Wall Street protesters: We're in for the long haul

[Razgovory]

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

Can't hurt.  It's the difference between Ide, and JFK jr.

[Barrister]

If you have nepotism you dont really need a degree...

Depends.  I mean, if your dad runs a private practice or is a partner, he can't just hire you as a new associate because he wants to.  You still need the J.D. and bar certification.  Same deal with a doctor's practice, and a lot of learned professions.

I guess if you own a widget factory it wouldn't matter.

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

I've seen more than a few sons and daughters of lawyers and judges who got some very hard to obtain jobs...

[Ideologue]

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

Can't hurt.  It's the difference between Ide, and JFK jr.

"What do Ideologue and JFK Jr. have in common?"
"Neither one of us know how to fly a plane!"

[Razgovory]

That wasn't really fair.  I think you are much smarter then JFK jr was.  I was thinking of nepotism and his difficulty passing the bar reminded me a bit of you.  That's why I made the comparison.  I believe he ended up with nice jobs before crashing into the sea.

[Jacob]

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

... but it rarely hurts.

Anyhow, I thought that a big part of these protests are because professional qualifications are much less of a sure thing than they used to be.

[crazy canuck]

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

... but it rarely hurts.

Anyhow, I thought that a big part of these protests are because professional qualifications are much less of a sure thing than they used to be.

You are falling into the same trap Ide has fallen into.  There is only one generation I can think of where a professional qualification amounted to a kind of golden ticket at that was the generation before mine when after the war there were a lot of jobs and not many people to fill them.  It was truly a golden age.  In my graduating class less than 60% of people got an articled position and of the lucky ones that did fewer still had jobs after their articles.

So what I would like to know is when was it that merely having a piece of paper was a "sure thing".  This strikes me more as a reaction of the age of entitlement  - Dammit, I went to school now give me my high paying job!  What do you mean I have to compete for it!

[crazy canuck]

If you have nepotism you dont really need a degree...

Depends.  I mean, if your dad runs a private practice or is a partner, he can't just hire you as a new associate because he wants to.  You still need the J.D. and bar certification.  Same deal with a doctor's practice, and a lot of learned professions.

I guess if you own a widget factory it wouldn't matter.

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

I've seen more than a few sons and daughters of lawyers and judges who got some very hard to obtain jobs...

I know even more that worked very hard to get where they are.

[Malthus]

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

... but it rarely hurts.

Anyhow, I thought that a big part of these protests are because professional qualifications are much less of a sure thing than they used to be.

You are falling into the same trap Ide has fallen into.  There is only one generation I can think of where a professional qualification amounted to a kind of golden ticket at that was the generation before mine when after the war there were a lot of jobs and not many people to fill them.  It was truly a golden age.  In my graduating class less than 60% of people got an articled position and of the lucky ones that did fewer still had jobs after their articles.

So what I would like to know is when was it that merely having a piece of paper was a "sure thing".  This strikes me more as a reaction of the age of entitlement  - Dammit, I went to school now give me my high paying job!  What do you mean I have to compete for it!

My grandfather's generation: saved bits of string and used elastic bands because they grew up during the great depression.

My father's generation: grew up right after WW2. If you had a HS degree, you got a job. If you had a university degree, you got a professional-type job. Unless you were a hopeless screw-up.

My generation: a degree was necessary but not sufficient for getting a job - even a professional-type degree. It was a ticket to play, but you still had to win the game on your own. Otherwise, you might well end up waiting tables.

[Capetan Mihali]

Everybody knows connections are immensely valuable for getting any job, from low-end work to the most prestigious professions.  Being from an elite background seems to obviously make the likelihood of having valuable connections much higher.

[Jacob]

You are falling into the same trap Ide has fallen into.  There is only one generation I can think of where a professional qualification amounted to a kind of golden ticket at that was the generation before mine when after the war there were a lot of jobs and not many people to fill them.  It was truly a golden age.  In my graduating class less than 60% of people got an articled position and of the lucky ones that did fewer still had jobs after their articles.

So what I would like to know is when was it that merely having a piece of paper was a "sure thing".  This strikes me more as a reaction of the age of entitlement  - Dammit, I went to school now give me my high paying job!  What do you mean I have to compete for it!

I'm not falling into any traps, at least not yet, I'm recounting what I'm hearing and reading. And, incidentally, I'm not just talking about recent graduates but also about educated mid-career people suddenly without work.

For arguments sake, let's posit two possible situations:

1. People are whining more. It really is no harder than it used to be.
2. It really is harder in aggregate than it used to be.

How do we determine which one is actually true?

My sense is that the increase in higher education combined with globalisation and the present economic downtown really has made it harder than it used to be to find a job, even if you're qualified. This, combined with mediocre health coverage for people not in good bargaining positions with their employers and abysmal coverage for the unemployed does in fact make things worse for more people.

