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.
Utter, total and complete [TOS Violation]. Would this thread even exist if what you are saying is true? Less than one percent of a large population like the U.S. are lazy schlubs that just want to scrounge off unemployment.
H
Hmmm.... where did I say anything about "lazy schlubs"....?
Every word of my post is true.
And there are thousands of jobs out there. They may not be jobs you are qualified for, but they are there. In fact, companies are losing lots of business because they cannot find skilled workers.
Yes, that is a problem. And our nanny state encourages "them" to become dependent on government.
We should educate students from a young age that they need to learn to take care of themselves. Almost everyone can become productive enough to earn way beyond the minimum wage.
"What if the only job you can get pays min wage?" Good question. I've been there. You work your butt off with two or three jobs and save enough money to get an education or develop a skill. Been there, done that, so I know it works.
Do you really think that living on the dole is FUN? Not for the people who have been responsible most of their lives and suddenly find themselves down on their luck. Let's take single folks for example. Single people can not get help from the government other than a few food stamps, unemployment, and SSI. That's about it. There are people living off a mere $150 a month in Indiana because that's all the benefits they get. Sound like fun to you??? I am sure anyone living off $150 a month would happily take a minimum wage job if they could find one.
Although, women who will spread their legs for any ole jerk can get free housing, welfare, food stamps, free lunch for the kids, WIC, maybe even a free cell phone, Pell grants, Section 8, free child care via Head Start, and Medicaid.
I wasn't getting on you, I was just pointing out that the 2 are really nothing alike. The big boys in tech find you, you don't have to market yourself to them.
I once had Apple approach me for an opening as head of their entire security division. I told them I didn't have much interest, but that didn't stop them from flying me down to the Bay, first class, putting me up in a great hotel for 4 days, and giving me their sales pitch (which I guess one could call an interview, though it was an interview in reverse). I was nonchalant, disengaged, intentionally aloof, and made absolutely no attempt to "sell myself" to any of the people I met.
When I left the Bay and got back home, there was a job offer from them waiting for me in my inbox (which I turned down - but not until I used that job offer as leverage to secure a raise at my existing job).
This, among all of the posts on this thread is perhaps the perfect post for my response (with a distant ghostly sound of a famous Carly Simon song eerily playing in the background )
It would seem that you've developed a valuable technical skill set that is in high demand at the moment, and that's good for you, as humility isn't likely to open many doors for you . That said, would it not also be safe to say that there are relatively few people in your company that have your specific skills and could not do your job? And would it not also be safe to say there are other jobs in your company that require particular skills that you do not possess? (The obvious answer is yes to both).
The point I'm driving at is that even as there are many specific skills and generalist talents needed in any particular company to keep things moving swiftly and efficiently ... the contrast is even greater regarding the pallet of skills and talents required to keep a society running smoothly. And, the strength of a chain is not defined by the strongest section, but by the weakest link, nevertheless, it is the chain in its entirety that is needed to do a chain's task.
The people who produced your car ... the people who produce the gasoline you put in your tank ... the people who produce the food you consume ... etc., etc., etc., all make it possible for you to do what you do. You probably cannot do those things for yourself anymore than the Oil Rig worker who pulls that crude out of the ground could secure your IT network. Each task, large or small, skilled or unskilled is necessary ... consequently, it is both impossible and undesirable for everyone to become a "Network Security" Guru.
Now, disruptions in the economy which occur from time to time affect some of those work sectors more than others .. often following a chain reaction path, and depending on severity, may or may not affect some sectors at all. Shifts in technology can also cause employment disruptions, and nowhere do such shifts occur more frequently than in information technology. Sometimes those shifts can be beneficial and create greater opportunities for professional growth and sometimes they can simply make you irrelevant. A task that might require a great deal of technical skill by a human being will often become automated later down the line, transforming the "irreplaceable" to the status of "irrelevant". And even though the highly skilled specialist is often in greater demand and more highly paid, it is the generalist who enjoys more stability. So as the old saying goes, remember that those toes you step on as you climb up the ladder are connected to the arses you'll be kissing on the way back down.
Yours is not the only attitude on display of the "I've got mine, and it's your own damn fault if you don't too" syndrome. It seems rather prevalent. But this is a very simplistic view that's immersed in fallacy ... just as one of the other posters put up the "See ... here are 1500 Jobs posted" in apparent response to 15 Million unemployed. Math doesn't appear to be that person's strong suit, so I doubt they'd be applying for the accountant positions among those 1500.
