How Bad Is the Job Market for the College Class of 2014?

article

Interesting article. 9% unemployeement, actually not that bad.

You can spend a long, long time arguing about precisely how bad freshly minted grads have it these days and why. But for now, let's stick to broad strokes. In its recent chartbook on youth joblessness, the Economic Policy Institute reported that roughly 8.5 percent of college graduates between the ages of 21 and 24 were unemployed.

Then there’s the other kind of underemployment—the kind where you're just too educated for your job. For decades now, we’ve been used to hearing about recent college graduates reduced to pouring coffee or working as bike messengers to pay off student loan debt. In a January report, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that roughly 44 percent of recent graduates—meaning those ages 22 to 27 with a B.A. or higher—were in a job that did not technically demand a bachelor’s degree. That, oddly, was good news: Even in very strong job markets, significant chunks of young grads typically take a while to move on to a career path that matches their education—the situation in 2012 was about on par with the early 1990s.

No mention of what degree they had? Would be cool to see those numbers paired together on the same study.

The bad news is that these recent B.A.s, working in jobs that don't require a college degree, are in occupations that pay far less than in the past. It used to be that more than half of these overeducated young workers would find themselves in “good” jobs—meaning that they'd pay at least $45,000 in today's market. Today, less than 40 percent do. Meanwhile, more than a fifth of this group were in low-wage jobs, meaning they paid $25,000 a year or less.

Why would you take a job making 25,000 a year? Are you just not trying?

originally posted by: onequestion
article

Interesting article. 9% unemployeement, actually not that bad.

You can spend a long, long time arguing about precisely how bad freshly minted grads have it these days and why. But for now, let's stick to broad strokes. In its recent chartbook on youth joblessness, the Economic Policy Institute reported that roughly 8.5 percent of college graduates between the ages of 21 and 24 were unemployed.

Then there’s the other kind of underemployment—the kind where you're just too educated for your job. For decades now, we’ve been used to hearing about recent college graduates reduced to pouring coffee or working as bike messengers to pay off student loan debt. In a January report, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that roughly 44 percent of recent graduates—meaning those ages 22 to 27 with a B.A. or higher—were in a job that did not technically demand a bachelor’s degree. That, oddly, was good news: Even in very strong job markets, significant chunks of young grads typically take a while to move on to a career path that matches their education—the situation in 2012 was about on par with the early 1990s.

No mention of what degree they had? Would be cool to see those numbers paired together on the same study.

The bad news is that these recent B.A.s, working in jobs that don't require a college degree, are in occupations that pay far less than in the past. It used to be that more than half of these overeducated young workers would find themselves in “good” jobs—meaning that they'd pay at least $45,000 in today's market. Today, less than 40 percent do. Meanwhile, more than a fifth of this group were in low-wage jobs, meaning they paid $25,000 a year or less.

Why would you take a job making 25,000 a year? Are you just not trying?

Why take the lower paying jobs? Well their just isn't enough work in America to support the education of grads. There is no bright future for jobs in the US until we bring industry back and start making things again. Outsourcing is killing us along with taxation out the Ahole and regulation that pretty much drives prices way out the roof to stay in compliance. These kids graduating should become proactive in re-shaping the future and creating jobs and a better America. We should all be proactive in that anyway.

a reply to: Brotherman

When 3d printing finishes hitting the market I think manufacturing outsourcing is going to outdated itself. I think maybe creating hemp related 3d models and growing hemp and manufacturing hemp products in your house is going to explode.

I think I can see the onset of an explosion in hemp and manufacturing through 3d printing coming I n our future.

The organic sections of stores are growing constantly and its all small business manufactures filling the shelves.

Job market wasn't as good for me as well when I graduated and I just continued working at the same place that I worked at through high school. Hopefully getting a promotion but even then it utilizes nothing of what I went to college for. On another note from what I've heard all the Pharmacy students a good portion will not be able to find jobs that is based on some heresay from Pharmacist at the various stores so not sure how well that is.

a reply to: onequestion

I wouldn't imagine it bad for any college grad who actually KNEW what they wanted to do. if you go for general courses or some stupid degree, then yes it will be pretty tough I am sure. If you go to college, just be sure you actually know what you want to do in life and stick to it.