Now, I could very well be wrong. Can you propose a good way to determine whether my impression above is correct or not, in a way that would convince men of good faith (as we both are )?

I should note, also, that I'm talking primarily about the US here. I think the relative resilience of the Canadian economy combined with socialized medicine means that we're not experiencing the same issue up here. Nonetheless, it would be worthwhile to look at the same criteria in Canada as we do in the US. If, for example, only 20% of graduates in a class similar to yours end up in an articling position then we'll both have to concede that the dynamic has shifted in Canada at least in this area and the time you graduated was in fact a 'golden age' comparatively speaking. Conversely if the present rate is 50% or 70% or otherwise comparable, then we can say that things haven't in fact changed.

In short, in Canada I think things are pretty decent. There's not a particularly big group of people caught in difficult situations; and I don't see people really making claims to that effect.

On the other hand, in the US it seems a growing number of people, it seems, are claiming they're having it harder than they used to; a larger number of people than there used to be, and from demographics where you'd previously expect them to do okay.

Do you agree with those, or disagree? Anyone else?

Are there any readily available metrics we can look at to support or disprove those hunches, yours or mine?

[crazy canuck]

Everybody knows connections are immensely valuable for getting any job, from low-end work to the most prestigious professions.  Being from an elite background seems to obviously make the likelihood of having valuable connections much higher.

The everybody knows arguments are usually based on false assumptions.  For example, how is it that one gets "low end work" because of connections.  I have done both low end and high end work.  I dont know to many people that get both simply because they come from an elite background.

[crazy canuck]

@Jacob, I dont think the whining has anything to do with jobs being harder or not.  It has to do with the sense of entitlement that has not existed before.  As Malthus said, my grandparents really did have it hard.  They didnt complain.  They just worked hard and lived frugally.  My parents had many job opportunities.  My generation had less.  This generation might have less still but they are the first generation to have such a sense of entitlement to the good life simply because they are there.

edit: also another nitpick.  We dont have "socialized medicine".  If we did Doctors would all be employees of the State.  Our system is quite different.  We do have a single payor system but doctors can be very entreprenurial within and outside that system.

[Ideologue]

If you have professional qualifications you really dont need nepotism 

... but it rarely hurts.

Anyhow, I thought that a big part of these protests are because professional qualifications are much less of a sure thing than they used to be.

You are falling into the same trap Ide has fallen into.  There is only one generation I can think of where a professional qualification amounted to a kind of golden ticket at that was the generation before mine when after the war there were a lot of jobs and not many people to fill them.  It was truly a golden age.  In my graduating class less than 60% of people got an articled position and of the lucky ones that did fewer still had jobs after their articles.

So what I would like to know is when was it that merely having a piece of paper was a "sure thing".  This strikes me more as a reaction of the age of entitlement  - Dammit, I went to school now give me my high paying job!  What do you mean I have to compete for it!

It's not an "entitlement" if you paid for it.  It's not like you can return the Goddamned thing for a refund.

If you want to make an argument that you're paying for the opportunity to compete, that's fine, I'm not disagreeing with you; are you suggesting that is way things should be?  Because I don't see why, unless standing on a hillock of broken rivals is just the kind of thing that makes you feel better.

[Jacob]

Everybody knows connections are immensely valuable for getting any job, from low-end work to the most prestigious professions.  Being from an elite background seems to obviously make the likelihood of having valuable connections much higher.

The everybody knows arguments are usually based on false assumptions.  For example, how is it that one gets "low end work" because of connections.  I have done both low end and high end work.  I dont know to many people that get both simply because they come from an elite background.

Maybe "everybody knows arguments are usually based on false assumptions" but I don't think it is in this case. Certainly, it's been true in my observation everywhere in my varied career.

If your dad is the CEO of HP, you can easily get pretty decent starting jobs in any number of corporations (because the CEO of the other corporation is your golfing buddy), and your immediate bosses treat you very well comparatively speaking.

If your uncle runs the construction site, or your buddy has been on the crew for a long time, it's much easier for you to get a job than somebody nobody knows on-site.

If you know a couple of people at the videogame developer already, you have a much better chance of being told of the opening before it's filled and a couple of extra checkmarks on your post-interview consideration than some guy who's just a name on a resume.

You have a better chance getting the job at the movie theatre selling pop corn if you're drinking buddies with the assistant manager, compared to the person who just drops off their resume.

... I'm surprised that you'd find the notion that personal connections is a big help in finding a job controversial at all.

[crazy canuck]

It's not an "entitlement" if you paid for it.  It's not like you can return the Goddamned thing for a refund.

This is exactly the attitude I am talking about.  You didnt pay for the good life.  You paid for another step to help you toward the good life.  You make of your degree what you will.