relying on big talk and big action about the latest fad. You don’t have leaders, you have owners.

You must look around and see the lack of men, and force yourself to become one.

by hyperhello

6/5/2026 at 9:14:15 PM

> You must look around and see the lack of men, and force yourself to become one.

As a man I need you to expand on this because I'm trying to imagine what concrete actions you think "a man" would do in this circumstance, and of the things I've come up with the only one I think I'm allowed to say on this forum is "quit and find a new job."

by BigTTYGothGF

6/5/2026 at 9:40:54 PM

Why complicate this? It's a well defined, harmless phrase. We don't have to pretend it's a touchy gender-related issue.

by happytoexplain

6/6/2026 at 9:15:41 AM

It clearly is not. Also the tone of this comment is at odds with site rules.

by a96

6/5/2026 at 9:24:28 PM

What do you mean, allowed to say on this forum? Who is around to stop you from saying what you mean? Is this some kind of dramatic display of your secondary status? What responsibility for you are you asking me to take?

by hyperhello

6/6/2026 at 12:00:50 PM

> What do you mean, allowed to say on this forum?

This forum is ran by my fellow man, dang, who expects a certain level of decorum and discretion, and it would be ungentlemanly to act otherwise. A Real Man knows to keep his cards close to his chest. It's a violation of the Bro Code to say some stuff out loud, my dude.

> What responsibility for you are you asking me to take?

I'm asking you to explain what actions you think OP, as a Man, should take in this situation. Quit (quietly or loudly)? Refuse and get fired? Something else?

by BigTTYGothGF

6/6/2026 at 3:13:13 PM

Your username and comment is soaked with a certain kind of negativity as you demand I take responsibility for my comment. Do you see that? I advise the blog author to do the opposite. I want him to look around and become the exact person that he looks at as an authority that stands tall and takes responsibility for their identity and their actions. He’ll meet resistance from people who can complain endlessly but never help or stop to think, but also much support from people who do help and need a strong and stable person. That’s what I recommend.

by hyperhello

6/5/2026 at 8:07:13 PM

> You must look around and see the lack of men, and force yourself to become one.

What exactly does this mean?

by bossyTeacher

6/5/2026 at 8:11:33 PM

I think parent commenter is using "men" in a manner similar to mensch, as in "a person of integrity and honor" [1]. In other words, "look around and notice nobody is taking responsibility, and choose to be the person who lifts others up." Or something.

It's a weird way to phrase it, in my opinion, especially in this era where we are generally avoiding ambiguously gendered collective nouns... but I'm pretty sure that's the gist. Or, at least, it's how I read it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensch

by DonaldPShimoda

6/5/2026 at 8:11:54 PM

"Men" is colloquially used here to mean "decent people", "strong people", "principled people", etc. It's a generic positive description ("Be a man", "Man up").

Younger generations might bristle at this use of the word, and that's fine, but try to give the benefit of the doubt (in fact, it's a rule on HN).

by happytoexplain

6/6/2026 at 7:50:47 AM

As an older generation man, I've tried to understand the touchiness here. This is dangerous territory, so I hope you try to read my intent here, even if the packaging is not as strong as I want it to be.

The best analogy I can come up with is the smurf village: Every smurf has an identity, describing a bunch of mannerism. Baker smurf, strong smurf, joke smurf ... The smurfette is both the only adult female and a separate identity. Her existence in a children's story serves to demonstrate to young humans how the female identity is supposed to work.

I think the smurf village echos a deep human archetype. A man is someone who can choose his identity. He is unbound. A woman is a man with an already fixed identity. She can't choose to be e.g. a baker as primary identity, her choice is made already.

While simplified, there is some truth in this worldview, and people, especially woman, are correct to protest teaching this archetype to new generations.

