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.
Let me break this down in the most intricate way possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss20ts
You are rude!
First off, no, I'm not. Never once have I said anything to degrade you personally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss20ts
What's ignorant about the fact that there are people who have been successful in life without a college education? I gave 2 well known examples. Sure, not everyone can be Steve Jobs or Marc Zuckerburg, that doesn't mean those without a college education are poor or unhappy in life.
This is what we call an anomaly. In statistical analysis, you have to account for said anomalies. Yes, Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerburg are highly successful college drop outs. No one is trying to disprove that. But if you look at much of society, the intellectual leaders of this world have extensive amounts of education. Also, I never said that by not having a college education that you were destined for misery and financial destitution. There are plenty of non-college degreed successful people in society. That was never the point anyone was trying to make. I was trying to explain the value I saw in a college education. It was you that instigated this entire back and forth by trying to degrade the value of said education. Why would you do that? I can think of nothing else other than just another insecure individual trying justify their life decisions by denigrating the value of a particular thing they did not achieve or do well at.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss20ts
You can have a great job, high earnings, educated up the wazoo, and be the most miserable person on earth.
Yeah, and you can also be ignorant and poor and rely on welfare for subsistence. It goes both ways. Then again, as the saying goes, ignorance is bliss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss20ts
And education doesn't make anyone intelligent.
Well that's ironic, because it wouldn't be called an education if you're not getting anything from it. That would be considered a wasted opportunity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss20ts
George Bush went to Harvard and that man could barely get a sentence out!
George Bush flubbed a few lines. You're saying you've never gotten tongue tied in your entire life? I'm not even a fan of the guy and I'll give him that much. Besides, I doubt you've ever met the man to know whether he's intelligent or not. There are plenty of brilliant people who have speech impediments or severe social awkwardness for that matter that come across as unintelligent on the surface. The idea that you'd criticize such an individual indicates to me that you are shallow and judgmental towards those that are different than you.
Let me give you an example...a management position opens up and there are 2 candidates. One has worked for the company for 8 years, no management experience, no degree. The other has 20 years experience in management with another company, and a degree. The reason the job may be given to candidate #1 is that it will lessen her commute. That's just not right.
Of course that's not right, unless there are some very company-specific processes or knowledge that the outside candidate would not have. Or, perhaps, the 20 year + paper candidate was a bad interview, or did not make the hiring manager belive they could get the job done? If the commute was the only reason, then that's a little shady.
I have worked for employers in the past that ONLY promoted from within. It worked for them, and really emphasized a results-based dynamic - the only down side is that you see creativity drop a bit, since you have the same "coaching tree" all the way up the line.
Of course that's not right, unless there are some very company-specific processes or knowledge that the outside candidate would not have. Or, perhaps, the 20 year + paper candidate was a bad interview, or did not make the hiring manager belive they could get the job done? If the commute was the only reason, then that's a little shady.
I have worked for employers in the past that ONLY promoted from within. It worked for them, and really emphasized a results-based dynamic - the only down side is that you see creativity drop a bit, since you have the same "coaching tree" all the way up the line.
I agree with this. Lessening ones commute is about the lamest excuse I've ever heard for giving some a job or a promotion. If I had been the 20 year + paper candidate, I would have raised four He**s if I found out about that. Of course, raising four He**s probably wouldn't get me the job, but it would have screamed volumes about the integrity of this company and their promotion criteria.
Someone high up in a company could be a co-founder or a very early employee who earned the position with hard work. Higher education does not always equate a "higher" level job in management.
Someone high up in a company could be a co-founder or a very early employee who earned the position with hard work. Higher education does not always equate a "higher" level job in management.
Yes, I do understand that. That isn't what I'm questioning. Sometimes I think people from within who are less qualified just get the job because the company doesn't have to pay them as much.
Let me give you an example...a management position opens up and there are 2 candidates. One has worked for the company for 8 years, no management experience, no degree. The other has 20 years experience in management with another company, and a degree. The reason the job may be given to candidate #1 is that it will lessen her commute. That's just not right.
Candidate 1 works for the company 8 years. Is she buying a new house next to the office with the promotion? How would it lessen their commute, if she isn't changing companies?
Whether or not she gets the promotion, her commute is the same as the last 8 years. The commute only changes for candidate 2, if he gets hired. He will no longer be commuting to his old office.
Candidate 1 works for the company 8 years. Is she buying a new house next to the office with the promotion? How would it lessen their commute, if she isn't changing companies?
Whether or not she gets the promotion, her commute is the same as the last 8 years. The commute only changes for candidate 2, if he gets hired. He will no longer be commuting to his old office.
Candidate 1 works in one office and this job is in a different town (the town in which she lives). She drives 15 miles to work each morning.
The way I moved up to the position I'm currently holding is experience.
When hiring today most employers are looking for experience over a piece of paper. Theory will only get you so far and when push comes to shove real world experience wins 99% of the time.
The way I moved up to the position I'm currently holding is experience.
When hiring today most employers are looking for experience over a piece of paper. Theory will only get you so far and when push comes to shove real world experience wins 99% of the time.
Did you see that Candidate 2 has more experience than Candidate 1?
Success w/o formal credentials doesn't mean a lack of education. The School of Hard Knocks provides some impressive training. So a combo &/or heavy emphasis on 2+ of these: SOHK degree + talent + perseverance +connections = impressive success
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.
Never once have I said anything to degrade you personally.
