Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

The Gaslighting of the Millennial Generation


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#21 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 13,772 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 27 October 2016 - 11:34 AM

It might be okay to revere both the holy men, and the assholy men, because either could give us (society) the proper nudge. 


Edited by Alder Logs, 27 October 2016 - 11:35 AM.


#22 August West

August West

    Mycotopiate

  • OG VIP
  • 3,487 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 28 October 2016 - 12:27 PM

Almost didn't come back but since you were game enough, figured I'd at least go one more...

 

 

 

I've had trouble breaking quotes up in order to individualize responses so I'm just going to post mine in this color within the quoted text.

 

*Good Idea

 

Even though that's a totally valid point (even sibling family members aren't  all the same)...

En mass, different generations of people, have been trained and sculpted, at the same point of their developmental cycles....to the same set of variables.   That counts...in a big way. 

 

People are a product of their environment...media and culture homogenizes.   

 

Agreed. Just to be sure, though...you're agreeing with the sentiment that all millennials fit into a fairly homogenous spectrum of behavior? The context of this part of your response seems to indicate such.

 

*Which part are you agreeing with?  ...and which part seems unclear?...Homogenizes, vs. Homogenized?

 

**I agree with the sentiment of most of what you've written there. What's a little confusing is that the context (ie. "even though...") presents it in opposition (for lack of a better word) to what I had posted, though I don't believe your point and mine are mutually exclusive. Your comment also appears to be  in opposition to what the op's article said. Nothing serious, just a little confusing to me.

 

 

 

We never look at individual birds, we look at patterns and behavior of the flock at large.

 

If our generation, in just one state...say Tennessee...was sent back in time to 1950 to start their development....and then was reunited with the rest of us concurrently, after a 30 yeard period....

 

We'd notice a big difference

 

The Tennessee hypothetical seems to go without saying and seems to fall short in addressing the point that groups are simply made up of individuals. Seems non sequitur.

 

*How much of an Individual are you....really? You have the illusion of getting to make all sorts of important personal choices....Nike/Adidas, Clinton/Trump,  Regular/Premium etc....but in the end, your really just picking and choosing from a box of presets.  

 

**Of course, this discussion has many layers. I wasn't particularly interested in the grand, 'humans only have so much spectrum to work within' layer. I'm aware of the forces that mold our individuality or lack thereof. I would further point out that Nike/Adidas, Clinton/Trump,  Regular/Premium aren't really important choices at all...or even choices for that matter. They are selections.  By definition then, they are not the kinds of decisions that define any concept of individuality.

 

This could take forever to spell/type out, but work with me here...

 

 

**The importance of language for shaping 'society' ie. groups of individuals is well beyond the scope of my interest at this time. Would-be controllers of populations have well understood this. A profound dissappointment of the founders (yes, I too hate this phrase) was that they didn't have enough time to truly create a new English as means for truly separating from the British Empire. They (as have many others) understood that a true break could only come through an essentially new language. One has to give it up for the British Empire for spreading their encyclopedia (from Greek: enkyklios paideia - training in a circle) of control across most of the globe. I have neither time nor inclination to really give that topic a proper discussion. However, just because there is a blanket of control over 'society', it does not negate the space for individuality. A few brief comments then just to show my appreciation for the effort...

 

Everyone speaks a language (vocabulary), which is a matrix of all the notions/concepts of the given *culture* in whom it has arisen.   Language is the primary means  by which individuals may communicate information to others, or even themselves, as the medium of linear thought. 

Just since the boom in computer technology, our vocabulary  has expanded, hand in hand, to include more nuanced differentiation of conceptual matter, as it relates directly, or metaphorically, to those tech processes.....giving our communications (inner & outer) a greater range of mobility...and further shaping our collective cognitive structure, in ways that are unique to the cresting generation.

 

**This is where internet conversations get a bit tricky. I could use a lot of clarification on the words you've chosen before responding but we'll just have to see if my response betrays a misunderstanding of them. I don't think I agree with much of this. Since computers, we have certainly gained a vocabulary but much of it is simply jargon. I don't know that it has included a  more nuanced differentiation of conceptual matter, partly because I don't really know what that means here. I also don't necessarily agree that computer jargon, or any new language technology is giving our communications (inner & outer) a greater range of mobility. It would depend on what you mean by mobility. In my experience or ime, the nuance and mobility, at least in much of communication seems to be diminishing. I'm looking at you emojis. Just as in a past generation, bumper stickers were a new communicative technology - appearing to explain something while saying virtually nothing. New ways of communicating are not inherently expansive. I do agree that new forms of communication are unique in shaping the generations within which they are occurring. 

