Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Digital Journal)   College graduates are taking low paying jobs away from the less educated. Wal-Mart clerks can now use their art history degrees to see if the 'Dogs Playing Poker' painting you want to buy is authentic   (digitaljournal.com) divider line 83
    More: Interesting, college graduate, social consciousness, paintings, New York Fed  
•       •       •

1018 clicks; posted to Business » on 09 Mar 2014 at 10:52 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



83 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-09 05:14:50 AM  
Liberals' answer: "More immigration!"
 
2014-03-09 05:47:31 AM  
No.

Employers are only hiring the exact perfect candidates for higher paying jobs because thanks to the wealth gap and slow economy, it's now an employers' market.

You can see the reverse of this happening after the Black Death in Europe when the peasants and laborers wised up and refused to work for the previous low wages and demanded more money. The aristocracy HAD to pay them or do the work themselves. That's an employees' market.

So the college grads aren't pushing out the less educated for low paying jobs. They don't want those jobs. It's just that low paying jobs are all that's left. The fact that employers choose the college grads goes back to the fact that it's an employers' market ATM.
 
2014-03-09 07:02:02 AM  
The article reads as if it was written by a petulant 16 year old.
 
NFA
2014-03-09 09:02:17 AM  

StanTheMan: Liberals' answer: "More immigration!"


Liberals?

You do realize the whole immigration movement was enthusiastically promoted by the Republican party as a way of providing cheap labor for the US, right?  Reagan / Bush set the whole immigration problem in motion by refusing to take action.  They wanted to open the border to allow Mexican's to travel into the US at will and work in the US.

It was only when the Republicans realized that Mexican immigrants typically vote Democrat, that suddenly immigration was a bad thing.

Reagan Bush promoting illegal immigration
 
2014-03-09 09:51:09 AM  
If only there were a president that could do and say inspiring things to stimulate the economy. On the bright side, at least they will get subsidized insurance with sky high deductible and food stamps while they live in moms basement struggling to pay student loans.
 
2014-03-09 10:14:29 AM  

SauronWasFramed: If only there were a president that could do and say inspiring things to stimulate the economy


LOL, like what? Maybe if we didn't have a congress that intentionally torpedoed the economy in an effort to reach their mission statement of making Obama a "one term President".
 
2014-03-09 10:16:42 AM  
Maybe it's more the 1% taking a disproportionate amount of the money out of the system leaving the rest of us to squabble over the scraps?
 
2014-03-09 10:25:52 AM  
Yep. Just in my little retail enclave where there are six of us, all have college degrees and a few have Masters, including me. We get paid barely more than minimum wage and we have student loans. None of us can find jobs in our fields.
 
2014-03-09 10:27:27 AM  
cdn.pjmedia.com
 
2014-03-09 10:39:19 AM  

Mugato: SauronWasFramed: If only there were a president that could do and say inspiring things to stimulate the economy

LOL, like what? Maybe if we didn't have a congress that intentionally torpedoed the economy in an effort to reach their mission statement of making Obama a "one term President".




Poor democratic, don't you know that the POTUS simply can wave his magic pen and pass executive Rogers out the wazzho. And during his first year, he had the house AND a veto proof/filibuster proof super majority in the senate?

Yet he spent his wad on getting Obamacare passed. A law so broken, even the admin can't stomach its implementation, so they give waivers to cronies and delay mandates.

How much better if he did nothing than blowing trillions that disappeared.

He would have done better to get out of the way...,give each family in the US $100k or suspend personal income tax than do what he did.

/I am old and not entering the rat race. For those that are, I pity them knowing that this generation will not have better opportunity than those that preceded it.

America is the titanic. We have hit the iceberg and are simply waiting for the ship to sink. Yet, democrats are going to protect their own insuring they can loot the wealth of the masses before they evacuate the ship in their under manned lifeboats.

It's what democratics do.
 
2014-03-09 10:46:31 AM  

SauronWasFramed: And during his first year, he had the house AND a veto proof/filibuster proof super majority in the senate?


