Losers aren’t losers in the normal sense, they are losers economically — they have struck a bad bargain where they labor for a paycheck. They don’t have equity.
Or they have struck a bargain to emphasise their families and relationships over their work life. They’re losers from the sociopath’s perspective..from other perspectives they’re winners. They’re not even economic losers so long as you define utility as stuff that makes you happy rather than money.
I think “slacker” would be a better word than Rao’s “loser” for this group. Their chief characteristic is that they don’t work very hard because there’s little benefit for them if they do. “Loser” seems needlessly pejorative—their actions are reasonable given their situations and risk tolerance (usually risk-averse). “Slacker” seems to define them better.
Losers recognize that being a wage slave IS a bad deal. As a result, they do the minimum necessary to not get fired and keep collecting their paycheck. Again, this is a reasonable thing to do in many cases. For example, you may be a Loser in your day job so you can pursue your real interests nights and weekends.
Totally agreed. The terms for the three groups don’t make a lot of sense. They’re drawn from that comic, which was (presumably) intended as a quick gag, not a substantive analysis.
Or they have struck a bargain to emphasise their families and relationships over their work life. They’re losers from the sociopath’s perspective..from other perspectives they’re winners. They’re not even economic losers so long as you define utility as stuff that makes you happy rather than money.
I think “slacker” would be a better word than Rao’s “loser” for this group. Their chief characteristic is that they don’t work very hard because there’s little benefit for them if they do. “Loser” seems needlessly pejorative—their actions are reasonable given their situations and risk tolerance (usually risk-averse). “Slacker” seems to define them better.
I like this. For the others maybe ‘Believers’ and ‘Ruthless.’
That is explicitly stated in the post.
Not a criticism of the OP, by the way.
Totally agreed. The terms for the three groups don’t make a lot of sense. They’re drawn from that comic, which was (presumably) intended as a quick gag, not a substantive analysis.