Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Why are people missing the point?

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 10, 2011, 12:46 a.m. EST by Mets (53)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I see so many people on here telling us to grow up and stop being lazy and get a job.

I certainly can't speak for everyone but I can speak for the vast majority in saying that we all want jobs. We all want to work hard and contribute to our society. That's why we are protesting. Our opportunities to do so have been taken away. (Among other things.)

People are saying that finding a job should not be easy. To which my response is, how hard should it be then?

316 Comments

316 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by thesoulgotsoldontheroadtogold (148) 13 years ago

Ten years ago, at the age of 19, I could find a job easily. I want to work now just as much as I wanted to work then. And I have even better credentials on my resume than I did back then. But the jobs are nowhere to be found. Hard working, conscientious, college graduate with honors, never insubordinate at work. An employers dream. Who will hire me??? .... Yeah, that's what I thought.

[-] 4 points by sewen (154) 13 years ago

And then there are us older people who would also love a job. This is my new Tag line that I add to all my letters (and emails):

"If you know of any Internet based jobs please let me know. I am one of those "once" middle class, over 60, over educated, under-employed, semi retired, soon to be poor workers, that everyone is talking about".

[-] 3 points by zelduh (14) from Los Angeles, CA 13 years ago

You are the 99%. (I am 60.)

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

I'm hoping an open source voting system develops

[-] 2 points by annecurrey (30) 13 years ago

I went to grad school and couldn't find a job for four years after that and I am in healthcare. It depended on who you knew. I'm glad I got a job now and I hope you find a good job.

[-] 2 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

Also a very vailid point. Who you know. That's how I got my state job. I was told flat out I would not have been hired had I not been recommended by that family member.

[-] 1 points by mreynolds (26) 13 years ago

so what's with occupying wall street then. Wall street companies underwrite the businesses which create stimulating high paying jobs. The more these companies are able to expand, the more they'll be able to utilize talented productive individuals. Also the more development we'll have in technology, medicine, arts, entertainment....

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I keep trying to point out the same thing. Wall Street is successfully creating high-paying jobs. What a lot of people are complaining about, if you read further down on this page, is that qualifying for those new high-paying jobs requires learning new skills, because Wall Street creates new high-paying jobs through innovation and "creative destruction", which replaces low-skill, low-paying jobs with high-skill, high-paying jobs. It then becomes the responsibility of the workers to develop new job skills so that they can fill the new high-skill jobs.

The problem around here is a rejection of the last part. Responsibility. The overriding theme in Zuccotti Park, if the participants on this forum are representative, is an attitude that OTHER people are responsible for jobs. People with un-marketable degrees feel entitled to their dream jobs, regardless of economic realities. If they can't get their dream job then it has to be somebody else's fault, not theirs. Never mind that they wasted four years studying art history or Latin studies or English or music theory.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

TechJunkie what do you do for a living? I'm curious.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

I want a job in foreclosing on people's homes! I want a job where I come up with crazy schemes which screw people out of money. I bet those jobs pay huge!

I didn't see those options in college.

[-] 2 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

lol so true

[-] 0 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

@TrevorMnemonic -- From my understanding of what I have read from your posts, you think foreclosure is a bank's way of screwing individual's over. This is untrue, my dear.

First off, let me explain to you exactly what you are not understanding of the current economic situation. The current economic situation started back in the Great Depression when Fannie Mae was created by FDR. Fannie Mae and, later, the introduction of Freddie Mac is what slowly sent our housing market into the dumps. During the Clinton administration, an outrageous idea was created. This idea, "everyone has the right to own a home", was what led the Clinton Administration to require that Fannie Mae expand mortgage loans to allow low and middle income families to be able to obtain mortgages for homes. In order to get the banks to give out these loans, Fannie Mae lowered their credit requirements so that the banks would give these loans outs. In addition, Fannie Mae refused to purchased back the mortgages from the banks if the banks did not follow Fannie Mae's rules.

So, the banks gave out these mortgage loans because they were pressured by good ole Fannie Mae. All was happy and grand... yada yada yada. Everyone owned a home... hooray! People, who knowingly couldn't afford these homes, were given loans because our federal government fostered the idea that everyone should own a home.

