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.
You quoted income which is a good reason to obtain a degree. The article was discussing how obtaining a degree is the best protection against unemployment.
Agree. A degree in ancient Greek studies w/ a minor in English Lit. doesn't translate well to anything outside of historical societies and antiquities.
An accounting degree however, can be applied in multiple applications/uses.
Actually, a degree in ancient Greek studies and English literature could translate well in real-world opportunities if they look for a position as a teacher, researcher, proof-reader, copiest, or other similar profession.
Granted, the number of opportunities for any of those professions is rather limited when compared to a more practical degree, like in accounting, but nevertheless one can still find rewarding work with a degree in the liberal arts.
My brother of head of marketing and sales in a large company. Connections are more important in order to sell. Obviously you need to know your product, but what good is knowing your product without having connections? Why not go into R&D then? Outside sales requires social skills. The ability to use connections effectively tells the hiring manager that you have the ability to use those social skills.
The best protection against unemployment is the individual who has connections because of her social skills, who knows her abilities or products by learning and who can put her skills to use.
miss littlejohn (woman in the op's article) should heed your words. she thinks her hair could be the problem
I have natural hair -- long and straight. Back when I was making the rounds looking for work, it was worn pulled back and neat to give a professional appearance. It would have been great to have it loose, but somehow long, free-flowing hair down to one's tush doesn't cut it in the work place. Chances are I would have forfeited opportunities had I arrived at the interview with the casual hair look.
Marketing would be the service sector, as is finance, basically any tertiary sector jobs (think white collar).
The thing is that many service sector jobs can't be outsourced. Marketing requires you to be in tune with the pulse of culture in order to effectively target your demographic. Imagine the debacle of not knowing your demographic. Well, hence why LA, NYC, and Chicago are the centers of marketing. Same with finance or government or many other service sector/tertiary sector jobs.
Blacks are believed to go into the sciences at the same rates as Whites.
Much of this is also the school itself. I'm mixed race from UCSB and had no trouble finding work. Same with my friends from UCLA, UCSD, USC, Stanford, Cornell...all of whom are Black. These schools have the money, resources, and network power to enable you to get a job. All of these schools have VERY small Black populations. My friends that wen to CSU schools had more trouble finding a job, but less than my friends that went to third and fourth tier schools.
For example Cal State San Marcos is heavily minority, but does not have the same marketability as a UC or high end private school (or even higher end CSUs).
My old boss stated that the reason I was hired was because I interviewed well and I went to UCSB. It was a job in sales, I had minimal sales experience. It was a SALARIED position in sales with GREAT commission rates (rare in insurance). During the height of the recession I was able to get a part time job paying $15 an hour because of my alma mater. Now I'm in South Korea and the boss was impressed by my experience and the fact I went to a UC school.
Schools that are traditionally White have better resources. It's a byproduct of our racist past. However, Blacks at this schools are likely to succeed like their White counterparts because of the system that is in place (now we live in a class based system, so for those Blacks in the upper middle class, you have MORE opportunities available).
I highlighted the above to show that intellectually you understand the real issue, but emotionally, you still prefer to continue to embrace the "racism" excuse.
The reality is that skin pigmentation has had way less to do with slavery historically, than has such things as "class", "power" and "wealth" and "culture". And it would seem that Americans, black and white have a very poor historical understanding of the foundations of slavery, and particularly as it applied to the USA. The truth is that there were white slaves accompanying the wealthy land owners who brought them to the "New World" from the very beginning, and before the first black African slave ever was brought to North America. These European land owners ... primarily British aristocracy, created the American colonies, and eventually the independent United States to free themselves of the oppression of "Royal Bloodline Rule", yet maintaining their long standing European class based structure of Land Owner, commoner, servant. The African slaves were introduced to the colonies later on, to supply that aristocracy the additional labor and craftsmen needed for the rapid expansion and growth of the colonies.
The African slaves were designated an underclass to the existing indentured servants because of the culturally common elements between these wealthy Land Owners and their European-Christian-White underclass servants, which spanned generations. Too few understand that in England and Europe in general, commoners and servants were born into their roles, and very few ever became members of the upper class to which they were subservient. And their servitude began at, and predetermined by birthright, serving their upper class masters in childhood.
