How many of us here are considered "Mid-Level"?
QuoteHelp Wanted. But Not For Mid-Level Jobs
by Yuki Noguchi
NPR
Unemployment figures for May come out Friday. While the numbers will show how many jobs have been added or lost, they won't tell us much about the quality of positions filled or illustrate what economists already know: that the middle of the job market is hollowing out.
Demand remains for people with complex skills, like software engineering or the ability to read X-rays. There is also demand for people to take jobs that require less skill, like cleaning and waiting tables. It's the jobs in the middle that are being squeezed – sales, administration, assembly positions, for example.
Economists have a term for this phenomenon: labor polarization.
"What's happening is we're getting jobs at both ends of the spectrum," says Howard Rosen, a research fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
The phenomenon goes back a couple decades, but Rosen says it has become much more visible in recent years. Companies accelerated the rate they laid off workers in those middle-skill jobs. Since then, in the recovery, firms haven't been adding those jobs back.
"We have two things going on: We have more people looking for jobs than we have jobs," Rosen says. "And also, there's a shift in the composition of those jobs. So many of those people looking for jobs are taking jobs at lower wages."
Take, for example, Sonya Spears. Until two years ago, Spears had a full-time job generating sales leads for a California-based company. When she lost that job, she moved from her studio apartment in western Massachusetts to a group house close to Boston where she has to share a bathroom and kitchen.
Now in her early 50s, Spears says the only job she has gotten so far is part-time, for $10 an hour. She says she surfs help-wanted ads on Craigslist and Careerbuilder – to no avail.
"I feel pretty bad. I never thought I'd end up like this, at my age, 'cause when I was younger, it seemed like only the experienced people got the jobs," Spears says. "Now they want the young kids out of school, and they don't want experienced people anymore."
Spears, who has a college degree in communications, feels stuck. For health reasons, she can't do physical labor or even retail jobs requiring her to be on her feet all day. Nor does she have the skills necessary for some of the higher paying work she'd like to get.
"I can't afford any other training," she says. "I was thinking about maybe going and getting a master's degree; but because I cannot get grants or loans, I can't afford to do that."
Workforce demand often changes when technology shifts, says David Autor, an economics professor at MIT whose research focuses on labor polarization.
"Many forms of technological change in the past probably had the effect of eliminating low-skilled work and making high-skilled work more important," he said. "This is a form of technical change that has had the effect of displacing the middle.
Faster processing speeds and software mean things can be monitored remotely. Software makes it easier for people to digitize and manipulate data.
So, for example at MIT, where Autor works, the school was able to save money by laying off many administrative workers without severely affecting productivity. There simply was less paper to push around. The school found it still needs professors and it still needs janitors, but not the layer of staff in between.
"And that's an uncomfortable phenomenon because we like to think of the march of progress as creating more and more good jobs, and fewer and fewer undesirable jobs," he says. "But that's not the era we're living in."
He says that partly explains why so many people have gotten discouraged and stopped looking for work, or why they remain unemployed for a very long time.
"And the problem is that once especially older, less-educated workers are out of the labor force for a while, they just become increasingly less likely to return," Autor says.
For Spears, owning her own business would be her dream, but that's not an option. She can't get a bank loan because the last couple of years have destroyed her credit.
"If I had my way, I'd not have to depend on an employer again," she says, "but I'm not in the situation to do that now."
I like how it turns out everything I was saying ten years ago is coming to pass, but I don't like how it means everything sucks.
Not really that shocking. It's going to get a lot worse before people finally acknowledge that consumerist capitalism was never really sustainable. Cheap credit managed to extend the bubble a little ways, but ultimately when you're turning almost everybody into low-end wageslaves, they aren't going to be able to afford your assorted products. On the other hand, where do we go from here? The bubble period was a time of incredibly high living standards, and folks aren't going to like to see those rolled back. Look at what's happening in Europe right now. But if those who are fortunate want to pretend that they don't live in a community, then the masses have no reason not to kill them.
