If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   If the economy gets worse, unemployment stays high. If the economy stagnates, unemployment stays high. If the economy comes roaring back, unemployment stays high. There's a pattern here   (latimes.com) divider line 79
    More: Obvious, building contractors, McKinsey, Discussion FAQ, Mark Zandi, job applications, dress shirts, Great Recession, software maintenance  
•       •       •

1445 clicks; posted to Business » on 05 Sep 2010 at 5:40 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



79 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-09-05 01:34:51 PM
Should have listened to me 18 months ago and spent the stimulus on a works program.
 
2010-09-05 02:06:54 PM
JacksBlack

Should have listened to me 18 months ago and spent the stimulus on a works program

How would a works program help rich people get richer? It seems like a jobs program would help the unemployed. And the unemployed don't have any money to bribe Congress with. So that's out of the question.
 
2010-09-05 02:33:08 PM
Marcus Aurelius: JacksBlack

Should have listened to me 18 months ago and spent the stimulus on a works program

How would a works program help rich people get richer? It seems like a jobs program would help the unemployed. And the unemployed don't have any money to bribe Congress with. So that's out of the question.


*puts fingers in ears, stomps feet* Shut up, shut up, shut up! We can't go further into debt. ZOMG budget deficits.

Amidoinitrite?
 
2010-09-05 02:39:03 PM
Marcus Aurelius: How would a works program help rich people get richer?

Put people to work rebuilding the infrastructure, and the rich can sell the needed materials to the gubmint at five times the normal price, as usual.

I can't kick about the stimulus, as it got the street in front of my house repaved.
 
2010-09-05 02:43:17 PM
oldebayer

Put people to work rebuilding the infrastructure, and the rich can sell the needed materials to the gubmint at five times the normal price, as usual

Yes, but who will use this infrastructure? Ordinary citizens, that's who. Anyone that has their own helicopter and private jet would be left out in the cold. So it's better to leave the tax cuts in place, let the truly rich people pay their 15%, keep shipping the jobs overseas, and to hell with the infrastructure. Infrastructure is for the teeming unwashed masses.
 
2010-09-05 03:10:56 PM
If we cut taxes by 100% we'll become infinitely rich.
 
2010-09-05 03:12:28 PM
coco ebert: Marcus Aurelius: JacksBlack

Should have listened to me 18 months ago and spent the stimulus on a works program

How would a works program help rich people get richer? It seems like a jobs program would help the unemployed. And the unemployed don't have any money to bribe Congress with. So that's out of the question.

*puts fingers in ears, stomps feet* Shut up, shut up, shut up! We can't go further into debt. ZOMG budget deficits.

Amidoinitrite?


Yes, but next time insist on tax cuts too.
 
2010-09-05 03:32:27 PM
I'd like to wake up from this now, please.
 
2010-09-05 03:42:15 PM
I think we no longer need American people to do jobs. They're unqualified, inexperienced, and demand a higher salary.

What the American people need to do is to accept wages of a dollar an hour in factories with a poor environmental regulations in free trade zones. They can probably afford a computer with internet overtime.
 
2010-09-05 04:09:17 PM
"Is it the fault of my boss that he has no work for me?"

I am glad your friend asked the question, for every workingman realises how important this matter of unemployment is to him. You know what your life is when you are out of work; and when you do have a job, how the fear of losing it hangs over you. You are also aware what a danger the standing army of unemployed is to you when you are out on strike for better conditions. You know that strikebreakers are enlisted from the unemployed whom capitalism always keeps on hand, to help break your strike.

'How does capitalism keep the unemployed on hand?' you ask.

Simply by compelling you to work long hours and as hard as possible, so as to produce the greatest amount. All the modern schemes of 'efficiency', the Taylor and other systems of 'economy' and 'rationalization' serve only to squeeze greater profits out of the worker. It is economy in the interest of the employer only. But as concerns you, the worker, this 'economy' spells the greatest expenditure of your effort and energy, a fatal waste of your vitality.

