Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Agreed, that "most" can be learned. But, an education in a specific field (such as engineering, or computer science) provides a baseline of skills that are important to enter specific specialized jobs with. These baseline skills must be learned through formal study, and in previous on the job training. Without the baseline skills that are required in most specialized jobs, a candidate without them has no chance of success.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spm62
Most skills or experience that an employer requires can be taught on the job with little effort. Any fairly intelligent person could catch on or learn most things that a job requires, such as administrative, software, clerical, how to use certain machines, or computer systems, etc. There are the obvious jobs or professions that do require years of being educated in that particular field, but IMO most of the training or experience they ask for isn't as difficult as they make it seem. You can tell at an interview if a person displays reasonable intelligence, can communicate effectively, and has common sense. Those should be the main criteria for most jobs. But it seems most employers want people with years of experience for even general office work and then pay them peanuts.
Heh, Cindy. Since you are directly refuting what I am saying then you are implicitly stating that I am one of those 'underqualified' and 'poorly educated' prospective employees.
Let me school you for a moment.
(1) First and foremost, I am employed, but not in my primary KSAs. I am finding it difficult to get into my desired field, hence why I am working in my secondary field. (2) I am finishing up my 7th degree (4 bachelors, 3 masters). They are all in interrelated fields and cover 3 of the 4 major fields in demand in the Washington DC area, which is where I also reside. My ENTIRE education has been funded by private and public donors, based on my academic merit. Additionally, I hold additional professional certifications that bolster my capabilities and desirability to employers. (3) I hold a distiniguished military background and also hold active clearances.
(4) I have been offered many job opportunities in my primary field. They have all been much less than what I am currently making in my secondary field, despite being of comparable positional authority. My difficulty has been in finding worthwhile work in my desired field with a pay at least near par of my current position. Being offered <70K with my capabilities in my field is simply not acceptable if the position is in the DC region.
The fact of the matter is, you don't know what you are talking about. Perhaps that what you are saying is true of lesser regarded positions (e.g. working at Walmart), but I am talking about 'real' careers.
And Cindy has been effectively BUUUUURRRRRNNNNEEEED!!!
Actually it's under qualified and poorly educated prospective employees who are trying to fabricate the case that employers are being too selective, and thus they cannot land the jobs they'd like to have.
This is the most ignorant post I've read. As a man who is not struggling with finding work, and with a solid history in economics, I have to say that this reflects an inability to advertise an opening effectively or a complete failure to understand reasonable wages. Unemployment was low less than a decade ago. Have all those people died? Is unemployment limited to the very young? Neither is the case. Have wages simply grown too high? No, inflation adjusted wages are lower now than they were then.
Employers have a vested interest in keeping the wages as low as possible and in shifting blame. However, during this recession the corporate side of America posted the highest profits in recorded history. It is not possible that the entire country's corporate side has managed to post record profits while all the people trying to find work are uneducated slobs, completely incapable of performing work. While the odds of record profits is low, and the odds of the unemployed being dramatically less qualified now than they were a decade earlier is low, the odds of both things happening at the exact same time while being completely independent events is mind boggling.
If you wish to correct someone, at least correct them with facts rather than opinions.
And Cindy has been effectively BUUUUURRRRRNNNNEEEED!!!
Actually, to me, it sounds like the 7-degree holder is the one getting burned (or, at least wasting a lot of time and energy). Not that Cindy is bringing a whole lot here, but if 6 degrees still isn't getting 7 Degrees the job s/he wants, s/he's doing it wrong. The only thing being done right is not taking out loans.
mb919, your view is based on a misunderstanding of my academic intent. I do not go to school simply for a career. I am a scholar in the classical sense in that I went to school out of an intrinsic desire to learn new skills and concepts. If I am being offered free education from tier 1 universities, then I will go to it. If you understand education only in terms of grabbing a job, then I can't help you.
I guess it also helps to give you an idea of my ability to multi-degree. My seven degrees are based on an anticipated 9 years of education (anticipated because I am not yet finished with my seventh degree, and the 9 years is the estimate for when I do complete it). Suffice it to say, I have been able to pursue multiple degrees concurrently and consecutively, and while working in career-track positions.
Lastly, I want to re-emphasize that my previous post was not talking about the inability to find jobs. I encourage you to re-examine the thesis of the post before making a response.
Actually it's under qualified and poorly educated prospective employees who are trying to fabricate the case that employers are being too selective, and thus they cannot land the jobs they'd like to have.
As others have pointed out, Cindy is incorrect. There is a quantum difference in experience between the same exact people seeking work in the 1970s and 1980s versus seeking work in the 2000s and 2010s. These people are now at what used to be the pinnacle of one's career, having finally achieved high levels of knowledge, experience and maturity. There is no rational excuse for how an entire generation of people are somehow worth less as they reached this pinnacle, when for generations prior to this one people in those positions were acknowledged as worth a lot more as they reached this pinnacle.
As others have pointed out, Cindy is incorrect. There is a quantum difference in experience between the same exact people seeking work in the 1970s and 1980s versus seeking work in the 2000s and 2010s. These people are now at what used to be the pinnacle of one's career, having finally achieved high levels of knowledge, experience and maturity. There is no rational excuse for how an entire generation of people are somehow worth less as they reached this pinnacle, when for generations prior to this one people in those positions were acknowledged as worth a lot more as they reached this pinnacle.
Have you been asleep? We are more efficient than ever before; that has shifted the ratio of supply-demand , while the latter has increased, the former has decreased. Fair Market Value is ever changing due to that ratio. Your error is in utilizing stagnant modeling.
On the contrary: I've been criticizing the perspective you prefer, and evidently so well that you posted this vacuous reply, which actually is consistent and supportive of what I and others have said (except for the subjective conclusion), rather than in disagreement to it. You couldn't even get your objection correct this morning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn
Your error is in utilizing stagnant modeling.
Your error is in ignoring people, the human side of the equations - you know: That which makes us a little better than primitive animals.
Which is nothing more than scurrilous rationalization for offensively immoral self-interest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
