What are some modern bullshit jobs?
Jobs that either don't contribute in any meaningful way or jobs where one would be better off if they were paid to be on call.
Jobs that either don't contribute in any meaningful way or jobs where one would be better off if they were paid to be on call.
If your job main tool is PowerPoint then there's a high probability that your job is a bullshit job.
Cries in teacher
Teachers' jobs are anything but bullshit. However, the modern schooling system sucks, teachers shouldn't be doing/have to do what they currently do.
anything related to planning, creation and targeting of ads
Influencers... Do I really need to say anything else?
They really should be making like $50k/year max.
It's basically modelling. With the same spread of poorly paid to insanely paid for no good reason.
Influencers in the modern age are competing for advertiser attention.
well they just got out of the rat race too well
not exactly what you're asking, but banks and insurance companies are the majority of what I call "the beaurocracy of money". they don't produce anything of value, and are basically just a sinkhole for labour.
I hate capitalism as much as the next lemming but banks and insurance companies, at their base level, definitely provides a service. Banks help you spread the cost of things over time at the expense of interest, and insurance companies do something similar with risk.
Its only when they do warped shit like lend money at zero interest or force consumers to pay for insurance (thereby negating the need to be competitive) that they start to leech off the system.
I would distinguish between providing a service & creating value. the service that banks and insurance provide is useful, but only in the context of a money-centric society. they don't create anything that has a purpose deprived of context, it's only the moving around of numbers.
But we do live in a currency-based society. That's like saying food only has value in the context of a chemical-energy based society. It's a pointless semantic argument here.
perhaps it is, but I'm not convinced. if food, eating, whatever were an unnecessary and wasteful system then the growing of food and processing, production, etc would likewise be a waste of resources, human labour included. a lot of our work does go towards food production, supply, processing, etc - if you could switch to an alternate system that dispensed with food but didn't otherwise alter our lives, that would surely be massively preferable. it's hard to imagine because eating is such a fundamental need, but that's just a limitation of this comparison.
if we could dispense with money but otherwise have society look much the same (or better, which I think it undoubtedly would be), that would be an improvement, to me, just by virtue of freeing up the labour of all the people who work solely in the overhead of the system. to imagine how else we might function as a society, I think it's useful to identify ways in which the present system is inefficient.
...but we can't, so what's the point
Administration in general. There are so many jobs in (public and private) administration whose entire job is, to fill out forms or write reports, that nobody will ever read.
The same is true for countless middlemanager positions. It's not a full-time job to manage 10 employees who are not directly working with you. No idea how this is called in other countries, but in Germany we call it Matrixorganisation, and it's often as absurd as it sounds.
I'm in administration and part of my job is filling out forms and reports that no-one will ever need unless there's a problem in which case they become very important indeed.
In today's business environment we tend to forget that redundancy = resilience.
I'm in the digitalisation part of administration. And I'm certainly handling a ton of processes that are not redundant, but plain useless.
Do you believe in unfettered free markets? Those jobs are very often to implement compliance to restrictions in the markets.
No, they are not.
They are often enough purely internal documents or remnants of old days, where certain documents were actually important, maybe.
Depends on the industry. If literally everyone just always documented everything, my job would be much easier.
The company I work for now has very much this attitude for the last 50 years.
As a result they have 3 locations, no sops, and no accountability.
Over the last 6 months is been my job to put us back in compliance with local and federal reporting requirements and develop SOPs. The feedback from the bottom up is that it's wonderful to have consistency, different bosses giving the same answers to questions, auditors being able to complete audits in expected and appropriate times, and in compliance with reporting regulations.
Can companies go overboard and employ people like me who do busy unnecessary work? Absolutely. But it is definitely appropriate to have a couple of administrators.
Rules and procedures are always a trade-off. However, I would argue that the vast majority of organizations have way too many of them and produces way too much busy work.
Just look at your own example - I'm 90% sure, that the different locations did have procedures and did document stuff, just not in a consistent way. So their documentation was scattered and their reports practically useless.
