Could this happen on Long Island? (Bethpage: fit in, real estate, credit)
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.
What’s the answer? Tax them to death so they leave the USA or give them tax breaks to employ thousands of workers who in return pay taxes & make up the difference?
So the corporations, who are already making massive profits, get even more tax breaks, and yet we pass on the taxes to the workers, who are already saddled with student loan debt, mortgages for overpriced homes (no matter where you live, it’s overpriced compared to wage growth over the past three decades) and an ever-increasing cost of living? I’m very libertarian, but corporatism is just as dangerous as socialism in this country. You can’t have corporatism without government allowing it. Rent seeking has gotten out of control. The corporate tax rate was already reduced in 2018, so the answer would be to close the tax loopholes and charge the companies taxes on business in the US, whether they move the headquarters to the Caribbean or to Ireland to escape the taxes.
Why should the people have to bear the brunt of all of the taxes when most people are barely making a greater salary than they were a decade ago while inflation still increases costs? Food costs have gone up drastically some years - as high as 8% - due to spikes in oil prices, and there is only so much people can afford for food, housing and education (most jobs require some type of degree or technical training, but aren’t paying more for that degree as compared to 20 years ago). There needs to be some balance.
In the past, there were apprenticeships. Companies would basically take people in and train them. In those times, you didn't necessarily have to have a college degree, you just had to be smart and enterprising. There wasn't the silly HR wall.
Somewhere, this became complaining about having to train people, but this seems to me a farce about cost cutting. Why should the company expect the government or the universities to provide them with workers who already have the skills they need, for nothing? Did they invest in the universities with training programs? Did they provide any instructors to teach anyone a trade in the university? So what are they complaining about? More government services, less regulation, no taxes.
But there are some more complex issues. There is also the problem of creative destruction within capitalism that seems to render trades obsolete far more rapidly than a lifetime. It is therefore highly likely that a person will go through at least long bouts of unemployment in his/her lifetime now.
Someone has to foot the bill for the life-long education that is required to be able to shift skills with the job market. This would best be done at the company level because the company defines where at least their efforts will go, and the worker can only guess. But the atomization and detachment of the work force means less of a social contract and has placed all the cost of (re)education on the worker.
Last edited by budgetwise5; 01-07-2019 at 12:16 AM..
So the corporations, who are already making massive profits, get even more tax breaks, and yet we pass on the taxes to the workers, who are already saddled with student loan debt, mortgages for overpriced homes (no matter where you live, it’s overpriced compared to wage growth over the past three decades) and an ever-increasing cost of living? I’m very libertarian, but corporatism is just as dangerous as socialism in this country. You can’t have corporatism without government allowing it. Rent seeking has gotten out of control. The corporate tax rate was already reduced in 2018, so the answer would be to close the tax loopholes and charge the companies taxes on business in the US, whether they move the headquarters to the Caribbean or to Ireland to escape the taxes.
Why should the people have to bear the brunt of all of the taxes when most people are barely making a greater salary than they were a decade ago while inflation still increases costs? Food costs have gone up drastically some years - as high as 8% - due to spikes in oil prices, and there is only so much people can afford for food, housing and education (most jobs require some type of degree or technical training, but aren’t paying more for that degree as compared to 20 years ago). There needs to be some balance.
In the past, there were apprenticeships. Companies would basically take people in and train them. In those times, you didn't necessarily have to have a college degree, you just had to be smart and enterprising. There wasn't the silly HR wall.
Somewhere, this became complaining about having to train people, but this seems to me a farce about cost cutting. Why should the company expect the government or the universities to provide them with workers who already have the skills they need, for nothing? Did they invest in the universities with training programs? Did they provide any instructors to teach anyone a trade in the university? So what are they complaining about? More government services, less regulation, no taxes.
But there are some more complex issues. There is also the problem of creative destruction within capitalism that seems to render trades obsolete far more rapidly than a lifetime. It is therefore highly likely that a person will go through at least long bouts of unemployment in his/her lifetime now.
Someone has to foot the bill for the life-long education that is required to be able to shift skills with the job market. This would best be done at the company level because the company defines where at least their efforts will go, and the worker can only guess. But the atomization and detachment of the work force means less of a social contract and has placed all the cost of (re)education on the worker.
Interesting points. Some thoughts.
1) the IDAs on LI already subsidize just about anyone who asks. And look at the recent Amazon deal that pays $2.8B in incentives for $2.5B benefit. That indicates an underlying problem.
