China's Millennials Are Hustling For Part-Time Gigs Instead of Traditional Jobs (bloomberg.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China's Millennials Are Hustling For Part-Time Gigs Instead of Traditional Jobs (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on Tuesday February 21, 2017 @03:20AM from the story-of-their-lives dept.

Bloomberg has a report today in which it underscores a growing trend among millennials in China who are looking for part-time jobs. From the article: Hopping from one short-term stint to another isn't the sort of aspiration an earlier generation had in China, where the middle-class dream has long been university degrees followed by a stable job -- preferably one backed by the government. In a 2016 poll of 13,000 college students, 48 percent said they didn't want to enter the traditional labor market. Hardly any of these part-time jobs pay well, but it doesn't matter to millennials. The report adds: "The money is little," Zhang Chen, a 21-year-old accounting student said of the short gig that pays about 240 yuan ($35). "But I want a more interesting life." Chen was lined up for the work through DouMi, a startup that focuses exclusively on part-time positions and blends elements of a temp agency with an internet jobs board and marketing service. For around 130 yuan a day, DouMi users can sort crates of milk at a supermarket or hand out pamphlets on frozen sidewalks. Those considered "beautiful women," and between the ages of 18 and 28, can make four times as much plus tips by working as live-streaming models to keep mostly-male viewers entertained. Many of the roles run for mere days or weeks at a time, a flexibility that suits those juggling social lives and university studies. "Every month we have between 300,000 and 400,000 jobs," said Chief Executive Officer Zhao Shiyong.

147 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Once you take away the need for FT benefits by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 03:31 · Score: 0

Once you take away the need to work FT to get benefits like health care & such, Its much smarter to have 2 PT jobs than 1 FT.
That way when you get laid off, you only lose half your income.
1. Re:Once you take away the need for FT benefits by Qzukk · 2017-02-21 05:37 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Dunno where you work, but around these parts all the part time jobs are scheduled by the week, and half of them will fire you if you can't show up in 30 minutes when they call you in for the lunch rush or inventory night. Oh, you're at your other job? Oh your other job wants you from 11-2PM next week too? Tough shit, but hey, you only lose half your income.
  
  --
  If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
2. Re:Once you take away the need for FT benefits by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 09:29 · Score: 0
  
  Its not that hard to juggle actually. One PT job is a day job & the other is a night job & if you want, a third can be the weekend job. They wont conflict that much. Also let your bosses know that whichever job pays better will get the priority. They'll understand & if not, you dont want to work for them anyway.
3. Re:Once you take away the need for FT benefits by chihowa · 2017-02-22 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  So the management just gets to offload the responsibility for its own incompetence onto the worker? It's clearly way too hard to anticipate the lunch rush or inventory night more than 30 minutes in advance!
  
  --
  If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Beware the gig economy... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 03:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

...and demand full time employment.
The gig economy is an extension of the reduce all costs, regardless of longterm impacts mentality that has brought us off-shoring, temp workers and the destruction of the middle class and the safety nets of retirement benefits.
It is one more step down the short road that leads is to eating tasty soylent green while pedaling a stationary bike for electricity and dreaming of actually holding a grapefruit
1. Re:Beware the gig economy... by GameboyRMH · 2017-02-21 06:10 · Score: 1
  
  I think this short road is leading to either a global French Revolution 2.0 or killbot-powered genocide against the 99%.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
2. Re:Beware the gig economy... by ShanghaiBill · 2017-02-21 06:26 · Score: 2
  
  ...and demand full time employment.
  How does one "demand" full time employment? Can I demand that you provide me with a full time job?
  The root problem is that we have pushed more and more social responsibilities and costs onto employers. If I hire someone to drive a truck, why should I suddenly be responsible for his medical care? If most people swap jobs every few years, does it really make sense for employers to be responsible for their retirement savings?
  In Maoist China, each factory ran a school for the children of their workers. If you changed jobs, your kids had to switch to a different school. That seems crazy, but employer provided medical care, and changing doctors when you change jobs, is just as silly. The only difference is that we are used to it.
3. Re: Beware the gig economy... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 07:37 · Score: 0
  
  If I hire someone to drive a truck, why should I suddenly be responsible for his medical care?
  Typical American mentality.
  They are people just like you and me. Not servants that you can dispose of when they suddenly become ill. You have an incentive to ensure their health stays well, so they can continue working for you, making you money.
  Unfortunately employers with your mindset are the norm, and it's damaging to society. If you're not willing to pay them enough to provide their own care, then yes, you should have to provide them with medical insurance.
4. Re: Beware the gig economy... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:23 · Score: 0
  
  This person, like most business-people in America have been tainted by the ideas of Milton Friedman and the corruption of ethics that he promoted.
  Basically, the idea is that their only ethic is to deliver 'shareholder value' (in a short-term quarterly sense with no eye to the long-term) and the only thing that will dissuade them from short-term cost-cutting mentality is a huge public outcry that costs them money, or fines and legal fees tthat cist them money, or a should say more money than they are saving with their insane cost cutting ideas.
  In the pursuit of this free market wonderland, they have propagandized Americans to cheer for things like hurt them (like gig work, dissolving unions, etc...) and they have bought the government so that they do nto face any fines or legal fees that could actually make them lose money
  just sayin
5. Re:Beware the gig economy... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:36 · Score: 0
  
  ... changing doctors when you change jobs ...
  
  The USA talks about small government and free markets a lot but it just demands the employer provide socialist infrastructure instead.
  
  ... be responsible for their retirement savings?
  
  Only when the employer feels like it: If the business is sold or bankrupted, it becomes their money again. Making the employer responsible for retirement and healthcare looks nearly-socialist but it's really another way to privatize profits and socialize expenses; this time with the employee's money.
6. Re:Beware the gig economy... by AthanasiusKircher · 2017-02-21 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  If most people swap jobs every few years, does it really make sense for employers to be responsible for their retirement savings?
  I have to agree with you that the whole "mandatory retirement contribution" thing is pretty much just an annoyance for all concerned today. I understand the rationale for it (because most people are incapable of long-term planning), but it's a terrible idea for people who are in jobs for a short term and need to deal with all sorts of different retirement accounts spread out in various systems.
  When I was younger, I took a few short-term jobs and once worked as a state employee for a couple years. In all of these I was required to make mandatory "contributions" out of my pay toward retirement accounts. Well, with the state employee system, I was told when I left that I didn't have enough years to qualify for a pension, so unless I returned to the system, my account would accrue interest for 5 years, after which it would become dormant. I could withdraw the money and put it in an IRA or something at any time, but by doing so, I would forfeit the years of experience I had accrued in the system.
  Anyhow, at first I wanted to keep options open, so I didn't withdraw immediately. And then the interest rates the account was paying was pretty good compared to how things were going in the market at the time, so I figured I'd just withdraw after the 5 years. Well, after 5 years, I contacted them, and the money was GONE. Turns out they changed the policy since I was employed, and rather making accounts just dormant after 5 years, you were summarily deleted from the system, and all of your retirement money was forfeited and returned to the state pension pool.
  Next, I had a very short-term gig (actually indirectly for a different state government) and was again required to contribute mandatory retirement. In this case, it was only a few hundred dollars, but they didn't really notify me of all the details, so I wasn't even aware of this balance or where it went. A couple years later, I had moved, but they decided to send my money to some 3rd-party account management service, which charged a $15/month fee to hold my money. I wasn't aware of any of this (because I had moved and wasn't even really aware that I was owed benefits) until the 3rd-party company finally located me and sent me a statement that this account was being closed, since my balance had fallen to $12 (all the rest had gone to fees), and they could no longer maintain it... so they literally sent me a check for $12 after taking all the rest of my retirement money.
  I'm currently fighting to get another small amount out of such a 3rd-party company because of other retirement benefits I wasn't even made aware of for a short-term contractual position nearly a decade ago.
  Cumulatively, all of the money I've lost isn't that much compared to my main retirement savings, but it's preposterous that people all the time are making forced contributions to retirement accounts for short-term employment -- sometimes where they're not even told clearly that they even are being given those benefits other than on an unclear line on a paystub -- and then having to jump through hoops to track down or keep that money, and then deal with the hassle of moving it to other accounts.
7. Re:Beware the gig economy... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 09:36 · Score: 0
  
  but it's a terrible idea for people who are in jobs for a short term and need to deal with all sorts of different retirement accounts spread out in various systems.
  Bollocks. Countries with superannuation schemes give you two options: (1) employers are required by law to pay into superannuation schemes of the employee's choosing (i.e.: one account) or (2) superannuation schemes are required to support free lump-sum rollovers into other schemes (i.e.: merge into one account).
I hate euphemisms.... by ewhenn · 2017-02-21 03:43 · Score: 3, Insightful

