What career to pursue for someone with no passion?

Like the title says, I’m 23M and at a standstill on what I want to do with my life. I’ve researched countless hours to find a career path that might fit me but have come to the conclusion that I have no passion for any type of work and just want something that pays decent without being absolutely miserable like the work I do now. I have only ever worked blue collar and dread waking up every day as early as 3 am and having to work 12+ hour days doing back breaking work. Yes the pay is great but my mental health is terrible and I can’t keep doing it. I’m not a very social person and my only real hobby is PC gaming and I can’t even come home and do that because I’m so tired every day. My last resort is to come here and maybe get some advice on what I should do. I was looking at going to college online but don’t know what degree would even be worth it.

Jobadvisor

Good, that's actually a smart pick — bookkeeping has a nice combination of things going for it: short path in, low physical demand, works well for introverts (mostly you and spreadsheets/software, not people), and it's one of the more remote-friendly entry points out there since a lot of small businesses hire bookkeepers who never set foot in their office.

Here's a realistic path while you're still working your current job:

1. Learn the actual skill first (cheap or free)

• QuickBooks Online is the industry standard for small business bookkeeping. Intuit offers a QuickBooks Online Certification that's free and self-paced — that alone makes you employable for basic bookkeeping work.
• Alternatively, the Intuit Academy Bookkeeping course on Coursera (a few weeks, low cost) covers fundamentals plus the certification.

2. Get a real credential (a few months, part-time)

• AIPB (American Institute of Professional Bookkeepers) Certified Bookkeeper — respected credential, doesn't require a degree, can be done in a few months studying part-time.
• Or a community college bookkeeping certificate (not a full degree) — usually 4-6 courses, often available online, and cheap compared to a degree.

You don't need both — QuickBooks cert + either AIPB or a community college certificate is a solid, employable combo.

3. Get first experience

• Entry point is often part-time or freelance bookkeeping for small businesses (through Upwork, local small businesses, or a bookkeeping firm) while still at your current job. This also builds a portfolio.
• After a few months of real experience + certification, you can look at bookkeeping firms, accounting firms, or in-house roles — many are remote or hybrid.

4. Where it can go

• Bookkeeper → Senior Bookkeeper → Accounting Clerk/Assistant Controller, or you could later stack on an Accounting Associate's degree if you want to push toward staff accountant pay down the line — but that's optional, not required to start.

Realistic pay: entry bookkeeping often starts modest, but remote/freelance bookkeepers with a couple years experience commonly land in a comfortable range, and it scales with client load if you go freelance.

One practical note: since you're working exhausting hours now, I'd start with just the free QuickBooks certification first — low effort, no cost, and it'll tell you fairly quickly whether the actual day-to-day (reconciling accounts, categorizing transactions, spreadsheets) feels tolerable to you before you invest more time or money into it.

Want me to put together a week-by-week study plan for the QuickBooks cert that fits around your current work schedule?

I got fired for "not making an impression" and "not engaging enough" during training. what did I do wrong?

I got hired as a closer for a real estate company. They mainly dealt with foreclosure properties, homes still stuck in probates and liens and all that stuff. We had a 3 day training period, where the CEO clarified many legal terms we'd hear, how the call flow usually works, some general sales tips etc tec.

I didn't ask any questions during that time (I never really felt a need to as everything was pretty straight forward. I knew I never worked with this type of stuff before so It would just take getting used to the script, doing some roleplays and I'd get the hang of it by the second or third call with a lead)

I got the message that I was being for not engaging during or asking any questions. My manager said "I know who you are and I like you but our CEO doesn't, you really didn't make an impression. if I said your name and X's name, X's name would have more echo" They also said I did badly on the test they gave for concept checking and during roleplay. But I was complimented by my team and the trainer at the time over improvising and thinking on the fly during that roleplay.

I also KNOW I did well on that test, I know my answers were correct and when I asked about a test result or did they grade it yet? they refused to share. the HR told me "I'll check and get back to you on that." and they also told me "Feedback is never given during training but after" (After; was after we all logged off for the day)

I have no idea what I did wrong. Maybe I didn't put my best foot forward. I've been trying to think all day about what I did and I just can't think of anything. I didn't mess up a call, I didn't curse at owner, I didn't show up late, I didn't mess up a deal or not get one for months on end.

I don't know what I did wrong.

Jobadvisor

That's a genuinely disorienting way to lose a job — no clear rule broken, no bad call, and then vague language you can't really act on. It makes sense you've been replaying it all day trying to find the thing you missed.

Here's the honest read: "didn't make an impression" and "not engaging enough" aren't performance metrics, they're vibes. And vibes-based firings during a short training period are often about fit or first impressions rather than anything you actually did wrong in a concrete sense. A few things stand out from what you described:

The quiet-but-competent thing can read as disengagement. You said you didn't ask questions because things made sense and you figured you'd pick up the rest on live calls. That's a completely reasonable way to learn. But in a lot of sales-floor cultures — especially ones being run by a CEO who's personally sizing people up in a 3-day window — silence gets misread as not trying, not curious, not hungry. It's not fair, but it's common. Some managers want to see the effort, not just the eventual result.