In the same way, the poster above uses 'Be a man' to probably mean something like: 'Be brave enough to choose a new identity'. Which is a valid message, but needs an implied ([*] woman are also men here) when this archetype is considered.

by hyperman1

6/6/2026 at 3:15:58 PM

Thanks for the well written response. It should be pointed out that Smurfs reproduce in the manner of spores and their gender is just a matter of children’s entertainment.

Extremely online people find the sweet contention in everything and act accordingly.

As for the [*] I did assume that the target was male because of the content of the writing. But if they were female they are presumably going to be no more or less able to discern the value.

by hyperhello

6/6/2026 at 7:33:55 AM

Giving the benefit of the doubt can only come after one understands what was said. Case in point, asking someone to clarify should be assumed to be a good faith question that comes from a place of ignorance. (And to your credit you did indeed provide an explanation.)

by fc417fc802

6/5/2026 at 8:32:50 PM

I'm giggling a little, imagining a company run almost entirely by raccoons... and the OP sitting there as the sole human, lamenting the lack of men.

by isoprophlex

6/5/2026 at 8:47:50 PM

Raccoons at least have some sort of intelligence. Leeches are a better animal comparison IMO

by miltonlost

6/5/2026 at 8:13:17 PM

It means you need to become a good wage slave and do more work without increases in pay or equity. Why should you get the rewards of your boss when you are given the ownership of their workload?

Apparently equal in value according to some fools.

by shimman

6/6/2026 at 7:34:28 AM

The answer is "simple": invest your energy in a workers union. Respect working law, and don't let the boss/manager overstep boundaries. Depending on your jurisdiction, this may mean that you can refuse extra hours, that you have no obligation to answer calls/emails outside of working hours, etc.

You should document everything the bosses are doing, because in many countries firing people for not magically becoming more productive is highly illegal. And workplace harassment is highly illegal.

Build up your power with your colleagues, stay strong and solidarity will prevail!

by selfhoster1312

6/5/2026 at 8:25:57 PM

fear is a reaction, courage is a choice.

You don't have to quit to start looking for another job, just start looking. You have 10 years experience, how can you say that you have no marketable skills? You could network, go to events, get involved in your local dev communities, show someone else your enthusiasm.

by Quarrelsome

6/5/2026 at 8:45:40 PM

Look, it sucks and nothing I say will fix it, but know this: it's never been easier to spot people WHO ARE DOING THE ACTUAL WORK, and never so easy to spot the impostors who care most about looking productive.

The world is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

There are precious few of us left who even still know how to write in our own voice, who have a will to grow ourselves and faith left in human ability. I urge you beyond all urging not underestimate yourself, for you have never been more rare and valuable!!!

by conartist6

6/6/2026 at 12:26:41 PM

This is a relationship question. Like any other relationship in your life that you might see early warning red flags or full-on toxicity right now, you have to consider if continuing to dedicate your limited time and energy to them is healthy for you. That a job takes up a very significant portion of a persons waking time, often as much or more than is given to family, friends, and romantic partners, then it is very important question to have a good answer to.

by Eddy_Viscosity2

6/6/2026 at 8:32:30 AM

If the company is losing all its humanity, leave.

I've done it twice. First when an $evil company aquired the place I worked, and the second time when an $evil company aquired the place I worked (the second one being Oracle and Sun, as described in the anthropomorphizing Ellison speech better than I can).

by jjav

6/5/2026 at 8:15:32 PM

How do you know your skills aren't marketable if you don't go out and market them? Go apply around. You don't necessarily need to leave to do it.

by 827a

6/5/2026 at 8:28:45 PM

Your company never had humanity. Thinking it did is mistake number 1.

by internet2000

6/5/2026 at 8:40:04 PM

If the pay is OK and you're not being asked to do anything unethical, just ride it out. AI is the technology du-jour but one day it will just be a part of the landscape and its role will have stabilized. Certainly worth interviewing and seeing what else you might find, but pretty much every dev organization is in chaos right now.

by SoftTalker

6/5/2026 at 7:40:12 PM

Anywhere! Just leave! :)

by lordkrandel

6/5/2026 at 8:12:05 PM

Unionize.

by egypturnash

6/5/2026 at 9:26:47 PM

There's nothing but sand at the end of that road, start building something that you own.

by wseqyrku

6/5/2026 at 8:25:49 PM

> I don't have any other marketable skills. My coding skills were barely marketable to begin with.