I hate euphemisms, and "gig" is just a euphemism for day laborer. We've been down that path before, is this really what we want to go back to?
1. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 03:45 · Score: 0
  
  Some people do. Hence the article. What is your problem with it?
2. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 03:48 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is that once the "gig" path becomes commonplace, companies will expect it and we will gradually shift to a mostly gig economy. Those of us with real jobs paying actual salaries with real benefits stand to lose because of your shortsightedness.
3. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by DontBeAMoran · 2017-02-21 03:49 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  What's a part-time gig anyway? It's only 1000MB some of the time?
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
4. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 03:55 · Score: 0
  
  No company is going to replace valuable employees with "gig" workers. Gig workers are for interchangeable jobs, like drivers, etc that require little training.
5. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 04:07 · Score: 2
  
  Those of us with real jobs paying actual salaries with real benefits stand to lose because of your shortsightedness.
  I've had some IT support contracts (gigs?) that paid better than what the full-time employees made. After I ran into a former coworker at a job interview, I turned down the job offer because my hourly rate was 80% greater than his for doing the same job. Those 2% raises over nine years don't add up to much.
6. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by geekmux · 2017-02-21 04:10 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Some people do. Hence the article. What is your problem with it?
  Let me know how "interesting" a Millennial's life becomes when their gig job doesn't pay medial or dental benefits, and an accident happens.
  How exactly is a gig economy going to provide benefits for things like starting a family. How will that family cope when tragedy strikes as no life insurance benefit is offered.
  The "gig" economy is a bullshit attempt to glamorize and hide the real issue, which is a population outpacing the availability stable employment that provides necessary benefits. And as the parent pointed it, this bullshit is a slippery slope we don't want.
  Instability should never be viewed as a good thing.
7. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by unixisc · 2017-02-21 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  This story is about the Chinese, so is that what you mean by 'we'?
8. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Samantha+Wright · 2017-02-21 04:17 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The supreme irony is that "job" used to mean a form of employment that was exactly that. Perhaps it's merely cyclical.
  
  --
  Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
9. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Samantha+Wright · 2017-02-21 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  There was a similar article last summer about Americans.
  
  --
  Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
10. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by ninjabus · 2017-02-21 04:30 · Score: 2
  
  It's just cognitive dissonance. If you're young and everyone you know can't find stable employment it's very easy to write it off as something that you weren't seeking out to begin with.
11. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:30 · Score: 0
  
  Some people do. Hence the article.
  Maybe it beats breaking your back in the fields or assembling iPhones until you get the urge to throw yourself off the roof.
  However even when I was young I wanted nothing to do with "hustling" and such. Hated shift-work as well. Give me a steady routine that pays well anytime.
12. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:38 · Score: 0
  
  It is fashionable to promote the 'struggles' of millennials across the globe. This study was done in China, sure, but the same story is repeated every month in a new city/country.
  Young arrivals to the job scene are apparently 'praised' for finding immediate work doing whatever they can, as fast as they can. In other words what many people across history everywhere have done until they're more secure in a career. The nickname changed though, from side-work, to gig, to self-employed, to hustle. So apparently that makes pursuing prosperity & making a niche for oneself is now a new thing.
13. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:51 · Score: 0
  
  Exactly this. I go out hourly at 3x my previous full-time salary hourly rate (roughly $300/hr). You want my skills on demand without vacation/sick/medical/whatever, that's what it costs. I go in, work hard, solve the problem, and clear out. My average job duration is less than 80 hours. Last year I worked roughly 1/4 time (600 or so hours over the year), made a fine salary, had an awesome quality of life. But this isn't what the article is talking about at all - these are non-skill jobs which are broken up somehow to be less than full time. I mean, certainly the supermarket needs boxes unpacked full-time, but by breaking it up into "gigs" they can pay someone a small hourly rate to unpack milk for four hours without benefits. That's a terrible race to the bottom.
14. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by Opportunist · 2017-02-21 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  What world do you come from? And, more important, how do I get there?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
15. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by AthanasiusKircher · 2017-02-21 04:54 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The "gig" economy is a bullshit attempt to glamorize and hide the real issue, which is a population outpacing the availability stable employment that provides necessary benefits.
  In some cases, this is being driven by population vs. employment. But in many cases, simple greed is a major contributing factor. It's so much cheaper to operate a business with a bunch of part-time workers. Many businesses would prefer it, if they could get away with it.
  
  Instability should never be viewed as a good thing.
  Yeah, unfortunately most folks in the past couple generations never had to see what the "gig" economies of the past were actually like. Back when you'd go to your local town square or down to the docks or whatever, and stand in line waiting for some potential employer to choose you for work FOR THE DAY. And then you'd break your back doing labor for the day, make enough money to feed your kids, and you'd be off again begging for work the next morning. If you hurt your back or got sick or whatever, you and your family were screwed. End of story.
  This was what employment was like for LOTS of people for millennia. Skilled workers like craftsmen could sometimes get more stable jobs, because their skills increased the productivity of the business and employers recognized that.
  But for laborer jobs or other things you could likely be trained to do in an hour or two? Not so much. And that's what many modern "gig economy" employers are exploiting again -- can you drive a car? Fine: you're a part-time Uber driver. Be sure to show up on time and be pleasant enough to keep the high ratings, or you won't have a job tomorrow.
  Lots of people today criticize unions (sometimes rightly) for corruption, etc. But what unions fought so hard for for a century or so was to finally get modern civilization out of that and recognize that even laborers and unskilled workers deserve to be treated with dignity in their jobs, rather than discarded at the end of the day.
  But no more -- I'm frankly shocked at how many younger folks seem brainwashed by all the hooplah over the supposed benefits of the "gig economy." People who know anything about history, on the other hand, see this as exactly what it is: an opportunity for businesses to return to a model where they make greater profits and don't have any obligations to their workers beyond today.
16. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by geekmux · 2017-02-21 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  Oh look. Another person who thinks they should run other peoples lives. How original. These people seem to like it at this point in their lives. Who are you to tell them any different?
  Given the impacts I've pointed out, I won't have to say a damn word to those who seem to "like" this.
  Life will eventually slap them in the fucking face, as wisdom and experience have taught many.
17. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:55 · Score: 0
  
  That would be a mebigig.
18. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by R3d+M3rcury · 2017-02-21 05:14 · Score: 1
  
  Let me know how "interesting" a Millennial's life becomes when their gig job doesn't pay medial or dental benefits, and an accident happens.
  Well, it depends.
  Remember that this is China. Socialized medicine. So, no, you don't have to worry about medical or dental.
  Here? Might be a bit different--you'd better make sure you can work and still afford your ACA benefits. It's a similar thing with life insurance--if you feel it is important, you buy it.
  The issue is whether or not your "gigs" can provide enough money so that you can afford to buy those things yourself.
19. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 05:24 · Score: 2
  
  I go out hourly at 3x my previous full-time salary hourly rate (roughly $300/hr).
  