I guess they should have stayed in school.
Quote from: The Brain on May 27, 2012, 11:57:21 PM
I guess they should have stayed in school.
What, forever?
Quote from: NeilBut if those who are fortunate want to pretend that they don't live in a community, then the masses have no reason not to kill them.
Something that always surprises me is how well-controlled people in the U.S. are. Even homeless folks, who literally have nothing to lose and are close to dying anyway, refuse to go out in a blaze of glory. Let alone the young males you really need to drive a red terror.
I actually remember having a conversation about it with RH during one of London Languish meets - essentially, jobs these days come either as highly paid but also highly demanding (not just in terms of skills/education, but time, commitment, flexibility etc.) positions or as badly paid ones - there seems to be less and less stable, 9-5, medium-level paying jobs out there.
The high-pay/high-commitment jobs are probably becoming more high-commitment because they can no longer rely on that mid-level/mid-pay admin assistant to deal with the mundane crap. :P
MIT might have found they can get by with less admin positions, but I bet there are a lot of stressed professors thinking "I can't believe I have to deal with this bullshit myself now".
Anyway, I know this term is a bit trite, but I think what we are witnessing is not really hollowing out the middle of the job market, but shift to what some call the "creative class", which are the people (of various pay levels) that perform creative functions and will continue to be paid more and more, whereas as pointed out, people in administrative/automatic functions will be replaced with software and robots.
Quote from: Tonitrus on May 28, 2012, 01:35:20 AM
The high-pay/high-commitment jobs are probably becoming more high-commitment because they can no longer rely on that mid-level/mid-pay admin assistant to deal with the mundane crap. :P
Nah. It's more the case that we have replaced couriers with e-mails and now have to respond much faster than before.
Quote from: Martinus on May 28, 2012, 01:37:42 AM
people in administrative/automatic functions will be replaced with software and robots.
Or an endless carousel of low-paid contractor staff, burn-out after burn-out.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 28, 2012, 01:52:06 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 28, 2012, 01:37:42 AM
people in administrative/automatic functions will be replaced with software and robots.
Or an endless carousel of low-paid contractor staff, burn-out after burn-out.
:w00t:
A lot of those jobs are shifted offshore here. In the area I work, we have our software developers in Minsk and Bangalore, our IT support in Bucharest, the accounting functions will soon be handled in Cebu, Phillipines. Etc.
Quote from: Neil on May 27, 2012, 11:10:57 PM
Not really that shocking. It's going to get a lot worse before people finally acknowledge that consumerist capitalism was never really sustainable. Cheap credit managed to extend the bubble a little ways, but ultimately when you're turning almost everybody into low-end wageslaves, they aren't going to be able to afford your assorted products. On the other hand, where do we go from here? The bubble period was a time of incredibly high living standards, and folks aren't going to like to see those rolled back. Look at what's happening in Europe right now. But if those who are fortunate want to pretend that they don't live in a community, then the masses have no reason not to kill them.
:unsure: :mellow: I concur. :)
I was speaking to a co worker on Friday, and all the software guys in my company's Indian subsidiary get paid like 1.50-2/hour for programming. :lol: wtf, how can Americans compete with that?
With guns.
You speak dangerously. Especially in these times.
I recall reading something interesting a few days ago, about how certain states in the US are passing legislation to help out companies who aren't solely aiming at making as high a profit as possible- they want to make some money but they also went to help people get employment, help the community, etc...
I have always been into such a polder system, as iffy as make-work is it is increasingly seeming like the only way to go.
The answer is that we need to not allow third world countries to train their citizens to be specialized workers. These skills are the birthright of the First World.
The Labour party came up with a quaint term for this, the "squeezed middle", which was the Oxford English Dictionary's word of the year for 2011.