The test score thing is a red flag, not on you. If you know your answers were right and they won't show you the graded test, that's not normal process — that's a company protecting a decision they'd already made, or covering for a subjective call by pointing to something that looks objective. Real feedback processes don't stonewall you on "did you check the results yet?" That evasiveness tells you more about them than about your performance.

The roleplay compliments vs. the "did badly" claim contradict each other. You can't be praised by the trainer and team for thinking on your feet and also have "done badly" on that same roleplay unless the CEO's read of it was just different — again, more about impression than substance.

Put together, this looks less like "here's what you did wrong" and more like: the CEO didn't personally click with you, needed a reason, and the reasons given don't hold up well under your own scrutiny because they're not really about your competence.

If it's useful going forward — not because you did anything wrong here, but as a calibration for future interviews/training periods — in rooms with founder-CEO energy, visibly engaging (asking a question even when you don't strictly need the answer, narrating your thinking out loud) can matter more than it should. Not because it's right, but because it's the kind of thing you can control next time even when the process is opaque.

You didn't curse anyone out, blow a deal, or no-show. This wasn't a discipline firing. It reads like a fit call dressed up as a performance issue.

Advice : quit or ride out ?

Looking for some advice or feedback from anyone in a similar position. Worked 8 years as a number one hire in a start up. More hires didn’t come for some time (year 3/4). Business was booming. Granted equity during a fund round. Hired a C suite and many more hires. Not all got equity but many did and while I don’t know who got what, I expect C suite were far above mine. Kept a good leadership and senior position but didn’t lead a function, closely worked with founder and executives. High pressure, long days, missed weekends and vacations with pressure to work. Fast forward two years and went through an acquisition, very big, seven figure payout. Not enough to retire but could in 5-7 years. Since then new owners - nothing really changed for a few months but then I’ve since been pretty much ignored during the integration, founder stepped down so knew my role would change but wasn’t expecting so much change. So far a new leadership team was created, mostly function leads, no one told me anything for a while until eventually I was told my role would change, I got to ‘pick’ what dept I would go in, a C suite was hired above me to report into, no longer have visibility into company or leadership, role is very silo’d. Less impact, less meaningful. Feels like a demotion, but not less pay. Baring in mind first hire, feels like I was pushed out and into a silo’d roles but told it was such an important role. Pushed for equity and have been put in the list (along with 20/30 other people, some who just joined the company). Role feels boring, admin heavy, no strategy. Business 150 headcount now.

Do I consider that I’m just not valuable any more and move on. I feel desperately sad some days. Mourning the loss of a job I loved in a fun environment where I felt impactful and it was meaningful. Feels a little embarrassing among co-workers that I was a first hire and now move to a meaningless admin heavy role. Or do I stick it out - I close my computer at 5 every day now. No more working weekends, evenings and vacations, low stress, no leadership team high stress reporting to new owners, still on incredible salary for what I do. Equity might be low compared to others but forget about it and just enjoy the low stress and high salary and keep plodding along until I can retire. My brain says this is the way, I’ve earned it. But my heart says quit.

Anyone been here before?

Jobadvisor

This is a real grief, not just a career decision — you loved that job, built it, and watched it get reorganized out from under you while everyone told you it was "such an important role." That contradiction alone would make anyone feel a little crazy.

A few things worth pulling apart, because I think "quit or ride out" is actually three separate questions tangled together.

The money question is easy to model. Low stress, full pay, done at 5pm, several years until you could retire comfortably. Financially, staying is close to a no-brainer, and you already know that — it's why your brain keeps voting for it.

The identity/meaning question is the real one. You were the first hire. You helped build something. That role doesn't exist anymore, and no severance package or "important role" reframing changes that the thing you were good at and proud of is gone. Staying in the silo'd, admin-heavy job doesn't bring that back — it just pays you well while you're not doing it. That's worth being honest with yourself about: you're not deciding whether to stay at "the company," you're deciding whether to keep collecting a very good salary for a job that isn't the one you miss.

The self-worth question is a trap. "Am I not valuable anymore" is the wrong frame — you got 8 years, an equity grant, a seven-figure payout, and now a well-paid low-stress role, all of which says the opposite. What actually happened is more mundane and impersonal: acquisitions restructure around new leadership's people and priorities, and long-tenured, closely-founder-aligned employees almost always get sidelined in that process regardless of their value, because the new C-suite doesn't have relationship capital with you and does with their own hires. That's not a verdict on you. It's how integrations work.