  That's consulting work. What I do is virtual ditch digging work that no one else wants to do.
  
  I mean, certainly the supermarket needs boxes unpacked full-time, but by breaking it up into "gigs" they can pay someone a small hourly rate to unpack milk for four hours without benefits.
  I've done plenty of four-hour jobs as a PC disconnect/reconnect technician for a moving company. The client being moved is obligated to pay a minimum of four hours. It takes an hour to disconnect the PCs, two hours for the movers to move stuff, and another hour to reconnect the PCs. While the movers are moving stuff, the PC techs are waiting around and doing nothing.
20. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by JaredOfEuropa · 2017-02-21 05:28 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe the real issue is that things like health and dental insurance are only affordable as benefits of a full time position. At least that seems to be the case in the US. Over here, the health care system suffers from problems similar to the ones in the US, such as the fact that it's being run by an oligopoly of insurance companies, but at least the insurance is affordable and available to everyone, including freelancers or jobless people.
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
21. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by ranton · 2017-02-21 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  Given the impacts I've pointed out, I won't have to say a damn word to those who seem to "like" this.
  Life will eventually slap them in the fucking face, as wisdom and experience have taught many.
  I know plenty of people with wisdom and experience who make a very good living as independent contractors. They have plenty of opportunities to find full time positions but vastly prefer their current arrangement.
  The problems you mention seem to only be the case when current workers are being paid more than the economic value they provide.
  
  --
  -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
22. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:42 · Score: 0
  
  It's that way in the aerospace world. I heard the term migrant aluminum picker in the 80's. As a valuable 'gig' worker, I've survived a few company layoffs where permanent employees did not. I once calculated that I had 20,000 hours of education and experience before I stated. It pays very well. No criminal past, no drugs. Be prepared to work death marches and long hours because that's why they're hiring you. Try to be at the top of your field.
23. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by ranton · 2017-02-21 05:42 · Score: 2
  
  The "gig" economy is a bullshit attempt to glamorize and hide the real issue, which is a population outpacing the availability stable employment that provides necessary benefits. And as the parent pointed it, this bullshit is a slippery slope we don't want.
  Society needs to start coping with the reality you describe instead of pretending we can continue to force employers to pay people more than the economic value they can provide. I for one welcome the gig economy, along with a universal basic income, so we can allow employment opportunities to exist whenever there is a willing employer and employee.
  
  --
  -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
24. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:48 · Score: 0
  
  Foxcon suicide rate was less than that of the general population of the US. Or China. Or most other places.
25. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:48 · Score: 0
  
  What's a part-time gig anyway? It's only 1000MB some of the time?
  Would you prefer 'quantum gig' ?
26. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by ShanghaiBill · 2017-02-21 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  What world do you come from?
  Very few companies use "gig" workers for their core competencies. If an engineer on my team has to stay home with a sick kid, I can't bring in a temp for a few days to replace him. Skilled jobs don't work that way.
  
  And, more important, how do I get there?
  Learn a skill that is not an interchangeable commodity. If you want to be valued you need to offer something that is valuable.
27. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 06:17 · Score: 0
  
  I'd argue this is selection bias. the people who've "made it" stick around, while others continue trying to find something that works for them, and the unsuccessful aren't seen.
  These Chinese kids will eventually be ground down and forced to make hard choices; the sooner they start working for their future the better, however that gets done.
  On the other hand, this article reeks of clickbait...
28. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 06:52 · Score: 1
  
  How exactly is a gig economy going to provide benefits for things like starting a family. How will that family cope when tragedy strikes as no life insurance benefit is offered.
  They don't need to start a family. Families are for people who can afford them. Millennials aren't starting families, so they don't need jobs that provide the luxury of having enough money for one.
  We need to just leave having families to the ultra-rich.
  which is a population outpacing the availability stable employment that provides necessary benefits. And as the parent pointed it, this bullshit is a slippery slope we don't want.
  Just because we want something doesn't mean we can have it. I want a secret lair in a hollowed-out volcano on a remote tropical island, but that doesn't mean I'm going to have it.
  Instability should never be viewed as a good thing.
  It's the best we can do these days. We just need to accept it and get used to it.
29. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 06:55 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, unfortunately most folks in the past couple generations never had to see what the "gig" economies of the past were actually like. Back when you'd go to your local town square or down to the docks or whatever, and stand in line waiting for some potential employer to choose you for work FOR THE DAY. And then you'd break your back doing labor for the day, make enough money to feed your kids, and you'd be off again begging for work the next morning. If you hurt your back or got sick or whatever, you and your family were screwed. End of story.
  This is easily mitigated these days: don't have a family. Now you only have to worry about making enough money for yourself, and saving enough for yourself on days you don't have any work.
30. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by geekmux · 2017-02-21 07:15 · Score: 2
  
  Given the impacts I've pointed out, I won't have to say a damn word to those who seem to "like" this.
  Life will eventually slap them in the fucking face, as wisdom and experience have taught many.
  I know plenty of people with wisdom and experience who make a very good living as independent contractors. They have plenty of opportunities to find full time positions but vastly prefer their current arrangement.
  The problems you mention seem to only be the case when current workers are being paid more than the economic value they provide.
  A life-changing car accident. A cancer diagnosis. A pregnancy. The problems I describe are often in the realm of accidents, which no human can accurately predict when that may happen to them or how often, and have jack shit to do with workers being overvalued. This is also why so many of us value those critical insurance benefits, along with the stability of full-time employment; to not only prepare for when life happens, but also create a career that will hopefully fund the concept of retirement.
  Corporate Greed will certainly prefer a "gig" economy that does not favor being prepared for life, which is the reason we should not let it continue to grow as the preferred economy.
31. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 07:21 · Score: 0
  
  So, your argument boils down to "Human dignity is only available to the highest bidder?"
  That's not even good trolling.
32. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 07:29 · Score: 0
  
  Independent contracting is not "gigging". Gigging in this sense is taking lots of menial jobs to make up for the one full time job. In the vast majority of the cases these people end up with much less money and no stability in their lives at all. They can live great and "free" for a while but it won't take too long before a life incident happens and they have no savings, no insurance or retirement options, or get hung out to dry by their many gig employers.
33. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by geekmux · 2017-02-21 07:39 · Score: 1
  
  How exactly is a gig economy going to provide benefits for things like starting a family. How will that family cope when tragedy strikes as no life insurance benefit is offered.
  They don't need to start a family. Families are for people who can afford them. Millennials aren't starting families, so they don't need jobs that provide the luxury of having enough money for one. We need to just leave having families to the ultra-rich.
  Well, that's certainly a rather fucked argument. With the "hook-up" generation, there certainly is no shortage of sex happening, so unplanned families are going to happen regardless of want or need. Not to mention the Millennials who happen to actually want a family.
  Establishing a retirement plan to fund life after employment or carrying insurance to help pay for the inevitable should never be viewed as a "luxury".
  