Quote from: Martinus on May 28, 2012, 01:37:42 AM
Anyway, I know this term is a bit trite, but I think what we are witnessing is not really hollowing out the middle of the job market, but shift to what some call the "creative class", which are the people (of various pay levels) that perform creative functions and will continue to be paid more and more, whereas as pointed out, people in administrative/automatic functions will be replaced with software and robots.
I beg to differ that people in creative jobs get paid more and more :glare:
QuoteI actually remember having a conversation about it with RH during one of London Languish meets - essentially, jobs these days come either as highly paid but also highly demanding (not just in terms of skills/education, but time, commitment, flexibility etc.) positions or as badly paid ones - there seems to be less and less stable, 9-5, medium-level paying jobs out there.
Many lower-paid jobs are demanding and require unsociable hours and unpaid overtime.
Quote from: Martinus on May 28, 2012, 01:37:42 AM
Anyway, I know this term is a bit trite, but I think what we are witnessing is not really hollowing out the middle of the job market, but shift to what some call the "creative class", which are the people (of various pay levels) that perform creative functions and will continue to be paid more and more, whereas as pointed out, people in administrative/automatic functions will be replaced with software and robots.
No, I don't think that's true at all. Try being a writer, a musician or an artist.
The people doing the best seem to be those that don't add value, but instead those who are able to rig the system and scam people.
Quote from: Jaron on May 28, 2012, 02:56:45 AM
I was speaking to a co worker on Friday, and all the software guys in my company's Indian subsidiary get paid like 1.50-2/hour for programming. :lol: wtf, how can Americans compete with that?
First, there is a major time zone difference, if you need the people in India to interact with the US frequently. Conference calls with one party in the middle of the night and exchanging emails are not always a great way to build an integrated team. Second, there are reliability issues. The infrastructure in India isn't so solid, for ezample you probably won't get a western style electricity grid that reliably operates 24x7. The politics of running a business can be messy. Third, how are you going to hire these people? A business class ticket to India costs $7-8k. Are you going to go back and forth from India, managing it yourself? Or are you going to rely on an outsource agency in India which can be expensive, and also means that whatever work you are sending them is not in your control (look up Satyam for how this can go horribly wrong).
"Labor polarization," "shrinking middle class." Old story, new headline.
The only thing ending is the ease for uneducated and unskille folks in first world countries to get any kind of decent living. Call that the shrink of the middle class if you want, I call it the end of the illusion of a broad middle class.
We will find new ways to help one another, increased automation will create new kind of jobs, reduce basic costs of living, and leave more disposable income for services.
And Jaron's example: the US workers will compete with that. Their wages will decrease, while the Indian wages will rise. They will eventually meet somewhere
I can't help but think "Man, it sure is different living in an area with a resource boom".
Not only can people without any particular skills get a job - they can earn a hell of a lot of money. Plenty of diamond drillers and rig bosses make more than I do with my 8 years of university. If anything it causes problems for small retail outlets who have trouble attracting workers because they have little ability to increase their pay. Several fast food outlets in Whitehorse closed for exacly that reason - they were profitable, but they couldn't attract enough staff to compete with jobs in mining.
Quote from: Barrister on May 28, 2012, 04:03:43 PM
I can't help but think "Man, it sure is different living in an area with a resource boom".
Not only can people without any particular skills get a job - they can earn a hell of a lot of money. Plenty of diamond drillers and rig bosses make more than I do with my 8 years of university. If anything it causes problems for small retail outlets who have trouble attracting workers because they have little ability to increase their pay. Several fast food outlets in Whitehorse closed for exacly that reason - they were profitable, but they couldn't attract enough staff to compete with jobs in mining.
That has its ups and downs, there's parts of North Dakota that pay six figures for oil and gas workers but shitty houses that used to cost $80,000 USD can't be bought for $250k now. Most people that take work up there can't rent anything because land lords have waiting lists 10 deep for every unit, so a lot of people are buying small lots of land and putting mobile homes up until they have enough money to have a house built (even the small plots of land are going for stupid prices.)