So here's a way to think about it that separates the tangled parts:

• If you stay, you're explicitly trading meaning for money and ease. That can be a completely legitimate trade, especially with a retirement number in sight — but it only works long-term if you find meaning elsewhere (outside projects, hobbies, family time you never had before), not if you expect the job itself to start feeling good again. It won't; it's been redesigned not to.
• If you leave, you're trading security for a shot at getting that "impactful, first-hire-energy" feeling again somewhere else — but at your stage, with your equity outcome already banked, that's a real option, not a reckless one. You're not leaving out of desperation; you'd be leaving from a position of strength.

One thing I'd gently push back on: "sticking it out" only works well if you can genuinely let go of comparing this role to what you used to have. If every day at 5pm you're relieved to be done but every week you're still mourning the old job, that's not sustainable peace, that's low-grade grief on a delay. The sadness you're describing now might not disappear just because the hours got better.

Given you don't have to decide today — could you treat the next 3-6 months as an information-gathering period rather than a final choice? Stay, bank the pay, but actively use the free evenings and weekends to explore what else exists (a search, a side project, informational conversations), and see whether the silo'd role becomes tolerable once you're not white-knuckling it as your whole identity, or whether the gap between "what I have" and "what I want" just keeps widening. You'll likely know within that window whether this is dormancy or decline.

What career path would you recommend for someone with my background?

I'm a 31-year-old man and I'm feeling stuck in my career. I'd really appreciate some honest advice from people who have been in a similar situation.

I have a bachelor's degree in English Language. My experience is mainly in journalism and editing. I've worked as a sub-editor on international news, where my responsibilities included editing, translating, rewriting, fact-checking, and writing headlines.

The problem is that journalism in my country doesn't pay very well, and job security is limited. I'm trying to figure out what career I should transition into over the next few years.

Some options I've been considering are:

Copywriting

Content writing

Technical writing

Translation/localization

Social media management

Teaching English or IELTS after getting certified

Any other career that values strong English, editing, and writing skills

Here are my constraints:

I live in a third world country.

My finances are limited, so I can't afford an expensive degree or long training program.

I'm willing to learn new skills if they have a realistic return on investment.

Ideally, I'd like a career that can eventually lead to remote or international opportunities.

If you were in my position, what would you focus on? Which skills should I learn first, and which career paths offer the best long-term prospects?

Jobadvisor

Good news first: your background is actually a strong launchpad, not a weak one. Sub-editing international news means you already have the hard-to-teach skills — fast accurate editing, fact-checking discipline, headline/hook writing, working under deadline pressure, and probably some translation fluency. A lot of people trying to break into remote writing careers spend years building exactly those muscles. You already have them. The question is which door to point them through.

Let me go through your list with realistic ROI for your constraints (limited money, need remote-capable, want it in the next 1-3 years):

Best fit for you: Content writing / content editing, aimed at B2B SaaS or international publications. This is the most direct extension of what you already do, pays significantly better than most local journalism markets, is almost entirely remote-native, and doesn't require a certification — it requires a portfolio. Companies hiring content writers/editors for blogs, newsletters, and marketing sites care about clean prose, structure, and the ability to research a topic fast and write authoritatively about it. That's your day job already, aimed at a different subject matter.

Second best: Technical writing. Higher ceiling in pay than general content writing, and less saturated because fewer people can do it well. It rewards exactly your skill set (clarity, precision, fact-checking, no fluff) plus a moderate learning curve (documentation tools, basic understanding of software/APIs or whatever industry you target). It's learnable without an expensive degree — there are free/cheap resources (Google's tech writing courses, Write the Docs community) and you can build a portfolio by documenting an open-source tool or writing sample API docs.

Worth pursuing in parallel, not instead of: Translation/localization, if you're genuinely bilingual to a professional level. This has real international remote demand and your news background (fast, accurate, register-sensitive translation under deadline) is a genuine edge. It can be a solid income stream even if it's not your main path.

Where I'd de-prioritize:

• Copywriting — high ceiling but it's a different skill than editing (persuasion over accuracy) and the market is extremely crowded with courses/gurus promising quick riches, making it noisy to break into without a strong existing network.
• Social media management — lower ceiling, and increasingly commoditized/automated. I wouldn't build a long-term bet here.
• Teaching English/IELTS — solid reliable income and genuinely remote-friendly, but it's a different career track from writing/editing, so treat it as a separate fork in the road, not a stepping stone toward the others.

A concrete first-90-days plan, since you said limited finances matter:

1. Pick content writing or technical writing as your primary target (not both at once — dilutes your portfolio story).
2. Build 3-5 strong writing samples in that lane, even unpaid/spec ones at first — rewrite/adapt real news pieces into blog-style or documentation-style pieces to show range.
3. Get on Upwork/Contra/We Work Remotely and similar, and also cold-pitch newsletters, SaaS companies, and mid-size international publications directly — direct outreach converts much better than platform bidding when you're building initial credibility.
4. Use your first few freelance gigs as portfolio proof, not primarily for the money, and raise rates every 3-4 clients once you have testimonials.

The core idea: you're not starting from zero, you're repositioning an existing skill set toward a market that pays better and travels internationally. Editing is editing — the subject matter is the easy part to swap.