When the job search becomes impossible

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 17, 2025, 2:05 AM UTC

tbrownaw wrote: post #243

roadside_picnic wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Homeless" is not the same as "living on the street". People living in hotels, temporary trailers (in some places even tiny homes count), living with a friend temporarily, etc are all homeless . Plenty of Americans are much closer than this than you might think working in tech. 50-60% of Americans currently live 'paycheck-to-paycheck' which means the second work stops they're on a timer for missing bills to start com…

> Plenty of Americans are much closer than this than you might think working in tech. 50-60% of Americans currently live 'paycheck-to-paycheck' which means the second work stops they're on a timer for missing bills to start coming in. How is that actually defined by whoever measured it?

Post by rcruzeiro » Wed, Sep 17, 2025, 2:08 AM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #239

ezekiel68 wrote: post #213

I've lived through the recessions of 1990-91 (in my 20s, not tech), the Dotcom bust and the Great Financial Crisis. I can tell you that it's always been this way when its' a "buyer's market" and the employers can afford to be picky. I can also tell you that this is not some game-changing phenomenon[0]. The jobs will return when it is once again a "seller's market" -- which it surely will be. This applies to non-tech…

"this is not some game-changing phenomenon[0]. The jobs will return when it is once again a "seller's market" -- which it surely will be." Pretty bold. Things like manufacturing haven't recovered and we're seeing similar outsourcing in tech.

Post by incompatible » Wed, Sep 17, 2025, 2:20 AM UTC

sfink wrote: post #245

bell-cot wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amusing Idea: Advertise three vaguely-similar positions, only one of them real. Specify impossible-for-honest-humans requirements for the fake two. Then discard all applicants for the real position who also claimed to be qualified for a fake one.

Strict honesty here has always been a losing proposition. The "requirements" section of a job posting has almost never been accurate. It's more of an image they're painting. An honest applicant is one who reads the whole description to understand as best they can what the company is looking for, and sort of holistically matches their own expertise against that picture. If the job posting lists requirements A-F and yo…

Post by squigz » Wed, Sep 17, 2025, 2:21 AM UTC

thrwaway55 wrote: post #254

myahio wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What could potentially put an end to the current hiring "winter"? We have an increasing amount of immigrants coming over in hopes of getting a white-collar job, in combination with the tech sector shrinking, as well as companies as a whole being much more careful when hiring. There would need to be some explosion in the amount of tech jobs, in order for everyone to be able to get one. However, I just cannot see what…

[flagged]

Post by throwaway173738 » Wed, Sep 17, 2025, 2:24 AM UTC

smegma2 wrote: post #232

ilaksh wrote: post #111

The thing that bothers me so much about this post is that it reeks of privilege by treating unemployment as if it were mainly just a bad trigger that you talk to your expensive therapist about once a week. For most people in the real world, psychological burn out is NOT the problem with unemployment. The problem is becoming homeless.

The median household net worth in the US is $193,000. The rate of home ownership is 65%. I don’t think the median American is at risk of becoming homeless during normal unemployment. Maybe you mean that the article isn’t as relevant for a global audience which is fine, but I would think that the median American lives in “the real world”. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scf/dataviz/scf/table... https://www.nahb…