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.

Why?

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 cohort.

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. Essentially 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.

Keeping up with the basics in terms of education and on-the-job work skills won’t be enough for jobs requiring future tech, labor market, skill-sets (i.e. robot repair). The poor and even the middle class (not the upper middle class) will simply NOT be able to keep up with the skill demands for future employment, REQUIRED CERTIFICATIONS, STATE LICENSING, etc, while earning wages AND keeping a roof over their heads. In the future these very high costs skills needed to stay “relevant” in ALL labor markets, will only be affordable to the rich, or at the very least, to VERY far forward thinking middle class families, willing to sacrifice everything financially to keep their offspring competitive in the larger job market.

originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
I wouldn't imagine it bad for any college grad who actually KNEW what they wanted to do. if you go for general courses or some stupid degree, then yes it will be pretty tough I am sure. If you go to college, just be sure you actually know what you want to do in life and stick to it.

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.

Before 1990, 40% of teenagers had part-time jobs while in school. This is a relevant statistic because today only 20% of teenagers in school have part-time jobs. Teens at one time made up a sizable portion of the workforce and such has changed dramatically in current employment practices.

Although not my primary point, I do think there is plenty of evidence that teens today do not have the opportunity to get part-time jobs, BUT at the same time, the wealthy ones are beginning to develop advanced skill-sets that COULD be MORE helpful in their future adult careers, than say, “working at a taco stand after school”. Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg are very good examples of people who made use of their free time and access to money, without having to EVER labor for pay and ultimately developed specialized skills that could not be learned at a MINDLESS part-time job or even in formal schooling. In the end, they leveraged that free time learning, into long term careers.

Those whom are going to be rendered jobless by automation/robotics/tech are going to be the least likely to be able to pick up these pieces in the coming era of traditional jobs destruction. Its going to IMPOSSIBLE for the poor to go back to school, get a masters degree in robotics, in full-time-only engineering programs, that strongly discourage their admitted students from taking part-time jobs, while favoring students who have both the money and free time and don’t EVER work at an unrelated job to their majors, who then buy expensive robotics hardware/software to experiment with outside of class.

I believe “rich kid job mobility" is going to be a bigger problem for regular folks, beyond even what the previous "rich kid" pedigree typically brought in the 20th century. This unfettered access to endless money and time to “explore” academics and hands-on work, with NO consequences, is going to END job mobility of any kind for the lower and middle classes, even those whom have met the typical required higher education and work experience standards. Its going to be a superstar only job market, with no room for middle of road folks.

Pffft BA's

If they really wanted decent jobs they would get a Bsc.

The science, mathematics and the engineering fields are the money makers. And with the science courses that involve chemistry if in the unlikely event your out of work you can if morally inclined or desperate enough make money in erm less reputable ways.

a reply to: boohoo

What's the solution

originally posted by: crazyewok
Pffft BA's

If they really wanted decent jobs they would get a Bsc.

The science, mathematics and the engineering fields are the money makers. And with the science courses that involve chemistry if in the unlikely event your out of work you can if morally inclined or desperate enough make money in erm less reputable ways.

I CAN NOT STAND this argument. Its drives me CRAZY. ITS A MYTH!!!

I will begin with the usual assertion I hear in regards to the impact of these, soon to be real, “future-tech jobs", which contrary to beliefs of some, includes the trades and related "proprietary tech" that will not be repairable, only "replaceable by a certified/licensed tech".

“Someone has to get paid to fix the robots!”

I often hear this above noted rebuttal to mass automation in the workplace.