 

The very scaffolding of our perceptual matrix, was/is/& continues to be, handed to us  starting around age 3.  

 

What defines my individuality?     Is not every phenomenon repercussive in nature?

 

The individual, is still, largely shaped by the *culture*.

 

Further, comparing birds to humans is like comparing apples to oranges or...birds to humans. Other than inhabiting the same scientifically categorized Kingdom (created by humans, not birds, btw) humans and birds are vastly different.

 

We are a communal, *cultural* species.  We naturally cluster/heard/flock together (Family/village/city/Nation).  Like all other beasts of the land and sea, we  humans follow  internally similar patterns of behavior, on the whole.  Most species have a modus operandi.

 

**Mostly, yep. But, I'm not sure most species have a modus operandi more than an autonomic operandi. 

 

Ourselves, being highly psychological creatures,  find much of our M.O. taking place at that subtle level....with it's repercussions emanating out externally, as a myriad of physical expressions (society) & mental projections (language).

 

Not so different.  We just understand "us" a little bit better than "them"

 

**Again, from a certain perspective, we are 'not so different'. But, as you've pointed out -Ourselves, being highly psychological creatures- and the fact that we are having this conversation, shows that, in another perspective, we are vastly different. 

 

 

.Interestingly, your example takes strides and strengthening your point (kudos) but imo, the premise is flawed. Maybe it's due to that conditioning you're pointing out that says, in affect that humans are just lumps of clay meant to be molded...?

 

"...in affect that humans are just lumps of clay meant to be molded?".... "is a very telling use of language for this person's point of view" ...and one which was never asserted in the first  place.

 

**Not quite sure what's being said here but I'll take a stab. And, this topic again, could fill several pages of conversation. If you're telling me that you didn't assert that humans are meant to be molded, I guess it depends on what or whom the driver of culture is. You've clearly asserted that humans are influenced by language, etc. The foundation of language has been driven, if not developed very much by a 'dominating' class. One can go back to the founders of operant conditioning, conservatively, in their use of the phrase molding lumps of clay.

 

 

'Old crotchety white people' is a very telling use of language for this person's point of view. There's an equally low socio-political-economic understand of the person described as such as there is in the person who just thinks you can raise the minimum wage or forgive student debt without a lot of chaos. Nuance can be a motherfucker where the naive are concerned.

 

I don't see a lot of thoughtful 'improvements' on offer. But I'm all ears.

 

 

I  realize "Old crotchety White people" doesn't sound very pleasing....But lets be honest....

 

White people own the world (I'm ready to discuss, if you think I'm generalizing.) & it's the older generations who hold many (and pass down)  of the limiting beliefs that keep  people divided  and struggling.    Almost every one of my friends grandparents (including my own) are racist as hell lol....if you really ask them.

 

That's  just "how they were raised"...They were a "Product of their environment" :rolleyes: 

 

Free and Critical  thinkers, of all ages/generations, willing to bushwack a new path...creatively & continuously.....

 

That's what we need.  

 

Unfortunately, it takes a lot of gumption to leave the heard....even if they're collectively marching off a cliff.  

 

Weird right?  Psychology  is a bitch, for those that are unaware of it.....your either the puppet, or the puppeteer :blush: 

 

You are generalizing

 

Am I?

 

**I believe so. In one, somewhat cartoonish layer, sure, 'old crotchety white people own the world'. But, interestingly, as per this discussion, there's a whole lot of nuance missing.

 

but I have no issue with that. Generalizations are useful. However, 'pleasing', or otherwise, isn't the issue. It's the lack of nuance. The indication is that if crotchety old white man were replaced by x colored gender/race/etc things would be different.

 

That's an erroneous conclusion, of which no one set you up for an assist.  

Who's Generalizing?

 

Would they? Racism isn't bound by color, funnily enough.

 

Again....I never said it was.

 

The people most focused on race that I'm aware of, call themselves 'progressive'.

 

LOLOLOL....so true :rolleyes: 

 

This is an philosophical problem, not a color/age/gender/etc problem.

 

Now were speaking the same language :thumbs_up:

 

Psychology is a bitch for those that pay it no mind. I'm not sure about the puppet or puppeteer idea. Seems a bit more nuanced than that. Perhaps it's more of a spectrum than a dichotomy?