It pays the employer to use up and exploit your strength and ability at the highest tension. True, it ruins your health and breaks down your nervous system, makes you a prey to illness and disease (there are even special proletarian diseases), cripples you and brings you to an early grave - but what does your boss care? Are there not thousands of unemployed waiting for your job and ready to take it the moment you are disabled or dead?

That is why it is to the profit of the capitalist to keep an army of unemployed ready at hand. It is part and parcel of the wage system, a necessary and inevitable characteristic of it.

It is in the interest of the people that there should be no unemployed, that all should have an opportunity to work and earn their living; that all should help, each according to his ability and strength, to increase the wealth of the country, so that each should be able to have a greater share of it.

But capitalism is not interested in the welfare of the people. Capitalism, as I have shown before, is interested only in profits. By employing less people and working them long hours larger profits can be made than by giving work to more people at shorter hours. That is why it is to the interest of your employer, for instance, to have 100 people work 10 hours daily rather than to employ 200 at 5 hours. He would need more room for 200 than for 100 persons - a larger factory, more tools and machinery, and so on. That is, he would require a greater investment of capital. The employment of a larger force at less hours would bring less profits, and that is why your boss will not run his factory or shop on such a plan. Which means that a system of profit-making is not compatible with considerations of humanity and the well-being of the workers. On the contrary, the harder and more 'efficiently' you work and the longer hours you stay at it, the better for your employer and the greater his profits.

You can therefore see that capitalism is not interested in employing all those who want and are able to work. On the contrary: a minimum of 'hands' and a maximum of effort is the principle and the profit of the capitalist system. This is the whole secret of all 'rationalization' schemes. And that is why you will find thousands of people in every capitalist country willing and anxious to work, yet unable to get employment. This army of unemployed is a constant threat to your standard of living. They are ready to take your place at lower pay, because necessity compels them to it. That is, of course, very advantageous to the boss: it is a whip in his hands constantly held over you, so you will slave hard for him and 'behave' yourself.

You can see for yourself how dangerous and degrading such a situation is for the worker, not to speak of the other evils of the system.

'Then why not do away with unemployment?' you demand.

Yes, it would be fine to do away with it. But it could be accomplished only by doing away with the capitalist system and its wage slavery. As long as you have capitalism - or any other system of labor exploitation and profit- making - you will have unemployment. Capitalism can't exist without it: it is inherent in the wage system. It is the fundamental condition of successful capitalist production

'Why?'

Because the capitalist industrial system does not produce for the needs of the people; it produces for profit. Manufacturers do not produce commodities because the people want them and as much of them as is required. They produce what they expect to sell, and sell at a profit.

If we had a sensible system, we would produce the things which the people want and the quantity they need. Suppose the inhabitants of a certain locality needed 1,000 pairs of shoes; and suppose we'd have 50 shoemakers for the job. Then in 20 hours work those shoemakers would produce the shoes our community needs.

But the shoemaker of to-day does not know and does not care how many pairs of shoes are needed. Thousands of people may need new shoes in your city, but they cannot afford to buy them. So what good is it to the manufacturer to know who needs shoes? What he wants to know is who can buy the shoes he makes: how many pairs he can sell at a profit.

What happens? Well, he will manufacture about as many pairs of shoes as he thinks he will be able to sell. He will try his best to produce them as cheaply and sell them as dearly as he can, so as to make a good profit. He will therefore employ as few workers as possible to manufacture the quantity of shoes he wants, and he will have them work as 'efficiently' and hard as he can compel them to.

You see that production for profit means longer hours and fewer persons employed than would be the case if production were for use.

Capitalism is the system of production for profit, and that is why capitalism always must have unemployed.

But look further into this system of production for profit and you will see how its basic evil works a hundred other evils.

Let us follow the shoe manufacturer of your city. He has no way of knowing, as I have already pointed out, who will or will not be able to buy his shoes. He makes a rough guess, he 'estimates', and he decides to manufacture, let us say, 50,000 pairs. Then he puts his product on the market. That is, the wholesaler, the jobber, and the storekeeper put them up for sale.

