The 5 year plan to £50k - Accomplished.

[Nix]

No one said it was a level playing field., time and time again people have pointed out things like country or birth and parents have huge impacts on your life but you seem to ignore these comments and keep reiterating that everything afterwards is down to chance. Even with a bad start in life there are many life decisions that will dictate your future.

Where have I said everything is down to chance? I've not once said that. I've explained over and over that it's the other side to the same coin. We have self-determination but we are never in complete control. It will only ever get you so far.

I agree with being able to spot the options e.g. night-school. BUT being able to action them can largely be a factor of chance and circumstance which is what I'm trying to explain which seems to keep being willfully missed.

Nothing is permanent however, and it may be case of exercising patience and utilising options at a later date (agency).

That however, would obviously mean being behind a person would didn't have setbacks. Thus, that is the luck of the draw. Nothing to do with will or action.

For those unwilling but able to take risk, then yes that doesn't have anything to do with chance. That's a lack of agency.

Agreed, you can't decide to become a millionaire but you are endlessly making decisions that improves your odds of living a happy and successful life, or increasing finances.

We seem to agree on the fundamentals here, I'm a little lost why there's so much hair splitting.

To make it clear: I am not over subscribing chance or giving up my agency to it. I have merely recognised it. We are but dogs on a rolling cart (and no, there isn't a way off because that would mean death). We go where fate and chance take us, but we have choice and direction within those bounds.

Luck and self-determination are two sides of the same coin.

You very much can make your own luck by pulling your socks up, but that doesn't mean that you are in control.

 

[Robosapien]

I think you need to step back, read the entire thread and then come back. I have never said you can control everything or that luck doesn't have influence....

The pattern I always see with these threads, is that the people who are not where they want to be in life seem to place too much emphasis on it being down to "bad luck". It seems an easy and suitably intangible thing to blame, I guess...

I'm not pointing the finger at luck or control as intangible entities.

I'm pointing the finger at external factors, verifiable and obvious things, like recession, number of unemployed, social mobility indicators, etc. Things that heavily imply a flawed economic system that doesn't work in everyone's favour. It doesn't take a genius to look at the big picture and work out that not everyone is going to make it to where they want to be by simply adopting a PMA.

If you seriously think these type of large scale economic problems are down to people having a 'bad attitude' or moping around blaming their 'bad luck' instead of trying to work towards something better, then you're deluded.

 

[Judgeneo]

You make your own luck

Well, not really as life is generally beyond your control.

"You modify your own probabilities" is more accurate, but not quite as catchy. Can anyone think of something better?

 

[Robosapien]

You make your own luck

Well, not really as life is generally beyond your control.

"You modify your own probabilities" is more accurate, but not quite as catchy. Can anyone think of something better?

"Life is pain."

 

[Nitefly]

You make your own luck

Well, not really as life is generally beyond your control.

"You modify your own probabilities" is more accurate, but not quite as catchy. Can anyone think of something better?

"Life is like a game of poker - you can't control the hands you are dealt, but whatever the odds, you can go bust on pocket rockets or win big on a 2 7."

 

[Housey]

I'm not pointing the finger at luck or control as intangible entities.

I'm pointing the finger at external factors, verifiable and obvious things, like recession, number of unemployed, social mobility indicators, etc. Things that heavily imply a flawed economic system that doesn't work in everyone's favour. It doesn't take a genius to look at the big picture and work out that not everyone is going to make it to where they want to be by simply adopting a PMA.

If you seriously think these type of large scale economic problems are down to people having a 'bad attitude' or moping around blaming their 'bad luck' instead of trying to work towards something better, then you're deluded.

You are making a statement, not debating the discussion at hand I suggest. No one is arguing with the point you are making. As I have said 100438084903890328490238490289023849023 times on this forum, life is not black and white, it has many themes, many trends, many influences. BUT there are also traits that are common and THAT is the point at hand.

If the economy collapses and 60% of the industries we all work for close then of course there is little the 60% can do to foresee, plan around or make good in the short term. However, 12 months down the line you will have people moaning about their luck and others talking about their new career path. Not everyone can win, many don't have the aptitude, inclination, luck or ability, but acknowledge that fact and don't blame the world is the GENERAL point here.

 

[Jono8]

. Not everyone can win, many don't have the aptitude, inclination, luck or ability, but acknowledge that fact and don't blame the world is the GENERAL point here.

But the point he is making is that there will be just as many WITH the aptitude, inclination, luck or ability that won't be as successful as those with the same amount of aptitude, inclination, luck or ability, because.....life.

It is a hard subject for people to argue over as it is going to be extremely rare for someone who is successful to admit that it was due to luck or that they didn't work all that hard for it. To look at this objectively is an extremely hard thing to do.

Yes, there are a lot of people that just feel sorry for themselves and probably do only have themselves to blame, but there will also be a huge amount of people who have done everything right, worked their asses off but still not got to where they should be in life or in their career.

