http://www.infowars.com/why-are-rec...-jobless-and-living-at-home-with-mom-and-dad/ http://www.economist.com/node/17848419
Oh I'm so sick of hearing this meme. "Ohhh! Woe is the poor uneducated shlub! They have to have good paying jobs too!" No, they don't. The market will no longer support morons without a market suitable college degree. That is a fact of life. Advanced technological societies mercilessly punish those who cannot adapt through education to functioning within them. We are no longer a nation of worker bees making socks and jocks. We are an ideas nation and we need ideas people. For those without IQ enough to go to college. Too bad, they have a job cleaning toilets. That's just how the world is now and people need to start accepting it instead of trying to reverse history like Luddites sabotaging their looms. When will America wake up finally to the harsh reality of globalization?
The problem is that everyone is expected to go through long and expensive training programs, then the jobs that await them are not even especially good paying. It would be one thing if people had to become better trained for the changing types of jobs available. But what is happening is that most of the jobs available are low paying and do not require any training, while employers are increasing requiring university educations for the jobs that formerly did not require degrees, and the jobs that do require high skill levels are paying less and less. When the wages and job opportunities of the lower level jobs started dissappearing, many economists just naively assumed that the next generation of workers would just have to be more educated. They failed to realise that this was only the beginning manifestation of decling job opportunities, and that all the displaced workers from the lower jobs would eventually result in increased unemployment (and lower wages) in the higher level jobs also. The Economist magazine even remarked that it was a historical oddity that uneducated American workers had managed to be able to afford their own houses for so many decades! As if needing a university degree to ever be able to buy a house should just be taken for granted as a fact of life. The problem with simply expecting everyone to become more educated, for essentially the same wages as before, should be obvious. Thanks to excessive immigration and "free" trade policies. Perhaps when the underemployment rate of lawyers starts going up, and the incomes of doctors start falling to levels where students become less motivated to go to medical school, everyone will finally admit that the real problem is NOT that people are not educated enough. When jobs start dissappearing in droves, and new good jobs are not available to take the place of the old, it should be cause for concern. Economists should have taken a better look at the realistic job prospects before they celebrated the "new service jobs of the future".
When you look at some of the greatest advances in human evolution, what comes to mind? To me, the following come to mind: 1. housing 2. water purification 3. dynamite 4. guns 5. clothing 6. agriculture 7. heat / air conditioning 8. electricity/ fuel If you can do all of these activities, do you really need a job? Why not investigate the real objective of “public education”? If it is not to make people self-sufficient, one must assume that that objective is mindless enslavement.
The reason people would have difficulty being self-sufficient is because of land-ownership. Trying to live a life out in a barren desert or frozen tundra would be nearly impossible. All the other land is occupied.
As one of the rare people in USA society that has lived in rural, urban and suburban cultures, I can assure you that people in rural areas do NOT respect property rights (i.e. they will fish in another persons pond, they will hunt on another persons land and they will steal another persons crops). Housing encroachment is of course a death sentence. Thus, land ownership is a meaningless concept when life is truly difficult. It is a social decision to live in Alaska or Arizona.
I think the answer to both is similar. Jobs are requiring degrees because kids can easily graduate HS illiterate. Why would you risk a worker with just a HS degree and have to waste time teaching him basic literacy skills when you can hire a graduate and get at minimum a literate person with a few minor job skills? As to immigrants -- Americans don't work very hard. It's better to hire an immigrant who knows that you expect labor from workers rather than an American who thinks that work is supposed to be "fun" and not very hard. I've yet to see an American worker break a sweat. PS, lawyers are already underemployed. Finding a law job after law school is very difficult.
The cure for the lack of job opportunities for young people is pretty simple: they need to make the opportunities for themselves. Look at the founders of many of the biggest companies in the country. They often started during college or right out of college. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, James Cash Penny, Sam Walton, Frank Mars and hundreds of others all started their giant corporations when they were in their twenties. That is the age where people have the freedom, drive and lack of responsibilities that will allow them to take the risks and invest the time needed to create great companies. Rather than whine about the job market being limited, these people need to create their own opportunities.