For like 2 weeks, after Al Franken left the senate. And they still had the filibuster.

You still didn't answer the question "like what could he have done?". And blew trillions? That was your guy who turned a surplus into a record deficit in part by putting two bullshiat wars on a credit card. Two wars that we'd still be in (and probably Syria and Iran as well) if Obama had lost either election.
 
2014-03-09 11:00:14 AM  

NFA: It was only when the Republicans realized that Mexican immigrants typically vote Democrat, that suddenly immigration was a bad thing.


Even at that, in my state, the people putting in a "actually punish employers for hiring illegal immigrants" bill are the handful of Democrats.  And every year that bill is shot down by the Chamber of Commerce-wing Republicans.  That's been consistent for 35 years.
 
2014-03-09 11:00:57 AM  

raerae1980: Yep. Just in my little retail enclave where there are six of us, all have college degrees and a few have Masters, including me. We get paid barely more than minimum wage and we have student loans. None of us can find jobs in our fields.


What degrees?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-03-09 11:04:38 AM  

mutterfark: Maybe it's more the 1% taking a disproportionate amount of the money out of the system leaving the rest of us to squabble over the scraps?


It's more that they arrange the economy to suit their own interests.  Eliminating protections for domestic workers means that the people who own the means of production can move it out of the country where costs are lower and still take advantage of the US consumer market.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-03-09 11:05:52 AM  
SauronWasFramed:

Poor democratic, don't you know that the POTUS simply can wave his magic pen and pass executive Rogers out the wazzho. And during his first year, he had the house AND a veto proof/filibuster proof super majority in the senate?

Yet he spent his wad on getting Obamacare passed. A law so broken, even the admin can't stomach its implementation, so they give waivers to cronies and delay mandates.

How much better if he did nothing than blowing trillions that disappeared.

He would have done better to get out of the way...,give each family in the US $100k or suspend personal income tax than do what he did.

/I am old and not entering the rat race. For those that are, I pity them knowing that this generation will not have better opportunity than those that preceded it.

America is the titanic. We have hit the iceberg and are simply waiting for the ship to sink. Yet, democrats are going to protect their own insuring they can loot the wealth of the masses before they evacuate the ship in their under manned lifeboats.

It's what democratics do.


I'm not sure if that was sarcasm, a pretty good troll, or meaningless gibberish.
 
2014-03-09 11:18:47 AM  
Who cares, The unemployment rate is going sown and ADP shows payrolls are going up, even though all those jobs are cheap paying retail and restaurant/hospitality jobs.
 
2014-03-09 11:27:26 AM  
FTA: College grads are taking jobs as bartenders, waiters, etc. This is pushing out less qualified people.
What ever happened to being too overqualified for the job? Seems to me that if you hire someone overqualified, they will quit the second something else comes along, whereas someone who relies on their "trade" for income will stick around.
 
2014-03-09 11:28:30 AM  

doglover: No.

Employers are only hiring the exact perfect candidates for higher paying jobs because thanks to the wealth gap and slow economy, it's now an employers' market.

You can see the reverse of this happening after the Black Death in Europe when the peasants and laborers wised up and refused to work for the previous low wages and demanded more money. The aristocracy HAD to pay them or do the work themselves. That's an employees' market.

So the college grads aren't pushing out the less educated for low paying jobs. They don't want those jobs. It's just that low paying jobs are all that's left. The fact that employers choose the college grads goes back to the fact that it's an employers' market ATM.


Yep... Also many companies use an automatic screening process now. All the resumes get filtered through a program before anyone even sees them. My sister works in HR for a large company and basically said that they would get thousands of resumes or applications for every position that opened. So the program would filter out the best applicants and then give them to her to review. So depending on the priority of things like a degree or what not she wouldn't even have a choice to hire someone without a degree. They were already stripped out of the pool of applicants. But she also expects those people to be the first to leave for other positions or companies if/when the economy rebounds. So as the demands rise and the pool or available worker shrinks the priority of a degree for these positions should decrease as well.
 