Suppose only 30,000 pairs were sold; 20,000 pairs remain on hand. Our manufacturer, unable to sell the balance in his own city, will try to dispose of it, in some other part of the country. But the shoe manufacturers there have also had the same experience. They also can't sell all they have produced. The supply of shoes is greater than the demand for them, they tell you. They have to cut down production. That means the discharge of some of their employees, thus increasing the army of the unemployed.

'Over-production' this is called. But in truth it is not over-production at all. It is under-consumption, because there are many people who need new shoes, but they can't afford to buy them.

The result? The warehouses are stocked with the shoes the people want but cannot buy, shops and factories close because of the 'oversupply'. The same things happen in other industries. You are told that there is a 'crisis' and your wages must be reduced.

Your wages are cut; you are put on part time or you lose your work altogether Thousands of men and women are thrown out of employment in that manner. Their wages stop and they cannot buy the food and other things they need. Are those things not to be had? No, on the contrary; the warehouses and stores are filled with them, there is too much of them there's 'over-production'.

So the capitalist system of production for profit results in this crazy situation:

(1) people have to starve - not because there is not enough food but
because there is too much of it; they have to do without the things they need, because there is too much of those things on hand;
(2) because there is too much, manufacture is cut down, throwing
thousands out of work;
(3) being out of work and therefore not earning, those thousands lose
their buying capacity. The grocer, the butcher, the tailor all s, as a result. That means increased unemployment all around, the crisis gets worse.

Under capitalism this happens in every industry.

Such crises are inevitable in a system of production for profit. 1 come from time to time; they return periodically, always getting worse. They deprive thousands and hundreds of thousands of employment causing poverty, distress, and untold misery. They result in bankruptcy and bank failures, which swallow up whatever little the worker have saved in time of 'prosperity'. They cause want and need, d people to despair and crime, to suicide and insanity.

Such are the results of production for profit; such the fruits of system of capitalism.
 
2010-09-05 04:11:03 PM
no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

/ha
 
2010-09-05 04:22:59 PM
C'mon, jaylectricity, tell 'em what happens next (according to Berkmann): we get ourselves involved in costly foreign wars to protect our own industrialists' assets in those countries, and a healthy supply of the poor on hand to take military positions when no other work can be found ensures we'll have a constant supply of soldiers!

/But that isn't what's happening, right?
 
2010-09-05 04:25:37 PM
Lane83: C'mon, jaylectricity, tell 'em what happens next (according to Berkmann): we get ourselves involved in costly foreign wars to protect our own industrialists' assets in those countries, and a healthy supply of the poor on hand to take military positions when no other work can be found ensures we'll have a constant supply of soldiers!

/But that isn't what's happening, right?


You know...I read that book a good 80 years after it was written and I was amazed at how much of it still rings true.
 
2010-09-05 04:26:08 PM
RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

/ha


Lol.. it's all the fault of minimum wage workers. I guess you forgot to blame unions too?
 
2010-09-05 04:35:40 PM
jaylectricity: I read that book a good 80 years after it was written

Actually, more like 75...for the sake of accuracy.
 
2010-09-05 04:39:23 PM
RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

/ha


No, you cum-guzzling farktard, this is what happens when we outsource our manufacturing base to China and decide to become a "service"-based economy, then blow a budget surplus, start two wars, a coupla unfunded entitlement programs, and to top it all off, hand Wall Street a blank check to the treasury.
 
2010-09-05 04:47:23 PM
Well... that was a depressing article.
 
2010-09-05 05:48:43 PM
If the economy gets worse, unemployment stays high. If the economy stagnates, unemployment stays high. If the economy comes roaring back, unemployment stays high.


if chairman Obama is in office all this happens

There's a pattern here
 
2010-09-05 05:49:06 PM
RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

/ha



I can find plenty of minimum wage part time jobs.

