Almost everyone has a boss, and that person usually has the power to make your job a joy or a misery.

A story this week looking at how bosses can help – or hurt – their employees’ careers left many readers talking about how their bosses had done them wrong.

More than half of the nearly 6,000 readers who took our vote said their boss had hurt their career.

One common complaint: The boss who is just looking for a ‘yes’ man (or woman).

“If you disagree with mine at all, then you can forget going anywhere else. No bonuses, raises or promotions. All they want to hear is Yes,” one reader wrote.

Others complained that their bosses had undermined their success, or actively worked to get them fired or demoted.

“I had a boss that hid promotion opportunities from me, because I was so good at the job I was doing,” one reader wrote.

Many readers did praise their bosses for being strong, supportive leaders. But even those readers lamented that they had had bad bosses in the past.

“Currrent boss is a great person and has helped me get to where I want to be. Remember, no one is looking out for you but you,” one reader wrote.

Still, some readers noted that there are plenty of bad employees, too.

“How many of the respondents are incompetent or just plain poor employees but blame their boss? … While many do have bad bosses, there is also a lot of ‘it's not my fault’ going around. I fear it will only get worse with the way kids are raised today,” one reader wrote.

Love it or hate it, many of us will rely on Social Security. And that’s making a lot of us very nervous.

This week in Life Inc., we wrote about how the latest plan to tweak Social Security is unpopular with both liberal and conservative thinkers. The story prompted tens of thousands of readers to weigh in on their hopes, fears and frustrations about the retirement safety net.

Many readers said they would like to see Congress take steps now to address the funding shortfalls that are projected in years to come.

“Fix the program now - while it's still ‘easy.’ Later changes will cost much more. We can lessen the impact to the less-wealthy recipients,” one reader wrote.

That’s not surprising, given how many readers said they will need those monthly checks in old age.

More than half of the nearly 36,000 readers who took our survey said they plan to rely on Social Security for day-to-day expenses.

Many Americans simply haven’t saved enough money to fund their retirement, especially now that the burden of saving has started shifting toward self-directed 401(k) plans and away from company pensions.

“I have my own retirement account, but it's not going to pay my total expenses. I'll need the Social Security benefits I've earned,” one reader wrote.

For others, Social Security has become a lifeline after losing other savings during the Great Recession and weak recovery.

“I lost all my money on a business that was too small to save in 2009. (unlike Wall st and GM) I only have SS to live on now,” another wrote.

For many Americans – including about 37 percent of those who took our survey – Social Security will be a key supplement to other savings.

“I'm not relying on it but it is a big share of my retirement plan. I worked and earned it! I should get the fair share my parents did!” one reader wrote.

About 10 percent of our readers were more cynical about the future of Social Security. They said they weren’t planning on getting that monthly check once they retired.

“If I get SS, great - but I'm planning and saving as if I'll never get anything from it,” one wrote.

The economy has technically been in recovery for nearly four years, and yet many Life Inc. readers still feel like they are treading water, if that.

“We are falling further and further backwards down the ladder and are powerless to stop the fall,” one reader wrote this week.

The reader was responding to a post looking at how the wealthiest Americans generally saw their wealth increase between 2009 and 2011, in the two years after the Great Recession officially ended. Meanwhile, the remaining 93 percent of Americans generally saw their net worth decline slightly.

The Pew Research Center report was based on an analysis of Census data.

Nearly two-thirds of the approximately 22,000 readers who took our Life Inc. survey said they have not seen their net worth increase since 2009. Many were feeling  frustrated with the growing gap between rich and poor.

“I'm falling more behind. It's hard reading about CEO pay gaining 300% while I live below the poverty line and work my a** off,” one reader lamented.

According to Pew’s report, one major reason the wealthy are doing better is because they tend to have more wealth concentrated in investments. The housing market, where many Americans have traditionally grown their prosperity, didn’t fare as well between 2009 and 2011.

Some readers said that while their investments are doing better, they still don’t feel like they are in a great financial position.

“401K has recovered and I've built some savings back up, but certainly don't feel like things are on the right track for those of us in the middle. The rich get richer, the poor get taken care of, and those of us working 50 hrs week pay for it all.”