Hot take: moving is more about interview skills than coding skills. Whether you leave or not, start interviewing now. You might end up finding a better place sooner than you hoped.

by dddddaviddddd

6/5/2026 at 8:34:42 PM

Yes, it's about how you think about yourself. Identity matters just as much as experience, sometimes moreso.

by watershawl

6/6/2026 at 3:14:34 AM

I don't get how OP has 10 years of full stack experience and thinks that sums to zero marketable skills.

by eudamoniac

6/5/2026 at 8:31:12 PM

Sometimes I wonder about even if you are the owners of such companies[0], then there would simply be issues arising in the near future about profitability at one or the other time.

The only thing that I can realistically think through is the fact that because such owners were able to get the personal income and expenses sorted out for a few years and maybe got a bigger house.

But if things change, which realistically speaking, it would. they might get so accustomed to the way of doing things and the shock would be too much in too short period of time.

It doesn't atleast in the moment, seem worth it to me to try to create or chase trends for investors or anything.

I also sympathize with the workers working in said companies like OP. Not sure what realistic solution is out there, the job-market is terrible at the moment for many people and IMO business-making is a hard thing to do and some of us might like to over-estimate ourselves in it too (& side note on under-estimating yourself too)

Accurate estimations of if you should do business or not seems to me to always contain some inaccuracies and you might have to decide your own decision in that and in that sense, job seems better.

You also can't go live without money if one has to exist within society.

I don't know if there is a catharsis to such problem. To me, it seems like an authenticity/trust issue on if you can trust the founders or not but trust by definition is a bit weird and immeasurable and it can always have blind-spots. Maybe the investors investing into such a company trusted the wrong guy but what if the company somehow sells to more people (Ahem SpaceX) and ends up making incredible amounts of money. You would never know and thus you have to just trust the system but the system doesn't work sometimes in a good fashion.

[0]: (We need a better term for such companies which are just trend-chasing and mostly are just built to impress investors rather than try to generate actual profits)

by Imustaskforhelp

6/5/2026 at 8:59:46 PM

I look forward to the day that AI slop is embarrassing for executives. We're at an inflection point for the herd mentality moment where they're dreaming of mass layoffs. When AI proves incapable of delivering ROI the wave will roll back.

by josefritzishere

6/6/2026 at 6:34:56 AM

Did we get any embarrassment from all the 2000s outsourcing that went to the cheapest sweatshop, and then slowly rolled back when they realised that you need to have expertise?

Thinking that you can do this without skills has been here before, and it'll come around again after the executives take the money and run.

by happymellon

6/5/2026 at 7:03:15 PM

If you have been coding for 8 years and don't have marketable skills you are either naive/insecure or doing something very very wrong.

In either case, this job is clearly not healthy for you in several different ways

by homeonthemtn

6/5/2026 at 7:41:40 PM

I've been doing full-stack Dev (mostly Django though I foolishly had a brief moment where I kinda thought Flask was okay then fell for the same dumb thing briefly with FastAPI) for 20+ years and don't feel marketable.

I went from jQuery to a brief dalliance with Angular to HTMX+_HyperScript. Everyone wants full stack Devs to use react and struggle eternally with insane dependency trees and challenging client side state management.

I like to build things that can be maintained in perpetuity by small teams.

So I'm not very marketable.

by Induane

6/5/2026 at 8:04:59 PM

I'm full stack for 19 years and I love React, and I've been laid off for 1.5 years now. This is a terrible job market right now.

That doesn't mean you don't have good skills, it just means that too many people have them. It happens from time to time in every industrial, for all skills.