The absurd theme being repeated here is that there are plenty of jobs, but no one willing to do the work ... or if they are willing but not qualified ... that's their own fault too ... or if they cannot relocate to where employment opportunities are more plentiful .. well no one forced them to buy that house they are now deep in the red and cannot sell. On and on here, it's blame the victim ... it's the plant workers fault when the plant closes and the jobs are moved overseas .... it's the auto workers fault when Detroit is basically closed and moved off shore, and as these jobs and plants disappear, so too are the thousands of secondary workers and business and services that existed to support those workers. Chain reaction.
Read my lips folks .... you can easily determine the number of workers that are unemployed and want a job from those that don't. You simply chart the average unemployment rate during times of economic expansion (which generally runs at around 3% plus or minus 1 or the willfully unemployed rate) and measure that against the true unemployment rate which is around 18-23%. (not the bogus 10% on the nightly propaganda news). That's a lot of people out of work ... and even if every one of them were as smart as you, (many of them are probably a lot smarter) and possessed your exact Network Security skill set ... most would remain unemployed because there is only so many of YOU actually needed.
Guess what? It's getting worse ... and it's going to continue getting worse until the public wakes up and demands real change ... or in the event that doesn't happen, eventually YOU TOO will feel the reality of this. It's only a matter of time. You may even keep your great little job laying bricks in the firewall, right up until the time that the "system" finally crashes completely ... and then, you'll find yourself in the same boat as the unemployed folks you've been thumbing your nose at.
Remember .. toes and arses, and what goes up, must come down.
But what if that job only paid minimum wage? What if the only jobs you can get pay minimum wage? Yes, you can be above it and say, well... that's on them, but you would be wrong. It's not on them. When there gets to be too many of 'them' it becomes everyone's problem.
H
Then you made a TON of mistakes growing up, and made bad decision after bad decision as an adult. At which point, you're no longer the rest of society's problem - or shouldn't be, at any rate.
ASP programmers do not lay around on unemployment! Network Security experts with Cisco Certifications do not scam the government and get welfare for them and their 5 children and live off it forever. Triage nurses are not avoiding looking for work because they are afraid of actually finding a job that they don't want.
Which is why we have jobs. Perhaps the large section of the population that has no marketable skills and whines about how nobody hands them a makework position instead of bettering themselves should take our cue.
And just to point something else out: No, ASP programmers don't lay around on unemployment. Guys like me in security don't scam the gtovernment and get welfare. Nurses don't avoid looking for work. No, what we end up doing is working our asses off to subsidize lazy losers who won't work. Yeah, there's fairness.
Donors and recipients, our society is made up of donors and recipients. The examples above? We're donors. No less than half of the "unemployed workforce"? Shameless recipients.
It would seem that you've developed a valuable technical skill set that is in high demand at the moment, and that's good for you, as humility isn't likely to open many doors for you . That said, would it not also be safe to say that there are relatively few people in your company that have your specific skills and could not do your job? And would it not also be safe to say there are other jobs in your company that require particular skills that you do not possess? (The obvious answer is yes to both).
There's nothing to prevent others from learning this skillset. Maybe they don't get as far along in it as I do, because I was blessed with a genetic gift that most do not receive, but they could get quite a ways. Yet I don't see people lining up to become IT professionals, or nurses, or radiology technicians, or any other "in demand" profession. No, they stubbornly cling to their skill as a button pusher and expect the world to create something for them. That's not how it works.
Quote:
The people who produced your car ... the people who produce the gasoline you put in your tank ... the people who produce the food you consume ... etc., etc., etc., all make it possible for you to do what you do. You probably cannot do those things for yourself anymore than the Oil Rig worker who pulls that crude out of the ground could secure your IT network.
The difference is could I learn to do it? The answer to that is yes. Would it be easier for me to learn how to do that than it was to learn what it is I do? Again, yes. WOULD I learn those skills, if they were to become in demand and my skill were to fall out of demand? Absolutely. And that's the difference, right there. There are those who will do, and there are those who will expect others to do for them. I've no respect for the latter group.
And that right there is my issue with the entitlement society that has become so prevalent, the collective who refuse to do for themselves, who refuse to do what it takes to survive on their own instead of having to rely upon me, who instead of doing what it takes to become successful, sit around and decry anyone who does, and attempt to make success a 4 letter word.
The jobs are there. The tools to learn the skills to do the jobs are there. If you have no money, if you have no job, if you have no prospects, you can learn for free. You will be subsidized by programs for not only the cost to train you, but also to provide living expenses while you do for yourself. Those that do not utilize them and instead just want to leech? Can fall off a cliff.
Each task, large or small, skilled or unskilled is necessary ... consequently, it is both impossible and undesirable for everyone to become a "Network Security" Guru.