2) it’s possible to get a 4 year degree and not incur massive (or any) student loan debt. This requires thought and planning, and not blindly accepting that a college degree of any sort leads to riches by itself.
3) life-long education should be owned and guided by the individual. In the trades - where apprenticeships are still common - the employer takes much of this function, but in a gig or white collar economy, the worker needs to own their own future.
4) lifetime employment with a single employer is dead outside the public sector. Partly that’s because of the company’s lack of employee investment, but it’s also because of lack of employee loyalty and commitment. It’s become acceptable to job hop every year to 18 months.
1) the IDAs on LI already subsidize just about anyone who asks. And look at the recent Amazon deal that pays $2.8B in incentives for $2.5B benefit. That indicates an underlying problem.
2) it’s possible to get a 4 year degree and not incur massive (or any) student loan debt. This requires thought and planning, and not blindly accepting that a college degree of any sort leads to riches by itself.
3) life-long education should be owned and guided by the individual. In the trades - where apprenticeships are still common - the employer takes much of this function, but in a gig or white collar economy, the worker needs to own their own future.
4) lifetime employment with a single employer is dead outside the public sector. Partly that’s because of the company’s lack of employee investment, but it’s also because of lack of employee loyalty and commitment. It’s become acceptable to job hop every year to 18 months.
This is spot on - especially point # 4. It used to be commonplace to train an employee and then want to keep that asset around, building off his/her experience. Now the name of the game is get them young and dumb, squeeze every ounce out of them and repeat the process before they can command more $.
This is spot on - especially point # 4. It used to be commonplace to train an employee and then want to keep that asset around, building off his/her experience. Now the name of the game is get them young and dumb, squeeze every ounce out of them and repeat the process before they can command more $.
It goes the other way too. Millennials who don’t want to work for years and years at a company, and shift employers because they offer more flexible work hours, benefits or slightly more money.
There used to be investment on both sides, now there is none. So companies get casually engaged employees who don’t want to stay there, and employees get employers who look at them as disposable resources not worth training or investing in.
lifetime employment with a single employer is dead outside the public sector. Partly that’s because of the company’s lack of employee investment, but it’s also because of lack of employee loyalty and commitment. It’s become acceptable to job hop every year to 18 months.
This is so true. When my father was discharged from the Army in 1943 at age 24, he went to work for the National Cash Register Company in Hempstead. They sent him to their HQ in Dayton for four months of training as a repair tech. When NCR started manufacturing electronic check processing equipment they sent him back to Ohio to train on those machines and made him in the in-house tech at the EAB processing HQ in Uniondale; that was in the 1980s if I recall correctly. He worked only for NCR until he hit the mandatory retirement age of 70 and was such a company man that he refused to join the union when NCR became a union shop, even though he was never management. Held firmly to the belief that an employer should take care of the workers and receive loyalty from the workers in return. In his opinion unions were fundamentally disloyal and adversarial so he wanted no part of it.
Thinking back on my own 25 year work history (I spent 20 years as a stay at home mom) I worked for 8 different employers. I think my shortest-term job was 2 years (I don't count the four months I spent training out of state with one insurance company who had promised a position here on LI and then after I completed the training said that the only open spot was in NJ because they decided not to open the LI satellite office after all; so I said bye-bye) and the longest one was 7 years. Left that one because the owner's son was brought in as the new office manager and immediately began harassing all the under-30 female employees (this was way before the #metoo movement, lol.) None of my employers were union and none provided any kind of pension plan during the years I was there.
Is the 12-18 month job swap really that common? Looking at my son's generation (born in the first half of the 1980s, so mid thirties nowadays) they seem to be sticking with one employer for five years or more. The idea of job hopping on an almost yearly basis would make me shudder; changing jobs was always a major PITA in my opinion, and so many of my generation just stuck it out on a "the devil you know is better than the devil you don't" basis. Of course things were very different for women than for men (and in many ways still are) so there was that factor too.
This is so true. When my father was discharged from the Army in 1943 at age 24, he went to work for the National Cash Register Company in Hempstead. They sent him to their HQ in Dayton for four months of training as a repair tech. When NCR started manufacturing electronic check processing equipment they sent him back to Ohio to train on those machines and made him in the in-house tech at the EAB processing HQ in Uniondale; that was in the 1980s if I recall correctly. He worked only for NCR until he hit the mandatory retirement age of 70 and was such a company man that he refused to join the union when NCR became a union shop, even though he was never management. Held firmly to the belief that an employer should take care of the workers and receive loyalty from the workers in return. In his opinion unions were fundamentally disloyal and adversarial so he wanted no part of it.