Still, not everyone felt worse off. About one-third of the readers who voted in our survey said they feel like their net worth has increased since 2009.

“We didn't panic and sell in 2009; courage or foolishness? Don't know, but we have done well since,” one reader wrote.

It’s that time of year when many high school graduates are anxiously trying to figure out where they will go to college.

But many college graduates are wrestling with another kind of anxiety: How to pay off their student loan debt.

A recent Life Inc. story about the possibility that interest rates will go up for certain newly issued government student loans got many readers talking about their own debt woes.

About 65 percent of the nearly 20,000 readers who took our survey said they are carrying some student loan debt.

Some said they are paying off debt but either don’t have a degree to show for it or haven’t been able to get a job in the sector they studied.

“I have an MBA, $55k in student loan debt, and no job prospects. So much for education making you more likely to find a job.,” one reader wrote.

Others lamented that their high debt load was making it harder for them to keep their heads above water.

“Our Student Loan debt repayment takes almost half of our income. It's crazy,” one reader wrote.

Even many of the readers without student loan debt complained that the high cost of college is making it hard for financially strapped people to achieve the American dream of going to college.

“College education is fast becoming a luxury that only the wealthy will be able to afford in a few years,” one reader wrote.

Others said they feel sorry for those who are juggling high debt loads.

 “I am 70 and that stuff is long past me. But I have a great deal of empathy for young people struggling to get an education,” a reader wrote.

Still, not all readers had sympathy for those who have taken out student loan debt.

“Nobody said Capitalism was fair. Going to college is simply another risk in the game of capitalism. It's never too late to learn a trade!” one reader wrote.

The nation’s corporations have been turning in record profits of late, and yet you wouldn't necessarily know it from how their employees are being rewarded.

A Life Inc. post this week looked at how many at-work perks are disappearing even as many are being asked to work longer and harder.

Many said it’s a recipe for unhappiness.

“20 years with this company. There used to be so many little, cheap perks that were real motivators. Now there's virtually nothing,” one reader wrote. “I'm happy to have a job - and a decent one - but it is hard to watch the salaries of senior executives double in those 20 years....and profits higher....and none of the lower rank-and-file employees able to reap any of the rewards.”

Many lamented that their employees seem to think it’s better to motivate by fear than to give a pat on the back for a job well done.

“Our company has the ‘Princess Bride’ motivation package - Goodnight, sleep tight. I'll most likely fire you in the morning,” one reader joked.

But others said they don’t need perks – they’d rather have a raise.

“Spare the pat on the back. Give me the money,” one wrote.

Psst, bosses: Take a good look around your office. There’s a good chance at least some of your workers are counting the days until they can take this job and shove it.

A Life Inc. post this week looking at how workers might bolt if the job market gets stronger prompted many workers to confess that they are coming to work with an eye to the door.

About 23 percent of the more than 12,000 readers who took our survey admitted that they hate their jobs. Another 60 percent said they’d be open to a better job if one came along.

The dour outlook comes after years of a tight job market that has left many employees working hard for the same – or less – pay and benefits.

 “They squeeze you like getting blood out of a turnip. Work you to death and generally treat you with disrespect. Bring it on!” one reader complained.

Others lamented that their work environment has left them demoralized, frustrated or angry.

“It's hard to stay energized while watching management all but suck the life out of an organization,” one reader lamented.

Many said they just don’t feel valued.

 “If management didn't treat us as though we are a dime a dozen, I wouldn't be looking,” one reader said.

Only about 12 percent of our readers said they love their jobs. Many of those workers said they were grateful to have a good employer.

“I was laid off for 10 months when things were bad, but was asked back when they improved. My boss has always paid and treated me well,” one reader said.

For those workers who are unhappy, it could still take a long time to find new work.

The jobless report released Friday showed a severe slowdown in the number of jobs being created. That means many people who want a new job may find that there isn’t a good one out there – yet.

For some shoppers, the coupon craze appears to have given way to coupon complaints.

A Life Inc. post this week about the sharp decline in coupon use got hundreds of readers talking about why they’ve grown disillusioned with the good, old-fashioned coupon. Coupon redemptions fell about 14.3 percent in 2012 compared to the previous year, according to industry consulting firm Inmar.