 

For sure...it's never just Black or White, This or That, 50/50  etc...

 

**As in, more of a spectrum than a dichotomy.

 

 

Oh well. Too much to drink for me...until next time.

 

Don't get the spins!! :ph34r: 

 

Unfortunately, probably - that's never been the problem for me. My issues there come from a decided lack of spins.

 

Alas, the internet strikes again. We've almost managed to stay on point...

 

 

 



#23 pharmer

pharmer

    Mycotopiate

  • OG VIP
  • 3,977 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 28 October 2016 - 01:34 PM

[Direct Link]





it's my favorite actor, though 35 years younger than I ever knew him, ripping on Bob Dylan. the video is funny all by itself and instructive that Hugh Laurie was already a competent musician way back then.....

but something about this video seems perfect to this conversation

and maybe in a couple hours I can think of how......and get back here with lazer like analysis

until then, enjoy the video

btw, just for bragging rights, I met and worked with Hugh Laurie for a couple hours back when I was a minor cog in the movie making machinery. Imagine my surprise to hear him speaking The Kings' :) I'd only known of him via the Dr. House TV show

Edited by coorsmikey, 28 October 2016 - 01:43 PM.
Embeded Video


#24 niemandgeist

niemandgeist

    You make me happy in a manic sort of way :)

  • OG VIP
  • 2,703 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 28 October 2016 - 03:59 PM

I didn't actually realize that, having myself been born in 1982, I am considered a millenial.

 

I do know that the older generations, at least when they write news articles about us, seem to say we're lazy and whatnot.

 

Well, just as you've laid out, Zen_, these days, since nearly 10 years ago actually, going to college to get a BA (4-year college degree) hardly ever qualifies you to work a well-paying job anymore. Also, the older generations were able to take advantage of subsidized education. They didn't necessarily have to go into so much debt.

 

This is why I took my time since I graduated in 2010 with my associates degree (2-year degree) to figure out what my next step would be. Now I'm dead set on going to vocational/technical college (trade school) to go into a trade. THAT is where the money is and I can realistically pay back that debt if I have to take out any loans. I'll be immediately qualified to be hired as an apprentice with less than 2 years of schooling.

 

It'll be hard, physical, dirty work, but because I've got a father who is not easy to work for, who himself did well in the trades, and because I've always been "smart"/did very well in school/college I know I can do well for myself.

 

But yeah: There are fewer opportunities readily available for our generation.

 

I know so many people from my childhood who have a 4-year degree and at most are working as managers in a retail store at a shitty fucking job they can't stand.

 

I also know a few people who have a MA who can't find work in their field.

 

As far as being tech-savvy, I definitely am, and I'm quite happy that in this day and age the internet has matured so much that I can (AND I AM) bringing myself up to speed on front-end web development/web design. Back when I was younger you NEEDED a degree to get into that, but these days? If you put together a solid portfolio demonstrating your knowledge/problem-solving skills/design skills and can explain to an interviewer how you'd solve certain problems you can get your foot in the door.

 

I want to go to trade school/technical college to get something that I can always fall back on --- some sort of stable, well-paying work, but I also want to explore my old favorite hobbies of web design/development (front and back-end) as well as some programming and possibly try that out for a job, too.

 

If only this country (USA) would even SLIGHTLY defund the military industrial complex and SLIGHTLY subsidize education, man, things would be much better for most younger people, but I don't think that is going to happen any time soon.



#25 dead head jed

dead head jed

    Lost Hill Billy

  • Moderator
  • 1,667 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 28 October 2016 - 09:47 PM

Ya, i never understood the lazy and entitled bit.

The generations before us didn't need to have a BS just to land a job, and even if they wanted one they could acutally pay for it with summer jobs. Thry also got paid enough to where they could support a family on one income. Oh... Lets not forget about healthcare they could afford, housing they could afford, AND an actual pension plan.

Entitled....no
But i'm am kind of tired of getting the shaft..
  • Juthro, niemandgeist and CatsAndBats like this

#26 August West

August West

    Mycotopiate

  • OG VIP
  • 3,487 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 28 October 2016 - 11:17 PM

I didn't actually realize that, having myself been born in 1982, I am considered a millenial.

 

I do know that the older generations, at least when they write news articles about us, seem to say we're lazy and whatnot.