It's harder to find full time jobs that pay a wage that can be lived on.



Companies are not gonna hire anyone because they already know they can force their current employees to do the jobs of 2 people with no raises and threatening a pay cut.

All in the name of higher stocks for their investors.
 
2010-09-05 05:49:38 PM
Funk Brothers: I think we no longer need American people to do jobs. They're unqualified, inexperienced, and demand a higher salary.

What the American people need to do is to accept wages of a dollar an hour in factories with a poor environmental regulations in free trade zones.


Or let in hordes of illegal aliens, which accomplishes the same thing.
 
2010-09-05 05:51:54 PM
freeze all taxes for 10 years

roll back all of Chairman Obama's fark ups, including OBAMAcare

/// there fixed it

you can thank we now.
 
2010-09-05 06:00:55 PM
RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

winterwhile: freeze all taxes for 10 years

roll back all of Chairman Obama's fark ups, including OBAMAcare


You guys are on empty, aren't you? I mean your rhetoric has reached comedic proportions. Surely you've cracked a smile while typing this nonsense, yes?
 
2010-09-05 06:04:35 PM
winterwhile: freeze all taxes for 10 years

roll back all of Chairman Obama's fark ups, including OBAMAcare

/// there fixed it

you can thank we now.


So your plan to fix a leaky sink is to shoot the guy who wants to paint your house? You must have been the smartist retard in your special class...

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2010-09-05 06:05:44 PM
minnesotaboy: winterwhile: freeze all taxes for 10 years

roll back all of Chairman Obama's fark ups, including OBAMAcare

/// there fixed it

you can thank we now.

So your plan to fix a leaky sink is to shoot the guy who wants to paint your house? You must have been the smartist retard in your special class...


And before you point it out, should have spelled it "Smartest" yes I know.
 
2010-09-05 06:07:18 PM
This is what capitalism does before we're all pitched into the abyss.
 
2010-09-05 06:18:39 PM
winterwhile: If the economy gets worse, unemployment stays high. If the economy stagnates, unemployment stays high. If the economy comes roaring back, unemployment stays high.


if chairman Obama is in office all this happens

There's a pattern here


Nice troll. Except I'm pretty sure you believe it.

A problem of this magnitude doesn't just manifest within two years of a presidency.

Massive offshoring of jobs. Massive tax cuts to decrease government revenue. Massive budget deficits including one unnecessary war that had to be funded through debt. Intentionally keeping interest rates low so that the housing economy overheated and nearly unraveled the economy from top to bottom when the bubble burst. That's Bush's legacy. Other problems can be laid at the feet of prior administrations.

It's Obama's job, unfortunately, to have to try to mop it all up. It's uncertain whether he'll be able to fix it. Not just because his policies might not work, but because the problem is so damn big.

Plus, the government is essentially out of bullets. There's decreasing appetite in bond markets to fund any future stimulus packages. Cutting taxes just ends up exacerbating the debt problem.

Yet the problem is still there and not getting better in the short term. The economy may have gone all non-linear and has set itself into a new equilibrium of high unemployment. That's not something that can easily be undone. Except that bankers can still walk away with their multi-million dollar bonuses and severance packages. That's still there.

Obama is going to be lucky if he can fix this mess in a two-term presidency.
 
2010-09-05 06:19:13 PM
Trailing indicator. Still.
 
2010-09-05 06:26:46 PM
GoodHomer: It's Obama's job, unfortunately, to have to try to mop it all up. It's uncertain whether he'll be able to fix it. Not just because his policies might not work, but because the problem is so damn big.

And because a depressingly large number of Americans would rather see America completely destroyed than to see any Democrat thought well of.
 
2010-09-05 06:30:07 PM
RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

Keep blaming the workers for their woes; it's always a winning strategy.
 
2010-09-05 06:34:50 PM
Bunnyhat: RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

/ha


I can find plenty of minimum wage part time jobs.

