|
Fat Ogre posted:Trade schools, starting your own business, getting certifications for fields that don't require a degree like IT, support jobs, or other service jobs. Any plan that has the phrase 'if you're really lucky' is bullshit.
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
menino posted:Any plan that has the phrase 'if you're really lucky' is bullshit. So like most people's plans they have like going after tenure or jobs after grad school that pay well?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:So like most people's plans they have like going after tenure or jobs after grad school that pay well? I'm pretty sure most people just want a well-paying (or hell, a decently paying!) job after high school. The problem is that all your premises rely on luck. Start a business...if you're lucky, it'll be successful. If you're lucky, you'll be able to afford a degree. If you're lucky. Well, tens of millions of Americans aren't lucky; they get fed the lie "a degree guarantees a job" from birth and then get blamed for not finding a job and having $100K in debt. These are systematic problems, not individual failings.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:Trade schools, starting your own business, getting certifications for fields that don't require a degree like IT, support jobs, or other service jobs. Name one company that will pay for your school. You see, by and large companies have stopped doing this. Why bother? They can hire another fool who ALREADY went to school and kick you to the curb.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Name one company that will pay for your school. You see, by and large companies have stopped doing this. Why bother? They can hire another fool who ALREADY went to school and kick you to the curb. I've had numerous different jobs that paid for classes related to your job. They won't pay for all of your schooling but they can and will pick up certain classes. This is most likely dependent on the industry your job is in. My sister could have had all of her student loans for med school paid for if she chose to be a doctor for few years in a rural area. She didn't want to do that though, but it was an option by multiple employers.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
AYC posted:I'm pretty sure most people just want a well-paying (or hell, a decently paying!) job after high school. I don't know how many job applicants I've seen that totally fail to look up what it is exactly a company does before applying for a job. That just simply giving us a resume and barely wearing business casual to an interview means they should get the job. Why do you want to work here, "uh I need a job." Yeah..... It isn't luck finding a job. There are poo poo tons of them out there. By saying it all comes down to luck basically implies no one has any skill whatsoever and everyone is equally qualified for every job. That the people in HR are just pulling resumes out of a hat and aren't looking at how well a person's attitude, relevant skills and qualifications fit them to that job 
Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 22:45 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
I don't know how many anecdotes you can spout that will still fail to be anything but anonymous bullshit on the internet.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:Why do you want to work here, "uh I need a job." Yeah..... I mean for some kind of scientist or whatever it could well be "passion" but for Office Assistant II (p/t) is it really somehow enlightening if the answer is "Because I want to help people in this office!" rather than "I need money for goods and services?" Is it an effort to see if someone is either stupid enough to believe it, or smart enough to know to lie?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I'm curious, what is the correct answer to "Why do you want to work here?" Depends on the job and the place you want to work. But "I need a job for money" is about the dumbest non answer you can come up with. I would like to expand my job skills. I am looking to advance my career in X and this job looks like an excellent opportunity to do so. I'm excited for the challenge this job will bring to my everyday life. I like that your company is involved in XYZ and I want to be involved in that even if it is just starting out at as ABC position to start with. I want to live here and establish roots in the community and this looks like a wonderfully stable place to build a career. etc etc. It isn't even smart enough to lie. It is being honest and not a goony shut-in that can't interact with others or smug idiot that thinks talking to people is below them. Many times the HR interview is to see how you interact with others that aren't your peers in your job at all just to see if you'd fit in the work environment.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:It isn't luck finding a job. There are poo poo tons of them out there. By saying it all comes down to luck basically implies no one has any skill whatsoever and everyone is equally qualified for every job. That the people in HR are just pulling resumes out of a hat and are looking at how well a person's attitude, relevant skills and qualifications fit them to that job In February 2014 there were 4.2 million job openings and 10.5 million unemployed persons. Even if we were to assume that every one of those unemployed people were somehow lucky enough to be geographically and educationally and professionally situated to meet the exact qualifications of those openings and they all tried super really hard, there'd still be over 6 million people unemployed through no fault of their own. Not even touching other factors like millions who are employed part-time because of economic reasons or who are otherwise underemployed. Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 22:52 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:Depends on the job and the place you want to work. What's it like being a gun nut with a chip on his shoulder
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:So like most people's plans they have like going after tenure or jobs after grad school that pay well? I'm not sure where you get off being that down on higher education when clearly it's done wonders for your mastery of metaphsyico-theologico-cosmoloonigology, Dr. Pangloss.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
I'm also deeply enjoying gun nuts arguing that guns aren't to blame for america's violence its the bad healthcare system and then in the healthcare thread talk about how only IT workers should be entitled to healthcare
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:In February 2014 there were 4.2 million job openings and 10.5 million unemployed persons. Even if we were to assume that every one of those unemployed people were somehow lucky enough to be geographically and educationally and professionally situated to meet the exact qualifications of those openings and they all tried super really hard, there'd still be over 6 million people unemployed through no fault of their own. So it is impossible for people to create businesses for themselves? And every job out there is over the table and in that list of 4.2 million jobs. How exactly are illegal immigrants finding jobs then? Again it is unrealistic to assume you'll ever get rid of unemployed people ever. From your link of the 10 million unemployed 3.8 have been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer. That is 6 loving months without a job. Sorry but that is ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:I'm also deeply enjoying gun nuts arguing that guns aren't to blame for america's violence its the bad healthcare system and then in the healthcare thread talk about how only IT workers should be entitled to healthcare Who exactly is saying that? When did I say I don't want UHC? 
Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 23:14 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:I'm not sure where you get off being that down on higher education when clearly it's done wonders for your mastery of metaphsyico-theologico-cosmoloonigology, Dr. Pangloss. It could be because I've seen numerous friends get hosed over by going after a college degree that ended up being worthless and are now paying student loans while working in what would be livable jobs if it weren't for the non dischargable student loans.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:So it is impossible for people to create businesses for themselves? And every job out there is over the table and in that list of 4.2 million jobs. How exactly are illegal immigrants finding jobs then? You said there were "poo poo tons" of jobs out there. You might not like the facts I have presented you that explicitly demonstrate that there are less currently available job openings than there are unemployed persons as of February 2014, but waving your hands and making excuses about illegals and long-term unemployed doesn't change the fact that even if 100% of the unemployed people spent literally every moment of every day applying for and interviewing for any and all job openings 6 million of them wouldn't have jobs as a result.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:You said there were "poo poo tons" of jobs out there. You might not like the facts I have presented you that explicitly demonstrate that there are less currently available job openings than there are unemployed persons as of February 2014, but waving your hands and making excuses about illegals and long-term unemployed doesn't change the fact that even if 100% of the unemployed people spent literally every moment of every day applying for and interviewing for any and all job openings 6 million of them wouldn't have jobs as a result. There are poo poo tons of jobs out there. 4.2 million of them. You just have to be better suited for that job than 60% of other people in this hypothetical situation. Again you'll never get unemployment to 0% and you still have the issue of people that are long term unemployed because of reasons like health or taking care of family members etc. Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 23:33 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:There are poo poo tons of jobs out there. 4.2 million of them. You just have to be better suited for that job than 60% of other people in this hypothetical situation. Aren't those people not counted in the official figures though because they are not looking for work?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:There are poo poo tons of jobs out there. 4.2 million of them. You just have to be better suited for that job than 60% of other people in this hypothetical situation. You have a long way to go to understand what you're spouting off about. Keep digging. Please. You need to learn. I will point out that it is beneficial to us all that the marginalized workers have both the opportunity to create new niches for themselves (through entrepreneurship or advanced education) and survive long enough to become productive in one of these new niches. The best method to do this is through federal or state governmental programs. Welfare. There certainly is the moral component to it; many of us feel it is moral to provide support through public programs. We all chip in to help those less well off (you know, like Jesus said, except we make it the government's responsibility and make contributions toward those programs mandatory). However, we also know that it is the conservative solution, meaning it helps the economy and all of society to run SNAP, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, and basic welfare. That is the main point of being concerned with inequity, not necesarily because of the difference between classes, but because the most poor are so very, very poor. We will all benefit by relieving relative poverty, whether welfare recipients "deserve" it or not. Morally, the poor do not deserve to die for being marginalized by business. Financially, poverty is an increasing drag on the wider economy, from increased crime to decreased general health. There is a great deal more to this than any of us can explain in one post or even one thread. I've been reading info-threads on SA for almost a decade, and in that time I've gone from a luke-warm libertarian to an enthusiastic social-democrat.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:There are poo poo tons of jobs out there. 4.2 million of them. You just have to be better suited for that job than 60% of other people in this hypothetical situation. This isn't a hypothetical situation: your "poo poo ton" of jobs only covers 40% of the unemployed no matter how strong the work ethic or how well qualified the other 60% are. Luck absolutely plays a factor in finding a job, and the fact that you continue to not acknowledge that would be astounding if you hadn't already demonstrated how your arguments are insulated from data to the contrary repeatedly now. There's no issue with the long-term unemployed because of health or taking care of family because that's not included in those 10 million: quote:In February, 2.3 million persons were marginally attached to the labor How does Table A-16 qualify those persons? quote:Includes those who did not actively look for work in the prior 4 weeks for such reasons as school or family responsibilities, ill health, and transportation problems, as well as a number for whom reason for nonparticipation was not determined. Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 01:49 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:There are poo poo tons of jobs out there. 4.2 million of them. You just have to be better suited for that job than 60% of other people in this hypothetical situation. Yes, yes if you run faster you'll win the race. It's not a problem that most people lose, because if they all just run faster they'll win! We're talking about policy here. How to arrange society so hard work actually pays off and so many people aren't left without insurance, a living wage, or even a job. I'm sure there's some Ask/Tell threads out there where people would appreciate your brilliant degree plan and debt insights in their individual cases, but we're talking about how to change the system as a whole so more people have a chance to live a decent life. Saying "well you just have to be better than the 60% of people who are losers" misses the point, because no matter how hard everyone works, 60% will be SOL regardless of talent and ability and that is bad. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 01:57 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:It isn't luck finding a job. There are poo poo tons of them out there. By saying it all comes down to luck basically implies no one has any skill whatsoever and everyone is equally qualified for every job. That the people in HR are just pulling resumes out of a hat and aren't looking at how well a person's attitude, relevant skills and qualifications fit them to that job