Plus they live in North Dakota, and have to wash their hands at the end of the day.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on May 28, 2012, 04:08:50 PM
Quote from: Barrister on May 28, 2012, 04:03:43 PM
I can't help but think "Man, it sure is different living in an area with a resource boom".
Not only can people without any particular skills get a job - they can earn a hell of a lot of money. Plenty of diamond drillers and rig bosses make more than I do with my 8 years of university. If anything it causes problems for small retail outlets who have trouble attracting workers because they have little ability to increase their pay. Several fast food outlets in Whitehorse closed for exacly that reason - they were profitable, but they couldn't attract enough staff to compete with jobs in mining.
That has its ups and downs, there's parts of North Dakota that pay six figures for oil and gas workers but shitty houses that used to cost $80,000 USD can't be bought for $250k now. Most people that take work up there can't rent anything because land lords have waiting lists 10 deep for every unit, so a lot of people are buying small lots of land and putting mobile homes up until they have enough money to have a house built (even the small plots of land are going for stupid prices.)
Plus they live in North Dakota, and have to wash their hands at the end of the day.
Yes, there's that too. Thankfully I've been a home owner for 10 years so I have generally made out well on the real estate increase, but it's not like you can cash out that money - the next place you buy is still going to be expensive.
What they do a lot here is they fly people in to these remote work camps for 2 weeks, then fly them abck out again. It's cheaper than trying to build houses for them.
And I imagine the other problem with those jobs is that they are unlikely to amount to a long career (I'd guess maybe a 5-10 year lifespan of work?), and who the hell would want to live in North Dakota when the work is done?
Quote from: Tonitrus on May 28, 2012, 04:15:30 PM
And I imagine the other problem with those jobs is that they are unlikely to amount to a long career (I'd guess maybe a 5-10 year lifespan of work?), and who the hell would want to live in North Dakota when the work is done?
Why? I know plenty of people who have worked 20 years or more in the oilfield. It does tend to be hard on the body so you can't do it into your 50s and 60s, but you can definitely make a career of it.
And I like North Dakota. :) Many fond memories of time spent in Fargo.
You are so clearly damaged.
Quote from: Barrister on May 28, 2012, 04:28:31 PM
And I like North Dakota. :) Many fond memories of time spent in Fargo.
I'm sure the weekend crew at the Denny's has fond memories of you as well.
Fargo...
Jesus, it doesn't need more of a put down than that.
Quote from: Neil on May 27, 2012, 11:10:57 PM
But if those who are fortunate want to pretend that they don't live in a community, then the masses have no reason not to kill them.
Why are you so sure that when the have-nots fight with the haves, the former will win? The haves have (see?) the army, organisation, equipment, resources, and technology to crush the rebellion. Who knows, maybe in the future, there will be robotic private armies...
Quote from: Monoriu on May 28, 2012, 09:05:21 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 27, 2012, 11:10:57 PM
But if those who are fortunate want to pretend that they don't live in a community, then the masses have no reason not to kill them.
Why are you so sure that when the have-nots fight with the haves, the former will win? The haves have (see?) the army, organisation, equipment, resources, and technology to crush the rebellion. Who knows, maybe in the future, there will be robotic private armies...
Because in the West, the army is built of poor people and they generally don't follow orders that include firing into crowds of their fellow citizens.
Aux armes!
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhomelessmanspeaks.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F03%2Ffrench-revolution-mar-6-2011.jpg&hash=11425e3e17b44252691b4a2a5b514c6770d23854)
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
:yes:
Harper should send in the troops. Or better yet, invoke the 2008 Canada-US defense pact and get a stryker brigade to crush the frogs.
At least I'd get some good television out of it.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 29, 2012, 11:52:40 AM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
:yes:
Harper should send in the troops. Or better yet, invoke the 2008 Canada-US defense pact and get a stryker brigade to crush the frogs.
