U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-10-2019, 07:49 AM
 
780 posts, read 203,493 times
Reputation: 1134

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessManIT View Post
That's right, cheapness and low-cost employees are in. Experience, accomplishment, and excellence are out, because they are too expensive.
A good analogy is to look at sports teams across the multiple sports leagues. Depending on their markets, some only have 1 or 2 superstars on the roster, with serviceable players around them in supporting roles. Smaller market teams generally have mostly younger players filling out their rosters due to budgetary limitations. Not many companies can afford to attract superstars in every single role in the organization. They just need people who are serviceable and can do the job at hand effectively.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2019, 08:33 AM
Status: "Disagreeing is not the same thing as trolling." (set 9 days ago)
 
Location: Texas
9,502 posts, read 3,645,114 times
Reputation: 19526
Colleges were originally designed for the children of wealthy families who didn't need to worry so much about getting a paid job after graduation. Their family money and trust funds helped them, or they were able to go work in the family business. A lot of liberal arts studies are leftovers from a different era in time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 08:38 AM
 
780 posts, read 203,493 times
Reputation: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by PriscillaVanilla View Post
Colleges were originally designed for the children of wealthy families who didn't need to worry so much about getting a paid job after graduation. Their family money and trust funds helped them, or they were able to go work in the family business. A lot of liberal arts studies are leftovers from a different era in time.
Odd. I thought they were subjects that enlightened us on the history, significance, and value of the arts in our society, past and present; whether pertaining to writing, artistry, structural designs, or other topics under the liberal arts umbrella. Who'd have thunk these programs were just just for rich kids to waste their parents' money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 08:57 AM
 
3,756 posts, read 2,123,163 times
Reputation: 10272
Probably. There was a time when companies actually invested in their workforce. Long before all the nuts and certifiable unscrupulous, greedy sociopaths took over and held accountable to no one. Where the future was important. Not just the current financial quarter
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 09:26 AM
Status: "Disagreeing is not the same thing as trolling." (set 9 days ago)
 
Location: Texas
9,502 posts, read 3,645,114 times
Reputation: 19526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Quotes A Lot View Post
Odd. I thought they were subjects that enlightened us on the history, significance, and value of the arts in our society, past and present; whether pertaining to writing, artistry, structural designs, or other topics under the liberal arts umbrella. Who'd have thunk these programs were just just for rich kids to waste their parents' money.
You completely misinterpreted what I said. I wasn't dissing liberal arts because I majored in liberal arts.

And yes, college was originally intended for the wealthy and that's who they were designed for. (And no, that doesn't mean I'm saying people who aren't rich shouldn't go to college).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 10:31 AM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
33,883 posts, read 42,105,179 times
Reputation: 43291
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorianRo View Post
Probably. There was a time when companies actually invested in their workforce. Long before all the nuts and certifiable unscrupulous, greedy sociopaths took over and held accountable to no one. Where the future was important. Not just the current financial quarter
When exactly was that time? You keep saying the same song and dance but never, ever, tell us when that Golden Age was. I know you won't answer, by the way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,596 posts, read 3,026,483 times
Reputation: 12839
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
When exactly was that time? You keep saying the same song and dance but never, ever, tell us when that Golden Age was. I know you won't answer, by the way.
It's difficult to quantify, but having lived through the evolution of the "aerospace" industry (to use that as a sweeping term for older 'high' technology and engineering) into the "tech" world of today, the latter - the rise of software and non-hardware engineering as a pinnacle field - brought with it a huge sense of largely false merit-entitlement and disdain for skilled, educated workers. That's spread into nearly everything else, and I don't think it's at all wrong to say that most companies today don't have a tenth of the regard and commitment to their workforces that was common, expected, even necessary through the early 1980s or so.

If we're not the guy in the dirty U sweatshirt who finalized some slightly new concept in our dorm room and became a billionaire, we're just replaceable worker ants... from janitors to engineering Ph.D.s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 11:00 AM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
33,883 posts, read 42,105,179 times
Reputation: 43291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
It's difficult to quantify, but having lived through the evolution of the "aerospace" industry (to use that as a sweeping term for older 'high' technology and engineering) into the "tech" world of today, the latter - the rise of software and non-hardware engineering as a pinnacle field - brought with it a huge sense of largely false merit-entitlement and disdain for skilled, educated workers. That's spread into nearly everything else, and I don't think it's at all wrong to say that most companies today don't have a tenth of the regard and commitment to their workforces that was common, expected, even necessary through the early 1980s or so.

If we're not the guy in the dirty U sweatshirt who finalized some slightly new concept in our dorm room and became a billionaire, we're just replaceable worker ants... from janitors to engineering Ph.D.s.
My experience predates yours, and in "dirty" industries and to say that those Greatest Generation mother****ers who ran industry cared about anything but quarterly performance would be incorrect as a whole. Their disdain for educated employees, even though the reason many of them had indoor plumbing was because the GI Bill sent them to college, was palpable.

Employees, at every level up to the executive suite, have always been replaceable cogs in the machine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 04:27 PM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
30,013 posts, read 16,597,455 times
Reputation: 22589
Quote:
Originally Posted by concept_fusion View Post
I read that up until the early 1980s, humanities majors were considered desirable by large corporations, who would hire and train them in various things. Because they were regarded as more versatile. If so, the world has really changed.
It was true well into the 1990's depending on the industry. Yes, versatility was key. An ability to speak, write, emphasize, and will some kind of emotional IQ was considered desirable. God only knows what Corporate America is looking for now
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 05:19 PM
 
1,606 posts, read 1,121,297 times
Reputation: 2414
It sure was true in the '80s and '90s as the IT industry was taking off. People had all kinds of backgrounds. A lot of the developers learned programming in the military and didn't even have degrees, or had taught themselves. Most of us tech pubs people had liberal arts backgrounds but good technical aptitude.

Back then the goal was to produce well-rounded graduates with an ability to think, write, and learn. Sadly, colleges are now becoming expensive trade schools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top