Many people generally do not bother to ask themselves, would future robotics consulting companies prefer to hire low work-experienced graduates, whom have demonstrated HANDS-ON, non-professional robotics experience, in the form of a “hobby portfolio”; OR a graduate with no “hobby portfolio” experience, whom worked hard to graduate with a difficult major, but didn’t have as much free time to develop skills specifically related to their major and instead having a long list of work experience, flipping burgers etc, unrelated to their major? I’m seeing this already happening in many different engineering fields, where the young workers being hired today are from wealthy families and great colleges, while at the same time are being trained by older folks whom were NOT necessarily as privileged in their youth, but got through school the 20th century way and were trained on the job, while paid, over long periods of time. This certainly is no longer an option in 2014 and on because companies would prefer to churn experienced staff from other companies, rather than train fresh graduates in-house.

Here is a modern example of a company with a big contract to fill and absolutely no "will" to increase wages to attract experience personnel, nor the desire to train inexperienced ones the job. Instead they put out a story on the web bellyaching:

bridgemi.com...

In the link below this paragraph I have posted an example of what I believe to be a young person, from a well off family, who majored in robotics at USC. She doesn’t appear to have had an unrelated part-time job to her major, while in college. She also seem to have had lots time to “experiment” with technology in her spare time, got a masters degree back to back to the bachelors AND at the end of the day got a job offer at a University sponsored dinner party for robotics majors. NOBODY I went to college with, EVER, got a job offer at a university sponsored dinner party. In contrast I’m sure many Ivy league and top 10 school graduates do however. My point being, these future “robot repair jobs” are going to require smart kids, with desire to advance, whom also went to good schools, had lots of spare time and money to play with the tech outside of school AND got their jobs offered at dinner parties, some of which will be non-paying internships at first. These jobs will not be gotten through sending out blind jobs applications or web job boards, as was done in the 20th century. Basically what this girl is doing for Disney will in the near future be more like what a plumber or electrician of today does, EXCEPT you won’t get trained on the job, in a low-pay apprenticeship when at “entry level”. In fact to even be considered for these “future-tech jobs” in the first place you’ll need to have good academic pedigree, lots of unpaid hobby time and 1+ years of unpaid internships.

Here is her story, readers can decide for themselves, my opinion is that this is what a career for a plumber is going to look like in 15+ years:

onedublin.org...

Take the medical field for example, I work with hospitals and fresh graduates of any kind are NOT NEEDED at this time. Demand for certain types of medical staff is at an all time high, but that doesn't include FRESH GRADUATES. Just to give you some insight, some of the BEST children's hospitals in the USA are planning to reduce overall healthcare staff, but at the same time also increase staff numbers at the C-suite level and MARKETING department! You would think that if they are doing this there must be some underlying financial issues right? Nope, they want to get more international patients that pay higher fees. Did you also know that many VERY experienced doctors are retiring because they were told, by the C-suite, that they need to adopt robotic surgery and medicine operations. BTW, fund raising for many of these hospitals are at an all time high, but even though they are non-profits, staff that do "the real work" must be reduced and those left shall become more "lean".

"Churn" existing knowledge workers and/or "H1-B" is what most companies are looking for in the USA.

originally posted by: onequestion
What's the solution

Basically we have TOO many people being born and not enough desire on the behalf of the "owners of capital" to employ them all for the sake of having a stable and safe civilization to live in day to day. The owners of capital want more people born, not simply for "growing the future tax base", but for the true purpose of DECREASING overall wages for everyone. More people MEANS less jobs and pay per person, affecting even the educated and highly skilled. Its actually quite simple for the peons/peasants of the world to start having more say in how the world is run. Simply don't have children nor support those having children. The result will be wages soaring and diverse employment options expanding for all. Taxing those without kids is a subconscious way to influence the birth of more kids, by punishing those whom are abstaining from having kids in their own best FINANCIAL interests, while also not giving in to the desires for increased population coveted by both government and large corporations.

I have been making the argument, for a very long time, that the ever increasing "non-1%'er" population is lowering the overall influence of those whom are not in the 1%.

How is this possible, you ask?