Best thing is to look at how it is represented in satire/comedy which is written by successful people. The Simpsons Frank Grimes episode for one .

 

[Richdog]

Someone didn't read the thread.

I think he did... or do you think yours are the only posts he is going to read before forming an opinion?

 

[toshj]

With regards to job searching/being hired, there's a severely limiting attitude fostered by many people in this country which involves clicking a left mouse button and then waiting for a response.

If, for instance, you're unhappy in your current role and applying to many advertisements without any positive response, then you're clearly doing it wrong.

- You're CV isn't right
- You're applying for jobs you don't have the required experience/skills for
- You're trying to jump from A to C without having worked at B
- You're applying for an oversubscribed role in a competitive market and your candidacy isn't standing out - this is particularly common, and one of my biggest frustration hearing about friends who are suitable for a position but aren't hearing back from HR/recruiters, yet doing nothing to counter this.

There are various ways around these issues, it's just that a great deal of people would rather send off a CV, wait for an answer and then complain about bad luck when they don't hear back. If you haven't hear anything back after a few days (from a recruiter) or a week (from an HR department), then get on the phone to them and highlight your candidacy. People think it's bad luck that they're not being offered roles/interviews for which they've applied, but it's normally just a case that there are other candidates who've prepared a better CV or picked up the phone/sent a LinkedIn message/etc. and got themselves noticed. If you've hammered out your CV to 50 positions without positive response, then doing the same to another 50 won't likely yield any better results.

Before I decided to go it alone, I interviewed at 3 places last summer. None of the opportunities had been advertised or listed anywhere, it was just a case of me putting in a bit of endeavour to get myself noticed.

Whilst "you make your own luck" is often thrown around, I agree more with "the harder I work, the luckier I get". The same applies to the effort you put in once you've started a role, as well as initially getting interviewed and hired.

 

[Nix]

I think he did... or do you think yours are the only posts he is going to read before forming an opinion?

I think you've got an axe to grind, personally.

 

[subbytna]

Earning 50k automatically means you "live to work" and have no free time or social life? Another classic and ultimately ignorant line.

Ultimately ignorant? Haha


Who licked the cream off your bun?

^was that line any better?^

You don't get 50k job and have little responsibility...unless you're a banker. Just because my opinion doesn't match some perceived utopian way of looking at life like you do, doesn't make it a wrong or bad opinion.

 

[Robosapien]

With regards to job searching/being hired, there's a severely limiting attitude fostered by many people in this country which involves clicking a left mouse button and then waiting for a response.

If, for instance, you're unhappy in your current role and applying to many advertisements without any positive response, then you're clearly doing it wrong.

- You're CV isn't right
- You're applying for jobs you don't have the required experience/skills for
- You're trying to jump from A to C without having worked at B
- You're applying for an oversubscribed role in a competitive market and your candidacy isn't standing out - this is particularly common, and one of my biggest frustration hearing about friends who are suitable for a position but aren't hearing back from HR/recruiters, yet doing nothing to counter this.

There are various ways around these issues, it's just that a great deal of people would rather send off a CV, wait for an answer and then complain about bad luck when they don't hear back. If you haven't hear anything back after a few days (from a recruiter) or a week (from an HR department), then get on the phone to them and highlight your candidacy. People think it's bad luck that they're not being offered roles/interviews for which they've applied, but it's normally just a case that there are other candidates who've prepared a better CV or picked up the phone/sent a LinkedIn message/etc. and got themselves noticed. If you've hammered out your CV to 50 positions without positive response, then doing the same to another 50 won't likely yield any better results.

Before I decided to go it alone, I interviewed at 3 places last summer. None of the opportunities had been advertised or listed anywhere, it was just a case of me putting in a bit of endeavour to get myself noticed.

Whilst "you make your own luck" is often thrown around, I agree more with "the harder I work, the luckier I get". The same applies to the effort you put in once you've started a role, as well as initially getting interviewed and hired.

That's great advice, but again looking at the big picture - people aren't unemployed because they aren't trying hard enough, vacancies get filled. The problem is that there aren't enough vacancies to accommodate everyone. Number of applicants per role has increased since recession.

 

[HangTime]

Having responsibility and having free time / social life are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Richdog]

Ultimately ignorant? Haha


Who licked the cream off your bun?

^was that line any better?^

You don't get 50k job and have little responsibility...unless you're a banker. Just because my opinion doesn't match some perceived utopian way of looking at life like you do, doesn't make it a wrong or bad opinion.

Yes, ignorance, likely because you have never been in the situation. Having a 50k job does not by an stretch mean that you have no work life balance. I speak from experience, and I know many people who are on similar money. Of course we have free time, and even more, we have the money to enjoy our free time and do things that wouldn't be possible on a lower salary.

Responsibility does not equal no free time or no social life, and to think otherwise is just patently false. Many people work like crazy on very low paid jobs without the mental stimulation or satisfaction granted by more intellectually stimulating work... now it's those people I feel for.