Huh? I can go almost anywhere in the world and wave my phone at a register and take whatever I want home. Without a bank Id have to carry a lot of everywhere.
No. No you wouldnât. We donât need banks to implement the concept of currency in a society and youâre myopic for not understanding that but instead pretending to be some sort of authority on the matter.
đ uh huh. I prefer a currency backed by something with some longevity and not petted by grifters who keep getting arrested for fraud over and over again, or hacked and cleaned out with little to no recourse.
Regardless, banks arenât âworthlessâ at all.
I think of this in the context of healthcare constantly
I'm no economist, but banks are pretty useful from how I understand it. Lending out money people don't use is like creating money out of thin air. Helps people buy houses and everything. I tried looking for the video I saw on this topic, it's something like "how banks create money out of thin air".
Most CEOs.
If you can be the CEO of multiple companies at the same time, then you're probably not doing much in that position.
How else are your kids friends going to fail upwards and support 4+ kids?
A lot of expensive business consulting (think PwC or Deloitte) exists just to tell organizations things the orgs already know.
They exist to take the blame. âPwC says we have to close down the plant, those damn bean counters!â - CEO who told PwC she wants to close down the plant
In fairness, some companies, especially the big ones, won't accept a hard truth until a third party agency tells them directly. This is primarily because the grunts of the workforce often have the most knowledge of the systems but whose opinions are easy to dismiss.
People I know who work in consulting have said they charge an outrageous amount of money to speak to factory line workers and say what they've said to the factory managers because the managers are too up themselves to do it
That's basically all Gordon Ramsay did on Kitchen Nightmares and Hotel Hell. The only time I can remember that it wasn't because the owners or management weren't listening to their workers, the problem was a 21 year old kid that BS'ed his way into a head chef position, who had no business being a head chef. The episode ended with the kid being fired, cause he couldn't manage to maintain a clean kitchen.
This is because their execs are overpaid idiots who are on this list of people who should just stay home.
The workers might know, but the executives would rather pay millions so a big name can tell them.
Because they are connected to them. This is what happened with Toys R US. Bain Capital bought control and made the company hire consultants from Bain Capital.
Tax prep software companies and tax prep services in general.
Yep.
Government already knows everything you owe.
They just cant tell you
Cause Tax prep lobbying said it would be unfair to their business.
So you gotta play the whole complicated game of figuring out your taxes, because H&R Cock wants your refund.
Lol it's so funny how many bad takes there are in this thread. But saying that the government knows everything g you owe is one of the worst one.
No they fucking don't. Sometimes they aren't even sure that someone who got both his legs cut off needs disability, or that they can't regrow their legs.
Or that a dead person can't have a job.
Like, there are plenty of independent contractors and businesses that need to report their income, ecause how the fuck would they know that ?
I get that there are a lot of people with special types of jobs where their specific financial circumstances or the way they earn money is unusual. In that regard, I get why those people need to file their taxes.
But what about the remaining vast majority of people with standard jobs? The government absolutely does know how much I make and it makes zero sense for us to have to fill out a bunch of paperwork and not make a mistake on something that the government already knows the right answer to.
The entirety of the health insurance industry
I like how an annual doctor's visit and a biannual dental cleaning are supposed to be 100% covered by insurance.
But every time I go, I get a bill later on with the explanation that "the provider is asking for too much money for the services so we are refusing to pay the full amount". Fuck off. That's not how that's supposed to work.
health insurance provides a legitimate service to society. not a bullshit job. i get you have political motives to project but it's not a bullshit job.
If by "job" you mean being a middle man sucking money and effectiveness from people and getting in the way of actual health care, then I agree. It's a "job" in that people show up and get paid, but it's 100% a bullshit job.
Exactly! Apparently being irritated by being directly affected by this bullshit this is a political agenda? đ¤Ł
Flash traders.
They abuse the technologies used by the stockmarket to buy and sell within milliseconds, so they can make a profit. They add absolutely nothing of value to the system, yet leech both money and talented employees from the market.