  Instability should never be viewed as a good thing.
  It's the best we can do these days. We just need to accept it and get used to it.
  If that is the attitude of tomorrow, then we shouldn't be surprised when slavery becomes legal again in the name of unending Greed that races to establish the worlds first trillionaires.
34. Re: I hate euphemisms.... by Rastl · 2017-02-21 07:52 · Score: 2
  
  The problem is that once the "gig" path becomes commonplace, companies will expect it and we will gradually shift to a mostly gig economy. Those of us with real jobs paying actual salaries with real benefits stand to lose because of your shortsightedness.
  Don't think this won't happen. The city where I grew up had a very large auto manufacturing plant. At the height it was running 3 shifts a day, 7 days a week. But it was bought out and downsized.
  All those sweet union jobs got slashed and suddenly people were scrambling for any work they could get. Employers soon realized they could hire 2 part time people without benefits for far less than 1 full time person with benefits. Since people were taking ANY job this became the model for most businesses that could support it.
  It took at least a decade for things to settle out into a more 'normal' situation where full time jobs were prevalent or at least more common.
35. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by AthanasiusKircher · 2017-02-21 08:02 · Score: 1
  
  This is easily mitigated these days: don't have a family. Now you only have to worry about making enough money for yourself, and saving enough for yourself on days you don't have any work.
  I'm not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic. But if you're serious -- Even assuming you can personally save enough money to avoid begging on the street, you do realize that most people in the world have families whether they like it or not?? E.g., Parents, who might get ill and can't take care of themselves on their own, or even siblings who might end up out of work or whatever. Just because you don't have kids to feed doesn't mean you won't end up with any family obligations to help support. Such situations happen more commonly than you might think, and it can be a significant strain on people who have low incomes.
36. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:09 · Score: 0
  
  The flood of visa and illegal labor into the US isn't helping. Americans used to do the lawnscaping work in the town/state I used to live in, but they were eventually replaced by illegals.
  It'd be nice if some politicians were willing to trade a crackdown on visas/illegals in exchange for worker benefits (more stability and so on).
37. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not talking about specific cases, I'm talking in general: if people, in general, stop having kids, then the stuff mentioned before becomes less of an issue. So that's going to be the general trend for society: not having any kids. Then people won't have to worry much about having siblings to support (more and more people will be only children), and their only worry will be their parents (which may more may not be an issue for some people, depending on their relationship with their parents: i.e., if the parents were shitty to them while growing up, as many parents seem to be, the kids won't bother taking care of them).
  And so, in the end, this whole problem in society will fix itself.
38. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  With the "hook-up" generation, there certainly is no shortage of sex happening, so unplanned families are going to happen regardless of want or need.
  That's factually untrue. Maybe you're unaware, but birth control has been around for at least a half-century now, and abortion is cheap and easily available now (meaning chemical abortions), not to mention "day after pills". Obviously, access might be a problem for poor people, but in general, unplanned families should not be a big problem any more, especially for anyone who can afford birth control.
  So we can leave having families to rich people and the very poor.
  Establishing a retirement plan to fund life after employment or carrying insurance to help pay for the inevitable should never be viewed as a "luxury".
  It shouldn't, in your worldview and opinion, but that's not reality. The reality is that this is how it will be, like it or not. (Note, I never said I thought this was a great way to run a society. But no one asked me on how to run this one.)
  If that is the attitude of tomorrow, then we shouldn't be surprised when slavery becomes legal again in the name of unending Greed that races to establish the worlds first trillionaires.
  I agree completely. I think we shouldn't be surprised when slavery is legalized, and I think it's not unrealistic to envision this.
  I just don't see the point in having rosy, unrealistic and idealistic visions of what the future will be. I think we should be realistic and prepared for what it will really be like. And that's trillionaires and slavery. But don't worry, the problem will correct itself eventually, thanks to an extremely low birthrate.
39. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:42 · Score: 0
  
  You could equally argue that people in those times never had so much access to information and the ability to communicate instantly in various formats with people on that other side of the world. I don't agree with this "gig" economy, but the world has changed at breakneck pace for the last 20 years and old rules may not apply.
40. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by thegarbz · 2017-02-21 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  Let me know how "interesting" a Millennial's life becomes when their gig job doesn't pay medial or dental benefits, and an accident happens.
  In many countries in the world, having a medical issue is not a thing tied to your job. Or your income / ability to pay. If this is your main concern than you have bigger problems in your country than the choice of profession.
41. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 09:23 · Score: 0
  
  Wow, so your solution to this is to end the human race. And you think that parents that people don't want to care for just magically disappear.
42. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by bluegutang · 2017-02-21 09:34 · Score: 1
  
  How exactly is a gig economy going to provide benefits for things like starting a family.
  
  It's not. It won't provide the benefits, and more to the point, it won't provide the economic security that's need to raise a kid and not risk getting thrown out on the street.
  Unsurprisingly, fertility rates have fallen significantly below replacement in both the US and China.
43. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by lucasnate1 · 2017-02-21 10:09 · Score: 1
  
  "day after" pills have a 50% chance of failure
  
  --
  Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
44. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 10:36 · Score: 0
  
  if people, in general, stop having kids, then all our problems are over.
  To summarize the summary of the summary, people are a problem.
45. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by j-beda · 2017-02-21 10:53 · Score: 1
  
  The flood of visa and illegal labor into the US isn't helping. Americans used to do the lawnscaping work in the town/state I used to live in, but they were eventually replaced by illegals.
  It'd be nice if some politicians were willing to trade a crackdown on visas/illegals in exchange for worker benefits (more stability and so on).
  Funny how the same ecconomics seem to be playing out even in those places without "illegals". Perhaps the illegals are not the root cause of the problem?
46. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 11:16 · Score: 0
  
  > gig work is a very good living to anyone worth "economic value"
  No. There are plenty of "worthy" gig workers that aren't making a "very good living".
  Even for the laughable "worthy" metric in your head.
47. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 11:22 · Score: 0
  
  >until they're more secure in a career
  This is the career.
  Therein newthing.
48. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 11:42 · Score: 0
  
  I believe it is more about income distribution than "availability." The businesses that use day laborers often have plenty of revenue to employ full-time workers. They just make more profits when they obtain labor at less cost. It will be the same in China as it has been here. Only China is not as well developed and more volatile. The cultural revolution could easily come back. The Chinese leadership is playing a dangerous game. Chinese labor has been increasing in cost. This structural shift is just a way to get some ground back for the exploitative. The same as it was for the US.
49. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Carewolf · 2017-02-21 11:45 · Score: 2
  
  What's a part-time gig anyway? It's only 1000MB some of the time?
  Yes, they were known a Quantum Fireballs.
50. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by ranton · 2017-02-21 13:45 · Score: 0
  
  A life-changing car accident. A cancer diagnosis. A pregnancy. The problems I describe are often in the realm of accidents, which no human can accurately predict when that may happen to them or how often, and have jack shit to do with workers being overvalued. This is also why so many of us value those critical insurance benefits, along with the stability of full-time employment; to not only prepare for when life happens, but also create a career that will hopefully fund the concept of retirement.
  You can get insurance policies which aren't paid for by your employer. If you are self employed they are also tax deductible, just like they would be for a traditional employer. There are certainly gaps in our current insurance industry, especially for self-employed disability insurance, but a growing independent contractor / gig economy is likely to create a larger market for this kind of product.
  
  --
  -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
51. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by ranton · 2017-02-21 13:47 · Score: 1
  
  > gig work is a very good living to anyone worth "economic value"
  No. There are plenty of "worthy" gig workers that aren't making a "very good living".
  Even for the laughable "worthy" metric in your head.
  Who are you even quoting. I never used the word "worthy" in my post.
  But you seem to be mixing together someone's inherent worth as a human being with their economic value to society. They are often very different, which is why a universal basic income is such an attractive way to close the gap.
  