At least I'd get some good television out of it.
Bah. It's Quebec's problem - let Quebec solve it.
Last thing they need is for it to suddenly become a Canada vs quebec issue.
Bah. I'd cream my pants if I saw the Princess Pat's shooting all those gay foxes in the street.
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Written like a true Babyboomer.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 28, 2012, 06:10:01 PM
Quote from: Barrister on May 28, 2012, 04:28:31 PM
And I like North Dakota. :) Many fond memories of time spent in Fargo.
I'm sure the weekend crew at the Denny's has fond memories of you as well.
:yes: He tipped 20%
I slept through university and when I got my good, hard degree I started hardly working. I did stellar work and switched jobs a couple of times. Now I am considered "rich" by the retarded classes who got their "college degree in communication" and wonder why they can't get high-paying jobs. Jesus Christ.
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 12:08:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Written like a true Babyboomer.
Except I'm not.
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 12:45:40 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 12:08:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Written like a true Babyboomer.
Except I'm not.
Babydreadnought.
Quote from: The Brain on May 29, 2012, 12:47:26 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 12:45:40 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 12:08:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Written like a true Babyboomer.
Except I'm not.
Babydreadnought.
:lol:
Well done.
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 12:45:40 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 12:08:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Written like a true Babyboomer.
Except I'm not.
Yet you've adopted every caractheristic of theirs.
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
Hey, fuck you.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
Then you are wrong and should feel bad.
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 01:22:48 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 12:45:40 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 12:08:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Written like a true Babyboomer.
Except I'm not.
Yet you've adopted every caractheristic of theirs.
Not at all. Hating entitled students who feel like they're doing the world a favour by getting a degree in fine arts or philosophy is not exclusive to the baby boomers.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
Yeah? What did the post-boomers ever do to you, other than give up all hope for the future?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 29, 2012, 01:42:06 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
Hey, fuck you.
:lol: You've just bitched about the boomers, read Brett Easton Ellis novels and all tried to become property developers. Post-boomers caused so many more problems, what's worse they whine about it. Endlessly.
What non sensical bullshit are you spewing Shaun.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
I don't know why certain generations get called out. I mean the 'Greatest Generation' was in charge for alot of bad ideas that have gotten tossed around. It really was a team effort. ONLY THE UNBORN ARE INNOCENT
Quote from: Valmy on May 29, 2012, 03:02:07 PMI don't know why certain generations get called out. I mean the 'Greatest Generation' was in charge for alot of bad ideas that have gotten tossed around. It really was a team effort. ONLY THE UNBORN ARE INNOCENT
Yeah.
I mean, there's definitely value at looking at the decisions and social organization of a particular time, and how that shaped events and policies afterwards.
But personalizing it like you see with the whole "people of [specific generation] are all like this and they ruined everything" is just dumb.
Quote from: Valmy on May 29, 2012, 03:02:07 PM
I don't know why certain generations get called out.
Most don't. But one has had a lock on power for decades as they are too big a voting bloc to counter.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:55:54 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 29, 2012, 01:42:06 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
Hey, fuck you.
:lol: You've just bitched about the boomers, read Brett Easton Ellis novels and all tried to become property developers. Post-boomers caused so many more problems, what's worse they whine about it. Endlessly.
Care to give us a few examples?
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:55:54 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 29, 2012, 01:42:06 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
Hey, fuck you.
:lol: You've just bitched about the boomers, read Brett Easton Ellis novels and all tried to become property developers. Post-boomers caused so many more problems, what's worse they whine about it. Endlessly.
They've both sold my generation and all generations after us into slavery, but in fairness the boomers started it and the post-boomers, made weak by the poor parenting they received, simply did their best to fit into the dystopia their predecessors made.
Quote from: Valmy on May 29, 2012, 03:02:07 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 29, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
I have more issues with the post-boomers to be honest.