Obviously, I don't have any good advice about how to deal with it.

by wccrawford

6/5/2026 at 8:08:09 PM

You mean you haven't been working for 1 1/2 years? How do you buy food?

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:35:16 PM

> I'm full stack for 19 years

That's the key.

I've been an AppSec engineer for about 12 years, but it wasn't until about 5 years ago I started working somewhere that actually paid a market rate. I wasn't living paycheck to paycheck for the first 7 years, but certainly wasn't putting much away.

Now, I've got nearly a full year of after-tax paychecks in savings. I could easily go ~18 months without pay without a change in lifestyle. I could stretch it out to 3 years with some belt tightening.

In about 6 more years, the house will be paid off and any savings I have could last even longer.

by Sohcahtoa82

6/5/2026 at 9:38:05 PM

Got it. I need to start saving some money.

Hope you find another job soon!

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 8:18:09 PM

Presumably they haven't been living paycheck to paycheck for the past 19. It's not that difficult for a SWE in North America.

by vkou

6/5/2026 at 9:46:09 PM

That's not rare for a SWE in NA. Difficult is another matter. Plenty of SWE's in NA are now staring down the barrel of not being able to afford their own home for much longer (or to afford their first home).

by happytoexplain

6/6/2026 at 12:27:23 AM

If you've been working for three years as a junior and just put down a big down payment on a house you can barely afford, yes, you're going to have problems.

If in 19 years as a SWE, you haven't saved up a lot of money, you are one or more of:

1. Incredibly unfortunate in the jobs you've been taking.

2. Have made some incredibly bad investments.

3. Are spending like a sailor, burning every dollar as it comes in.

4. Have gone through one or more absolute life catastrophes.

... Then yes, you are also likely to have financial problems if you're out of work for two years.

I don't mean to say that these are incredibly uncommon. They aren't, especially in people chasing the startup carrot and ending up with nothing but the brown, sticky bit.

But I think it's fair to say that a large number of people in the profession should have managed to avoid all four. (With #3 being the main 'avoidable' culprit, and with #4 being largely unavoidable.)

Consider that somehow, people making less than a quarter of our prevailing wages manage to live... Fairly comfortably.

by vkou

6/5/2026 at 8:21:59 PM

Yes, I guess investments, etc., but 1.5 years is a long time.

I don't think I could go more than 2-3 months. Maybe I should start saving some money.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:39:19 PM

Location matters a LOT.

The parent comment mentioned North America. This is huge. Tech salaries in Europe are half what they are in NA. In India, they're like 1/4 to 1/3.

Saving is absolutely important, especially in such a layoff-ridden industry. You should really strive to get at least 6 months of living expenses into savings.

by Sohcahtoa82

6/5/2026 at 11:30:38 PM

>In India, they're like 1/4 to 1/3.

My company pays 10k a year for an Indian contractor, full time. I don't know what their agency pays them, but it can't be even 1/4 of a typical NA SWE salary. More like 1/12th.

by happytoexplain

6/6/2026 at 9:22:44 AM

Most of Europe has social security and reasonable health care. Cities even have working transit systems. Living costs are massively different. I expect the costs in India will also be.

Not that it means you'll be raking in a lot of surplus money, but that's also not directly tied to the size of your salary.

by a96

6/5/2026 at 9:42:58 PM

I know but there's always something shiny that keeps me away from that goal.

But I keep reading about people getting fired because of AI and every time I do I get progressively more anxious and closer to getting start on that.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 7:56:01 PM

Dude. You are marketable as fuck.

Don’t live in the hype. Not everyone is drinking the ai cool-aid bottoms up.

What do you mean by fastapi being a mistake ?

by joss82

6/5/2026 at 7:51:34 PM

Write a script that tidies up and fixes everything in a repo.

by hyperhello

6/5/2026 at 8:01:32 PM

[dead]

by benjiro3000

6/5/2026 at 7:15:14 PM

It’s just business.

If you’re new to it, it might be a shock.