  --
  -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
52. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Gussington · 2017-02-21 19:11 · Score: 1
  
  The "gig" economy is a bullshit attempt to glamorize and hide the real issue, which is a population outpacing the availability stable employment that provides necessary benefits.
  That's one way to look at it.
  Another way is that automation will make lots of things cheaper and more widely available, so people won't need to work 40hours a week just to eat and put a roof over their head. The 'gig economy' could just a small bump during the transition to what could be the next great epoch in human development.
53. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Gussington · 2017-02-21 19:30 · Score: 1
  
  ...see this as exactly what it is: an opportunity for businesses to return to a model where they make greater profits and don't have any obligations to their workers beyond today.
  This is backwards thinking. I've been a contractor for years, an employer is not my mother. I get paid to do a job then when it's done I find another job. I think you'll find technology is allowing work to shift back to a needs based model, rather than filling the office floor with dead weight who only turn up for their benefits.
  The idea of a permanent job is outdated, the world is moving onwards and upwards and those that adapt quickest will do the best out of it.
54. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by geekmux · 2017-02-22 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  The "gig" economy is a bullshit attempt to glamorize and hide the real issue, which is a population outpacing the availability stable employment that provides necessary benefits.
  That's one way to look at it. Another way is that automation will make lots of things cheaper and more widely available, so people won't need to work 40hours a week just to eat and put a roof over their head. The 'gig economy' could just a small bump during the transition to what could be the next great epoch in human development.
  Unless human development is going to somehow change the pure unadulterated Greed that the 1% demands, the only thing the masses will transition to is Welfare 2.0 on a global scale.
  Costs will not decrease relative to a 20-hour workweek because of Greed, so don't think for a second you'll be afforded a living wage any better than the "gig" economy is providing.
55. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-22 04:53 · Score: 0
  
  You're misdirecting. You've inserted a requisite credential without establishing the actual Scotsman's conditional that qualifies ("worth") it. Without one, even a ditch digging cripple has "economic value" greater than zero.
  And I hope I don't have to refute further nitpicking when I claim that a cripple's ditch digging does not provide a "very good living".
  My next pedantry isn't meant to just be contrary: UBI is a simple (and likely necessary) approach - I don't know about "attractive". I would probably concede "most attractive".
56. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by geekmux · 2017-02-23 04:03 · Score: 1
  
  ...see this as exactly what it is: an opportunity for businesses to return to a model where they make greater profits and don't have any obligations to their workers beyond today.
  This is backwards thinking. I've been a contractor for years, an employer is not my mother. I get paid to do a job then when it's done I find another job. I think you'll find technology is allowing work to shift back to a needs based model, rather than filling the office floor with dead weight who only turn up for their benefits. The idea of a permanent job is outdated, the world is moving onwards and upwards and those that adapt quickest will do the best out of it.
  Automation and AI are going to work to ensure the concept of human employment becomes outdated, so the future will have nothing to do with how humans will "adapt". What will need to adapt quickly is Greed, which is working faster than most assume to create that future. Greed will need to create a stable society that can provide to sustain life and prosperity without humans working for it, while continuing to find ways to motivate humans to learn. When there are no jobs to go off and do, it tends to eradicate the motivation for higher education.
57. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Gussington · 2017-02-24 19:08 · Score: 1
  
  Unless human development is going to somehow change the pure unadulterated Greed that the 1% demands, the only thing the masses will transition to is Welfare 2.0 on a global scale.
  You don't seem to be grasping the concept. The 1%, the greed, and most of the economics are based around a resource scarce model that has existed since time began. All the things you want, food, clothes, a house, toys, all require effort and time to acquire, hence a supply demand force creates greed. In a fully automated society, with free production of everything you need to live, there is no mechanism for greed to wield any power.
  
  Costs will not decrease relative to a 20-hour workweek because of Greed, so don't think for a second you'll be afforded a living wage any better than the "gig" economy is providing.
  Why would I need a wage in a fully automated society? If machines grow food, make clothes, build toys, what purpose is there for money?
  If you want an example of how this might play out, play GTA5 and enable god mode. Once you have unlimited stuff that costs zero to produce, everyone ends up with everything they want or need. Money no longer serves any purpose. Greedy people have the same power as everyone else because there is no scarcity to the things that everyone needs.
58. Re:I hate euphemisms.... by Gussington · 2017-02-24 19:25 · Score: 1
  
  When there are no jobs to go off and do, it tends to eradicate the motivation for higher education.
  Fortunately we already have real world examples to compare. The many examples of elite societies throughout history who do not need to work but choose to educate and entertain themselves make the claim a little shaky
  As someone who doesn't need to work, I prefer this life to the alternative, and I think most others would too.
Seen this before... by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 03:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

I've seen this before in the video game industry. High school graduates pissing their pants to test (not play) video games and get paid for it. Eager beavers willing to work 80 hours a week for months on end. Flash forward years later, they're no longer in the video game industry and realize that all they have accumulated is a bunch of cheap tech toys. Sad.
1. Re:Seen this before... by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  And now they all have government jobs sucking off the teat of the taxpayer?
  Are you referring to the fact that I went back to community college to learn computer programming on a $3,000 tax credit that George W. signed into law after 9/11 to assist people in changing their careers and pay more taxes from earning more money in a new job?
  Or the fact that I got a government IT job that required 20+ years of technical experience to secure the network from users... uh... hackers?
  Or are you in fact being a dick because I have a successful career?
2. Re:Seen this before... by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 04:53 · Score: 2
  
  Yep. Exactly. Gotta love government IT workers!
  I love my government IT job. After years of working for Fortune 500 IT teams, I'm finally working with the best pros in the industry. ;)
3. Re:Seen this before... by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 05:07 · Score: 0
  
  babysitting the president would be a nice gig. enjoy the amex black centurion card that goes with that.
  That responsibility belongs the 4,000+ political appointees that Trump has yet to make to fill out his administration.
4. Re:Seen this before... by swillden · 2017-02-21 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  Yep. Exactly. Gotta love government IT workers!
  I love my government IT job. After years of working for Fortune 500 IT teams, I'm finally working with the best pros in the industry. ;)
  Second best.
  I spent 15 years as a consultant, working with both fortune 500 companies and government agencies. Government agencies tend to have one of two personalities; either they're quite good or they're horribly bad. Sounds like you got into a good one. Corporate IT departments of non-IT companies tend to be more middle of the road, though variance is huge. But the top tier information technology companies tend to have almost uniformly excellent people.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
5. Re:Seen this before... by antdude · 2017-02-21 15:18 · Score: 1
  
  Been there, done that. I'm old now. :(
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by geekmux · 2017-02-21 03:59 · Score: 1

"The money is little...but I want a more interesting life."
While the part-time choice while attending college may be the rather obvious choice due to school demand, I'm wondering about those who are choosing not to seek out stable full-time employment post-graduation. Things like getting married, starting a family, or even moving out from underneath Mom and Dads roof; all of these life events will likely cost more than the average "interesting" salary.
This story seems to glamorize Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting, but perhaps the glamor is hiding the true problem, which hints to a growing shortage of full-time jobs.
1. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by lucasnate1 · 2017-02-21 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  Or maybe, like some people europe and japan, people are becoming less interested in starting a family.
  
  --
  Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
2. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by unixisc · 2017-02-21 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  That makes sense, seeing how one has to struggle to make ends meet even after getting a full education and doing everything right. On top of that, unlike in the past, when marriage was a selfless commitment b/w 2 people, today, financial failure of one spouse is enough to end the marriage. If that's the environment one faces, why would one be remotely interested in bringing into the world people that they'll love, but whose struggle will be even uglier? Humans going extinct would be a better idea as we all automate ourselves out of all jobs
3. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by Nidi62 · 2017-02-21 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  Or maybe, like some people europe and japan, people are becoming less interested in starting a family.
  Which also means they are dooming themselves to a life of nonstop, low paying work. Without families or children, what are all these gig millenials going to do when they get to be 60-70 years old? They won't have anything in savings, no kids to support/take care of them, and the government will be so overburdened it won't be able to do anything either. There's too much focus on the here and now these days, not many in the current generation think about what will happen long term.
  