I don't know why certain generations get called out. I mean the 'Greatest Generation' was in charge for alot of bad ideas that have gotten tossed around. It really was a team effort. ONLY THE UNBORN ARE INNOCENT
This is true. But there's just been so many rants about the boomers that it's tiring. And that in itself is an indictment of post-boomers :P
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 30, 2012, 05:48:45 AM
But there's just been so many rants about the boomers that it's tiring. And that in itself is an indictment of post-boomers :P
They deserve it, you know. Boomers. Waste of fucking space and air.*
*My Generation X sensibilities make me *shrug* about it, though.
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 01:52:03 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 01:22:48 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 12:45:40 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 29, 2012, 12:08:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
People like Grey Fox and the Quebec students ruin it for pretty much everybody else. Because their concerns are so trivial and he's so willing to resort to violence and goonery over such irrelevant matters, they de-legitimize the entire struggle. Even as things get worse, nobody wants their cause to be associated with a bunch of whiny, idiotic college students.
Written like a true Babyboomer.
Except I'm not.
Yet you've adopted every caractheristic of theirs.
Not at all. Hating entitled students who feel like they're doing the world a favour by getting a degree in fine arts or philosophy is not exclusive to the baby boomers.
Right, maybe I'll extend my contempt to all 35+ years old.
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 30, 2012, 05:20:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 01:52:03 PM
Not at all. Hating entitled students who feel like they're doing the world a favour by getting a degree in fine arts or philosophy is not exclusive to the baby boomers.
Right, maybe I'll extend my contempt to all 35+ years old.
You could, but that's hippie asshole talk. 'Don't trust anyone over 30, man.'
Quote from: Neil on May 30, 2012, 06:54:59 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 30, 2012, 05:20:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 29, 2012, 01:52:03 PM
Not at all. Hating entitled students who feel like they're doing the world a favour by getting a degree in fine arts or philosophy is not exclusive to the baby boomers.
Right, maybe I'll extend my contempt to all 35+ years old.
You could, but that's hippie asshole talk. 'Don't trust anyone over 30, man.'
I don't trust anyone under 25.
Quote from: Ideologue on May 29, 2012, 10:32:44 PM
They've both sold my generation and all generations after us into slavery, but in fairness the boomers started it and the post-boomers, made weak by the poor parenting they received, simply did their best to fit into the dystopia their predecessors made.
So what did the boomers do that sold you into slavery? If you're talking about govt debt, medicare and Social Security deficits, I can understand. I don't like the trends of leaving so much debt to hit the generations coming behind me. You can support reform of the programs for futuer generations.
I'm not too far off from collecting Soc Sec. I've been contributing about 15% of my salary into it for decades now, between me and my employer portions. I've put money into my own IRA's and 401K plans else I wouldn't survive in retirement just on Soc Sec.
Convinced about forty million of us that higher education was the only path to middle class success, had us take out monstrous loans that they profit from, and then destroyed all the jobs and all the prospects for jobs that could possibly service that debt, let alone provide us middle-class security, and in many cases even the marginal security necessary for true adulthoods.
I'm also not too fond of Social Security, but as it is a wealth redistribution scheme, I'm afraid my hands are tied.
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 30, 2012, 05:20:55 PMRight, maybe I'll extend my contempt to all 35+ years old.
So you're just going to push that limit back every five years? In 2017 you won't trust anyone over 40?
Quote from: Jacob on May 30, 2012, 11:25:18 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 30, 2012, 05:20:55 PMRight, maybe I'll extend my contempt to all 35+ years old.
So you're just going to push that limit back every five years? In 2017 you won't trust anyone over 40?
I don't trust anyone over the 49th parallel. :angry:
Quote from: Ideologue on May 30, 2012, 11:07:28 PM
Convinced about forty million of us that higher education was the only path to middle class success, had us take out monstrous loans that they profit from, and then destroyed all the jobs and all the prospects for jobs that could possibly service that debt, let alone provide us middle-class security, and in many cases even the marginal security necessary for true adulthoods.