It's harder to find full time jobs that pay a wage that can be lived on.



Companies are not gonna hire anyone because they already know they can force their current employees to do the jobs of 2 people with no raises and threatening a pay cut.

All in the name of higher stocks for their investors.


My question is: what comes next? We live in a country full of depressed people with access to firearms and a lot of hatred towards the rich. What happens after this, again?

It also doesn't help that the people with the military training are also part of the poor as well.

Weird times, my friends, very weird times.
 
2010-09-05 06:43:49 PM
GoodHomer: Yet the problem is still there and not getting better in the short term. The economy may have gone all non-linear and has set itself into a new equilibrium of high unemployment. That's not something that can easily be undone. Except that bankers can still walk away with their multi-million dollar bonuses and severance packages. That's still there.

How much of that unemployment is in the blue-collar manufacturing sectors, and how much is in the white-collar office jobs sectors? I'm thinking that we'll have high unemployment due to the manufacturing jobs disappearing while younger, college-educated generations may struggle for a few years with employment but will settle into careers somewhat close to what they went to school for as the economy starts to grow again.

The days of having a life-long job down at the mill are through, and the people who relied upon that are in trouble because they don't have the skills for the Information Age workforce.

Guntram Shatterhand: My question is: what comes next? We live in a country full of depressed people with access to firearms and a lot of hatred towards the rich. What happens after this, again?

But it doesn't seem like there is a big hatred towards the rich. It seems like there is a big hatred of the "liberals" who are trying to clean up this giant mess while those protesting the government are calling for tax cuts for the rich.

It's perplexing if you think about it.
 
2010-09-05 06:47:56 PM
My former jobby job went to Bangalore. Mah job's been outsourced.

img820.imageshack.us
 
2010-09-05 06:50:46 PM
Guntram Shatterhand: Bunnyhat: RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

/ha


I can find plenty of minimum wage part time jobs.

It's harder to find full time jobs that pay a wage that can be lived on.



Companies are not gonna hire anyone because they already know they can force their current employees to do the jobs of 2 people with no raises and threatening a pay cut.

All in the name of higher stocks for their investors.

My question is: what comes next? We live in a country full of depressed people with access to firearms and a lot of hatred towards the rich. What happens after this, again?

It also doesn't help that the people with the military training are also part of the poor as well.

Weird times, my friends, very weird times.


I was thinking the same thing. What are the war hawks and republicans going to say when the soldiers that they hung their little red ribbons are home invading their asses while working as security for corps and rich HOA's? I'm loving the idea of gang members with military training, my local PD deserves a little payback for being the jerks that they are.
 
2010-09-05 06:56:26 PM
Republicat: How much of that unemployment is in the blue-collar manufacturing sectors, and how much is in the white-collar office jobs sectors? I'm thinking that we'll have high unemployment due to the manufacturing jobs disappearing while younger, college-educated generations may struggle for a few years with employment but will settle into careers somewhat close to what they went to school for as the economy starts to grow again.

I think the reason this recession will last for a decade or so is because of the outsourcing(or off-shoring) of white-collar jobs. As a company finances improve, all of the hiring will be overseas. HP has set the goal of having 90% of their employees outside the US. IBM is further along that goal. Even legal work is now being off-shored.

Look at the companies bailed out by the government - Bank America, AIG, General Motors, etc. They all become more profitable by having *less* workers, not more.

10% (or 20%) unemployment is here to stay for the immediate future.
 
2010-09-05 07:01:04 PM
HempHead: I think the reason this recession will last for a decade or so is because of the outsourcing(or off-shoring) of white-collar jobs. As a company finances improve, all of the hiring will be overseas. HP has set the goal of having 90% of their employees outside the US. IBM is further along that goal. Even legal work is now being off-shored.

True...although in defense (a rather unpopular one, probably) of HP and IBM, they're global corporations in global economies. The US only represents a fraction of their market, and we're not growing like China, India, etc.