  --
  The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
4. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  Once upon a time in America, multi-generations — grandparents, mom and dad, kids and baby daddy — living under one roof was considered the norm.
5. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:46 · Score: 0
  
  Actually this was never the norm in America. This was the norm in Europe where overpopulation was an actual problem and land was scarce. In the US with the wide open West and Western expansion it was most definitely not the norm for males to not marry and move out of their parents house wife in tow to greener pastures. At literally no point in US history was this the norm.
6. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 05:04 · Score: 1
  
  At literally no point in US history was this the norm.
  You're wrong. Multigenerational homes were quite common until the 1950's.
  
  In the old days, the old-age assistance problem was not so great so long as most people lived on farms, had big families, and at least some of the children stayed on the farm. It was customary when the old people got too old to do their share of the work they would stay on the farm and the sons or daughters would keep them there in the home. That pattern changed slowly but continuously from the early part of the century as more and more of the young, rural population left the farms. The three generation household (aged parents, children, and grandchildren), perfectly common 50 years ago, had begun to become very rare indeed. By the time people got old, the children had already left and gone to the city. There was no one to take care of them. Hence, an increase in the problem of the needy aged.
  http://users.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/multigenerational.pdf
7. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:22 · Score: 0
  
  This is nonsense. And no stats are actually cited as to how many YOUNG people actually lived like that. What actually happened is that in the old days you had 6 kids and maybe 1 would stay with the parents because they had no options available to them (homely looking woman, semi-autistic, homosexual, etc...) but the other 5 did not. The law of large numbers favored that outcome. With 6 kids one of them will be sufficiently unmarriageable that they will stay. Now you have 1-2 kids and none of them stay because that's just the math of it. But in no way was it a common thing EVER in US history the way it is not only accepted by expected in Europe.
8. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 05:33 · Score: 1
  
  What actually happened is that in the old days you had 6 kids and maybe 1 would stay with the parents because they had no options available to them (homely looking woman, semi-autistic, homosexual, etc...) but the other 5 did not.
  My maternal grandmother had ten kids. The first one she 16 and the last one when she was 50. Whenever someone turned 18, they got booted out of the house. No more than five people ever lived at the house at any time. She died at 83 with the youngest daughter, her husband and their children living with her. According to her obituary, she had 81 kids, grandkids, great-grandkids and great-great-grandkids. And that's not even the Mormon side of the family!
9. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by lucasnate1 · 2017-02-21 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  I agree with most of your post except for one thing. In our current culture, at least where I live (Israel), having kids doesn't guarantee that they will support/take-care of you.
  
  --
  Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
10. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  Without families or children, what are all these gig millenials going to do when they get to be 60-70 years old?
  What are most adults going to do when they get into their 80-100 years old? Most people are going to outlive their retirement funds by 30 to 40 years longer than their parents or grandparents.
  When my father retired at 59-1/2, he expected a short retirement since all his older brothers kicked the bucket at 60. He lived until he was 75. Fortunately, he had a pension and Social Security benefits. I'm planning to retire at 77 and live until I'm 120. If I die sooner than, my heirs will have an inheritance.
11. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:58 · Score: 0
  
  Fertility rate in Norway is below replacement level. And almost as bad in Sweden. I thought those places were supposed to be good places to live with high salaries and everything given to you.
  http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=fertility+rate+norway
12. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:58 · Score: 0
  
  They work until they die, just like my parents did because social security is a joke now, and like I plan to because social security will have died too.
  With any luck, the Republicans will finally allow us peons to have euthanasia so when my MS gets so bad I can no longer work, I can go out peacefully instead of starving to death. Hey, if they haven't by then, maybe I'll get an uber driver to drop me off in the ditch in front of one of their houses. Nah, they'd probably enjoy watching me die in their ditch.
13. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by thinkwaitfast · 2017-02-21 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  Ten years ago this was still the norm for all of my asian friends until they got married
14. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 06:07 · Score: 0
  
  "The money is little...but I want a more interesting life."
  Translation: Farming in-game MMO currency to sell is interesting.
15. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by bmk67 · 2017-02-21 08:48 · Score: 1
  
  Here too, but NOT having kids guarantees that they won't be there for you.
16. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by lucasnate1 · 2017-02-21 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  Some would say that NOT having kids guarantees that you can at least enjoy your younger years, making killing yourself after having lived a full life or saving money for old age more viable.
  
  --
  Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
17. Re:Lifestyles of the Poor but Interesting by Areyoukiddingme · 2017-02-21 11:26 · Score: 1
  
  Things like getting married, starting a family, or even moving out from underneath Mom and Dads roof; all of these life events will likely cost more than the average "interesting" salary.
  Many Chinese men will never have the opportunity without plural marriage. There's 27 million more men than women in China right now. By 2020, it's expected to be 35 million more men than women. As the linked article points out, that's the entire population of Canada. A country worth of young men will not be able to marry and start a family. It's 15% of their age cohort. Fifteen percent! That's insane. And they're already an economic force to be reckoned with. Singles Day sales in China dwarfs Black Friday sales in the US.
  Gigging is one reaction to that massive demographic disparity. There's no need to look for the stability and independence that goes with a family because for tens of millions of Chinese men, there will be no family. The consequences of China's One Child policy are going to be with them (and possibly with us, the rest of the world) for the rest of the century, and no one really understands all of the ramifications. This has never happened before, in all of human history. The closest analog is perhaps the American West during the colonial period, but that gender disparity neither lasted as long as this one must nor involved anything like the sheer scale of the one in China. Gigging may be the least of the distortions that are coming.
Really More Interesting? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:09 · Score: 0

Is becoming a cam girl or stocking shelves at a grocery store part-time really leading a "more interesting" life?
1. Re:Really More Interesting? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:27 · Score: 0
  
  As opposed to the traditional job market where you may work between 1 and 10 different jobs throughout your entire working life (and getting bored in the process)? By comparison, E-giggers can work dozens or up to a hundred different jobs.
2. Re:Really More Interesting? by Opportunist · 2017-02-21 04:56 · Score: 2
  
  As opposed to the traditional job market where you may work between 1 and 10 different jobs throughout your entire working life (and getting bored in the process)? By comparison, E-giggers can work dozens or up to a hundred different jobs.
  ...that are boring right from the beginning.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
3. Re:Really More Interesting? by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 07:06 · Score: 1
  
  I disagree. Personally, I wouldn't mind stocking shelves for pay, for a single day. I'd get bored of it pretty quick, of course, but for a single day it'd be fine. By contrast, my regular programming work doesn't get boring that fast, but after a few years, I really get tired of working in the same place and start itching to move. Simple jobs like shelf-stocking are not really different, it just takes a lot less time to get bored with it. If I had a different such job every day, maybe it wouldn't be so bad.
4. Re:Really More Interesting? by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-02-21 07:09 · Score: 1
  
  ...that are boring right from the beginning.
  Some of my best paying IT support contract work was boring at heck. But someone had to do the job.
Giggin' by Tablizer · 2017-02-21 04:11 · Score: 1

Those considered "beautiful women," and between the ages of 18 and 28, can make four times as much plus tips by working as live-streaming models to keep mostly-male viewers entertained.
eHo

--
Table-ized A.I.
Americans are doing the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:18 · Score: 0

Different lingo, same turd economy. Hurry up and bring us those, uhhhh, coal jobs.
"Entertainment" = Chaturbate by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:25 · Score: 1