2014-03-09 11:42:37 AM  

NFA: StanTheMan: Liberals' answer: "More immigration!"

Liberals?

You do realize the whole immigration movement was enthusiastically promoted by the Republican party as a way of providing cheap labor for the US, right?  Reagan / Bush set the whole immigration problem in motion by refusing to take action.  They wanted to open the border to allow Mexican's to travel into the US at will and work in the US.

It was only when the Republicans realized that Mexican immigrants typically vote Democrat, that suddenly immigration was a bad thing.

Reagan Bush promoting illegal immigration


Liberals ( Democrats) are just as bad ( if not worse) than Republicans on this issue, IMHO. Their reasons for supporting mass immigration are different, of course, but the end result is the same....

/ both sides are bad,but I'm not urging anyone to vote Republican
// this is one of those few issues where I'm far to the right of any major political party, I think...
 
2014-03-09 11:45:16 AM  

raerae1980: Yep. Just in my little retail enclave where there are six of us, all have college degrees and a few have Masters, including me. We get paid barely more than minimum wage and we have student loans. None of us can find jobs in our fields.


What are the fields? Did anyone learn anything usefull?
 
2014-03-09 11:54:01 AM  

NFA: StanTheMan: Liberals' answer: "More immigration!"

Liberals?

You do realize the whole immigration movement was enthusiastically promoted by the Republican party as a way of providing cheap labor for the US, right?  Reagan / Bush set the whole immigration problem in motion by refusing to take action.  They wanted to open the border to allow Mexican's to travel into the US at will and work in the US.

It was only when the Republicans realized that Mexican immigrants typically vote Democrat, that suddenly immigration was a bad thing.

Reagan Bush promoting illegal immigration


They may have promoted opening the borders.  Know who actually did it though?

i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-09 11:56:45 AM  

cig-mkr: What ever happened to being too overqualified for the job? Seems to me that if you hire someone overqualified, they will quit the second something else comes along, whereas someone who relies on their "trade" for income will stick around.


Some jobs, like retail for instance, employers aren't really sold on the value of experience. At a point people who stick around aren't contributing to productivity what they are costing is their increased wages and benefits.
 
2014-03-09 11:59:00 AM  

Lawnchair: Even at that, in my state, the people putting in a "actually punish employers for hiring illegal immigrants" bill are the handful of Democrats. And every year that bill is shot down by the Chamber of Commerce-wing Republicans. That's been consistent for 35 years.


Well back then you had the "jobs Americans won't do" argument, and you could plausibly make that argument in a lot of cases. But we are in different labor market now and we still have people who want to make it easier to import labor, both skilled and unskilled.
 
2014-03-09 12:03:48 PM  

AngryDragon: They may have promoted opening the borders.  Know who actually did it though?


Outsourcing jobs to other countries screwed a lot of people over and speaking as someone who had to fix the shiatty programming done in India, ultimately screwed over a lot of companies as a whole. Although Bush didn't help matters by giving tax breaks to companies who did it.
 
2014-03-09 12:09:25 PM  

NFA: StanTheMan: Liberals' answer: "More immigration!"

Liberals?

You do realize the whole immigration movement was enthusiastically promoted by the Republican party as a way of providing cheap labor for the US, right?  Reagan / Bush set the whole immigration problem in motion by refusing to take action.  They wanted to open the border to allow Mexican's to travel into the US at will and work in the US.

It was only when the Republicans realized that Mexican immigrants typically vote Democrat, that suddenly immigration was a bad thing.

Reagan Bush promoting illegal immigration


You're forgetting that Reagan and Bush are liberals now. Hard to draw a bead on those goalposts.
 
2014-03-09 12:14:07 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: Some jobs, like retail for instance, employers aren't really sold on the value of experience.


Shockingly, this also applies in manufacturing work as well!