That said, there are still plenty of national and international corporations that will need to hire more white collar workers over blue collar workers.
 
2010-09-05 07:02:32 PM
HempHead: 10% (or 20%) unemployment is here to stay for the immediate future.

So what do I do about my student loans?
I would have just joined the Navy if I knew the job market was going to tank 3 months before I graduated.

So much for being the first college graduate in my family.
 
2010-09-05 07:15:14 PM
Sergeant Grumbles: HempHead: 10% (or 20%) unemployment is here to stay for the immediate future.

So what do I do about my student loans?
I would have just joined the Navy if I knew the job market was going to tank 3 months before I graduated.

So much for being the first college graduate in my family.



You can still join the Navy.
 
2010-09-05 07:19:29 PM
Republicat 2010-09-05 07:01:04 PM
HempHead: I think the reason this recession will last for a decade or so is because of the outsourcing(or off-shoring) of white-collar jobs. As a company finances improve, all of the hiring will be overseas. HP has set the goal of having 90% of their employees outside the US. IBM is further along that goal. Even legal work is now being off-shored.

True...although in defense (a rather unpopular one, probably) of HP and IBM, they're global corporations in global economies. The US only represents a fraction of their market, and we're not growing like China, India, etc.

That said, there are still plenty of national and international corporations that will need to hire more white collar workers over blue collar workers.


I think we should tax the crap our of companies that oursource the jobs overseas.

They shipped the manfacturing jobs overseas and told the displaced workers to get a degree in IT. Then they shipped those jobs overseas.

We now have no manfacturing base. If a World War broke out, we could not fight it like WWII, because all of the factories are in China/India.

We let the corporations bone us and people like you are cheering them on.
 
2010-09-05 07:22:35 PM
jaylectricity: On the contrary: a minimum of 'hands' and a maximum of effort is the principle and the profit of the capitalist system.

My Hermes got that hellhole running so efficiently that all the physical labor is now done by a single Australian man.
 
2010-09-05 07:33:26 PM
Bunnyhat: You can still join the Navy.

I have been looking into it, and the Air Force. Officers openings are in short supply, and enlisting seems like a waste of my college degrees. If things would just turn around, I wouldn't need the military and would probably get paid more.
And I'd rather not leave my fiance alone while I'm pissing about on a ship for 4 years. I had thought I'd be married and maybe have children two years out from graduation, but the world seems to have other plans...
Really just not sure what to do, but the Navy isn't as good an idea as it was when I was 18.
 
2010-09-05 07:34:30 PM
I make decent money, about 100k/yr. My take home pay after all taxes and deductions is about 50 percent of my gross. I still would give up 2% more if it would save this country. I would pay a little more to build infrastructure and put people back to work.

It absolutely boggles my mind that an expiring tax cut is treated as a tax increase. It was a tax cut which should never have been.

We are not going to make it through this century if we do not address the damage done to this country's middle class by not addressing systemic issues which favor maximizing shareholder value over systemic health.
 
2010-09-05 07:43:17 PM
RobertBruce: no one saw this coming when they raised the minimum wage a couple of times ...no one.

/ha


Just what in the hell can you do with somebody who'll work for 3 bucks an hour? We have robots for that shiat.
 
2010-09-05 07:51:19 PM
"Not a single Dem-o-rat has run an ad in support of the health care bill since April,"

Cx it and you fix the economy


// you can thank me now... I fixed it
 
2010-09-05 07:59:31 PM
Sergeant Grumbles: Bunnyhat: You can still join the Navy.

I have been looking into it, and the Air Force. Officers openings are in short supply, and enlisting seems like a waste of my college degrees. If things would just turn around, I wouldn't need the military and would probably get paid more.
And I'd rather not leave my fiance alone while I'm pissing about on a ship for 4 years. I had thought I'd be married and maybe have children two years out from graduation, but the world seems to have other plans...
Really just not sure what to do, but the Navy isn't as good an idea as it was when I was 18.


Why bother?