Seriously. "Cam models" are literately just Chaturbate and similar sites. If you want to know how much a female model makes, someone who is young and cute can make about $50 an hour. These are mostly Russian models however, not Chinese (due to laws about porn and inability to stream through the china firewall.) The catch to these streaming sites is that the site itself takes a >50% cut, and if you get booted from the site, there is no alternative to take you. There are of course alternate sites, but your audience will be lost.
And for the most part "chaturbate"-like sites are extremely boring. Sure you might find someone who looks cute and is actually smart, but the vast majority of adult and non-adult video streams are just people who look like they are bored to tears and only have about 4 different poses they do. The most interesting ones aren't the ones who strip on command, but rather the ones who don't strip at all unless a large payout is set. The vast majority of boring "adult" webcams are just people wearing things like the lovesense or ohmybod telepresence-like vibrators and all they do is moan when it's triggered with cheap pays (equal to about 20 cents.)
When will people learn by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:27 · Score: 1

Compromise your long term goals and integrity for short term results. Musicians have been selling out for years just to play a "gig", what does it get them? Nothing. The vast majority are broke and their industry commoditized because they are willing to work for peanuts or even nothing. Please people, put a value on your time and skills and stop allowing yourself to be exploited as "cheap labor".
Nail on the head by Viol8 · 2017-02-21 04:27 · Score: 2

"moving out from underneath Mom and Dads roof;"
Its very easy to talk about money not mattering and wanting an interesting life when you don't have to worry about rent or bills. Part of being an adult is accepting responsibility for your own fate and - unless you want to live in a hut in the woods or a park bench - than means finding the money to pay the above.
The "gig" economy is just (usually rich) hipster talk for dead end park time McJobs thats been repackaged and remarketed for the latest gullible generation of 20 somethings who haven't yet wised up.
1. Re:Nail on the head by geekmux · 2017-02-21 04:44 · Score: 1
  
  "moving out from underneath Mom and Dads roof;"
  Its very easy to talk about money not mattering and wanting an interesting life when you don't have to worry about rent or bills. Part of being an adult is accepting responsibility for your own fate and - unless you want to live in a hut in the woods or a park bench - than means finding the money to pay the above.
  The "gig" economy is just (usually rich) hipster talk for dead end park time McJobs thats been repackaged and remarketed for the latest gullible generation of 20 somethings who haven't yet wised up.
  Perhaps the gullible ones here are the parental enablers of hipsters ascribing for nothing more than an "interesting" life at the cost of their providers.
2. Re:Nail on the head by Kjella · 2017-02-21 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  Its very easy to talk about money not mattering and wanting an interesting life when you don't have to worry about rent or bills. Part of being an adult is accepting responsibility for your own fate and - unless you want to live in a hut in the woods or a park bench - than means finding the money to pay the above. The "gig" economy is just (usually rich) hipster talk for dead end park time McJobs thats been repackaged and remarketed for the latest gullible generation of 20 somethings who haven't yet wised up.
  I think it comes in both flavors, those who use the gig economy to pick work and those who get used by the gig economy. Probably a lot more of the latter but I've met a few people who were avid surfers, kiters, snowboarders, golfers and such who want to be able to look out the window and say nope, not going to work today. Maybe we don't notice it much doing development where they care more about the results than when you do it but in a lot of other places like retail, manufacturing, education, healthcare etc. you have to be there from your shift starts until your shift ends, flexibility is low and tardiness is a big thing. Also there's people that go half a year to Thailand and work as hotel guide, dive instructor and bartender so they can afford to stay that long.
  I had a colleague that was like super-fan of snowboarding, he had even more talented buddies who got sponsored enough they could stay the season in the Alps to practice, show off and do competitions, I doubt they made any real money. But that would for him be like a dream, half a year where he'd get paid to snowboard. Another friend of mine got a job where he's travelling a lot, lots of conferences and such. A lot of people wouldn't want that, but for him it was an opportunity to get a paid trip to a new golf course. I've heard the same about half-decent poker pros, some use it as a paid means to go different places and see the world while playing in poker tournaments. So for a few poster children I'm sure this is what they actually want, at least for the short term they have totally different priorities and do ad hoc work because they genuinely want ad hoc work.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Not seeing a problem by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:27 · Score: 0

Look at all the assuming idiots here, like assuming that jobs have benefits like PTO and insurance--it's fucking China with a completely different economy, work environment. These people aren't wanting to get stuck in a shit position working shit hours for shit pay. They know what kinds of assholes are running the company, they know the manager's daughter is takes regular trips to places like Korea, Japan, and Singapore buying handbags that cost what the proletariat workers are making in a year.
Why so millenial? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:32 · Score: 0

Well such employment can always be found right away as opposed to careers which may take a while to crack into.
So really what they're saying is: "New arrivals to the job-scene are begining with easy to get, immediate jobs, while they contemplate their deeper careers".
SO WHAT - MOST OF US DID! (Why is this considered so 'millenial'?)
Un-News
3, 2, 1, by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 04:36 · Score: 0

Crappy jobs arriving to China, that was quick. We'll see how it develops...
how communist is china? by kristianbrigman · 2017-02-21 04:44 · Score: 1

Are these people also benefiting from government handouts, or is that still a thing in China (was it ever)? Is there (was there ever) any kind of medical safety net? This makes a lot more sense if this is the equivalent of a teenager getting a side job while still living in their parents' house - if they already have some of their basic needs met, then this is really for luxuries anyways - lots of people are willing to trading working hard for a higher standard of living, but there's likely to be many others who are willing to trade a lower standard of 'stuff' to get more free time...
1. Re:how communist is china? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:29 · Score: 0
  
  That's a socialist Western Europe thing and not a communist thing. The Soviets never had welfare of any kind and neither did the Maoists or any other Soviet inspired regime. You worked or your starved. To the extent welfare existed it was the gruel you got to eat in jail if you refused to work. Not working was a felony. When my parents immigrated from the USSR to the US they were amazed to learn a thing like foodstamps existed. In many respects the USSR was more capitalist than the US. If you didn't work no one cared if you starved.
2. Re:how communist is china? by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, except wasn't it trivially easy to get a job if you didn't have one? That's what's different in the US; it's not always easy to find a job if you don't have one.
3. Re:how communist is china? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 14:55 · Score: 0
  
  But they had a guaranteed employment for life on a job that you couldn't get fired from. No matter how drunk you were
Won't work in America by computational+super · 2017-02-21 05:00 · Score: 1

I tried that in America right after graduation. I changed jobs about once a year (after boredom set in) and after four years, it caught up with me - suddenly nobody would talk to me because I was a "job-hopper".

--
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
1. Re:Won't work in America by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:31 · Score: 0
  
  Uber.
2. Re:Won't work in America by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:34 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe it's industry specific. Out of law school I temped for 7+ straight years. It was a better living than I could have made as a solo or as an associate at a small 1-10 man shop. It never hurt my employability and I would still be doing it today if one project didn't turn into a fulltime job where I've now been for 3.5 years. I think the trick is just to do it through 1 or 2 temp agencies and then put down the agency as your sole employer. On my resume you just see the agency and "contract attorney" as my job. Of course, in reality I worked at like 50+ firms in 7 years.
3. Re:Won't work in America by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 06:50 · Score: 0
  