 

Well, just as you've laid out, Zen_, these days, since nearly 10 years ago actually, going to college to get a BA (4-year college degree) hardly ever qualifies you to work a well-paying job anymore. Also, the older generations were able to take advantage of subsidized education. They didn't necessarily have to go into so much debt.

 

This is why I took my time since I graduated in 2010 with my associates degree (2-year degree) to figure out what my next step would be. Now I'm dead set on going to vocational/technical college (trade school) to go into a trade. THAT is where the money is and I can realistically pay back that debt if I have to take out any loans. I'll be immediately qualified to be hired as an apprentice with less than 2 years of schooling.

 

It'll be hard, physical, dirty work, but because I've got a father who is not easy to work for, who himself did well in the trades, and because I've always been "smart"/did very well in school/college I know I can do well for myself.

 

But yeah: There are fewer opportunities readily available for our generation.

 

I know so many people from my childhood who have a 4-year degree and at most are working as managers in a retail store at a shitty fucking job they can't stand.

 

I also know a few people who have a MA who can't find work in their field.

 

As far as being tech-savvy, I definitely am, and I'm quite happy that in this day and age the internet has matured so much that I can (AND I AM) bringing myself up to speed on front-end web development/web design. Back when I was younger you NEEDED a degree to get into that, but these days? If you put together a solid portfolio demonstrating your knowledge/problem-solving skills/design skills and can explain to an interviewer how you'd solve certain problems you can get your foot in the door.

 

I want to go to trade school/technical college to get something that I can always fall back on --- some sort of stable, well-paying work, but I also want to explore my old favorite hobbies of web design/development (front and back-end) as well as some programming and possibly try that out for a job, too.

 

If only this country (USA) would even SLIGHTLY defund the military industrial complex and SLIGHTLY subsidize education, man, things would be much better for most younger people, but I don't think that is going to happen any time soon.

Serious question...if there aren't jobs available to people with masters degrees, what good does it do to subsidize 'higher' education? 



#27 dead head jed

dead head jed

    Lost Hill Billy

  • Moderator
  • 1,667 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 29 October 2016 - 08:08 AM

The problem is there really are too many people with advanced degrees, becauae in HS they push everybody towards the 4 year college route. A route whos end game, if you want to own a home and maybe even a new car some day or are even thinking about children, is an advanced degree. Once you are on the road there is almost no jumping off, thanks to student loans.

What they should be doing is pushing people toward tech schools like they do in germany, who economy is pretty much single handedly keeping the EU afloat.

Atleast imho

#28 pharmer

pharmer

    Mycotopiate

  • OG VIP
  • 3,977 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 29 October 2016 - 08:48 AM

In the big city in my State the unions and private construction companies are begging for entry level people to train in a trade. They beg, they advertise, they do TV shows explaining why they need applicants, they beg some more.......

 

The kind of money they are offering, with benefits and other perks, is amazing.

 

These are the companies that get the really big contracts, the ones where nobody works all that hard anyway but if a breeze of over 8 miles per hour comes along the whole thing shuts down for "Safety" reasons.

 

If I were a young man again I'd be all over this. No college costs, immediate paycheck better than the unemployed college grads, and pretty much garanteed employment all the way to retirement time.

 

BUT, to get back on topic, the millenials don't think this is worthy of their time, apparently.

 

There is something telling in this.

 

Does my saying this make me guilty of generalizaition? Possibly, but let's look at some (admittedly imprecise) numbers:

 

Millenial generation = what? 30 million persons? Divided by 50 US States = 600,000

 

The unions (in this Big City region)  are trying to fill 6000 training positions (according to a radio interview with a union training spokesman) regardless of applicants gender, race, religion, etc

 

 

That's one in ten people in the Millenial generation in that state who could be working and being productive

 

That's 90 percent who won't cross the street to apply for one of these paid training positions

 

Nevermind the fact that some (never provided) number among these 6000 positions goes unfilled

 

Which could drive the percentage of uninterested Millenials upward of 90%

 

That's not generalizing is it? In fact I'd say it's the exact opposite of generalizing

 

That's 6000 people (presumably per year or other training cycle) who could be working in well paid construction jobs but choose to do other/lesser kinds of work, if they work at all,  while waiting for never-to-arrive other jobs.

 

This tells us something about the generation.

 

Am I gaslighting? or allowing sunshine to fall where it is seldom welcome?


Edited by pharmer, 29 October 2016 - 10:06 AM.


