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.
How can you have an education and be jobless? I do mechanics, mobile hvac, and some MIG welding, I get job offers all the time, I went to a 2 year school for mechanics and refrigeration. Nep is a bean counter perhaps?
Anyways 100k a year is great money in most of the US, NY, NJ, CT, are just high tax areas, they really always have been and alot of it has to do with the economics and the politics of that region.
Growing up there I never really knew that he impact of it because I was a youngster, I didn't have to worry about paying mortgages and such.
It depends what you mean by jobless. Are we talking about a living wage adult job or a service economy slave job?
If you are talking about descent white collar type job than it's supply vs demand. Too many people going to college with a limited amount of college degree type jobs. As more people go, the value of the degree declines. If everyone goes to college and gets a standard liberal arts degree than they will end up working at Walmart or mcdonalds after their degree. It's already starting to happen as more people are driven to college since even blue collar jobs like many police departments are requiring 4 year degrees. The whole thing makes no sense. Even many receptionist jobs are requiring a a college degree. We are extending childhood for 4 extra years. College has become an an expensive extension of High school.
HS gives you the education you need to be a functioning adult. It covers history, chemistry, biology, basic English skills, and algebra. Anything past that is specialization. HS needs some reform though. The vast majority of people don't understand 5th grade math including those with a 4 year degree. Understand = not memorizing, but actual comprehension. They don't understand the concept of the mole. Most people who take chemistry are conversion factor machines. We waste time teaching people foreign languages for no reason. No one learns to speak it unless they go to a foreign country. This is a waste of time. The brain can only hold so much information. We are not computers. Teach the basics of history/science over and over again. One year of biology doesn't cut it. Give the exact same course at least twice. Teach basics over and over again. Stop making people memorize obscure dates they will forget right after the test and stick to the basics. That will put it into long term memory. That way when you ask someone who fought in the American revolutionary War they'll actually know. Many don't. Education is supposed to exist so people aren't walking around ignorant and we don't repeat the same mistakes. I'd have people writing papers explaining the history of genocide and what can lead to it in HS. Stick with that type of thing
I'd get rid of Shakespeare from the HS curriculum as well. It's nonsense. People just buy cliff notes. We don't speak old English. They should just teach people to read/write and concentrate on that. Just my 2 cents.
Good point and let's not forget trade school programs disappearing from high school as well. Not every kid will succeed at college because not all kids are the same and the Standard Of Learning or SOL as most know it is a waste of time, it doesn't teach anything, how many kids could write a check, cook a balanced meal, change a flat tire, or even understand debt and how it works?
Back to the topic and Nep as an example heres a guy that has education but because of a high cost of living which is common in the Northeast it would appear that even having a degree doesn't pay enough.
100,000 dollars a year cleared is bringing home roughly 1,932.07 per week, multiplied by 4 weeks is around 7728.28 per month.
I'd get rid of Shakespeare from the HS curriculum as well. It's nonsense. People just buy cliff notes. We don't speak old English. They should just teach people to read/write and concentrate on that. Just my 2 cents.
Personally I wouldn't want to live in a society that doesn't teach Shakespeare. As an aside on this 4th of July, the two books Abraham Lincoln, the preserver of our modern nation, always kept nearby were the bible and the works of William Shakespeare. He referred to each continually throughout his adult life.
Personally I wouldn't want to live in a society that doesn't teach Shakespeare. As an aside on this 4th of July, the two books Abraham Lincoln, the preserver of our modern nation, always kept nearby were the bible and the works of William Shakespeare. He referred to each continually throughout his adult life.
Well I'm also not for teaching the bible in school either. Go to Church if you want to do that. If you want to study Shakespeare then join an after school theater group. It should not be part of required curriculum that the tax payers pay for.
The idea that you need to study Shakespeare is nothing but pompous b.s. We need more science, math, and civics instead of a play from hundreds of years ago that is written in a different language. It's a waste of time just like studying Latin. I was taught Shakespeare and didn't understand it since I don't speak Old English. I did what every other person in my class did. I bought the cliff notes and wrote book reports based on that while the teacher stood at the front of the class reciting B.S. to make himself feel smart. I got ZERO from it and I wasn't planning on becoming an old English scholar working at the Cambridge university. We need high yield education where people retain what they learned and know basic history and science. Shakespeare is less useful than a degree in medieval art. It's actually NON functional teaching Shakespeare. You'd have to read hundreds of books in OLD ENGLISH and become literate in it before you even open up a book by Shakespeare. It's idiotic. The curriculum was designed at a time when we didn't know 99 percent of what we know about science today. So much more to study nowadays. Also, can someone explain to me why all college lectures aren't put on video/youtube so you can watch them over and over again? It's the way I learned basic science as an adult since I was unable to learn(truly comprehend) it as a student, but went back on youtube and learned basic molecular biology/chemistry/basic math. Think about the amount of money that could be saved in college by simply having video lectures. Best way to learn since you can pause if you don't understand a part.