/ CSB: I witnessed the near-collapse of a small company after they laid off a machinist (w/decades of experience) who could tear down and rebuild all of the critically important tools. The 23-year old college grad (BSME) they hired to replace him failed epically after a couple of months and was transferred out of there, probably fired...
// Engineer got what he deserved, he didn't value anyone's opinion on the mfg. floor
 
2014-03-09 12:14:37 PM  

vpb: mutterfark: Maybe it's more the 1% taking a disproportionate amount of the money out of the system leaving the rest of us to squabble over the scraps?

It's more that they arrange the economy to suit their own interests.  Eliminating protections for domestic workers means that the people who own the means of production can move it out of the country where costs are lower and still take advantage of the US consumer market.


I don't disagree that they've arranged the economy to suit their interests. Citizens United?
I think that unregulated hedge funds moving more public companies into private hands, buying up houses as investments and getting preferential treatment by investment banks, to the detriment of the vast majority of other's 401k(for 1), amounts to the 1% being allowed to pillage the wealth of the nation to the detriment of the remaining 99%.

/apologies if incoherent, worked last night and lost the hour, or at least that's the excuse i'm sticking with
 
2014-03-09 12:20:00 PM  

AngryDragon: NFA: StanTheMan: Liberals' answer: "More immigration!"

Liberals?

You do realize the whole immigration movement was enthusiastically promoted by the Republican party as a way of providing cheap labor for the US, right?  Reagan / Bush set the whole immigration problem in motion by refusing to take action.  They wanted to open the border to allow Mexican's to travel into the US at will and work in the US.

It was only when the Republicans realized that Mexican immigrants typically vote Democrat, that suddenly immigration was a bad thing.

Reagan Bush promoting illegal immigration

They may have promoted opening the borders.  Know who actually did it though?

[i.imgur.com image 525x294]


Roll Call
Looks like a President(D) sided with a majority of Republicans. Am I reading that link correctly?
 
2014-03-09 12:21:12 PM  

Mugato: AngryDragon: They may have promoted opening the borders.  Know who actually did it though?

Outsourcing jobs to other countries screwed a lot of people over and speaking as someone who had to fix the shiatty programming done in India, ultimately screwed over a lot of companies as a whole. Although Bush didn't help matters by giving tax breaks to companies who did it.


No argument out of me.  The political affiliation of the President and ruling party really means nothing anymore.  Their policies are just all incremental additions on what came before (e.g. NAFTA, PATRIOT,  Gramm-Leach-Bliley, etc.).
 
2014-03-09 12:27:30 PM  
And you thought "trickle-down economics" was all bullshiat. Welcome to the dream!
 
2014-03-09 12:29:06 PM  
Hooray for unregulated capitalism!
 
2014-03-09 12:30:14 PM  

mutterfark: Roll Call
Looks like a President(D) sided with a majority of Republicans. Am I reading that link correctly?


yeah, but in that one, both sides are complicit.
 
2014-03-09 12:30:58 PM  
Art and any science that doesn't make someone money is a waste of time. The sum of humanity's endeavors is to make some rich asshole richer.
 
2014-03-09 12:42:49 PM  

Forbidden Doughnut: DrewCurtisJr: Some jobs, like retail for instance, employers aren't really sold on the value of experience.

Shockingly, this also applies in manufacturing work as well!

/ CSB: I witnessed the near-collapse of a small company after they laid off a machinist (w/decades of experience) who could tear down and rebuild all of the critically important tools. The 23-year old college grad (BSME) they hired to replace him failed epically after a couple of months and was transferred out of there, probably fired...
// Engineer got what he deserved, he didn't value anyone's opinion on the mfg. floor


Any idiot that would replace a machinist with a mechanical engineer should be shot (which I could only assume would have been an HR drone).  Engineers and machinists/techs have COMPLETELY different skill sets.  Both may be necessary, but they generally aren't interchangeable unless you get a really good mechanist/tech/engineer who is willing to learn and the time to do so.
 
2014-03-09 12:47:02 PM  

OrionXVI: Forbidden Doughnut: DrewCurtisJr: Some jobs, like retail for instance, employers aren't really sold on the value of experience.