#29 dead head jed

dead head jed

    Lost Hill Billy

  • Moderator
  • 1,667 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 29 October 2016 - 06:32 PM

Yes that is generalizing... You are veey much assuming the reasons they don't run over there and fill up those jobs.

I was told i was over qualified for atleast a dozen jobs after i graduated when all i wanted to do was pay my rent.

They don't hire people with degrees for this sort of work because they figure you will just ditch it the first chance you get, which is probably right.

Imho your statements are straight full of assumptions and lack of understanding of the troubles my generation faces

#30 Zen_

Zen_

    Timelord

  • Founders
  • 5,088 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 29 October 2016 - 08:24 PM

Just because you have a degree doesn't mean you have to say as much in your application for a job you are overqualified for. The resume and/or application filling should fit the job, that includes which of your past jobs and which bits of education you choose to list. HR is a black hole, you need to read the job posting and then write your application/resume to talk to those points and only those points.

 

^^ If you want the job, make yourself the most qualified candidate for that job. Don't lie, but don't tell the whole truth either if it makes you less likely to qualify, especially if you just need to pay rent. 

 

There are many reasons, generally, why people don't go for this job or that job, and not just "a" job. There comes a point, and a time, though, when that just doesn't fly. If you're able to make that decision then things aren't that bad for you yet.


  • niemandgeist likes this

#31 niemandgeist

niemandgeist

    You make me happy in a manic sort of way :)

  • OG VIP
  • 2,703 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 29 October 2016 - 09:48 PM

 

I didn't actually realize that, having myself been born in 1982, I am considered a millenial.

 

I do know that the older generations, at least when they write news articles about us, seem to say we're lazy and whatnot.

 

Well, just as you've laid out, Zen_, these days, since nearly 10 years ago actually, going to college to get a BA (4-year college degree) hardly ever qualifies you to work a well-paying job anymore. Also, the older generations were able to take advantage of subsidized education. They didn't necessarily have to go into so much debt.

 

This is why I took my time since I graduated in 2010 with my associates degree (2-year degree) to figure out what my next step would be. Now I'm dead set on going to vocational/technical college (trade school) to go into a trade. THAT is where the money is and I can realistically pay back that debt if I have to take out any loans. I'll be immediately qualified to be hired as an apprentice with less than 2 years of schooling.

 

It'll be hard, physical, dirty work, but because I've got a father who is not easy to work for, who himself did well in the trades, and because I've always been "smart"/did very well in school/college I know I can do well for myself.

 

But yeah: There are fewer opportunities readily available for our generation.

 

I know so many people from my childhood who have a 4-year degree and at most are working as managers in a retail store at a shitty fucking job they can't stand.

 

I also know a few people who have a MA who can't find work in their field.

 

As far as being tech-savvy, I definitely am, and I'm quite happy that in this day and age the internet has matured so much that I can (AND I AM) bringing myself up to speed on front-end web development/web design. Back when I was younger you NEEDED a degree to get into that, but these days? If you put together a solid portfolio demonstrating your knowledge/problem-solving skills/design skills and can explain to an interviewer how you'd solve certain problems you can get your foot in the door.

 

I want to go to trade school/technical college to get something that I can always fall back on --- some sort of stable, well-paying work, but I also want to explore my old favorite hobbies of web design/development (front and back-end) as well as some programming and possibly try that out for a job, too.

 

If only this country (USA) would even SLIGHTLY defund the military industrial complex and SLIGHTLY subsidize education, man, things would be much better for most younger people, but I don't think that is going to happen any time soon.

Serious question...if there aren't jobs available to people with masters degrees, what good does it do to subsidize 'higher' education? 

 

 

As Dead Head Jed stated, the push toward higher education has produced an overabundance of people with college degrees, so jobs seeking to hire can be much more picky. Job postings often require 4-year degrees for things that never required them in the past.

 

Subsidizing higher education would help people who want to go to college earn their degrees without going into crippling debt, allowing them to compete in the job market and, ideally, to help advance our civilization and to allow people to better provide for themselves in order to get jobs they can live off of.

 

I also strongly believe that there should be a bigger push into the trades, or at least more help to afford such career pursuits.

 

I see that some countries, such as Germany and Norway, who have some of the highest taxes, but also heavy social nets for those who fall on bad times, and 'free' (subsidized through the high taxes) higher education. The new demands for jobs in regard to higher education can be met by the populace.