If it’s not to your taste you might look for work in an industry that matches your values such as social services or environment.

by andrewstuart

6/5/2026 at 7:58:43 PM

That's no panacea. I worked for a social service non-profit for years. Yes, some stuff was better, there were still tons of issues.

by TylerE

6/5/2026 at 7:52:05 PM

No, it’s capitalism. You don’t have to do business in a specific industry to do it in a humane manner.

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 7:59:36 PM

You haven't lived in a communist country nor visited any communist country, I see...

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 8:16:18 PM

It's too bad those are the only two sides to the binary of political ideology!

by magguzu

6/5/2026 at 9:01:35 PM

What are other economic systems..?

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:14:43 PM

You haven't ever studied logic, I see. Look up "false dichotomy" to start with.

by antonvs

6/5/2026 at 9:16:33 PM

I'm a high school dropout.

What are other economic systems..? Nobody seems to be able to answer, I would be happy to look them up to learn more about them.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 10:23:03 PM

Capitalism brooks no competition. You won’t find another economic system to study that isn’t markedly worse.

Look into what the Blackfoot Indians were doing. Their lifestyle inspired Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs — though he gets it pretty wrong IMO.

But here’s the thing: the Blackfoot didn’t really have an economic system divorced from other systems. It was all part of a whole that valued people and made sure everyone had what they needed.

Now here’s the kicker: Its my belief their society was based on spreading abundance. Whereas Capitalism is based on spreading scarcity.

by Henchman21

6/5/2026 at 10:30:33 PM

OK, so there's capitalism, socialism, communism can't really exist, and then the Blackfoot Indians..?

by altern8

6/6/2026 at 12:54:50 AM

You asked for a thing to research. So go do that and report back. Maybe it’s bullshit. Maybe you’ll do some research, be inspired, and change the whole world.

I dunno. I’m not an economist… have you asked an economist?

Edited to add: hey I found a use for AI; here’s a prompt for your favorite model:

“What economic systems have humans devised over the course of recorded history?”

by Henchman21

6/6/2026 at 7:26:49 AM

I did.

You implied in your first comment that being against capitalism didn't mean being in favor or socialism, but it is because they're the only modern economic systems.

So, I guess I can keep going without changing my mind.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 8:15:02 PM

I grew up in ESSR or as it was known locally ENSV. Replying to any criticism of capitalism with an immediate “so you want communism” without even a stopover in complaining about socialism is quite something.

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 8:21:08 PM

What do you want, then?

Isn't there capitalism, socialism--which is what people are actually talking about when they talk about communism, and then communism which will never exist?

What were you referring to?

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 8:34:15 PM

Not to sound like a hippie but we could just try to be a bit kinder to each other and not put money as the single most important thing above all else. You can run a business to make money AND do it in a way that leaves our world in a slightly better state than you found it.

It’s not a black and white choice of either we jump hardcore into capitalism or all the other way into socialism.

Similarly to OP I work at a company that has a certain set of core values and the moment they have changed irreversibly I am gone out the door.

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 8:42:57 PM

So you're talking about a set of values, not the economic system. The "capitalism" mention was bit of a non-sequitur, then.

by internet2000

6/5/2026 at 8:52:41 PM

Yes, exactly.

Which is good, I can't figure out how anybody can see the government owning everything as a good thing for anyone.

If you just look at postal services across the world, as an example, or anything else run by government, they're 100 times less efficient then competitors and their workers always look like they're super-miserable. Imagine if that was the only option.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:21:13 PM

Less efficient or less profitable? Also I'm gonna need to see some references for those claims in your last paragraph.

Funnily enough it's the couriers working for the private companies that I see looking more and more dead inside recently.

So, yknow, anecdote for an anecdote.

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 9:33:52 PM

I would say both less efficient and less profitable.

If you're saying FedEx people are also depressed, then maybe it's just delivering boxes that's the problem?