  Deriveroo.
4. Re:Won't work in America by Rastl · 2017-02-21 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  I tried that in America right after graduation. I changed jobs about once a year (after boredom set in) and after four years, it caught up with me - suddenly nobody would talk to me because I was a "job-hopper".
  Back in the day...
  Actually I wasn't making an old-timer joke. Maybe 15 years ago it was a red flag to see a series of 18 month jobs on a resume since the expectation was that you would be in a job for at least 5 years in order for us to recoup our investment. Those skips looked like someone stayed just long enough to gain some experience and then moved on to fresh pastures.
  Not so much these days. Given how easily companies toss their people to the curb having a number of jobs in a short time isn't necessarily something that will send your resume to the circular file. Mind you I'm speaking about the IT industry so YMMV.
  A job or two, followed by some consulting, another job, some more consulting. It's all work. And given the economy it's pretty typical of what happens to technical folks.
  Back on topic for this thread. People are getting married later (if at all) and birth rates are in decline. There's nothing wrong with the concept of spending your youth doing a variety of jobs and gaining a wide range of experience. Stocking shelves may not sound glamorous but it shows that you're willing to do the work that's in front of you. After a certain point it will lose its allure and they'll find longer term jobs. Or not. The options are there for now.
as long as they just part timers and not 1099's er by Joe_Dragon · 2017-02-21 05:02 · Score: 3, Interesting

as long as they just part timers (w2's) and not 1099's.
I don't know how that works in China but in the usa there is a lot of abuse of 1099's as the work places get's out of paying taxes, uniforms (in some states they must be free to workers) others mini wage laws apply. liability, workers comp, tool/car/cell reimbursement.
labor laws may push it the other way and kill real by Joe_Dragon · 2017-02-21 05:09 · Score: 1

labor laws may push it the other way and kill real 1099's as the abused 1099's get to bad that laws over fix the issue. Just changing a lot of the 1099'ser to day to W2 will fix a lot of the issues and save the real 1099's from having to make big changes.
Re:This is the future by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 05:44 · Score: 0

Because Millennials (and future generations) are fucking morons.
The problem isn't that millenials are ignorant--almost everybody is ignorant when they're young. The problem is that millenials are so arrogantly certain that they know what's best, and that there are so many of them that they'll drag the rest of society down with their foolishness.
Remembering it's China works both ways... by denzacar · 2017-02-21 06:09 · Score: 1

Like when accounting for "20 million active users" monthly to "between 300000 and 400000 jobs" every month.
Population of China: 1.357 Billion.
Out of which 359.14 million were employed in urban and 405 million in rural China, in 2011.
Meaning that those "monthly gigs" represent 0.039 - 0.052% of jobs in China.
While "20 million active users", would represent 2.61% of workers - if there actually were 20 million gigs too.
Instead of there only being enough "gigs" for about 1.5 - 2% of "workers".
Some of whom are significant enough percent of the whole to be singled out in the article as ""beautiful women"...between the ages of 18 and 28...working as live-streaming models to keep mostly-male viewers entertained" - for 70$ per day + tips.
I.e. The company offers either "sorting crates of milk at a supermarket or hand out pamphlets on frozen sidewalks" kind of "gigs" - or "gigs" which are not so cleverly disguised online prostitution.
Considering that regular prostitution can employ some 300000 in a single city those 80$ million look more and more like they are being made on the backs of prostitutes.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Re:as long as they just part timers and not 1099's by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 06:45 · Score: 2

Not only is there an incredible amount of abuse, the IRS publishes rules about what is and isn't allowed, however the IRS does absolutely *nothing* about any abuse. They're quite happy to let it continue.
School-Aged Students Hold Part Time Jobs by avandesande · 2017-02-21 07:02 · Score: 1

Kind of remember doing the same kind of thing 20+ years years ago, but we didn't have the fancy 'gig' prefix.

--
love is just extroverted narcissism
Re:This is the future by Grishnakh · 2017-02-21 07:04 · Score: 1

Oh bullshit. The rest of society (meaning, the older generations) is what set things up so badly in the first place. The Millennials are simply playing the hand they've been dealt, which is a shitty one.
When Western society goes down the tubes, it's the older generations (especially the Boomers) who will be to blame. Personally I'm hoping it happens sooner rather than later so that the Boomers will be alive to see and experience what they've brought about.
No ambition? by p51d007 · 2017-02-21 07:33 · Score: 1

It's almost like they just want to live for the moment...instead of plan for the future. How many times do you see young adults saying they don't have enough money for a new phone, but will buy one anyway? Never save, never put off until you can afford it...it's all now now now.
Re:This is the future by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 07:46 · Score: 0

Incorrect. Every generation arrives to the game already in progress & feels entitled to change it. You just arrived to a society already running and you don't feel you can fit in so you call it shitty & declare it must be changed. Your prob if you can't figure it out despite ALL the help, advice, love, and education you've received.
But sure, blame the players and change the game to something only you & your friends know about... now that'll become the 'new' thing until the next gen. And suddenly the newbs blame you for dealing shitty cards to them, despite your claims that it's good stuff, not your fault, and you did your best. Yep it'll happen...
Grow up.
Why by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:11 · Score: 0

Are they dancing and playing music instead of working?
In my day you got a job, part time or full time to suit your situation. We didn't need any dumb ways to describe that.
Re: labor laws may push it the other way and kill by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:19 · Score: 0

Dude... That is not even close to English.
No one understands the forces at work by shoor · 2017-02-21 09:29 · Score: 1

I can think of at least 2 major forces at work, and not just in China:
1. Birthrates are down
2. Automation is changing the nature of work.
These aren't new, particularly increasing automation isn't new, but that doesn't mean their impact on the future is well understood or predictable.
Millenials may be conscious of the uncertainty of work and reluctant to invest in learning skills and spending time in a job that disappears in 10 years. I suspect also that they haven't suffered the hardships of their parents and may have a more casual attitude about it all.

--
In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
1. Re:No one understands the forces at work by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 11:11 · Score: 0
  
  Millenials may be conscious of the uncertainty of work and reluctant to invest in learning skills and spending time in a job that disappears in 10 years.
  
  Cue condescending comments from arrogant pricks:
  "If your job disappears in 10 years, you didn't keep your skills up, but my job will last forever, and I won't be laid off next, because I'm elite!"
  For proof, see the poll :
  I think my current job will be replaced by a robot/software:
  "NEVER BECAUSE I'M ELITE!"
  ....... so many deluded assholes.
expected? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 15:50 · Score: 0

Trump said he wants the factories to move back to US. So China will or already has fewer full time job. Now China's Millennials solution is to do part time... It makes sense. Did I missed something?
Re:This is the future by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-22 02:09 · Score: 0

Oh bullshit. The rest of society (meaning, the older generations) is what set things up so badly in the first place. The Millennials are simply playing the hand they've been dealt, which is a shitty one.
And the Millennials will deal a shitty hand of cards to their kids -- been happening for thousands of years.
What -- other than a lack of historical perspective -- makes you think that all of the sudden everything has changed? That the Millennials will be any different than the thousand generations before them?
Re:as long as they just part timers and not 1099's by Aaden42 · 2017-02-22 05:45 · Score: 1

There's no shortage of W-2 abuse in the US. You need N hours to qualify for benefits? Oh look, N-1 hours on your "full time" schedule AGAIN! Sucks to be you. But remember, we need full time availability & you don't get your schedule until two days before so good luck getting another "full time" job to fill in!
Gig economy isn't that different than the reality many people face working W-2. If anything it's more honest about the fact that there's no safety net and you need to keep working until you're dead. The idea of "having a retirement" is romanticized, but it's not going to happen for probably a majority of workers in the US.
Re:as long as they just part timers and not 1099's by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-22 07:33 · Score: 0

Eh. I work as a cook. Truly good cooks are in pretty short supply these days, and if for some god forsaken reason mass deportations actually come about, the situation will be much worse. The major companies absolutely try to pull the N-1 hours nonsense but it often doesn't work in reality, since there simply are not enough people so if you are good, you get the hours anyway.
Re:This is the future by Grishnakh · 2017-02-22 13:35 · Score: 1

The Millennials aren't having kids.
Your wish is granted by thoughtlover · 2017-02-23 11:22 · Score: 1

"But I want a more interesting life."
May you live in interesting times. -Chinese proverb

--
No sig for you! Come back one year!