God I wish they would tax trades. Not even much. Like 1,000 trades for a dollar or something. Just to stop that type of fuckery.
Not at all. They are the ones who make markets efficient. Although I would consider frontrunning retail using private order flow data is bullshit.
They provide liquidity and price stability.
No, the opposite of that.
My apartment complex uses a package delivery service that basically acts as a middle man to receive your packages and deliver it to you. They use contractors who pick up packages from their warehouse and deliver them door-to-door. As expected, it's common for packages to get lost/stolen. Instead of getting your package on the date/time promised, you have to wait several more hours for it to actually arrive. If it gets to the warehouse late in the afternoon, you'll get it the next day. If you have Amazon next-day delivery, you essentially negate it with this service. If you're expecting perishable items, good luck getting it fresh. If your package is large or heavy, you'll have to wait several days as they only deliver oversized packages on specific days. All these are mandatory with a fee ranging from $10 to $30 on top of rent.
Now, that, is a postage tax.
Anybody want to bet someone in the building administration is in bed with this company?
So the rumor is the owner is related to one of the big apartment companies, that's why the service is being pushed hard to a lot of apartment complexes in my city.
M I D D L E
M A N A G E R S
This is the real reason why companies are trying so desperately to camcel WFH. Covid revealed the truth (that we knew all along) that these people add no actual value to a company. They're only there to act as a buffer between the C-suite and the peasants.
Managers of people can be good.
Managers of managers are almost always useless.
how are you connecting cancelling of WFH to middle managers ?
Also in your ideal company you don't have team leads department heads but peasants talk to CEOs directly ?
Found the middle manager
haha no right now I am peasant class.
Worker owned cooperatives, worker managed teams, company decisions made democratically.
All other kinds of companies are dictatorships.
and why should that be any better? just because it appears democratic does not mean it makes it automatically "better" <- name 1 cooperation which has shown success for every 1000 "dictatorships"
democracies are plagued with slow reaction time which would take away your entire market edge. Also democries require transparency. If everyone knows the costing structure/ suppliers... you are done.
"Why would having a say in making decisions about your employment be any better than just doing whatever the richest idiot says?"
Do you even hear yourself? They've got you loving the taste of boot polish.
go freelance. you don't have to. since your consider yourself smarter than your boss try starting a business.
it's a trade off between income fluctuation and stability.
since you didn't address any of my points but chose to just respond with random statements, I take it you were convinced but too ingrained with your original statement to admit. It's fine happens to many of us.
glad to have helped you thinking critically.
Why would we be done? Most of this stuff is public record or easy to determine if you have a head for business finance.
not really.. even for publically traded companies the you cannot tell much about their suppliers and customers. Most of the customers of the Firm I work for have NDAs stating we cannot openly advertise.
Only in services/tech sector where product differentiation is large you are a bit isolated form these concerns.
Oh please my competitors are often using the same suppliers and they have the same type of beancounters we have. Especially in my industry where we have a bunch of overlap. Just recently I had a corporate partner put together a quote for something we normally buy but wanted them to buy it. They came back with a price within a few percent of what we normally pay.
There is a reason why the three letter agencies are so good at catching money laundering. They have data on what X type of business should be buying and selling at what markup.
I bet you can do it. Just start looking at your numbers.
so you agree that numbers aren't currently in the public domain. You just think they can be and it wouldn't hurt.
Also this isn't the only problem I outlined. it's one of them.
also people are often disinterested and unqualified to even understand a balance sheet. let alone deciding on company direction.
I just find it fascinating that many people are convinced that they can run a company while they aren't even able to manage their own finances
This is a very important role in some companies, otherwise the C suite meddling would stop any work from getting done.
I've had two excellent managers and both of them saw their primary purpose as being a bullshit filter to free up the rest of us to do actual work.
That is a good point actually.
I am just thinking of my job. The client wants something stupid, I have to pick and choose my battles. When it comes time for me to hand over to fabrication I get yelled at. Never mind the fact that what the fabrication manager sees is the aftermath of my work. They had say 13 bad ideas and I got it reduced to say 6.