Because its easier to "pay less" or "nothing at all" to contracted or indentured "labor" when there is another willing laborer/slave waiting in the wings to do the work for less or nothing at all. Its actually quite simple, if those not in the 1% refused to get married or have babies from here on out & block any future immigration, the 1% would very quickly need to raise wages. Otherwise nothing the 1% want to get "worked on" would ever get done. When low-wage/low-skilled labor becomes scarce in the larger market, wages go up.

This kind of "baby making with benefits" thinking on a grand scale is the problem. There are not enough paying jobs to go around as it is and the "baby makers" somehow think bringing another human onto the earth is a good idea. Their future, unborn, child is going to do nothing except drive down wages for everyone else who was already here. These people, quite simply put, need to rethink their purpose in life. Its not to make babies in a world without a job for them to earn a living from. People who think like this are doing nothing more than driving the rest of us deeper into slavery at the hands of the "owners of capital", whom use "extra living bodies" as an excuse to constantly drive down wages and increase the costs of goods due to increased demand or lack of demand. People need to change their world view, RIGHT NOW, its not about making babies anymore! Save a job for a person already born and living, by getting a vasectomy and vilifying those who choose to make more human beings through biological reproduction!

Guess when the largest “recorded” wage increase happened in history for, non-land owing, wage-laborers, post the introduction of fiat currency?

Any ideas?

I’ll tell you, it was after the black death pandemic in the 14th century, especially in post-pandemic England.

How is that possible?

Because “the owners of capital”, post-black-death-pandemic still needed wage-laborers, but there was a HUGE shortage of able bodied people, so, in order for ANY work to get done they had to pay the peasants and other undesirables more, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE. This principle is still at work today, when you take the time to recognize that portions of the population are actively discouraged from participating in the full-time labor market. This is easily done, by throwing people in prison, forcing them to attend formal school longer and allowing more people to claim themselves as disabled or collect long/short term welfare. The next obvious step for government to further reduce the number of people participating in the full-time labor market is to allow them easier access to welfare or as some have been recommending lately, a guaranteed minimum wage or allowance that everyone gets, without having to provide labor to an employer first. I’m not going to go into any specific economic theory, but this above noted cohort of non-participants collecting a base amount of guaranteed welfare/allowance will likely keep wages stable for those whom are still working full-time. If all people capable of working full-time, entered the job market simultaneously, wages would crash and to a certain extent have, as of 2014.

Contrary to popular, academic and authoritative opinions, history has already proved my above inference to be VERY effective against the 1% quest to drive down wages. Hence, if those NOT in the 1% refused to get married or have babies from here on out & aggressively blocked any future immigration, both legal and illegal, the 1% would very quickly need to raise wages for non-land owing/peasants/undesirables/wage-laborers, etc. Otherwise nothing the 1% want to get "worked on" would ever get done. When low-wage/low-skilled labor becomes scarce in the larger market, wages go up, FOR EVERYBODY. For us the peasants, "self induced labor shortages" is one of the few ways to get the "owners of capital" to pay more for services rendered. This includes the concept of the UNION, but Americans have already voted against their interests in that respect. All they have left now to negotiate with is making less babies and stopping both legal & illegal immigration.

Its not simply about "wealth redistribution" and taxing those without children, its about overabundance of labor on the market and the ability of the 1% to artificially drive down wages of the 99%. When the Black Death came about and wiped out "excess labor", the 1%'ers of the day somehow found "extra money" to pay said labor, for services rendered. Which means it was always available and wages could have been higher previously, but instead the 1%, of the day, chose to play the game, "pit the desperate against each other".

The French Revolution and the Peasant's Revolt also function within my "scarce-labor of ALL types" theory, resulting in higher wages being paid to non-land owing/peasants/undesirables/wage-laborers. During the French Revolution, from 1789 to 1799, birth rates fell dramatically. Also the earlier he Peasants Revolt, of 1381, not surprisingly, had roots in the aftermath of the Black Death. In fact, the Peasants Revolt was triggered by the "Statute of Labourers 1351", due to the sustained wage growth for non-land owing, wage-laborers. Since wages were rising so quickly the English parliament, a few decades post the Black-Death, under King Edward III, introduced the "Statute of Labourers 1351", which was used by the "Owners of Capital", as an artificial means to drive down the wages of non-land owning peasants. Despite market conditions signalling the need for increased wages.

avalon.law.yale.edu...