But... (and here is where it gets good) when it came time for these individual's to pay their mortgages, they couldn't! And, guess what started happening? FORECLOSURES! Boom... people lost their homes. And, the banks start losing their money because good ole' Fannie Mae (created by the government) screwed them over. Well, guess what?! These banks STILL lost their money? What do you do when you lose money? You tighten up your wallet (or most of us who know how to manage our money) and you tell the people who you let borrow YOUR money to give it back. Unfortunately, the dumbasses who signed the dotted line are saying they got screwed by the banks when, in reality, the people screwed over the banks! The banks are just trying to get back the money they lost (bailouts).

Wouldn't you be pissed off if your government was the cause of you losing money and the government bailed out their OWN entity, Fannie Mae, that cost the taxpayers over $150 billion? Well, I would and I am.

In conclusion, it isn't the banks you need to be pissed at or the people foreclosing on your home. You can thank your federal government, FDR, and the Clinton administration for the foreclosure notice you received. The banks are doing what the rest of us are doing now, struggling.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

When you offer poor people money to feed their children, they take the money to feed their families. It's called taking advantage of desperation caused by a shitty economy or a sad situation. It's why people in foreign countries work in sweat shops. They have no other option, so companies think instead of paying decent wages, that the people can't do anything about it. Which is why the newest corporate trend is laying off full time employees and replacing them with part time employees, you know so they don't have to pay benefits anymore.

I agree there should have been more limits with the loans.

And I also think everyone should have the right to have a home. You can even look at that from a selfish perspective. I don't want to see homeless people in poverty outside my window.

You cant hate on FDR, who is dead, and Bill Clinton, who isn't in office, all that you want. It Does Not accomplish anything.

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

Your right... everyone has a right to have a home. ON THEIR OWN EXPENSE.

That is the problem with you people, you don't understand that this "right to a home", "right to an education", and "right to free healthcare" is all at the expense of those providing these things.

For instance, your "right to a home" is at the expense of those who are building it, painting it, etc. Your "right to education" is at the expense of teachers. Your "right to free healthcare" is at the expense of the doctor's who PAID for their education. Are you going to be the one to tell these people they have to work for free? I don't see you stepping up to the plate to work for free.

NOTHING IS FREE. Haven't you ever been taught that? When something is FREE it is always at the expense of someone else. And, guess what happens when you get something for free? You get what you paid for. So that "free healthcare" or "right to housing" you are claiming might not be exactly what you want.... :) Jus saying...

[-] 0 points by jonvonleaderhosen (50) 13 years ago

Do they foreclose on homes to screw over people or because they were getting screwed over by those that were defaulting on their mortgage?

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

both actually.

[-] -1 points by jonvonleaderhosen (50) 13 years ago

How so? If a person isn't paying their mortgage and their house gets forclosed, they've screwed themselves plus the mortgage company. The villian that crushed the economy by crashing the housing market was irresponsible consumers who borrowed money under terms they could not pay back.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

Google mortgage fraud. My response is there. You're obviously just here to troll people. I'm not biting any further.

[-] 0 points by jonvonleaderhosen (50) 13 years ago

I'm just here to learn more about the cause because I can't seem to find a steady theme. It just seems like a bunch of angry, bitter, people looking to blame all of their problems on the wealthy rather than owning up to their own bad choices. I live below the poverty line because of my bad choices, and now I'm striving toward accomplishing goals I've set forth to better my situation. The blame game is the opposite of problem solving.

[-] 0 points by DevilsAdvocate (1) from Washington, DC 13 years ago

I do. They were called finance, accounting, and investing.

I'm in business school right now. I don't consider myself a terrible person. Personally, I want to go into SocEnt/SocInn because I think I can make money while helping people while working for myself.

But I don'f think my b-school friends are terrible either. If they have the skills and desire to use the system to their advantage, what right do you have to demand they don't?

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

I have the right to expect businesses that I'm paying for to keep my best interest in mind while also profiting. That is all I expect.

Is that too much? Or should I want companies to be in business to screw people over?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

I have a friend in accounting, and he has never foreclosed on anyone's house. He simply crunches numbers for a business.

Like I said... where in school do they teach you how to screw people over for profit?

[-] 1 points by DevilsAdvocate (1) from Washington, DC 13 years ago

Not all accountants foreclose houses. But it's part of the field. And no, you shouldn't expect business you are paying for to keep your best interest in mind. you should expect them to keep their best interest in mind. And you should expect the government to use your money to support businesses with their best interest in mind, not yours.

This isn't so say any of this is right, of course.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

You didn't read what I said properly

"I have the right to expect businesses that I'm paying for to keep my best interest in mind while ALSO profiting. That is all I expect."