It’s clear that many people are still drawn to coupons: About 42 percent of the nearly 29,000 readers who took our survey said they use coupons often.

“On top of only buying things on sale and in store promotions, I save 30% or more. I LOVE coupons,” one reader wrote.

But many readers complained they are using coupons less because the discounts just aren’t as useful.

One common gripe: Coupons seem to be offering a lower discount but they often require the user to buy several containers of same item. For many, that’s a deal breaker.

“I've been using coupons for 35 years. Lately I have used almost zero. Mainly because I am required to buy 3, or 5, or more of an item,” one reader wrote.

Others complained that coupons have become too restrictive with their expiration dates, making them hard to use. And many readers said they can get better deals by shopping around or choosing in-store brands.

“I wanted to rejoin the coupon cutting crowd and have. But very rarely do I use them. When I compare the store brand to the popular name brand I have a coupon for it STILL does not make economical sense to buy the name brand. And I do NOT want three boxes of cereal,” another reader wrote.

Another common gripe: There aren’t enough coupons for fresh and healthy food items.

“I used to use them, when they covered more items. Now they primarily offer discounts on processed food and name brands I don't buy,” one reader wrote.

It’s well known that U.S. medical costs are more than double that of other developed countries, which is why, in a bid to lower insurance premiums, companies encourage their employees to be healthy.

Exercise, they urge workers, eat fresh fruits and vegetables, limit fast food and – above all – don’t smoke.

Sometimes this encouragement takes the form of a wellness plan – maybe offering $25 gift certificates to those who meet personal goals – but some companies take a more aggressive approach. This week, CVS Caremark made waves when it told employees to reveal their weight – or pay a monthly $50 penalty.

The drug retailing company is not alone, and as many TODAY readers pointed out – is mild compared to what they’ve gone through to lower health care premiums. Dozens said they had to give blood samples, although not all were upset by the requirement.

“My company already does something similar to this and I don't see the big deal,” said one reader. “Technically it isn't mandatory. You can either submit the basic info (BMI, glucose, cholesterol, blood pressure) and pay a discounted monthly rate, or not submit anything and pay the full monthly rate. It's just a discount for submitting the info – just like for my car insurance I get a discount for submitting my mileage and for being a ‘good driver.’"

One reader, self-described as 50 and “in relatively good health,” wrote: “We had to give information of weight, height etc., then the ‘plan administrators’ came back and told us what is wrong with us. … They even had a pedometer tethered to my hip for over 3 months to monitor my physical activity.”

But many readers lambasted CVS for invasion of privacy.

Wrote one: “This is a MASSIVE invasion of privacy that is headed towards your employer tell you what and how much food you can eat, the number of beers you can consume and what activity, i.e. motorcycling, rock climbing or anything that might even remotely be considered risky.”

One reader was sarcastic, noting that CVS sells cigarettes: “I wonder if CVS will eliminate their candy display and other unhealthy items they carry?”

Other readers argued that people need tough love: “It seems like the only way to do this anymore is to hit people where it matters ... in their wallet.”

No doubt about it, many working parents are stressed out. But is there a better alternative?

A Life Inc. post this week about a Pew study showing that both working moms and working dads are stressed out by juggling job and family responsibilities prompted readers to debate whether it would be back to go back to a system where Mom was more likely to stay home full time.

Some readers said they are pining for the days glorified by the television show “Leave It To Beaver.”

“Ahhh, wouldn't it be nice if it were the 50s all over again when the moms stayed home and were there for the kids! I guess I was lucky growing up in a ‘Beaver Cleaver’ type family! I am all for women's lib, but I think this is one of the big downfalls of women working full time as well as the man,” one reader wrote.

But others argued that things are better today. One reader said his grandmother stayed home with the kids while his grandfather worked, leaving Grandpa with little time with this family but lots of financial stress.

“Now compare that to today. I have one child. Both my wife and I work outside the home (always have) and we do our absolute best to share ALL household and child rearing responsibilities. As such I have a closer bond with my daughter and I am more informed than my grandfather ever was with his children. And I do not need shoulder the financial burdens alone. One loses a job we have the others income and vice versa,” he wrote.