The Statute of Laborers; 1351 ("Statutes of the Realm," vol. i. p. 307.)

Its simple, newborn babies, legal immigrants and illegal immigrants destroy the wage negotiating power of the 99% and the 1% know this.

originally posted by: onequestion
article

Interesting article. 9% unemployeement, actually not that bad.

You can spend a long, long time arguing about precisely how bad freshly minted grads have it these days and why. But for now, let's stick to broad strokes. In its recent chartbook on youth joblessness, the Economic Policy Institute reported that roughly 8.5 percent of college graduates between the ages of 21 and 24 were unemployed.

The bad news is that these recent B.A.s, working in jobs that don't require a college degree, are in occupations that pay far less than in the past. It used to be that more than half of these overeducated young workers would find themselves in “good” jobs—meaning that they'd pay at least $45,000 in today's market. Today, less than 40 percent do. Meanwhile, more than a fifth of this group were in low-wage jobs, meaning they paid $25,000 a year or less.

Why would you take a job making 25,000 a year? Are you just not trying?

B.A = Bachelor of Arts - not a STEM degree . BA degrees are subjects like Architecture, Art, Accounting, Modern History, Classical History, Social Studies, Anthropology, African-American Studies, Gender Studies.

The Architecture and Art courses might get you employment in the animation/art industries if you have good portfolio, though you might need a MFA as well. Accounting might find a job in any corporation, but the rest are really only useful for politics or academic research/teaching.

But many high-school students just pick the course that's the easiest and seems the most "fun". Though that strategy is any worse that picking the subject that pays the most or has the greatest demand for workers, only to find a glut three years later.

Even doing a pure subject like Mathematics or Physics won't be any good unless you have parallel programming/HPC/big data knowledge as well.

Understand this: there are millions of grads and current hopefuls out there, that list getting bigger every day.

*Today... there are graduating highschool seniors going to college because they were told its 'the way".
*Today... last years college graduates are looking for work. Any kind of work.
*Today...is the 1st day for college freshmen excited to learn new things and get into interesting fields.
*Today...is the 1st month of being required to start paying back those student loans...for those past ad current grads above still looking....

*Tomorrow...those graduated will realize that yes..the degree is great and should make one very proud.
*Tomorrow...those grads will be trying to find interviews and finding that at least over 1/2 of companies are hiring by one filling out an online application. Put away the suit and nice dress. Maybe theyll call if they ever get your digital-plain-non-descript-one of many apps and "resume" Maybe.
*Tomorrow...those same students and grads will come to realize that they were mislead...if only by the fact of being under the impression they are gonna go to work, in their fields of study, right away, for decent wages after they get the job.

After they get an interview...IF the company pulls their plain digital app from the thousand on line.

The NEXT day...it all begins again. The new grads wait, while the older grads still hope, while the higschoolers make an honest attempt to find a good college...and while the student loan receivers sweat out without a way to begin paying their loans off.

So remember...all the while this is going on with no real end in sight? There are every day...EVERY DAY...new grads, new college applicants, new job "fairs" and as that group grows larger....there are stil the same amount of no-jobs.

And a ton more of "on-line-no-interview-or-callbacks" job ops out there. The whole system is a ruse. The numbers grow every day, the lies continue, the likelyhood of companies beating a path to your door...based on that on-line application...are nill. Zip.

We all become another piece of text in an email box stacked above then under thousands of others. And the list of grads, hghschoolers, job apps grows and grows and grows everyday...with the reality? Not much changes.

We were lied to. We werent told the truth, or reality. Sorry...thats the way it is....

a reply to: mysterioustranger

This is going to lead to an uprising in the very near future I know a lot of people frustrated with the system and I know more everyday.