I expect them to profit from me. If they can't present a good deal for me and them, the deal shouldn't exist. That's just good business.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I'm a software developer who eliminates low-skilled, low-paying jobs and creates new high-skilled, high-paying jobs through innovation. If you're faced with a system that works this way, then an obvious strategy for success is to learn to be one of the people who benefits from change, not to be one of the people threatened by change. The solution is not to object to change, because change is inevitable. The solution is to learn to love change.

[-] 2 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

Ah yes you so you help computer programs eliminate more jobs! Just like the state jobs that were made for computers to now process medicaid and food stamps!

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

What kind of software eliminates and makes jobs? Software implies that you have designed a program that does this? I doubt such software exists. If it does, where can I buy it?

[-] -1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I developed an information management system that automates a job specific to a niche industry that was previously handled by low-skill office workers. Each time a company buys our software, somebody gets fired. Because saving HR expenses is the whole appeal of our product. And each time we make a new sale (every day) it also creates new demand within our startup company for high-skilled workers. We replace low-paying office clerk jobs with high-paying software development jobs. And graphic designers, and technical writers, and tech support, and technical sales.

[-] 2 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

So you put 20 office workers out of work and hire 1! Thats helpful. Yes Trevor it eliminates positions by doing the work that real people used to do. And when our technology crashes all that wonderful data we put into computers will be gone.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

If I don't innovate to improve productivity then somebody else will. Are you upset at IBM for putting millions of secretaries out of work by enabling business executives to send their own emails? This is an inevitable force of nature, like the rising of the tide. Trying to while about the unfairness of the rising of the tide is an exercise in futility. The best thing that you can do is learn to adapt. I didn't make up the rules, I just know how to play the game so that I benefit from change. Learn to love change. Learn to benefit from it. You can't stop it any more than you can stop the tides, so don't fantasize about a world without tides, learn to live in the world as it exists.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

Lulz so you're just on this site to stir up problems...? Good for you?

I still don't get how your software works. Is it doing something that a person was doing previously?

What you're describing doesn't make sense to me. You're literally just saying it causes people to get fired and then creates high level tech positions. You're not explaining the "how"

I don't want to work for a company that gets people fired. But hey, I'm also not an asshole for a living. It sounds like job security at your company would probably be a joke.

So for every person you cause to get fired... you hire a new position in your company?

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I am not a troll. Im speaking the uncomfortable truth, because avoiding reality wont help anybody. I came here on Saturday as a potential supporter because I'm concerned about disproportionate political influence from the Tea Party. ( http://occupywallst.org/forum/vote-or-else-this-will-all-be-a-pointless-exercise/ ). I've been very disappointed with what I've found.

Our economy expands through creative destruction. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction ). I didnt make up the rules, that's just how it works. It's natural selection. Survival of the fittest. It doesn't do anybody any good to lament that the system isn't "fair".

Our company is just one of many that is making our economy more productive by enabling businesses to accomplish things with less people. It's called automation. It started at the industrial revolution and it never stopped. When the industrial revolution came along, agricultural workers learned new job skills so that they could participate in the new automation-based industries. People who didn't learn to work machines were left behind. That trend never stopped.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

Actually fighting an unfair system is the best way to create a better one.

But that's just me and logic. I don't need websites I'll just throw these out there

United States Revolutionary War

Civil War

But hey, I'm just lazy and don't want to look for a job... isn't that the way you see it?

Automation is the first step to SkyNet, lulz. What do we need robots and computers making shit for if no one has a job paying them so they can buy stuff? It will just turn into the super rich living like kings exchanging goods. This is not what I want in America. Automation is failure. All it does is help the guy on the top add a few more hundred thousand dollars to his millions while casting people on the streets. Sadly, not everyone can be at the top. And it's going to keep getting worse if we follow this route. What is the name of your company?

You should make software that replaces your job. Because if you don't... someone else just might.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Automation is not failing, automation is succeeding and that's why people are complaining. My every-day job is to automate my own job. If I find myself doing the same computer task ten times in a row, then I write code to automate that task so that the next time that I have to do it ten times in a row, I can just press a button and accomplish the same thing with less effort. That's called a productivity gain. Having the ability to do that is why I have never had a problem finding a job. And I never will.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

You should get up at a podium and tell people this.

"I write lines of code. Therefore everything is your fault and society is fine without you."