Although more moms are working, they’re also still doing more of the housework and child care. More than half of the nearly 6,000 readers who took our poll said mom is taking on more of the home responsibilities, while nearly three in 10 said it’s an even split.

Some readers noted that it’s much easier to balance work and family responsibilities if you have another ingredient: Money.

One reader recalled when she and her husband first had a child and went so far as to wash clothes and diapers in the tub. Years later, she said, the couple has the money to hire a housecleaner, send the kids to private school and splurge on a babysitter for date night.

“Money makes the difference and anyone that tells you different has never been poor,” she said.

Many Americans are feeling pessimistic about their retirement prospects, and with good reason.

Previous studies have shown that many households are drastically unprepared for their golden years because they haven’t saved enough money, and now comes another showing that we rank 19^th worldwide when it comes to retirement security.

That puts our retirees in a worse position overall than countries including Israel, Japan, Slovenia and the Czech Republic.

A Life Inc. post this week on the relative quality of American retirement got many readers talking about their own retirement prospects, or lack thereof.

More than 7,000 readers took our poll, and about 39 percent said they are not at all confident they’ll be able to save enough for retirement.

“Retirement? What's that?? My gracious employer has gutted its pension plan and 401-k match, and gave us a 10% pay cut,” one reader wrote.

Still, not everyone was so gloomy. About 29 percent said they were somewhat confident they’d be able to sock away enough money, and another 21 percent were feeling very confident.

Their secret? Many said they had sacrificed luxuries and goodies along the way with an eye toward the delayed gratification of not worrying about money later in life.

“I actually save unlike most Americans and I do not plan to depend on Social Security or Medicare,” one reader wrote.

The hubbub over Yahoo’s decision to nix telecommuting got a lot of people talking this week about the potential distraction of working from home.

But what about those office distractions?

About than half of the more than 38,000 people who took our poll this week dismissed the idea that working in an office is more productive. Instead, they said, this much-vaunted “exchange of ideas” you get an office is more of a distraction.

Anyone who’s ever had a lengthy “exchange of ideas” with a co-worker who’s had a complicated health problem, relationship drama or parenting issue probably knows what these readers are talking about.

 “I telecommute on occasion and I find I get twice to three times as much done when I work from home. Part of this is due to no co-worker distractions - and while I am certainly always open to discourse, it does interrupt the work flow,” one reader wrote.

Many readers noted that in this modern era, there are plenty of ways to stay connected besides physically being next to each other.

“In the 21st century, it's not necessary for workers who have the right tools to work side-by-side in order to share ideas. Email, instant messaging and online discussion forums -- not to mention the good ol' fashioned telephone -- provide those functions quite nicely,” another reader wrote.

Still, others readers argued that people are more productive at the office, where they can see co-workers, be seen by the boss and not be distracted by household chores.

But some readers said it’s really about the worker, not the location.

“If people are lazy, they're going to be lazy anywhere,” one noted.

Looking for a job in this still-tight job market can be frustrating enough. For many, it’s made worse when they never even hear back from the company they had hoped to work for.

A post this week finding that 75 percent of employed jobseekers never heard back from at least one potential employer struck a nerve with many readers.  

About three quarters of the more than 16,000 people who took our poll said they thought employers should follow up with everyone who applies for a job.

Many readers said they just want to know whether they should move on or keep hoping they might get a callback.

“People put effort in applying, at minimum, they should get a response that their application was received,” one reader said.

Some readers said they thought it was OK not to follow up with everyone who applies for a job – a difficult task these days, when many companies are inundated with hundreds of applications.

“It'd be nice, but I'm not naive enough to think some of these HR people have enough time to contact the thousands of people applying,” another reader commented.

Some who work in human resources agreed.

 “I work in HR, and you just don't know what you're asking. Resources are thin, and it's just not possible to send out so many replies,” one reader said.

It’s one thing to never contact those who apply, but many felt it was just plain rude to not let people who interviewed know if they got the job or not.

“Being unemployed is hard enough on the self-esteem, but being completely ignored by companies after having interviewed is just soul crushing,” one reader wrote.