|
I get that your mom is being unreasonable, but did you really expect to garner much sympathy with "my parents struggling to pay the bills might throw out items I spent money on rather than helping out with food and lodging"? I mean are you aware that there's no backup set of parents to go to if your family can't pay the rent? Has the concept of not having enough money to buy food or shelter crossed your mind as important enough to not be spending your money on frivolous poo poo? Your options are: 1. Stop buying poo poo and/or sell your comic books and use any/all savings to work on moving out and becoming independent asap. 2. Stop buying poo poo and/or sell your comic books and use any/all savings help out with the household expenses. 3. A mixture of 1/2 How can someone be so clueless and entitled? It always baffles me when someone posts an E/N thread that consists of them doing pretty much everything wrong and you can just feel their expectation that everyone will think they're in the right.
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2013 09:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 07:53 |
|
|
Benny the Snake posted:Well people have been asking what industry am I trying to get into and what my internship responsibilities are.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
So everyone who's hounding the OP for not having a job even though he's clearly putting forth an effort, are you aware that there are literally less jobs than there are unemployed people and the gap is growing everyday? I've been employed my entire life (well 15+) and already have a fantastic lab position lined up after my grad degree this may, so I'm not being whiny on my own behalf but I don't get what's so complicated to understand about the idea that there are less jobs than there are people looking for jobs. Even if every unemployed person did everything right ever, there'd still be some. Personally my career success has pretty much everything to do with luck and incredibly little to do with hardwork, I've applied to like two things in my life and one of them was just a formality. ArbitraryC fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Feb 1, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2013 06:44
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:He's just being a sarcastic rear end in a top hat thinking he's owning me or others in this thread. I find it to be an incredibly simple and easy to understand concept, if there were 5 apples and 6 people, at least one person is not going to have a whole apple. I am honestly confused as to how anyone with any basic knowledge in arithmetic could have trouble understanding this. Perhaps you could elaborate for me because you seem to be one such person who believe everyone could succeed if they tried hard enough despite there literally not being enough success to go around from a mathematical standpoint.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 07:03
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:Because that's not what an unemployment rate usually signifies, especially in a first world country. You have a child's understanding of it. Department of labor straight up says that for every 1 job opening there is >1 unemployed person. This means that if the maximum number of unemployed people got jobs, you'd hit a point where there were 0 job openings but >0 unemployed people. What part of this is confusing? At what point are you willing to acknowledge that those >0 people who want jobs but for which there are 0 jobs available might not be at fault for not having a job? If you want to make a general point about whether or not our country is utilizing all of it's potential labor I'd agree with you that we're falling short. But that's pretty much strictly because "job creators" want there to be a shortage of available jobs because that drives wages to an absolute minimum as any rational person is going to accept being underpaid over being homeless and starving. There is an inherent conflict of interest between having everyone employed and successful and having an upper class that leaches off the surplus labor of those willing to work for less than they're worth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9Whccunka4 ArbitraryC fucked around with this message at 08:08 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 07:42
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:I added an edit in my above post to explain a bit more but if that's how you interpret that stat then I don't think there's really a way for us to come to an understanding. Your conclusion about what the OP should do about that stat doesn't follow at all either. E/N probably isn't the place for it in any case. e: vvv I'm willing to admit that the statistics could potentially be deceiving and there are plenty of famous quotes on this very concept. However, unless you link an academic source that provides an in depth review on how the problem is that people are choosing the wrong major, it's simply baseless speculation on your part. What is real is that there are less jobs available in america than there are people looking for jobs and I've already linked to a concrete government source that says just that. ArbitraryC fucked around with this message at 08:11 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 08:07
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:Those aren't my personal thoughts. You posted a source with a very obvious non understanding of what they signified. So where's your academic sources? Put up or shut up.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 08:15
|
|
|
I'm still confused as to how clemen could see a government source that literally says "The unemployed persons per job opening ratio has trended downward since the end of the recession and was 3.3 in November 2012." and not understand that this means there aren't enough jobs to employ all unemployed people. Clemen what this means as directly stated in quite plain and easy to understand English is that for every 1 job opening there is over 3 people who don't have a job. Lets say that means there are 100 jobs and 330 unemployed people. If those 100 jobs were immediately filled you would still have 230 unemployed people but 0 jobs remaining. This has nothing to do with your major, your skills, your expertise, whatever, there are simply less jobs in existence than people looking for jobs. It is mathematically impossible for all 330 of those people to get a job even if they all went back in time and made sure they got the perfect skillsets for what are the presently available jobs. This was a government source, and I notice you ran away with your tail in between your legs when I asked you to provide something other than baseless conjecture but I'm honestly curious as to how you misinterpreted this in the first place. A child should be able to understand the 1 apple 3 people example. ArbitraryC fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:You