Real estate agents
Yes! It shouldn't be difficult to purchase a house, but when we were looking, none of the seller agents would even talk to us until we had a buyers agent đ
Years ago my dad was fed up with realtors and you couldn't list a property for sale without a realtor license. So he figured it's probably as easy as it seems, seeing how many airhead realtors he'd met. He was right. He read a book and then went and passed the exam to get licensed. Sold his own property himself and never used the license again.
Absolute madlad
Wow I didn't know this. How fucking stupid. Why is there this for a house but I can sell anything else
The agent we have used for several houses has been indispensable. He got us into our current house before it was listed, and before that he knew all the issues with every house we looked at because he's been in the area for so long. You may have had bad agents, but some of them are really good at their jobs and add quite a bit of value.
In property markets where prices are reasonable they can be alright, but up here in Toronto where detached houses go for 3 million plus, there's just too much incentive for greedy parasites
Anyone who earns any portion of income by hanging shit on my doorknob.
Anything in the online sports betting space. Addicts, scumbags, degenerates, and the people who make money off them.
Anybody working in SEO / "search engine optimisation." Complete bottomfeeding scumfuck grift. The only reason it's not considered fraud is because the government hasn't caught up to it yet.
I'm learning web design, and one of those topics I need to learn is SEO so the websites I make rank higher. While I don't like the idea of "gaming the system" to rank higher, it kind of becomes a necessity when everyone does it. What for you makes it such a scummy business?
Because of AI, SEO it's likely to disappear along with search engines. People will just ask AI instead of using Google or Bing.
I'll take the bait a little. I will help small businesses out of SEO holes from time to time. My friends' business was really stuck, and often you just need an outside eye to point out some obvious things: their home page was a splash screen with no text, they didn't use the most-searched terms in their headings, they were using text-on-imagd with no alt text.
As, generally, it's agreed we need businesses to have a society (somewhat unfortunately), and businesses need the internet to function nowadays (mixed blessing), I don't think it's necessarily bad to help the smaller guys succeed.
Landlord
Not a job
It's like calling shareholder a job.
Its a crime imao
But their money is at risk! đą
I don't know why people are so insistent it's not a job rather than arguing that it's a bad job, etc. Small landlords almost certainly put a lot of time into maintaining the property, handling occupancy, reporting income, etc. How is it any less a job than renting out bouncy houses. Sure some landlords might outsource all this, in which case it's more akin to holding interest bearing assets, but for a small landlord it almost certainly is a job under any definition of the word.
Small landlords put in a lot of time?
How much would you say? My job takes 37 hours a week.
Is a job a job only if it takes a certain amount of hours a week? dumb comment tbh
But to answer the question my friend who owns 2 properties spends probably anywhere from 10-30 hours a week. He mows the grass, takes trash to the dump, makes repairs himself, etc.
Pull the other one mate.
If a landlord is providing services like mowing the lawn and taking rubbish out etc, you can damn well guarantee that they're charging extra for those services.
You honestly believe a landlord spends 15 hours per week maintaining a property? At that point, you'd be exceeding by far your tenants right to a reasonable expectation of privacy, so are you really that gullible or are you just on some really good shit? You've clearly never rented a property yourself.
He does not charge extra for those services. Idk what you are on about, I know for a fact maintaining his property takes a decent amount of work. I don't respect some internet nobody telling me that isn't true lol. 15 hours is not that much time.
Landlords the worst
Influencers?
Health insurance agent, health insurance CEO, health insurance board member, etc
Scrum master
Mine rocks out with his cock out. I get a little annoyed with him constantly pressing us to find better ways of working, when we're already the #1 team.
But still, the man really knows his shit and has turned a lot of things around for the company. He's a good person to approach when you're having a problem, of just about any sort.
OTOH, before we had him, we were floundering around trying to play agile and not actually accomplishing anything.
The way I learned agile scrum master was a role that everyone on the team rotated through, not a specific person.