Shockingly, this also applies in manufacturing work as well!

/ CSB: I witnessed the near-collapse of a small company after they laid off a machinist (w/decades of experience) who could tear down and rebuild all of the critically important tools. The 23-year old college grad (BSME) they hired to replace him failed epically after a couple of months and was transferred out of there, probably fired...
// Engineer got what he deserved, he didn't value anyone's opinion on the mfg. floor

Any idiot that would replace a machinist with a mechanical engineer should be shot (which I could only assume would have been an HR drone).  Engineers and machinists/techs have COMPLETELY different skill sets.  Both may be necessary, but they generally aren't interchangeable unless you get a really good mechanist/tech/engineer who is willing to learn and the time to do so.


Nailed it...  ;-)
 
2014-03-09 12:54:31 PM  
So no Fail, Sad or Sick tag?
 
2014-03-09 12:59:08 PM  
STEM degree: check.
Student loans: check.
Gave up after a year and a half of looking for real work and took a job delivering pizza, which I only got after I swore up and down that I wouldn't quit as soon as I got a real job: Check.
 
2014-03-09 01:03:38 PM  

Bunny Deville: STEM degree: check.
Student loans: check.
Gave up after a year and a half of looking for real work and took a job delivering pizza, which I only got after I swore up and down that I wouldn't quit as soon as I got a real job: Check.


Still looking?  And what degree?
 
2014-03-09 01:11:52 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: cig-mkr: What ever happened to being too overqualified for the job? Seems to me that if you hire someone overqualified, they will quit the second something else comes along, whereas someone who relies on their "trade" for income will stick around.

Some jobs, like retail for instance, employers aren't really sold on the value of experience. At a point people who stick around aren't contributing to productivity what they are costing is their increased wages and benefits.


That's precisely why I go to Home Depot vs. Lowes, the folks at Home Depot seem to have more practical experience the "shelf stockers" at Lowes.
 
2014-03-09 01:20:17 PM  

Forbidden Doughnut: DrewCurtisJr: Some jobs, like retail for instance, employers aren't really sold on the value of experience.

Shockingly, this also applies in manufacturing work as well!

/ CSB: I witnessed the near-collapse of a small company after they laid off a machinist (w/decades of experience) who could tear down and rebuild all of the critically important tools. The 23-year old college grad (BSME) they hired to replace him failed epically after a couple of months and was transferred out of there, probably fired...
// Engineer got what he deserved, he didn't value anyone's opinion on the mfg. floor


Was a time when people started out working the floor, got promoted to foreman, take a few management classes, and finally supervisor. With this system the people below you couldn't bull sh*t you because you have been there done that. I've seen a lot of people come and go with BSME degrees, great folks but didn't have a clue how the real world works.
 
2014-03-09 01:29:42 PM  
Where else would an art major get to study so many vintage Lynard Skynard tour t-shirts?
 
2014-03-09 01:34:20 PM  

CujoQuarrel: raerae1980: Yep. Just in my little retail enclave where there are six of us, all have college degrees and a few have Masters, including me. We get paid barely more than minimum wage and we have student loans. None of us can find jobs in our fields.

What are the fields? Did anyone learn anything usefull?


Keep on trolling, sparky.
 
2014-03-09 01:41:10 PM  

mutterfark: AngryDragon: NFA: StanTheMan: Liberals' answer: "More immigration!"

Liberals?

You do realize the whole immigration movement was enthusiastically promoted by the Republican party as a way of providing cheap labor for the US, right?  Reagan / Bush set the whole immigration problem in motion by refusing to take action.  They wanted to open the border to allow Mexican's to travel into the US at will and work in the US.

It was only when the Republicans realized that Mexican immigrants typically vote Democrat, that suddenly immigration was a bad thing.

Reagan Bush promoting illegal immigration

They may have promoted opening the borders.  Know who actually did it though?