 

[HangTime]

That's great advice, but again looking at the big picture - people aren't unemployed because they aren't trying hard enough, vacancies get filled. The problem is that there aren't enough vacancies to accommodate everyone. Number of applicants per role has increased since recession.

I think his point is that if 'you' are persistently failing to get a positive response to applications then you need to be more competitive. Even if there are not enough vacancies to accommodate everyone, more people get responses than there are vacancies (i.e. multiple people interviewed for a single position).

If people are genuinely doing everything they can, being right at the top of their game, perfect CV, putting themselves out there to be noticed etc, and they STILL aren't getting any sort of response, then what that tells me is that they are not, in fact, unlucky. They just simply aren't good enough relative to the competition and should change their expectations.

I've been brushed aside for jobs in the past I'm confident I could have done with my eyes closed (basic admin jobs paying well under £20k). That doesn't necessarily mean I was unlucky, just that either I did not present myself in the best way, or there was some other reason why other candidates were deemed better than me.

That said, I do think that there is an element of 'luck' (I use the word loosely) when it comes to personality fit at interview. I have noticed that sometimes I will hit it off with an interviewer and other times feel awkward. One could argue that that is down to poor preparation, but the trouble is you cannot be sure what the interviewers will be like from a personality standpoint in advance. Some might also argue that if you have a bad personality fit at interview, then you probably aren't the best choice for the job anyway, but I think that places too much emphasis on individuals rather than the team as a whole (just because you get on with an interviewer like a house on fire, doesn't mean you won't clash with others in the team, and vice-versa).

 

[Robosapien]

I think his point is that if 'you' are persistently failing to get a positive response to applications then you need to be more competitive. Even if there are not enough vacancies to accommodate everyone, more people get responses than there are vacancies (i.e. multiple people interviewed for a single position).

If people are genuinely doing everything they can, being right at the top of their game, perfect CV, putting themselves out there to be noticed etc, and they STILL aren't getting any sort of response, then what that tells me is that they are not, in fact, unlucky. They just simply aren't good enough relative to the competition and should change their expectations.

I've been brushed aside for jobs in the past I'm confident I could have done with my eyes closed (basic admin jobs paying well under £20k). That doesn't necessarily mean I was unlucky, just that either I did not present myself in the best way, or there was some other reason why other candidates were deemed better than me.

That said, I do think that there is an element of 'luck' (I use the word loosely) when it comes to personality fit at interview. I have noticed that sometimes I will hit it off with an interviewer and other times feel awkward. One could argue that that is down to poor preparation, but the trouble is you cannot be sure what the interviewers will be like from a personality standpoint in advance. Some might also argue that if you have a bad personality fit at interview, then you probably aren't the best choice for the job anyway, but I think that places too much emphasis on individuals rather than the team as a whole (just because you get on with an interviewer like a house on fire, doesn't mean you won't clash with others in the team, and vice-versa).

That's exactly my point, his advice is just about beating someone else to get the job. How does that resolve anything? It still means that you can point the finger at someone and say 'Your CV wasn't up to scratch, you didn't try hard enough, you have a poor attitude, you can't blame the world for not having enough jobs to go round.'

'The interview' has always seemed like a poor way to assess suitability or competency to me. A short presentation = hire the best actors/liars.

 

[Nix]

Just to point out:

If you're not the best candidate for the job, yet manage to beat others to the punch then clearly that's well-employed agency, but also luck (well-timed, etc.)!

 

[Housey]

But the point he is making is that there will be just as many WITH the aptitude, inclination, luck or ability that won't be as successful as those with the same amount of aptitude, inclination, luck or ability, because.....life.

It is a hard subject for people to argue over as it is going to be extremely rare for someone who is successful to admit that it was due to luck or that they didn't work all that hard for it. To look at this objectively is an extremely hard thing to do.

Yes, there are a lot of people that just feel sorry for themselves and probably do only have themselves to blame, but there will also be a huge amount of people who have done everything right, worked their asses off but still not got to where they should be in life or in their career.

Best thing is to look at how it is represented in satire/comedy which is written by successful people. The Simpsons Frank Grimes episode for one .

But I disagree with your premise as that again isn't the basis of my argument. To be clear, in my experience the people most vocal about the luck of others and their own bad luck are those who often should look in the mirror. It is interesting that older people agree with that in this thread more than younger people it would seem and I find that interesting as it again points to experience.

 

[Bear]

Things like this annoy me.

I've been utterly ****ing miserable in my job enduring all manner of abuse, harassment and shame whilst working my nuts off, yet I'm barely off of minimum wage.

Crock of ****.

It is a very sad state of affairs but unfortunately the lower paid you are, the more you are treated like **** in my experience. I don't know why people do it, its pretty much adding insult to injury.

 

[Jono8]

It is interesting that older people agree with that in this thread more than younger people it would seem and I find that interesting as it again points to experience.

The older people with good jobs that deem themselves a success...yes. My point exactly.