It can definitely be/is a dedicated role. A useful one too, though not always...
Never met a scrum master yet who was actually a driven motivated individual. Its almost like it's a default job you just fall into if there's nothing else for you
I've seen at least two SMs who were really motivated and they can actually be a tremendous help.
My last project was complete chaos, and that one lone SM managed to get it all streamlined and efficient. Then he was pulled from the project and everything collapsed again.
99% of middle management could have been automated away a decade ago
This is the first correct answer that I came across in this entire thread.... Ugh..
Life coach
Honestly, can just be a different form of therapy. Worked with one in conjunction with a therapist through a service provided by my medical insurance.
The therapist was completely useless. The life coach had me questioning the way I thought about things, and got me to seriously reevaluate the ways I caused myself stress. All she did was ask questions, but they got me to see things differently. Helped a lot.
Money managers, financial management. Yeah, they make sense in capitalism but they really don't produce anything tangible.
I think 'producing something tangible' is hardly a fair metric.
A therapist doesn't produce something tangible, but many of them provide value to their clients.
A guitar teacher (or any teacher for that matter) doesn't produce something tangible either, but they again provide value.
If the business is to produce educated people. Teachers provide the core benefit.. and pretty measurable.
It's when there's a teacher with 7 line managers that are just have meetings to talk about the teachers "output" that causes the problem.
Yeah but those aren't groups I have to deal with unless I choose to. You really can't get around the financial system. It's not like I can take a 100 bucks and walk up to say a gas station and say "1 share please". And before you say Robinhood keep in mind that you don't actually own those stocks, they own them and you are just "managing it".
I'll agree to that but still wish we didn't have a "need" for finance people.
What does Atwater make?
What do you mean, like, how much money does the company make?
Oh, no, I mean what do we make?
I don't follow. We make money.
No, I know we make money. I mean, what do we create?
We create wealth.
No, no, I mean, what do we build, what do we design, you know? Because I have some ideas that could really help the company.
Charlie, Charlie, Charlie, we don't build anything.
The financial industry is, ostensibly, about connecting people that need money to people that have more than they need. In practice it's about skimming from the top of EVERYTHING in society.
I mean most are just greedy cuz the field attracts those kind of people. You'd be surprised how many people have next to no financial literacy and a GOOD financial expert can do legitimate good for these people.
I did say it makes sense in capitalism. I too pay to use one. I'd like a world without them.
They provide plebs access to the complicated world of finance and pass on some of the yield. I think that's valuable.
Any job can be a bullshit job actually. But for me:
"Consultant" in IT is often enough a fancier sounding title for "rentable body". You're basically working as a contractor of some sort, but officially you're a consultant.
Bankers. Specifically, the high up mega bankers.
Also politicians.
As evidence I present the Irish Bank Strike:
That is so cool. Thank you for sharing it.
It reminds me of what makes me continue to be bearish on BitCoin.
I worked at a pretty advanced technical place, with a woman, let's call her Janet.
If the system misplaced 2 cents, Janet would hunt you down and make you find it.
All that tech could melt down tomorrow, and I would still do business there, as long as Janet was there.
If the entire world economy collapses, I will still bank with Janet.
If Janet is using pen and paper, I trust that's good enough for me. If Janet is using one massive Excel file, fine by me. If Janet starts accepting payment in weirdly shaped rocks, I will accept weirdly shaped rocks as payment, too.
And when Janet adopts BitCoin, then I'll be all-in on BitCoin.
This is the sauce- 12 weeks without banks in a high trust community, what happened? Thanks!
GNOME Foundation names "professional shaman" as new executive director
That's kind of a two-fer right there.
Middle management
Diversity and Inclusion Officer
I dunno. There's an inclusion officer at my kids school who's sole role is to make sure kids get the help that they need to not get left behind academically. They don't have "Diversity" in their title, so it may not be demographic driven which I'm guessing is the distinction.
They mean the C-Suite "position" that changes absolutely nothing about inclusion or diversity in the company.