But I think it's pretty safe to say that there is nobody more pissed off than post office workers. Are they nice in Estonia? Luckily I do most stuff online nowadays but when I have to go to the post office it's always an awful experience.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:42:40 PM

I would say it's more likely that the hours and wages are the problem.

A few grumpy delivery workers aside, most people in Estonia are nice in general. You should come visit :)

I don't know where you are but consider that the reasons your postal workers are pissed of may go deeper than simply being government employed. Could it be your state-owned services are being managed in way that makes their workers unhappy because they are run by people who think that government services even need to be profitable in the first place?

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 10:16:14 PM

I'm in Poland, but I'm from Italy and I've lived in the U.S. for a few years. Worst post offices in Italy by far, but Poland and U.S. pretty similar.

Other low-paying jobs don't seem to generate the same amount of unhappiness.

I have no idea what the reason is, to me it's just that governments can't do anything right because they're too big with no oversight.

That's why I was complaining about socialism, anywhere I've been where the government runs more than just post offices it was hell.

In Poland, all these Soviet buildings and if you look at old pictures of people standing for hours in queues for bread. Truly horrific. I was recently in Cuba and even if they can't talk about it many people told me they would flee right away if they could, but the government doesn't give them passports. Socialism destroys everything.

by altern8

6/6/2026 at 1:39:27 AM

Source on 'poorly paid'? In the US starting salary for a USPS carrier is $24/hr. FexEx starting pay is $17/hr.

by TylerE

6/6/2026 at 1:38:06 AM

If you're talking about the US, you're glossing over a couple of really important points. The USPS is required to provide universal service. I'm sure providing service to NYC and SF is extremely profitable, and providing service to rural Iowa where the cows outnumber the humans 100:1 isn't. USPS doesn't get to pick and choose.

FedEx and UPS do... and in fact in those rural communities often uses the USPS for last mile service.

by TylerE

6/5/2026 at 8:49:40 PM

Well all the things OP complained about are inherently caused by capitalism but I think it’s probably possible to engage in capitalism in a way that is cognizant of those issues and actively trying to avoid them instead of treating them as eh that’s just how business is done

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 8:54:35 PM

Then I'd suggest, in good faith, avoiding the "Ugh, capitalism" framing in the future. That just comes across as lazy, which doesn't help your point. As exemplified by the replies you got, all arguing about words.

https://www.persuasion.community/p/ugh-capitalism

by internet2000

6/5/2026 at 9:14:30 PM

I admit I could've probably used more words but when someone says "it's just business" that is a clear example of how the particular flavor of capitalism we live under has enabled and indeed encourages brushing away any moral and ethical qualms as "it's just business" and as you say, it was quite interesting to see how many people immediately jumped to dictionaries, communism, and whatever else the moment capitalism was criticized.

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 8:48:08 PM

Capitalism is a moral framework as much as it is an economic system, especially in the US where it is deeply entangled in the Protestant work ethic and prosperity gospel ideals.

by krapp

6/5/2026 at 8:58:55 PM

Is that in any dictionary, though? Capitalism means capitalism, free market with citizens owning companies.

If it's deeply entangled in the Protestant work ethic and prosperity gospel ideals in the U.S., then what's bad is the Protestant work ethic and prosperity gospel--whatever that might be.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:07:51 PM

Capitalism is what capitalism does. Name one "capitalist" economy strictly and exclusively defined by a "free market with citizens owning companies." None. There are no free markets. Governments always own some interest in companies, regulate and interfere in markets. Culture and morality always influence class and power hierarchies, and by extension economic systems. The real world is more complex than dictionary definitions allow.

by krapp

6/5/2026 at 9:30:55 PM

Right, I agree that governments should stay out of people's business.

If you're saying that governments always mess with the free market, then I guess we're in socialist-capitalist economic systems..? Still better than just socialist.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:35:35 PM

If your definition of capitalism requires pure free markets, and you consider any regulation of markets by government to be socialism, then yes all existing economic systems are socialist and no capitalist systems exist.

