originally posted by: miragezero
2. You are not over-educated. You picked the wrong field. In the case of the masters "degree", wrong twice perhaps.
3. Skilled trades. You will not be rich (probably) and will have to work in inhospitable places, but you will make a (very) good living and over time
improve your skillset and demand in the workforce. It is more difficult longterm than college I believe and not as respected in our culture anymore,
unfortunately... as a result, and with the boomers leaving the workforce they will be in greater and greater demand and maybe this country will light
the bulb again that not everyone can or should be a banker, lawyer, artist or social worker.
I explained this already, the government and big business want to INCREASE minimum licensure requirements for ALL trades and professions, that usually
means more formal, butt-in-the-seat, schooling. The government has made licenses and certifications mandatory to enter and to continue working, in
MANY professions today. Sure, not all these licenses and certifications require a 4-year degree or masters, but once you hit 60 semester units, you
may as well find a way to get the 2-year degree. I work in construction engineering, where a degree is required to get the license, PERIOD! Also many
states have eliminated the old rules where 8 years on the job was equivalent to a 4-year degree, in order to sit for the state license exam. But that
hints at a larger policy issue, where the government WANTS people in school, not just to rack up debt, but also to keep them out of the larger job
Don't any of you see the ruse here?
2 years of free Junior College can, in theory, INSTANTLY remove millions of people from the unemployment rolls, filling out applications and attending
job fairs. It will also reduce the number of applicants applying to jobs, saving big business overhead costs. That Ford factory line worker job, that
once had 25,000 applicants might only have 15,000 now, because 10,000 people instead went to "free" Junior College.
Obama is selling a stealth welfare/unemployment expansion plan, under the guise of "free higher education".
Answer me this, is it easier to get voter approval for MORE welfare for the millions of unemployed OR eliminating their unemployment status by putting
them in school full-time? Government and big business know there is no way to ever employ these people, so they just kick the can down the road by
putting on another band-aid. The band-aid in this instance, is free schooling, which will INSTANTLY lower overall unemployment figures and somewhat
reduce the race to the bottom seen in falling wages across all sectors, due to the current over supply of labor in the market.
Up to the 1940 a person could get just about any job with an 8th grade education, but today you need a BA or Masters for entry level.
Because the government & big business figured out a long time ago that populations would certainly increase over time, but due to technology
advancements, the availability of jobs would not expand to meet that population growth. There is a reason they don’t want people dropping out of
high school and then at the same time, encourage those high school graduates to attend junior college, then a 4 year university and finally a Masters
degree or PhD. They do so because it DECREASES the amount of people looking for full-time employment at the SAME TIME, chasing after jobs in a market
that CANNOT provide employment for everyone looking for, able, qualified for and willing to work.
Look at it this way, when people could get a job with an 8th grade education, they went out and did it as soon as possible (opportunity cost). Then
jobs got scarcer and the minimum requirement became a high school diploma, adding 4 more years of people NOT Looking for jobs within their cohort.
Then jobs got even scarcer and the minimum became a 2 or 4 year college degree, adding an additional 2-4 years of people NOT looking for jobs within
their cohort. Now jobs are really scarce and may require a Masters or PHD, adding an additional 2-7 years of people NOT looking for jobs within their
Basically the way the economy has been structured TODAY, we are looking at young people within their cohort whom are NOT looking for full-time, career
type, employment for 6-15 YEARS, beyond K-12, all while they finish more school!!!
This has been done ON PURPOSE, to keep the number people seeking employment lower. In 1920 after 8th grade everyone who was able, went out to look for
work and typically found it, that’s simply NOT possible today under any circumstances. Easily accessed welfare will soon add another 1-3 years of
people within a cohort, to those “not seeking employment”. Not to the specific detriment of society, but to continue to mask the illusion that
jobs and upward mobility are still available. So, if someone gets a graduate degree and collects 1-3 years of welfare on top of than, that’s ONE
less person competing for scarce jobs. The extra years of welfare are then acting in the same way to the larger economy as the increased minimum
education levels for employment, with the real goal of decreasing the number of able-bodied applicants out on the job market at the same time. This
cohort of people "not pursuing full-time employment" also includes those in Prison, Government pensioners/SSI and the disabled on government
assistance. If everyone needed to go out and “get a job” or “start their own business” TODAY, as many “capitalists” and "entrepreneurs"
suggest these days, we would all be making 0.25 cents a day.
With big business being hell bent on replacing living workers with machines, such comments as those in this post, miss a subtle point that ONLY the
children of the wealthy will have the opportunity to become TRUE experts in such fields. Let me clarify, through the prior 20th century, a poor kid
who studied hard could become a lawyer, engineer, accountant, even a doctor sometimes with the right combination of hard work, savings, scholarships,
family support, etc, OR they simply went into the trades and learned on the job WITH pay. HOWEVER, in engineering and technician curriculum’s today,
times are changing, which now favors kids whom have access to expensive software and hardware to “experiment” with and “practice” on before
entering college or a particular training program. So when they finally get to college or to their first apprenticeship, those whom have had lots of
free time to “play” with robotics and programming, outside of the classroom, WILL CERTAINLY outpace their less privileged peer, who flips burgers
part-time, to pay rent and school expenses.
NOW do you see?
2 years of free Junior College can, in theory, INSTANTLY remove millions of people from the unemployment rolls, whom are currently filling out
appllications and attending job fairs. Reducing the number of applicants applying to jobs, saves big business AND government overhead costs. For
example, that Ford factory, line worker, job opening, that once had 25,000 applicants might only have 15,000, after the implementation of the 2-years
free college policy, because 10,000 of those potential applicants instead went to "free" Junior College.
edit on 16-2-2015 by boohoo because:
(no reason given)