Very controversial statement but really couldn't be more true. Of course there might be exceptions but most of the time it's a cushy job where you are paid exorbitant amounts to do practically nothing of value.
This is an interesting one that I hadn't thought of before. I think the same could probably be said for any sort of corporate job where you're coming up with stupid corporate nonsense speak. Like whoever's job it is that's seems to come.up with a million pointless acronyms for a company that they share with new employees at orientation for some reason.
Diversity and etc. is no doubt important, but should be strived for as a group.
Corporate communications / public relations
They've largely subverted the occasionally useful profession of journalism. There's a big difference between researching things your audience wants to know, and asking someone with a commercial agenda what they'd like to tell your audience.
Politicians
We could very easily vote on most issues ourselves using the wide array of technology at our fingertips, with a similar or possible better sense of security than what politicians currently provide.
But the only way for that to happen is for politicians to make it happen, and who would vote to eliminate their own job? No one.
Well, the second problem would be figuring out who curates the system. If you've ever voted on a referendum you'll probably know what I'm talking about. You can make any proposal sound awesome/horrible if you leave out the right details.
If you've ever organized to resist a referendum you've probably also experienced the "we'll just rephrase this and try again later" effect, wherein special interests just need to stubbornly keep pushing until the opposition voters get sick of participating in the polls.
I don't think these are unsolvable problems, but they do inherently require setting up a representative beaurocracy of unelected technocrats -- an apparent oxymoron. It's gotta be someone's job to run the machine and ideally you want them to be looking out for the people above all else.
So, how to play kingmaker? Well, if we take literal kings & elected representatives off the table, what remains is a model akin to academia, wherein credentials & seniority are prioritized above most else. It's not a bulletproof system (none are), but if you squint hard enough the EU sort of exemplifies what this model could look like -- just replace the delegates with smartphones, essentially.
Who would draft new legislation? I know it's not just politicians that do this but their staff helps a ton. I just don't see a good system of John Everyman drafting a bill that makes sense. That said I would like to see politicians get fixed cause the system is clearly broken.
Hmm... I'm not sure I agree with this completely despite politicians obviously being problematic. At least at its core, the rationale is that the significant majority of people aren't aware enough of all the contentious (or even mundane) issues in society, so we elect people we trust to make our decisions for us. I just checked Canada's recent bills in Parliament, and the voter turnout for something like this would be almost nothing:
Obviously our current system is very easily corruptible and that needs to be addressed, but getting rid of politicians altogether wouldn't necessarily fix our society, despite how terrible they're making it right now.
Politicians
Advertising
Professional athletes.
Professional athletes? Nah. Professional sports team owners on the other hand...
Por quĂŠ no los dos?
Ehh, watching sports is fun (for some people).
Not a bullshit job at all, unless you consider musicians to be a bullshit job too.
"Startup founder"
That depends most startups are shit and fail but they still are useful. But the idea is VCs will just fund thousands of startups in hopes one is a unicorn and actually has a product worth selling.
But the founder is expected to use capital they don't have to fund the business until it is attractive to people with capital. They are expected to market the product without marketing experience. They are expected to negotiate with people who are negotiating from a position of strength and who has much more experience. They are expected to be personally attractive to get interest from VCs. After they have gotten traction they are expected to be "coachable" and follow the advice of advisors that up until now have not been involved in the growth of the company.
The ecosystem is broken. Founders rarely get funding and when they do they end up losing most of the business they built. VCs are getting very few positive results.
If big VC firms were losing money in terms of net total they wouldn't exist. Albeit most of them define success as being acquired by a big company like Google. As for independent VCs most of them are probably wasting heaps of money and just following the hype.
not a bullshit job either. being a successful startup founder is one of the most stressful and hard working jobs out there.
Stressful, expensive, hard working and statistically unproductive.
Exorcist
Oh, yeah, they're bullshit right up until the moment you need them...
Legion told me youâd say that. I mean, nuh-uh.