IMHO I think our workforce needs to return to apprenticeships and on the job training. A lot of companies want experience even in entry level jobs, how are you supposed to get that if no one will hire you in the first place?

I graduated in May 2013 with a BA in Music Composition and needed a job so I worked for a couple places including a car dealearship. After a while I decided that I needed a job that could provide a future if this composing thing doesn't work out. Because of my work experience and degree I became quite good with computers and although I have no certifications or degree's in such field I thought I'd try to get a job in an entry level IT type job. The first place that came to mind was Geek Squad at Best Buy. I felt I had enough experience with computers for an entry level/low wage IT job. Needless to say I was wrong. They want people with everything, certifications, experience and yadda yadda. The less training they have to do the more money they make! Plain and simple.

With regards to the composition route you have the same problem but in a different way. Basically you have to find a composer in a field you like (such as film or video games) and hope they will take you under their wing in most likely a unpaid internship or extremely low paid one. Where are these jobs also? LA, one of the most expensive cities to live in. My question is why do I have to do an unpaid or extremely underpaid internship in order to potentially do a job I went to school for? Isn't that the point of school?

See people used to follow their parents in a trade or study under a master in their field of interest. They would start in their early teens work alongside an expert and by the time they were done have enough experience and education to continue in said field by themselves. What was wrong with that system? Why does everyone need 12 years of extremely repetitive courses in English, math and science? Or if you're the math and science type 12 years of mandatory humanities and arts classes?

i don't know about statistics..
but from personal experience
the last job interview i went to
some punk teenager sat me down
and stared at the floor the whole time

and it was for washing dishes at hogs breath cafe
i don't think i'll ever get over it

at least those 12 y.o's at KFC can still heat up a mean chicken

a reply to: mysterioustranger

I actually was holding my breath while reading your post..............Brilliant truth.........Brilliant. I you are reading this and skipped to the bottom you must scroll back up and read this posters thoughts.



If I could give you all my stars.......I would.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: mysterioustranger

This is going to lead to an uprising in the very near future I know a lot of people frustrated with the system and I know more everyday.

After reading how this other poster broke it down I would have to agree with you.

Never bought into the "you must go to college" mentality. I did give it a go, but when you can sleep through classes and still pull 3.5gpa your wasting your money. Mind you the sleeping was due to already knowing all about the courses I was "required" to take.

So with my small foray, I quickly went nope not for me. Now I make more than most of the people I know with degrees, which is still not saying much as it is not a large amount of money.

I deal with people day in and day out who work in the mortgage field, and honestly I am not sure most of the people I support are qualified to be janitors let alone process loans.

The lack of basic math, critical thinking and problem solving skills are all very apparent in a large portion of the population.

As for the job market, at least here where I live a huge portion of the jobs available are from temp agencies. So I chuckle to myself when I see you ask about the job market, there is no job market. It has been destroyed over the past 20 years, some would argue longer than that.

a reply to: boohoo

Yet I got a degree in Biological sciences in 2008 at the height of the recession and had ZERO problems getting employment and further qualifications while working. Im self employed now but if I quit my job tomorrow id have no problem getting a $35,00 a year job within a week and if I was patient a $40,000 and likely be up to $50 or 60,000 within 3-5 years. Ad a extra $15k on to any figure if in London.

I only come from a middle class family, I did not go to Oxford or Cambridge and Im not in the "old boys" network.

I just got a useful degree in a difficult subject and have a nice CV.

Lets face if Im in HR and get a application from someone with a BA in Liberal arts or creative writing/media studies ect (IE BA in heavy drinking and partying) or a BSc in Chemical engineering (Or insert long complicated name that impresses the dumb HR manager) that HR managers going to give priority in interview to the Bsc as they obviously have some brains to get that degree.

And anyway I dont know about the USA but in the UK if you have any respectable degree 2:2 and above and you really need money you just go into teaching. If you have one in the sciences/IT or History you are guaranteed a job.