Thinking back on my own 25 year work history (I spent 20 years as a stay at home mom) I worked for 8 different employers. I think my shortest-term job was 2 years (I don't count the four months I spent training out of state with one insurance company who had promised a position here on LI and then after I completed the training said that the only open spot was in NJ because they decided not to open the LI satellite office after all; so I said bye-bye) and the longest one was 7 years. Left that one because the owner's son was brought in as the new office manager and immediately began harassing all the under-30 female employees (this was way before the #metoo movement, lol.) None of my employers were union and none provided any kind of pension plan during the years I was there.
Is the 12-18 month job swap really that common? Looking at my son's generation (born in the first half of the 1980s, so mid thirties nowadays) they seem to be sticking with one employer for five years or more. The idea of job hopping on an almost yearly basis would make me shudder; changing jobs was always a major PITA in my opinion, and so many of my generation just stuck it out on a "the devil you know is better than the devil you don't" basis. Of course things were very different for women than for men (and in many ways still are) so there was that factor too.
Job hopping varies. Usually by the time you’re in your 30’s you are either married with kids or in some sort of longer term relationship, so stability is desirable.
There used to be a stigma with job hopping, but no longer. If anything, staying too long at an employer raises eyebrows now.
Supply & demand. Up until recently, there wasn’t much of either.
I love when people tell me they have 50k, 60k, 90k in student loans. IF (notice how I stated “IF”, LoL) you have a job making 75-100k (My Friend an RN for example) there is ABSOLUTELY no reason why that loan can’t be paid off in 5-7 years. You’re making 75k-100k! I then asked “my friend”.....how much were you making before you became an RN? She told me 25k working in retail.
Yes, I know status changes kids, marriage, ect....
Yes, I know many can’t find jobs, many have huge loans, many are now working in retail making 30k. This was just one example. I told her it was an investment and you wouldn’t have that decent paying job if you didn’t have those loans.
I love when people tell me they have 50k, 60k, 90k in student loans. IF (notice how I stated “IF”, LoL) you have a job making 75-100k (My Friend an RN for example) there is ABSOLUTELY no reason why that loan can’t be paid off in 5-7 years. You’re making 75k-100k!
I'm equally puzzled. My DIL had over 100K in student loans and has been working as a teacher for the past 10 years, with a starting salary of $60K right out of the gate. She now makes $108K as of the 2016-17 published salary lists. You would THINK that student loan would have been paid off by now, but nope.
Luckily my son exited college with zero student loans, thanks to being the beneficiary of a life insurance policy the year before he graduated from high school. Did not go to grad school though. He really did not know what he wanted to end up doing so if he had gone he'd have gotten an MBA. It turned out that a summer internship turned into a job in banking and he just stayed in the financial industry with his BA from a business oriented university. He's happy where he is, though he hates the commute to NYC he also knows he would not be making the same salary at any job here on LI. His only debt is the interest on his mortgage which is now exactly 50% paid off already with 10 years to go. Forty percent equity in the house outside of the one mortgage, so if he is smart and takes on no further debt they will own the house free and clear by the time their child enters junior high.
Supply & demand. Up until recently, there wasn’t much of either.
I love when people tell me they have 50k, 60k, 90k in student loans. IF (notice how I stated “IF”, LoL) you have a job making 75-100k (My Friend an RN for example) there is ABSOLUTELY no reason why that loan can’t be paid off in 5-7 years. You’re making 75k-100k! I then asked “my friend”.....how much were you making before you became an RN? She told me 25k working in retail.
Yes, I know status changes kids, marriage, ect....
Yes, I know many can’t find jobs, many have huge loans, many are now working in retail making 30k. This was just one example. I told her it was an investment and you wouldn’t have that decent paying job if you didn’t have those loans.
My wife has 2 master's degrees. I never set foot in a high school. I make almost triple what she makes.
My wife has 2 master's degrees. I never set foot in a high school. I make almost triple what she makes.
Different times. With all the competition these days, no matter what field, the “degree” weeds out the competition.
A few hundred applicants vs. a few thousand.
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.