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Name one company that will pay for your school. You see, by and large companies have stopped doing this. Why bother? They can hire another fool who ALREADY went to school and kick you to the curb. Part of the reasons companies don't do this anymore is that the tax code treats this as a fringe benefit now. The requirements are much stricter on what companies can pay for without getting taxed or counted as salary. This is a bad tax law and ideally should be changed to allow employers to pretty freely pay for higher education expenses for any reason without it getting counted as salary.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I'm sure there's some Ask/Tell threads out there where people would appreciate your brilliant degree plan and debt insights in their individual cases, but we're talking about how to change the system as a whole so more people have a chance to live a decent life. Saying "well you just have to be better than the 60% of people who are losers" misses the point, because no matter how hard everyone works, 60% will be SOL regardless of talent and ability and that is bad. Knight posted:gently caress you. There are 3 unemployed working age people for every 1 job opening available. Saying there are "poo poo tons" of jobs is about as relevant as telling kids there are "poo poo tons of chairs" after losing musical chairs. Were at 6.7% unemployment.. 5-6% is considered healthy for the economy. http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/economy_14424.htm If all 4 million found jobs that would reduce unemployment by 2.68% means we'd be at 4.02% unemployment which is considered amazing and healthy for our country so again, this isn't that big of a deal. You cannot get unemployment to 0% nor would you want to.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
I think living in America has broken Fat Ogre. He truly loves the Brother.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:Were at 6.7% unemployment.. 5-6% is considered healthy for the economy. Underemployment would throw a hex on those job figures just as it is now: ~90% of News Jobs since 2009 Part-Time code:
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:You cannot get unemployment to 0% nor would you want to. You have used this straw man like 5 times now. It's not the stone cold zinger you think it is. Full employment is generally considered to be anywhere between 3%-6% depending on a variety of factors. That usually covers the number of people who are between jobs at any one time. Literally nobody here has described their goal as 0% unemployment because 0% unemployment is unhealthy for the economy, and they understand what they're talking about. You are really uneducated about this topic, and you have misunderstood them. If you actually knew a drat thing about what you're talking about, you would realize that most people are targetting the generally accepted full employment figure I described above.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
GROVER CURES HOUSE posted:I think living in America has broken Fat Ogre. He truly loves the Brother. It's all for the best, in the best of all possible worlds.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
ErIog posted:You have used this straw man like 5 times now. It's not the stone cold zinger you think it is. Full employment is generally considered to be anywhere between 3%-6% depending on a variety of factors. That usually covers the number of people who are between jobs at any one time. Literally nobody here has described their goal as 0% unemployment because 0% unemployment is unhealthy for the economy, and they understand what they're talking about. So what would you say the people complaining about the other 60% not being able to find jobs (aka if they all had jobs there wouldn't be unemployment) are arguing for? It isn't a strawman if people keep moaning about how unfair it is that there would still be 6 million unemployed people if everything went perfectly and all the jobs were filled. But sure get pissy at me who isn't making the argument that we need to employ everyone unlike others in this thread.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Underemployment would throw a hex on those job figures just as it is now: ~90% of News Jobs since 2009 Part-Time Does anyone have info on hand on what the break down between new full time/part time jobs was prior to 2009? I ask because I remember this being a widely talked about thing all through the early through mid 2000s.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:It isn't a strawman if people keep moaning about how unfair it is that there would still be 6 million unemployed people if everything went perfectly and all the jobs were filled. They're not moaning about how unfair it is, they're pointing out that looking down your nose at the unemployed while simultaneously being aware that the economy requires there to be millions of unemployed people at all times makes you kind of a jackass.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:(aka if they all had jobs there wouldn't be unemployment) You do not understand unemployment figures. The figures you and others in this thread are using are the U3 unemployment numbers. You made the claim that if those 6 million people were given employment that we would have 100% employment. That is not the case because you're only figuring from U3. We would still have millions more unemployed people that are counted in U4/U5, and then also underemployed workers counted in U6. The U4/U5 workers would also start to move back into the U3 figure as they began to look for work again as the economy recovered. So even if all the people currently being counted under U3 all managed to find employment in your utopia, we'd still have U4/U5 to worry about because we have a structural problem with long term unemployment and labor force participation right now. This is caused by there being many more people than there are jobs. This is a fact. ErIog fucked around with this message at 04:43 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:Were at 6.7% unemployment.. 5-6% is considered healthy for the economy. Those numbers have been greatly smudged. Real unemployment hovers around 15%. (There's a reason they don't "count" underemployed, discouraged, and long-term unemployed workers in this figure...the economy is essentially a confidence game at this point.)