 

I don't know everything, and there's obviously a great deal that I don't know about at all, but this is my understanding of things.

 

Then again, this sort of borders on America hating taxes, and the rich hating having to actually give any of their money in the form of taxes to the country they live in, instead choosing to use loopholes and tax havens to keep it all.

 

Some countries don't mind the high taxes because they see direct benefit from where that money goes.

 

Going back on topic slightly, it's simply no longer the case that a 4-year college degree, even in a specific field, will be able to land anyone a job in that field, let alone a job that they can live on. The 4-year degree is now the old high school degree that was able to provide people to live comfortably in the world.

 

Jobs are demanding more education when it isn't necessarily required for the position.

 

There are positions at Google for those who do nothing but manually review search engine requests and categorize them to some degree. There are positions at Google for simple technical support that require advanced degrees. Simply because Google wants the best and can demand such higher qualifications. There are actually many such positions in other companies that do the same.

 

To me that doesn't make any sense.

 

The whole issue is likely due to far more things than this, but this is simply some of what I know of the subject, as I do know some people I went to school growing up with who work at Google, who worked at Microsoft, and who do similar things.

 

I'm just grateful that I can continue to get back into my techie ways of programming and such without needing a degree to do things like web design and web development. Fortunately, those friends keep telling me that I was really good at doing those things in high school and that I am doing the right thing to continue to pursue tech as a hobby and to slowly build up a portfolio. It's a very nice thing that, with a nice portfolio showing what you can actually do these days you can land an OK job.

 

I wonder if that's because they don't teach a lot of this stuff in colleges and if it's also partially because of the fact that damned near everyone has at least a 4-year degree now.

 

Things are going to change dramatically in tech. because of this, and things already have begun to change. For very, very high-tech jobs you would absolutely need a beefed-up portfolio as well as an advanced Computer Science degree, but if you just want to code and make useful things you no longer need a Computer Science degree. The Comp. Sci. MAs and PHDs are working on those mathematical algorithms that drive our modern digital world.

 

People who code just take advantage of higher-level methods of implementing those things.



#32 August West

August West

    Mycotopiate

  • OG VIP
  • 3,487 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 30 October 2016 - 03:48 PM

If people with degrees aren't getting jobs, I suppose I'm just not sure about the logic of funneling tax money to incentivize degrees? Seem like more of a structural paradigm shift is needed. I would be interested to see what would happen if the government got out of accreditation and licensure. Not that I believe it will happen but at that point we may see a real shift in the structure of the economy...maybe.

 

European examples are tough to overlay onto the USA. In a very real way, U.S. taxpayers are subsidizing European social systems by picking up their military tab. They can funnel more money into school and healthcare because the U.S. essentially is their military.

 

It's fairly impractical to compare a country of 350 million vs much smaller European nations. I don't know how it works across Europe but in Ireland for example (which is practically a vassal state of the IMF now), their higher education is (or was?) subsidized but there are a lot fewer degrees on offer and not every student was able to get in. I'm not sure there are many countries funding the number of degrees found in the Humanities and Social Sciences, etc as one finds within U.S. institutions.



#33 pharmer

pharmer

    Mycotopiate

  • OG VIP
  • 3,977 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 30 October 2016 - 04:01 PM

Yes that is generalizing... You are veey much assuming the reasons they don't run over there and fill up those jobs.

I was told i was over qualified for atleast a dozen jobs after i graduated when all i wanted to do was pay my rent.

They don't hire people with degrees for this sort of work because they figure you will just ditch it the first chance you get, which is probably right.

Imho your statements are straight full of assumptions and lack of understanding of the troubles my generation faces

 

You're assuming that I'm assuming something. What I AM saying is that people who can't get the job of their choosing still  have options. One of them is doing one of the skilled trades, that this option is being served up  on a silver platter, and people are staying away from this by the tens of millions. These people have the option of earning barrista wages, skilled trade wages, code writer wages, web designer wages, whatevers.......except that, apparently the jobs they prefer are not available to them. So what to do? Accept reality and recalibrate ones' expectations and take the best of the possible remaining jobs.....wait indefinitely for their terms to be met........or just sit around and complain about all the challenges their entire generation faces.......or divorce themselves from the shackles of being part of that group and get about the work of bettering their own lives and letting the rest of their generation do the same.

 

This is very much about individuals choosing what's best for them, and always has been

 

 






Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!