Personally I don't find a framework so reductionist that it considers the USSR and the US to be equivalent to be very useful.

by krapp

6/5/2026 at 8:48:03 PM

I'm not following you. Capitalism just means free market. Private individuals own the companies instead of the government, and they do that with the main goal of making money.

I can't figure out why that must necessarily mean that those companies can't leave the world in a slightly better place. A LOT of them do, specially small businesses.

I've seen the destruction that socialist governments left even after decades and I went to Cuba and other socialist countries and the government treats them like literal slaves and life is shit over there, with no way out.

Anyways, I know of capitalism, socialism, and communism. I just wanted to see if you meant another form that I wasn't aware of.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:01:39 PM

Sure, as a theory capitalism is just a free market but I obviously mean capitalism as it exists today and shapes our entire world. And socialism has it's own can of worms, sure.

But what I was responding to in particular with my original comment was the parent commenters claim that "It’s just business" and that engaging in capitalism means you must inherently engage in the practices the OP was complaining about.

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 9:13:45 PM

They didn't mention capitalism, "it's just business" just means that's how it goes.

If the government owned the company OP works at, it would still be "just business" according to the commenter.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 9:26:20 PM

Sure, because that's not all it means. "It's just business" is the excuse people tell themselves to justify the things they do.

by pebble

6/5/2026 at 8:12:41 PM

You haven't looked up what "capitalism" or "communism" is nor considered the possibility of other alternative economic systems, I see...

by DonaldPShimoda

6/5/2026 at 8:56:02 PM

I have. What are other options?

Capitalism, socialism (what people refer to as communism), and then communism which will never exist because it always stops with the government stealing everything and not wanting to give up power to move on to communism.

What are other economic systems? Not saying there aren't any other ones, I just don't know.

by altern8

6/5/2026 at 8:14:10 PM

No, it's communism when you hurt a capitalists feeling. That has always been the definition, especially when it comes to enforcement.

by shimman

6/5/2026 at 7:58:18 PM

"Humane" treatment of workers under socialism is far worse.

Repeatedly, around the world.

No, this time will not be different.

by rdbl27

6/6/2026 at 6:44:06 AM

Do you mean socialism, or communism?

Because socialism has definitely not been "far worse". Cooperatives and employee owned businesses can be great for workers and incentivises them to work towards investing in their work without the rent seeking C levels.

by happymellon

6/5/2026 at 8:07:41 PM

The problem is the existence of money and hierarchy to reinforce class strata

by Henchman21

6/5/2026 at 7:51:39 PM

These are just category errors masquerading as morality.

by nh23423fefe

6/5/2026 at 8:01:15 PM

> They're taking away our perks bit by bit, like remote office and working without having to clock in and out.

So tired of elites complaining about totally normal working practices in every other workplace on earth. Oh no you have to come to the office and you have to clock in. Join the club with the rest of us. Your McDonald's fry cook has to come to work & clock in, so should you.

by appreciatorBus

6/5/2026 at 8:10:20 PM

I think we should improve working conditions for everyone, not make them worse for everyone.

by pesus

6/5/2026 at 8:38:08 PM

How is being asked to show up and clock in making things worse?

by appreciatorBus

6/5/2026 at 8:46:54 PM

At a minimum any commute is extra unpaid time you have to spend for no benefit. For many people where I live, commutes can be an hour or more each way.

by mjamesaustin

6/5/2026 at 9:58:08 PM

We should abolish zoning so that people can live closer to work.

by appreciatorBus

6/6/2026 at 3:19:49 AM

Ok great, now let's talk about the real world we currently live in

by eudamoniac

6/5/2026 at 8:43:40 PM

Full-time, white collar workers generally are not expected to "clock in" in the United States. It's why certain employees are legally exempt from overtime pay.