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Those numbers have been greatly smudged. This is not true. We've been measuring unemployment the same way since around 1994. You can make the argument that U4/U5 are better measures of actual unemployment, but the idea that the numbers are fudged is right wing meme nonsense bullshit. BLS diligently calculates and reports these other higher numbers along with the U3 number everyone likes to talk about.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Those numbers have been greatly smudged. Real unemployment hovers around 15%. (There's a reason they don't "count" underemployed, discouraged, and long-term unemployed workers in this figure...the economy is essentially a confidence game at this point.) Just nitpicking and all, but U6 is at 12.7 ATM.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
 PhDs in science should not be pursued by most people because it's 'fiscally irresponsible'. Tell me more about how only the sons and daughters of privilege should be allowed to pursue a PhD gently caress you and gently caress your bootstraps nonsense. Do you seriously believe everyone is a temporarily embarrassed millionaire who just hasn't unlocked their ~~full potential because you obtained your degree during a time when it was actually possible for non-educated persons to have decent full time jobs? Is it reasonable to expect every single person to only pursue "responsible" jobs (whatever that means, presumably STEM)? If every single person switched to what you consider a valid field, there won't be any more jobs yet there will be millions more people looking for jobs. You're either an elaborate troll or a stereotypical ignorant Gen Xer. Edit: hold on, creating the "purge the poors from PhD progams pogrom", or P5 for short Edit Edit: Man things just aren't the way they used to be, must be because of all those drat lazy millenials and not systemic problems with our society. If only they could bootstrap harder 
Axe Master fucked around with this message at 17:45 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Axe Master posted:
Look at you saying I think that it should be reserved to only those with money. Again with the straw man. Under our current system, those are the only people it financially makes sense to go get them. If we have real reforms with our education system, like I already said we should do, then it wouldn't be reserved to those that can afford it. But no don't read what I posted or said. I'm saying if you're smart and poor don't waste your time and money on going after a Phd in the current system as it doesn't make financial sense for you to do so. Especially if you don't have family backing that can support you. How dare you try to help people not get hosed over in a lovely economy by pointing out the game is loving rigged. It is tottally rigged you stupid gen-xer! You're so out of touch you can't know it is rigged so stop telling people how to best deal with a rigged game and just let them get hosed over because I disagree with a straw man version of you! 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Please look at these quotes and see how you have, in fact, said, within the response, the thing that you are so angry someone has accused you of saying. I have cut out portions to make it more obvious.Fat Ogre posted:Look at you saying I think that it should be reserved to only those with money. Again with the straw man. That you have proposed reforms is irrelevant, as you are still accusing people of being irresponsible "under the current system." It's rather incredible that you can smugly deny saying something while saying it in the very same breath.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
Bicyclops posted:Please look at these quotes and see how you have, in fact, said, within the response, the thing that you are so angry someone has accused you of saying. I have cut out portions to make it more obvious. The market collapsed in 2008 with warnings all over the place the market was going to implode. The dotcom bubble busted in the early 2000s. So basically at the very least 6 years if not almost 10-14 years to adjust to the new realities of getting jobs and degrees etc. If you're still considering a PHD in something like Archaeology or any other low paying highly competitive field that is irresponsible or uninformed plain and simple. Or do you get mad at people for pointing out that maybe we shouldn't use lead in things anymore and greenhouse gases are a bad idea?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 18:30
|
|