Talk:Careerism

complaint
This article seems to have issues with neutral point of view and original research - see, for instance, the comments about 'little Hitlers' and Bernie Madoff. This reads more like an essay than an encyclopaedia article. Robofish (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Presume that's gone, will delete if not. The cited work in the Lede has a profile equivalent to an advert, not warranted by a term that is a well known synonym for crass opportunism. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 13:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Pulled the whole &sect;:

Ethics and extreme careerism
There have been many cases over the years about the effects of extreme careerism in business, organizational and political ethics. Those who are extreme careerists walk on a fine line of what is right, and what is wrong. Although the individual must determine that for themselves, there are certain codes of ethics that those in each career, whether it is a doctor, lawyer, teacher or politician need to abide by. If they do not, corruption and greed, can ensue, note Bernard Madoff.

Ethics &sect;
Obviously there should be one. The above was a miss. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 13:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Where's "careerism"?
If we have a Wikipedia article on extreme careerism, we should also have one on careerism, and then try to integrate the two (or leave them separate if there's enough content for both). My apologies if I skipped over an article on careerism that already exists. KBurchfiel (talk) 05:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * A redirect has been created so that Careerism now lands at this article.Rgdboer (talk) 21:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

seventeen workdays added to calendar???
"In the United States, seventeen additional workdays have been added to the calendar since 1994.[citation needed]"

No this doesn't need a citation, it needs a deletion since it is nonsense. How were these 17 'workdays' wedged into the 365 days of the calendar?

-- according to (https://dqydj.com/use-vacation-days/), americans skip on average 17 more vacation days than they did in 1994. what's written in the article right now is misleading/false, therefore removed. this whole article is full of weird unsourced hand-waving statements, almost incoherent. Mcslinky (talk) 05:01, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Americans live under some of the highest pressures from employers. They are less likely than others in the First World to have union protection (indeed, labor unions are much on the decline and might even be outlawed in a few years if the political trends that we now have continue. Americans have shorter times for vacations and holidays than elsewhere in the First World. The welfare system is anything but generous. Workers even in near-minimum-wage jobs are under great stress to perform as if 'professional', taking on heavy responsibilities and personal risk but for small rewards. In an Orwellian twist of a phrase, the "free market" means that the market is free to do what ever its operators wish it to do to people. Americans starting a business need recognize that the tax system favors monopolized, vertically-integrated entities. Those with the talent to fit into the professions know that they will go heavily into debt while working their way through college. Opportunities for well-paying work are concentrated in a small number of metro areas, so unless one is a physician or attorney, one can expect to pay exorbitant rent for the privilege of living where the well-paying jobs are.

Even if on vacation one is expected to take work with one in the form of being connected to the office. Such people as sales clerks, nurses' aides, and fast-food workers are under pressure to adopt 'careerist' ways just for economic survival.

This is itself original research, but those who have grown up before the 1980's largely concur. The GINI coefficient (relating to economic inequality) has gone from average to very high. Whether this continues implies speculation on whether a trend will continue into the distant future, which is not a sound assumption. Pbrower2a (talk) 05:25, 15 December 2019 (UTC)