To ask exempt employees to clock in and out demonstrates that management doesn't trust its employees, which is a failure on the part of hiring/management, not the workers.

by reaperducer

6/5/2026 at 9:45:01 PM

Individuals making 3x the national median income are not "workers" by any definition. They are a part of the elite, top 10% of society. They will survive!

by appreciatorBus

6/5/2026 at 8:18:02 PM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

This is the poison that kills entire societies.

by happytoexplain

6/5/2026 at 8:10:36 PM

Yeah, the other complaints are valid but complaining about punching in? I don't see how that's an issue.

by NDlurker

6/5/2026 at 8:27:45 PM

Clocking in and out serves little purpose if you're salaried.

by wl

6/5/2026 at 8:35:55 PM

Might be needed if your salary expense has to be charged back to various internal accounts or to external clients. My first job was salaried, but I had to fill out a time sheet so clients could be billed.

by SoftTalker

6/5/2026 at 8:46:58 PM

Filling out a time sheet and clocking in and out are two different things.

I have to fill in a time sheet, but I never ever clock in and out.

If someone clocks in and out, they don't need a timesheet. It's automatically recorded.

by reaperducer

6/6/2026 at 12:54:54 AM

I don't even fill out a timesheet; they just pay me. It was kind of shocking at first when my manager told me there wouldn't be any sort of time tracking.

by NDlurker

6/6/2026 at 9:31:08 AM

One would hope it's automatic, but no. There may be two or three sets of books you need to fill in many places.

by a96

6/5/2026 at 8:33:22 PM

A remote worker who hates McDonald's in 2026 is an "elite"?

by sublinear

6/5/2026 at 8:42:44 PM

If they're on Hacker News, there's a good chance they've never made less than a six figure salary in their entire life, which would certainly place them in the upper 5% of wealth globally. So while it isn't a certain bet it is a safe bet.

And if it doesn't apply to you, it doesn't apply to you. There are plenty of people here it does apply to.

by krapp

6/5/2026 at 9:10:55 PM

Yeah... that's 1 in 20? The smart kid in the back of the class grew up? I'm not sure who you were expecting that person to become.

If the barrier to becoming an "elite" is that low and you still consider 6-figures a meaningful benchmark in a world that sells big macs for 10 bucks, are you also calling anyone running even a modestly successful small business "elite"?

I'm not even sure I'm engaging with a meaningful political statement here. The barriers to this level of "success" are more reliably psychological, not systemic. You're basically upset at anyone with a career. There are definitely things we need to do to help those struggling, but yelling here is slacktivism.

by sublinear

6/5/2026 at 9:18:13 PM

Yes. Having more wealth than the vast majority of people makes you an elite.

I don't know why you think making a 100k or higher salary is just "Big Mac money," but you're either larping or exactly the kind of out of touch I'm talking about.

by krapp

6/5/2026 at 9:48:05 PM

Exactly. Median income in the US like 50k. For the HN folk (including me) who make more than that, I'm very happy for you, but please stop pretending you are part of the downtrodden, oppressed proletariat. Be happy for your lot in life, but for the love of god find a way to be humble. Consider yourself lucky, enjoy your time in the sun, but no one is oppressing you by asking you to come to the office.

by appreciatorBus

6/5/2026 at 8:18:16 PM

Ressentiment is a deep-seated state of impotence and people like you aren't even worth a shred of pity.

by plastic-enjoyer

6/5/2026 at 8:37:41 PM

> Ressentiment: A chronic, festering state of mind. It is a lasting mental attitude where the suppressed emotions of envy and spite continually replay in the mind, leading to a general, cynical worldview.

lol not even close. I have a positive outlook and think the world can be a better place. I just think that world will involve most people working together in workspaces and clocking in. There will always be some professions & situations where that's not the right call but I have no reason to believe SW dev will always be one of them.

by appreciatorBus

6/5/2026 at 9:16:25 PM

> Your McDonald's fry cook has to come to work & clock in, so should you.

Haha fuck you, no. That's your choice, don't put it on the rest of us.

by antonvs