Quote:
and even if every one of them were as smart as you, (many of them are probably a lot smarter) and possessed your exact Network Security skill set ... most would remain unemployed because there is only so many of YOU actually needed.
But the reality remains, there are a lot more of ME needed than there are me's available. Know what a free market backer calls that? An opportunity. See it, seize it. If you refuse to? Then that's on you. As mentioned above, if suddenly I was on the outside looking in, the first thing I would do is identify a new in, and exploit it. Like you're SUPPOSED to do.
(and incidentally, statistically speaking, only 1 out of every 600,000 people are "as smart"....and I'm guessing almost all of them are either working or retired).
(and incidentally, statistically speaking, only 1 out of every 600,000 people are "as smart"....and I'm guessing almost all of them are either working or retired).
heh. Didn't think there was anyone else on this board with similar statistics as me. Though admittedly you are probably about 5 points smarter IQ wise than I. I think you and Garfieldian perhaps. I suspected as much but didn't know for sure. Anyway.
There is data to back you up. The number of people with an IQ over 130 who spent more than 1 month unemployed, in this market, is 1%.
Dropping it down to about 120 makes it around 5%.
That there tells me that it pays to either be book smart and therefore knowledgeable, or naturally intelligent. The former need to work hard and the latter usually do anyway because they're naturally driven.
For the former, the vast majority aren't born with the gift of intelligence can and should work hard to be book smart and at least have the ability to link thoughts together and solve problems. Not everyone can be innovators, but a lot of people can improve on things gradually and there's lots of jobs for people like that.
The problem is that US culture has never stressed learning except for a) immigrant parents stressing this (e.g. the Irish and Polish) or b) right after WWII to "keep up with the Russkies." Pre WWII we were strong only through expansion into the frontier. Post WWII we were strong only because our competition were bombed back to the stone ages.
Since then, we've seen how our true shades are. We've grown complacent. We're simply still reaping the benefits of having had zero and I mean ZERO global competition for the past 60 years. Until quite recently, the USA was the only game in town, save a few civilized and up and coming countries like Canada. Europe was bombed to smithereens. China was a backwater hellhole. Japan was also bombed to smithereens.
Since then though, nearly every place where we didn't have competition we do now. Even in high tech things like infrastructure, aerospace, physics, etc. Americans have been losing ground because we keep thinking we can all be Britney Spears or Tom Cruise and don't want to work for what they want. Such people essentially contribute zero to society (even the ones that DO make it) and continue to perpetuate this sad affair.
It is such a shame that people like me have to squander part of our wealth to help leeches in the system continue to pump out kids and get fat while rotting their brains and making bad role models for those kids, perpetuating a vicious cycle, and any genetic anomalies which actually want to strive for excellence are derisively ridiculed at school by parents, teachers, and peers at worst, and at best, walls are erected or the opportunities simply don't exist. I would just quit and do the same thing, but I like having nice things, and I'd be bored out of my mind doing nothing all day.
(and incidentally, statistically speaking, only 1 out of every 600,000 people are "as smart"....and I'm guessing almost all of them are either working or retired).
Dude, get a clue. It was like that. No longer. Smart, scary smart, young college graduates are not being hired in their senior year because H1B's are being recruited in from India and China. But you go on believing that the world is still like the one you grew up in. I so would not want to be you when the karma from all that arrogance comes back to bite. Hard.
Dude, get a clue. It was like that. No longer. Smart, scary smart, young college graduates are not being hired in their senior year because H1B's are being recruited in from India and China. But you go on believing that the world is still like the one you grew up in. I so would not want to be you when the karma from all that arrogance comes back to bite. Hard.
H
You know what you call a "scary smart" young college graduate in most industries? Dangerous. Kids coming out of uni aren't being offered jobs because people understand that kids coming out of uni have no actual skills. They either know how to operate a business in an idyllic society (which we don't live in) or perform a tech task inside a bubble (sorry, no safety nets out here), or the like. The truly outstanding ones rise above and join the workforce. The ones who slogged their way through 4 years and expected that it was miraculously going to guarantee them a 6 figure salary get left behind.
The kids coming in from India (China is not pervasive) are codemonkeys. Companies largely aren't willing to entrust them with truly critical equipment or needs. Those skills still come from MIT, Stanford, Cal Poly, Carnegie Mellon and the like.
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.
)
. That said, would it not also be safe to say that there are relatively few people in your company that have your specific skills and could not do your job? And would it not also be safe to say there are other jobs in your company that require particular skills that you do not possess? (The obvious answer is yes to both).