I'm also not too fond of Social Security, but as it is a wealth redistribution scheme, I'm afraid my hands are tied.
You got a law degree. That's extra evil, like being part of the SS or the Air Force.
Meh, the worst generation are the people born in the second half of the 1980s/first half of 1990s. All the previous generations believed in hard work and earning money to get things you want - these new generations think that having stuff (especially access to high tech/gadgets/information) is their god-given right and refuse to work to get it but think they should be given it for free by the more industrious generations.
Quote from: Ideologue on May 30, 2012, 11:34:38 PM
Quote from: Jacob on May 30, 2012, 11:25:18 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 30, 2012, 05:20:55 PMRight, maybe I'll extend my contempt to all 35+ years old.
So you're just going to push that limit back every five years? In 2017 you won't trust anyone over 40?
I don't trust anyone over the 49th parallel. :angry:
Curious.
I don't trust anyone beneath the 60th parallel.
Quote from: Barrister on May 31, 2012, 12:53:09 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on May 30, 2012, 11:34:38 PM
Quote from: Jacob on May 30, 2012, 11:25:18 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 30, 2012, 05:20:55 PMRight, maybe I'll extend my contempt to all 35+ years old.
So you're just going to push that limit back every five years? In 2017 you won't trust anyone over 40?
I don't trust anyone over the 49th parallel. :angry:
So, what you only trust Russians?
Curious.
I don't trust anyone beneath the 60th parallel.
Quote from: Ideologue on May 30, 2012, 11:07:28 PM
Convinced about forty million of us that higher education was the only path to middle class success, had us take out monstrous loans that they profit from, and then destroyed all the jobs and all the prospects for jobs that could possibly service that debt, let alone provide us middle-class security, and in many cases even the marginal security necessary for true adulthoods.
I'm also not too fond of Social Security, but as it is a wealth redistribution scheme, I'm afraid my hands are tied.
I don't know if you can blame college education costs just on the boomers. Lots of cost issues with the bloated, costly pig that's become and no change there. Govt just gives more loans, and that gives no incentive to colleges to restrain costs.
As for Soc Sec, just try changing it; I've been for reform for a long time. But try making even some reform and not just seniors, but especially the opposite political party of the one proposing reform will come out of the woodwork crying bloody hell. We've all allowed it to become such a sacred cow. It works ok, and you'll get your due out of it when the time comes, but each of us puts a lot of money into it, about 15% between our portion and our employer's.
Yes Raz nobody but Russians live above the 60th parallel.
Quote from: Ideologue on May 30, 2012, 11:07:28 PM
Convinced about forty million of us that higher education was the only path to middle class success, had us take out monstrous loans that they profit from, and then destroyed all the jobs and all the prospects for jobs that could possibly service that debt, let alone provide us middle-class security, and in many cases even the marginal security necessary for true adulthoods.
:cry:
Quote from: Martinus on May 31, 2012, 12:35:54 AM
Meh, the worst generation are the people born in the second half of the 1980s/first half of 1990s. All the previous generations believed in hard work and earning money to get things you want - these new generations think that having stuff (especially access to high tech/gadgets/information) is their god-given right and refuse to work to get it but think they should be given it for free by the more industrious generations.
I don't think that. :unsure:
Quote from: Martinus on May 31, 2012, 12:35:54 AM
Meh, the worst generation are the people born in the second half of the 1980s/first half of 1990s. All the previous generations believed in hard work and earning money to get things you want - these new generations think that having stuff (especially access to high tech/gadgets/information) is their god-given right and refuse to work to get it but think they should be given it for free by the more industrious generations.
This being the same generation that is now expected to work for free for a significant portion of time in "internships" devised by the good, honest hard-working types of previous generations who knew the value of a day's work (except when it comes to paying interns)?