The institutions of education were similarly class based as was everything else, and reserved for the privileged class, with few exceptions. Harvard College (est. 1636), College of William & Mary (est. 1693) Yale (est. 1701) Princeton (est. 1746 as the College of New Jersey, then Princeton University in 1756) among many others predates the creation of the United States, and were funded by endowments of the Aristocracy, for the Aristocracy. Blacks were not denied access to this type of education because they were black, they were denied because everyone BUT the aristocracy was denied.
Those traditions of privilege continue on strongly today, as you will find very few poor Harvard and Yale graduates standing in the unemployment line, irrespective of the color of their skin. The Yale graduate always had and still does have the upper hand to that of the community (commoner) college product, regardless of skill, intelligence, ability or color of skin. That's just a fact of life.
In the early days of America, the aristocracy was "white" because British heritage was white, as was their long established servant class. It was certainly not a situation as is insinuated today in which black people were singled out of the line up and made slaves, with their white counterparts receiving a pass. The "all black" slave situation in the United States evolved as a result of many factors, none the least of which was driven by the profiteers ... the European money changers who owned or financed the merchant ships used in the slave trade. It was big money and it was a case of the powerful dominating the weaker ... such as can been seen in ancient Egypt, with the darker skinned Egyptians enslaving the lighter skinned Hebrews.
I know it is the popularly accepted myth that opportunity and prospects for success are defined in terms of White versus Black ... and it's not accidental. Keeping the commoners fighting amongst themselves has always been one of the most valuable tactics used by the privileged class to shield themselves from the backlash of the underclass, and a ploy dating back centuries. The King or Queen didn't toss to the masses coins from their carriage as a gesture of their generosity, but a ploy to have the masses scurrying and competing for the tokens, leaving the carriage to continue on it's path unmolested.
It is as it has always been .... the powerful dominating the weaker ... the weaker serving the more powerful. And that's what we see today in the United States ... there is a dominant elite class, and then there are the rest of us. And the elitists are still tossing coins from their carriages, hoping that the masses continue butting heads, competing with each other for the spare change.
Until the masses recognize these ploys for what they are, and join together in common cause, black people are going to be in big trouble, and continue to lose ground ... because they're going to be totally outnumbered when most of us are in the street scurrying for the loose change.
I highlighted the above to show that intellectually you understand the real issue, but emotionally, you still prefer to continue to embrace the "racism" excuse.
The reality is that skin pigmentation has had way less to do with slavery historically, than has such things as "class", "power" and "wealth" and "culture".
The may be true in earlier times and it may have been true in the early colonies but by the 1650's most of the slaves in this country were of African descent. In fact Europeans actually preferred African slaves because they were stronger, less prone to getting diseases and overall where more productive.
The premise that slavery in the United States had nothing to do with skin color is patently false.
I know. I'm still curious what ArtsyGuyDC sees in terms of bias and lower wages for blacks of equal qualifications to others. Are there statistics?
i don't think he was saying that. artsyguy was asking miyu if miyu had seen first-hand with his own eyes this-n-that about black science majors and how they're treated. so when miyu said yeah, artsyguy got pwned-- again (as he often does).
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
King or Queen didn't toss to the masses coins from their carriage as a gesture of their generosity, but a ploy to have the masses scurrying and competing for the tokens, leaving the carriage to continue on it's path unmolested.
It is as it has always been .... the powerful dominating the weaker ... the weaker serving the more powerful. And that's what we see today in the United States ... there is a dominant elite class, and then there are the rest of us. And the elitists are still tossing coins from their carriages, hoping that the masses continue butting heads, competing with each other for the spare change.
Until the masses recognize these ploys for what they are, and join together in common cause, black people are going to be in big trouble, and continue to lose ground ... because they're going to be totally outnumbered when most of us are in the street scurrying for the loose change.
sounds like a scene from a movie but believable to me
I don't know about education from a race point of view. I did not go directly to college after graduating high school, I worked at restaurants and other various service positions. My great dislike for those types of jobs, and the bad treatment received from others in supervisory positions and some patrons gave me the drive to pursue a higher education. The experience I had in those positions definitely gave me a greater appreciation for my education.
No doubt about it, this depression is hitting college graduates harder than any since the 1930's. Especially hard hit are architects and engineers, due to the collapse in construction.
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.