Easy to say. Much more difficult to do. This is just not a realistic option for most of these people. The opportunities have been drying up. Not just job opportunities but room for business opportunities also. Rent is high, profits for small businesses are low. And young people typically do not have any savings. Difficult to start a most types of businesses without savings.
It has always been very difficult to start a business. It has always taken a lot of work. Businesses have always cost a lot of money to start. Small businesses have always had very small profit margins and young people have never had much savings. Even so, the people that worked past those barriers instead of giving up are the ones that not only became successful, but also created opportunities and jobs for other people. Most of the people who did this were young, had no assets to speak of, yet were able to push through. Many of their peers made the same excuses, but the ones who pushed through are the ones whose names are associated with the big companies of today.
I am a recent graduate from University of California, and I can't even find a job to pay off my debts. Walmart won't even hire me, they say I am "over qualified." However, I think they're bull(*)(*)(*)(*)ting, maybe it has something to do with me spending all my time in school and have no work experience.
There are jobs in Silicon Valley if you have the skills. Other than that there isn't much going on in California any more.
Employment for the young has been crippled by older workers remaining in the work force longer. retirement should be urged during periods of mass unemployment, instead our government is atempting to raise the age SS can be drawn, one experienced senior employee's salary can generaly pay for two new hire employees in almost any career. Start up/ truly small businesses are cripled by lack of health insurance over all, unless you can afford to pay 1200 month +5000 deductible dont even try, you will go broke the fist time you have to visit the hospital.
To many people are getting college degrees and those not suited to college level work take "soft" degrees of little value. When I went to college in the late 80's I paid for my degree with money I earned and did study philosophy but it was for personal interest and I left with no debts with my BA. My work was generally things I liked doing crafting jewelry, busking and so forth and I never made a lot of money. Its just not important to me over other things. But now why would you get a degree unless you can do something with it that means a STEM field, maybe pre-something like going for a graduate degree in psychology. I have a suggestion join the military with a college degree your a shoe in if you can pass the physical demands and yes I'm being serious its an option. What was your degree in?
Getting better all the time ... Unemployment rate, 16-19 y.o. Oct 2009: 24.7% Sep 2012: 21.2% http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab1.htm College degree: Sep 2009: 5.0% Sep 2012: 4.1% http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab4.htm
Only a liberal would call stagnation "recovery". Why can't you progressives admit that what you really want is a permanently stagnated "zero-growth" economy? It is what every major progressive organization calls for on their websites.
Half right. It's not that the degree must be STEM, but really, the days of using college as a means to delay adulthood are gone. It's a simple answer -- unless you have a specific job you need a degree for, DON'T GO TO COLLEGE. There are plenty of degrees that are helpful, accountng and the like if you don't want STEM, but simply going to college because you finished HS is stupid. If anything, the trouble is that we're flooding the market with college grads, thus making college degrees not as valuable to an employer. If it were up to me, I'd raise the admission standards and toughen grading -- both of which, IMO would make a degree worth something. If you have to get a 3.0 to get into a college, and if 50% of college students didn't finish, then those who do finish end up in demand simply because there are fewer grads in the environment. That's the problem of teaching generations of kids and parents that all students MUST attend a 4-year college and MUST have a degree -- it weakens the value of the degree, to the point that essentially a college degree today is literally what a HS diploma was in 1930 -- proof of literacy and numeracy and intelligence. And I expect the credentialism to get worse -- as most people now have a BS/BA, those who want to stand out have to get a MS/MA until everyone gets one of those as well. Then we get to the PhD level, and run out of degrees. College doesn't work because the standards are lower and we produce too many grads.
Check out income levels and unemployment levels amongs college grads compared to HS grads and you'll find your answer.
It's an option, not an expectation. If you can make yourself useful without expensive training, by all means do so. If you can't make yourself useful, maybe some training will help. End of the day though, whether you are useful or useless is entirely your responsibility. It's your life.