keep saying simple english but thats not what it means at all, by anyone who studies economics. Its an issue of distribution of jobs of varying complexities and professions. Thats why different rates exist for different professions and thats a general statisitc. Your reading it extremely myopically and its honestly weird. I never doubted your source and why you posted it 3 times like it proves your point is really confusing because we were discussing what those numbers mean, not if they exist. You clearly seem to have an ideological reason to believe this and I'm not gonna argue with you further over it (I also went to sleep last night). The OP has updated his thread. Words are cheap, post sources. e: Here's another good one: http://stateofworkingamerica.org/charts/unemployed-and-job-openings-by-industry/ Notice how all those dark blue bars are longer than the lighter blue bars? That's a pretty important point! And in this one the line that says unemployed is always higher than the line that says job openings, I wonder what the implications of this are? http://stateofworkingamerica.org/charts/job-openings-levels-and-unemployment-levels/ I just can't put my finger on it, oh well I guess it must be my childish understanding of economics. ArbitraryC fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
something clever posted:I've going to wait until Monday
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
lucifer chikken posted:At what point will you decide that a position probably more suited to your skills, probably in an office, will be worth a bit of a commute on public transportation until you get enough savings for a car (or to move out of your family home)? I really think you're cheating yourself out of good opportunities by being inflexible. This thread is a pretty good example of how people who already have a job and a stable life really have a hard time understanding how you get out of a post college slump. I have several bright friends all stuck at home with no real prospect of getting out because all the jobs they want they have to compete with people recently laid off who have far more experience. A couple years can really make that big of a difference. ArbitraryC fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Mar 29, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:And theres dudes like lucifer who think 0 work experience and a non technical BA make you above that sort of work. Very few people are "above" working in a warehouse. It's not like working in warehouses or McDonald's for x years is going to give him any more work experience to be a journalist or whatever, eventually if he applies to enough entry level positions that require an English degree he's going to get a job that's going to be a better career move than any type of work he could do that wouldn't require a degree. If anything I wouldn't be surprised if working non applicable jobs for too long would be a black mark on his resume, why would an employer want someone who no relevant work experience who's had several years to forget what they learned in college when they can just pick up someone else with no relevant work experience who just freshly graduated?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 07:02
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:Being 24 with no work experience is a much blacker mark. Theres no reason he can't work these jobs while applying to other things he feels are more "relevant". I will say that something like 50% of recent college graduates are unemployed or underemployed so at best the tough it up and try harder advice can only work for 1 in 2 people you talk to. You can't have winners without losers.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
waste of internet posted:Is this the OP's case? Is this even a frequent thing? Can people seriously go all 4 years in college without having a job, internship, volunteer situation, leadership experience, work-study etc? I've had 3 different jobs, throughout my college experience.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
InEscape posted:Sorry Benny I know you don't care that much about grammar in your posts but you did it twice on the last page and I have to say it. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trawl http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/troll Troll can be a synonym from trawl and I'm pretty sure etymologically speaking it's where term "trolling" (with respect to saying stupid poo poo on the internet to bait people) comes from. It's a stupid point anyways because I've literally never had someone give me a hard time for making a simple math error just because I'm an engineer, it really just seems like it's part of that visceral "well you shoulda picked a different major" reactions to lib art degrees that we try to fling it in their face whenever they're not perfect.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Out of curiosity how did they catch you for hitting that bumper? If no one saw it it seems like you could just feign ignorance and who knows maybe some rear end in a top hat customer left a cart out and it rolled into another car. If people directly saw you do it then I don't think there'd have been a point trying to hide it in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
Arch Stanton posted:Dude you seriously need to stop using "said" as an adjective. It makes you look like such a loving tool. You're not a British lawyer; cut that poo poo out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
Ursine Asylum posted:I was going to comment on why the next step is "fill out a form online", as opposed to "I filled out the form as soon as I got back from orientation and now I need to ...", but I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume you posted as soon as you got back from orientation, because the alternative is to believe you've spent one or more days not filling out an online form. Sometimes I kinda feel bad for Benny/other E/N posters with these kinds of problems because I do pretty much everything the OP always gets chastised for in these threads. For example I procrastinate on everything and will frequently do nothing productive until the last minute even when a lot of things need to be done, something like an online form usually won't end up being submitted until right before I need it done. I think in reality most people aren't as on the ball as they instruct other people to be and the only difference is whether or not they're in a position to be criticized over that kind of thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 07:53 |
|
|
natetimm posted:Benny, everything you just said makes sense and are good decisions. Good for you. Except his eventual plans for acadamia which there's no way he can actually handle, the short term goals are reasonable and decently thought out. Follow through with the plan Benny and just take it one step at a time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2014 02:20
|
|