Shakespeare is nothing but a playwright. It would be like a non English speaker studying Steven Spielberg hundreds of years from now. I'd much rather they be familiar with the history of the papal system and why there needs to be a separation of church and state than study a person who writes/directs entertainment.
100,000 dollars a year cleared is bringing home roughly 1,932.07 per week, multiplied by 4 weeks is around 7728.28 per month.
If that's just getting by I would move as well.
For a single person that should be enough to have decent life in FFC. If that is total income for household of 4, you are struggling period. Taxes, health costs and retirement will take 40% of that 7700, leaving 4600 for rent, mortgage, cars, insurance, medical bills, child costs. You are tottering on brink for sure.
As for nep321, I don't think 3 jobs in 9 years is that uncommon anymore. You certainly have short term thinking in Corp America and less career control than in the past. It is "hired gun" mentality and immediate results attitude out there. I had friend who was hired on contract at pharma company then let go almost immediately due to tough personalities expecting earth and moon as they were behind..due to mass layoffs in previous year. Most people in banking or finance have been let go or forced out last decade, many more than once. It is a constant struggle to avoid layoffs. Now, this person's attitude could certainly be a trigger but I hope they are smart enough to "play the game". You never demand things upfront unless upper mgt. level.
I made into the 100's (nothing crazy from 2014-spring 2016...but then it bumped up an additional 50K while I was consulting in Spring-Fall 2016) and lived in a very nice place in Norwalk, where rents are close to Stamford (I was paying around 2500 for a large one bedroom.) I did just fine. However--no kids. I DID however eat out quite a bit, shop, etc. I don't think it was unmanageable...but I definitely was not putting aside, savings wise, what I wanted to.
I definitely would not want to have kids, making what I was making, back in CT.
I think it's funny that people out here in CA think it's just sooooo expensive--I'm actually moving to a new spot, completely updated, in a fantastic area and will be paying LESS than I was in CT. Food, car insurance, etc is cheaper, too. Buying real estate (not renting,) is the only thing that I find is not cheaper than CT.
Well I'm also not for teaching the bible in school either. Go to Church if you want to do that. If you want to study Shakespeare then join an after school theater group. It should not be part of required curriculum that the tax payers pay for.
The idea that you need to study Shakespeare is nothing but pompous b.s. We need more science, math, and civics instead of a play from hundreds of years ago that is written in a different language. It's a waste of time just like studying Latin. I was taught Shakespeare and didn't understand it since I don't speak Old English. I did what every other person in my class did. I bought the cliff notes and wrote book reports based on that while the teacher stood at the front of the class reciting B.S. to make himself feel smart. I got ZERO from it and I wasn't planning on becoming an old English scholar working at the Cambridge university. We need high yield education where people retain what they learned and know basic history and science. Shakespeare is less useful than a degree in medieval art. It's actually NON functional teaching Shakespeare. You'd have to read hundreds of books in OLD ENGLISH and become literate in it before you even open up a book by Shakespeare. It's idiotic. The curriculum was designed at a time when we didn't know 99 percent of what we know about science today. So much more to study nowadays. Also, can someone explain to me why all college lectures aren't put on video/youtube so you can watch them over and over again? It's the way I learned basic science as an adult since I was unable to learn(truly comprehend) it as a student, but went back on youtube and learned basic molecular biology/chemistry/basic math. Think about the amount of money that could be saved in college by simply having video lectures. Best way to learn since you can pause if you don't understand a part.
Shakespeare is nothing but a playwright. It would be like a non English speaker studying Steven Spielberg hundreds of years from now. I'd much rather they be familiar with the history of the papal system and why there needs to be a separation of church and state than study a person who writes/directs entertainment.
Ummm.....I was in our high honors tract in my high school. No one used Cliff Notes, at least in my classes. We read and LEARNED the prose and reading. I also took physics, chemistry, and NUMEROUS other science classes, at the same time. I DID study pre-1700 literature in college, as well as a double major in Nutrition and minors in CS and Communications. Shakespeare is a part of our modern languages history (as is Latin, which I also studied.) It is also referenced in many more places than you most likely realize, in today's modern world.
The papal system and separation of church and state is something that I also learned--as do most people I know. That's basic history.
Also, HOW Steven Spielberg directs and how he chooses to shoot his movies (not just HIM, as a person) is something that people actually do study. And, I'm sure will study in film classes, years from now.
I do have to say, that everyone learns differently. What worked for you, may not work for another.
FYI, I'm in IT and have been, for years. I'm also considered to be one of the top in my field.
I think it's funny that people out here in CA think it's just sooooo expensive--I'm actually moving to a new spot, completely updated, in a fantastic area and will be paying LESS than I was in CT. Food, car insurance, etc is cheaper, too. Buying real estate (not renting,) is the only thing that I find is not cheaper than CT.
Yep. We found LA area rents to be similar (or even less in many cases) to FFC. Home prices (LA vs Bridgeport/Stamford/Norwalk) also similar, statistically. What people do is only look at the 'beautiful' areas they visit and think that's standard around the whole area, when it's not.
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.
