251–260 of 491 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have real trouble believing a competent developer can't find a job developing native iOS apps in this job market.
Why would I do something I truly love for someone elses dream?
Most of the comments here focus on how people aren't trying hard enough to get jobs. This article indicates that the jobs don't exist and that the problem is likely to get far worse. You can try as hard as you want to get a job - if no one is hiring, you aren't going to get one. The reality is that as time goes on, the world's needs can and will be met by fewer and fewer people. This should be a good thing, but it wo…
>You can try as hard as you want to get a job - if no one is hiring, you aren't going to get one. True as far as it goes, and I too am concerned about the future of work, but I'm skeptical that we have ever seen, or will ever see, a future in which "no one is hiring". Today, there is tremendous demand for certain occupations, even as others are being hollowed out. The difference from historical expectations is that t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, there's always some holdovers commenting from the era of easy jobs and easy money. Underemployment should be mentioned in any discussion of job difficulty; in the US, getting a job as a barista or fast food is possible, but a horrendous waste of a college education. It's really a shame that the US has decided to let its most educated generation ever suffer for its biggest strength.
>Underemployment should be mentioned in any discussion of job difficulty; in the US, getting a job as a barista or fast food is possible, but a horrendous waste of a college education. But there have never been enough "good" white collar to employ the current number of Americans getting a college education. The difference was there were enough good, white collar jobs for the college graduates back then. But the numbe…
I was raised to think this - there is absolutely no shame in working for a living. This scene from Girls basically sums up millenials and their relationship with work for me:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm afraid I don't have the money to devote my life to politics and I'm much too idealistic to be a good politician. In any event, I've come to the conclusion that the best way to influence the system is to have a lot of money to throw around. Then you can hire a guy to go make speeches for you and spread your message, you can buy scientists to publish research that supports your agenda, you can buy lawyers to silenc…
And that, in a nutshell, is the problem. We are the government, and if you choose not to help make it what you want, it gets made for you by people who don't appreciate your point of view. Look no further than the "hell no" Republican tea-party caucus in the US Congress for a really visible example of people making the government the way they want it made while we sit on the sidelines. You don't do it for the money,…
That's a mythology we are told to pacify us. It has no factual connection to reality.
You're arguing the authority of traditional religious doctrine to people who've already left the faith, that strategy will not work. Try another strategy. Or consider you could be wrong, and join us.
Most of the comments here focus on how people aren't trying hard enough to get jobs. This article indicates that the jobs don't exist and that the problem is likely to get far worse. You can try as hard as you want to get a job - if no one is hiring, you aren't going to get one. The reality is that as time goes on, the world's needs can and will be met by fewer and fewer people. This should be a good thing, but it wo…
> Most of the comments here focus on how people aren't trying hard enough to get jobs. This article indicates that the jobs don't exist and that the problem is likely to get far worse. The reality is that BOTH are true. There is no law stating that each generation of humans should have it easier and with more resources available to them. My generation is facing this crisis, and the default response is to complain. Wh…
The solution at the time was a mix between unionizing labor and adding regulation, like anti-monopoly laws, from the public side, and basically "inventing" the service, tertiary, sector and modern consumerism from the private side.
The problem with this solution now is that there is no quaternary sector in sight to absorb the displaced from the automation of the tertiary sector. Some researchers are talking about an "experience" sector that would be inmune, at least for now, to automation, but the volume of the current job market doesn't seem to indicate that it could replace the "service" sector any time soon.
Also the current market solution seems to be sharing economy businesses, which doesn't seem to scale from a social standpoint.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is no law stating that each generation of humans should have it easier and with more resources available to them. This is pie-in-the-sky thinking, but maybe there should be a law. Corporations have a legal duty to shareholders to make money. Why shouldn't our government have a legal duty to society to increase our resources and make things easier for each generation?
To play devil's advocate here: Why should governments be beholden to the smaller half of its population (at least in most developed countries), if it comes at the expense of the larger half (and the one that is actually most involved in government)?
* Desperate people are more likely to mug / murder people ==> Medical cost, psych therapy cost, security cost, cost of being afraid of who's going to get you for the $20 in your pocket. * People in shitty conditions are more likely to become drug addicts, funding criminal activity and being a burden on things like EMS / hospitals. Maybe the next time you need an ambulance it will be busy with an OD case. Or maybe the ambulance will run you over as you attempt to cross the street? Or even just the sirens interrupting your sleep at night, removing a few $ of value from your life without your consent. * For those who grow up in the poorer portion, they're less likely to get properly nourished, resulting in stunded growth, future health problems and diminished IQ (eg no omega3s in childhood) * Same security issues but with your kids and their kids comingling in public schools.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> in the US, getting a job as a barista or fast food is possible, but a horrendous waste of a college education. Maybe. Not all college educations are created equal. Got a major in philosophy? You're not useful to the economy, there are no jobs and no one is wasting your education. Of course the example here is facetious, the point is this: If you have a college education/degree in something that is not marketable to…
A philosophy major is not a poor financial instrument because it's not financial instrument at all. Education has aims other than making investors money. As a practical matter, philosophy is typically studied by those who will go on to law school, a Masters in something employable, or as part of a minor or "core curriculum" alongside a trade. In most of the liberal arts and humanities - particularly philosophy, a gra…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why young people need to vote.
For one of two paries that are essentially the same? Obama made a lot of big prommises before getting into power. He hasn't followed through on many of them at all.
You might find both major parties to be not good enough, but that in no way implies their policies are the same. Policies MATTER. Disappointed that Obama didn't do as much as he promised? So am I. Bothered by his reactions to things like Snowden? Ditto. But don't mistake those issues as being exactly what the other party would have done. [And for those that hold more conservative views, while recent Republicans haven't done much for actual limiting government and reducing spending, make no mistake that their policies would be notably different than Obama's or a fully Democratic Congress].
Policies matter, and policy differences matter. Don't mistake unhappiness as making the alternatives indistinguishable - all that does is reduce accountability and exacerbate the problem. (And this is true for liberals, conservatives, and those that don't hold such binary opinions alike)
We're definitely drifting off-topic, but I feel this is relevant to issues like the linked article in the HN space:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why young people need to vote.
For one of two paries that are essentially the same? Obama made a lot of big prommises before getting into power. He hasn't followed through on many of them at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>You could get living expenses close to zero by living with your parents for a while, but student loan payments require you to have some cash coming from somewhere each month. Not with federal student loans. They have income based repayment plans. If you have no income, you don't pay. After 20 years the debt is forgiven.
Unfortunately the cap on maximum borrowing with federal student loans is quite low compared to the total cost of many colleges, so there's lots of private loans that come due six months after graduation and don't really care what your income level is -- they just want to be paid.