At this point it makes more sense to ditch the country and tell everybody you owe money to take a flying leap. You can't squeeze blood from a stone and since the idea of 'we aren't owed a job (much less one you can survive on)' is pushed by a lot of ignorant people, what you have is a lot of dissatisfaction. I can't imagine America will survive as it does now when the Baby Boomers. The generations coming up have nothing except poorly-paying jobs, a lack of investment, and a lot of bitterness and debt in lieu of pay.

I keep saying this, but think about it: if you were placed into this situation, how would you vote? People talk about a Democratic majority due to Republican incompetence. But the real factor will be how utterly uninvested the majority of Americans are. This shows no sign of stopping.
 
2010-09-05 08:05:45 PM
Carlin on classes

You know how I define the economic and social classes in this country? The upper class keeps all of the money, pays none of the taxes. The middle class pays all of the taxes, does all of the work. The poor are there... just to scare the shiat out of the middle class. Keep 'em showing up at those jobs.
 
2010-09-05 08:09:44 PM
Guntram Shatterhand: Why bother?

And we come to the root of my unmanageable depression.

I'd be on the first plane out if I had any idea where to go.
 
2010-09-05 08:11:37 PM
Sergeant Grumbles: I have been looking into it, and the Air Force. Officers openings are in short supply, and enlisting seems like a waste of my college degrees. If things would just turn around, I wouldn't need the military and would probably get paid more.
And I'd rather not leave my fiance alone while I'm pissing about on a ship for 4 years. I had thought I'd be married and maybe have children two years out from graduation, but the world seems to have other plans...
Really just not sure what to do, but the Navy isn't as good an idea as it was when I was 18.


How old are you? Regardless, with a college degree you'd finish basic and then go into officer's school. It depends on your ASFAB (I think that's the acronym) but if you score high enough the military world is your oyster. After basic that is.

Don't have kids. And don't get married, yet, reap all the bonuses from being "single" then get hitched and reap all the rewards from being married.

This is from what I figured out after almost joining in 2006, it might've changed. Military guys please help out on this.
 
2010-09-05 08:19:23 PM
ProdigalSigh: Sergeant Grumbles: I have been looking into it, and the Air Force. Officers openings are in short supply, and enlisting seems like a waste of my college degrees. If things would just turn around, I wouldn't need the military and would probably get paid more.
And I'd rather not leave my fiance alone while I'm pissing about on a ship for 4 years. I had thought I'd be married and maybe have children two years out from graduation, but the world seems to have other plans...
Really just not sure what to do, but the Navy isn't as good an idea as it was when I was 18.

How old are you? Regardless, with a college degree you'd finish basic and then go into officer's school. It depends on your ASFAB (I think that's the acronym) but if you score high enough the military world is your oyster. After basic that is.

Don't have kids. And don't get married, yet, reap all the bonuses from being "single" then get hitched and reap all the rewards from being married.

This is from what I figured out after almost joining in 2006, it might've changed. Military guys please help out on this.


26. Already been told I'd need to score fabulously on the Officer Candidate tests to even be considered. A 3.2 GPA in Graphic Design and Studio Art doesn't have the military knocking down my door.
Air Force has a hiring freeze for officers until October. The Navy would put me on a ship, which I'd rather not do.
Like I said, a better idea at 18 than now.
 
2010-09-05 08:37:24 PM
Republicat: True...although in defense (a rather unpopular one, probably) of HP and IBM, they're global corporations in global economies. The US only represents a fraction of their market, and we're not growing like China, India, etc.

And China and India also have very strict laws to make sure they keep their own jobs.
 
2010-09-05 08:39:18 PM
Sergeant Grumbles: . Already been told I'd need to score fabulously on the Officer Candidate tests to even be considered. A 3.2 GPA in Graphic Design and Studio Art doesn't have the military knocking down my door.

Try to avoid using the word "fabulously" and Studio Art when talking to military recruiters.
 
Displayed 50 of 79 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report