[i.imgur.com image 525x294]

Roll Call
Looks like a President(D) sided with a majority of Republicans. Am I reading that link correctly?


No person who is not a globalist can become president of the united snakes.
 
2014-03-09 02:05:45 PM  
As a college graduate in a low paying job... I'm there because I like it and I'm good at it. Applying my degree (Econ with a specialty in stat analysis and demography) occasionally pays the bills, but jobs that my degree is relevant to want more out of me than I am willing to commit. I don't feel like doing 60-70 hour workweeks on a regular basis. I don't feel like being stressed out by artificial deadlines and paperwork. Mostly though, I don't want to spend 10 hours a day being unhappy for the next 30 years, hoping I live to be 65, and maybe then I can be happy. I can be happy today, so I choose that.
 
2014-03-09 02:28:25 PM  

cig-mkr: DrewCurtisJr: cig-mkr: What ever happened to being too overqualified for the job? Seems to me that if you hire someone overqualified, they will quit the second something else comes along, whereas someone who relies on their "trade" for income will stick around.

Some jobs, like retail for instance, employers aren't really sold on the value of experience. At a point people who stick around aren't contributing to productivity what they are costing is their increased wages and benefits.

That's precisely why I go to Home Depot vs. Lowes, the folks at Home Depot seem to have more practical experience the "shelf stockers" at Lowes.


That said, I've found Lowes to be far more organized, I can get in and out in a matter of minutes... as someone who hates socializing, idgaf about the life experiences of whoever stocked the shelves, I'd rather not interact with them at all.
 
2014-03-09 02:29:16 PM  
Our company is hiring. Entry level job requirements: Advanced degree in relevant field and 2-3 years experience.
 
2014-03-09 02:33:40 PM  

Carth: Our company is hiring. Entry level job requirements: Advanced degree in relevant field and 2-3 years experience.


Nothing like "Entry Level" requiring 2-3 years experience.
 
2014-03-09 02:41:21 PM  

Mugato: AngryDragon: They may have promoted opening the borders.  Know who actually did it though?

Outsourcing jobs to other countries screwed a lot of people over and speaking as someone who had to fix the shiatty programming done in India, ultimately screwed over a lot of companies as a whole. Although Bush didn't help matters by giving tax breaks to companies who did it.


Couldn't be more onboard with you. Though my primary job is playing with snowboards and bikes, I occasionally use my degree. With an MA in Econ and a specialty in Stat Analysis, my side job is quantitative proofreading. Basically, I look for math errors in formulae and inconsistencies between narratives and those formulae. This skill is not cheap, and I charge about triple what it can be done for out of country (China and India are the cheapest places to get this kind of proofreading done). That said, most of my work comes after companies have wasted a fair amount of money on those cheaper competitors, and some manager says something to the effect of "I don't care what it costs, get it done right, or you're fired."  Our tax structure encourages employers to do shoddy work out of country and see how well that works before trying to bring any work here to the US. It is nearly the polar opposite of the (enviable) German tax structure, which strongly encourages domestic manufacturing, and further incentivizes employers to offer job-specific training in areas where the labor pool could be improved upon.
 
2014-03-09 02:42:05 PM  

RedPhoenix122: Carth: Our company is hiring. Entry level job requirements: Advanced degree in relevant field and 2-3 years experience.

Nothing like "Entry Level" requiring 2-3 years experience.


An "employer's market" is kind of a misnomer at this point. It's more like "they want us to be their ponies" now.

The thing is, they'll find it or kvetch for an H1B.
 
2014-03-09 02:46:36 PM  

Goimir: RedPhoenix122: Carth: Our company is hiring. Entry level job requirements: Advanced degree in relevant field and 2-3 years experience.

Nothing like "Entry Level" requiring 2-3 years experience.

An "employer's market" is kind of a misnomer at this point. It's more like "they want us to be their ponies" now.

The thing is, they'll find it or kvetch for an H1B.


And if it ever becomes an employee market again, they'll just crash the market.
 
Displayed 50 of 83 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report