It depends on what you mean by "contribute". Most of the jobs right now don't contribute to nothing if not maintain the (zombie) capitalism system.
Some local governments have rules that X must be done by someone in that area. Usually the mayor's nephew. To get around it they are made into a rep for the company that does the actual work. No value whatsoever to the project, the users, or the taxpayer.
Mod for any website
Therapists used to be the most helpful thing in the world (or so I've heard), now they're so unhelpful they have to rely on the state to get us to use them and have so many different indie-based projects and programs competing with them, like BetterTherapy (which isn't bad tbh). The old joke is they're paid friends but now I see they're just paid, you could be in a genuine situation where something obliterates the quality of your life (e.g. custody battles) and they'll be like "does lithium sound good" (which by the way, lithium is outdated by two thousand years, so if it's recommended right away to you, run). The reason they're not set up like lawyers where you only pay them "if you win" is because they know this would destroy them.
I fear the medical profession is also going down this path.
Government and lawsuits are totally regulating everyone to death. Doctors used to be knowledgeable and creative (and they still are) and had the freedom to prescribe whatever they thought would be the best.
Now, they can only follow conventional wisdom and the exact recommendations of the regulators. If they deviate just a little to find the perfect fit for your case, they risk themselves and their livelihoods.
It's primarily private insurance (at least in the US) that drives that. The doctor can prescribe something and then a "doctor" who works for the insurance company can take a 10 second look at it and deny it outright in favor of a more profitable treatment.
When it comes to costs, yes, but there is also another angle.
Sometimes doctors will prescribe expensive, patented drugs when cheaper, better, out-of-patent alternatives exist.
This is not to the benefit of the insurance companies.
Rather the pharma industry and regulators act in a concentrated rap battle: the regulator covers their ass by only approving in accordance with the latest, most comprehensive studies ("evidence based practice") and the pharma industry only bankrolls new studies on their most profitable medications.
Nine out of ten doctors are great.
The regulations exist because of the tenth doctor.
The problem with that thinking is that it also applies to patients in a different way:
9 out of 10 patients fit the 90% confidence interval.
And the tenth patient gets told to F off, because the scientific consensus does not cover their situation.
Department of social services workers.. Their job really doesn't help anybody, and it would be a better usage of tax payer dollars to have a UBI.
The entire defense industry.
Yeah as is evident in Ukraine
Moron
Yeah because we would definitely be motivated to manufacture fucking Hellfire missiles and landmines without the pressures of global capitalism... /s
Like I get it, getting rid of the defense industry â getting rid of war, but it would be a much more daunting task to wage war if we didn't have fucking weapons factories.
Reddit mod.
But on the other hand the employment criteria is just to be mentally challenged.
People get paid for that?
Yes, actually despite claiming to be volunteers, mods of large communities on reddit are frequently offered decent sums of money for going along with shilling/advertising. Thatâs why many tried to become mods of hundreds of major subs, not for âpowerâ.
I'm a mod of a few I helped form and nobody's ever told me about any monetary benefit. How does one apply?
I mean the default subs that have millions of subscribers. Your subs look great topic-wise, but they have like 50 people so I don't think you're going to get ad offers yet.
Most people don't run into any issues with mods online. If you're constantly running into "asshole" authority figures in online communities it might be you...
Nah reddit mods are actually awful. I would tend to agree with you if it were a bunch of random mod teams but reddit is almost entirely controlled by a small group of powermods who get off on flexing their minute amount of power on an internet discussion forum. Truly awful people who contribute nothing to society by taking over small communities so they can use their power to indiscriminately ban people they disagree with.
The only incentive to become a reddit powermod is power.
Sometimes, sure. But with ~15 years on reddit I have run into some power-tripping mods before... /r/portland, for example - I mainly agree with their politics but when I didn't they'd delete all of my posts and then shadowban me. Not allowed to disagree.
Try to open a controversial topic, let's say CCP or other heated sub reddit, Even when non political, mods straight power tripping when you ask serious questions.
But I think this is a reference for an old thread of "my wife think being a mod is not a real job"