This is what your argument is leading me to believe. Correct me if I'm wrong. I guess I'm failing to see the point you're trying to make.

So if everyone just turns to computer programming, who is going to be our nurses, our police officers, our teachers, our janitors, our librarians, our taxi drivers, our waitresses, our sales clerks, OUR EVERYTHING ELSE THAT ISN'T COMPUTER PROGRAMMING AND AUTOMATION.

People with your skewed perspective fail to see what a SOCIETY is.

[-] 2 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

He's basically saying that we need to learn the skills to do whatever job is most in demand at any given moment. Unfortunately, it's not that easy. Education costs more MONEY. Nor is it easy or right to give up on your dream.

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

I get what he's saying. It's just wrong.

Let me reiterate why I think so

So if everyone just turns to computer programming, who is going to be our nurses, our police officers, our teachers, our janitors, our librarians, our taxi drivers, our waitresses, our sales clerks, OUR EVERYTHING ELSE THAT ISN'T COMPUTER PROGRAMMING AND AUTOMATION. People with your skewed perspective fail to see what a SOCIETY is.

[-] 1 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

No Wall Street companies charge outrageous prices for bonuses and pay minimum wage or close to it, to those "high paying jobs" 5 people in the company making a million dollars doesn't help the rest scrounging for food and home.

[-] 1 points by thesoulgotsoldontheroadtogold (148) 13 years ago

key word "utilize" they will USE them like commodities instead of treat them like human beings....

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

You would prefer to be a non-utilized (unemployed) worker?

[-] 3 points by jamesfredericrose (6) 13 years ago

The main problem that the protesters have is corruption, not every company traded on Wall Street. It is the fact that Wall Street is where all the corrupters gather. They send their representatives to Washington, and many of them go to Washington themselves, but the problems start with the money, not the elected officials. The money available to government officials attracts the wrong kind of elected officials. If the money was taken out of government then the the pure of heart would be the only ones left in government and we wouldn't need to protest anymore.

This is the system we have, so the good companies that aren't corrupt also trade here, and some of the innovative companies that allow us to have this dialogue in this tech format. And cheers to them, it takes guts to do the right thing.

One thing though, do not blame people for pursuing degrees in art history, English, philosophy or art. Sure it is difficult to get a job once you are out or to make money. But those that went into it knew that. We also knew that there were other ways to make money. But since the unforeseeable happened those days are over. Also, we need artists, writers and musicians and the philosophers and historians who write about them. What would America be in this world with out our cultural influence? Do you think we would have gotten away with all of our military blunders and bullying if we didn't have the hearts of the world because of our art, films, music and literature? Do you think the world would appreciate us based solely on our military prowess or business acumen?

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

Right on bro.

[-] 1 points by Lork (285) 13 years ago

Continued from -

"He's basically saying that we need to learn the skills to do whatever job is most in demand at any given moment. Unfortunately, it's not that easy. Education costs more MONEY. Nor is it easy or right to give up on your dream." (FUCK these forums are screwed up!)

He'll get his comeuppance when everybody takes his advice. He will create a tech bubble that will explode rofl. Global economy + overpopulation + job killing free trade + job killing automation + stagnant to decreasing wages and worker rights making people desperate + infinite growth in a finite economy = BOOM!

Or he may be asking us to ALSO sell each other out for him. So that the rich can kill MORE jobs and excaberate the oversupply problem while decreasing demand.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

sorry if your not a bro haha didn't think for a sec

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

What are your job skills?

[-] 3 points by jamesfredericrose (6) 13 years ago

Are you hiring?

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

You guys need to remember that since other people don't have problems that means that no one should have problems. Duh... These guys obviously know how everything works. Just look at tech junkie... He makes software that eliminates and makes jobs... sounds real too.... sarcasm.

[-] 1 points by Lork (285) 13 years ago

He'll get his comeuppance when everybody takes his advice. He will create a tech bubble that will explode rofl. Global economy + overpopulation + job killing free trade + job killing automation + stagnant to decreasing wages and worker rights making people desperate + infinite growth in a finite economy = BOOM! Or he is asking US to make automatons to kill MORE jobs so that the oversupply problem get EVEN WORSE. Thus making the rich richer and the poor...well...poorer.

Also Trevor - there will be plenty of demand for nurses, social workers, firemen, policemen, garbage men, etc. Basically - Insulate yourself from demons like TechJunkie by going into recession proof, unoutsourceable, etc. jobs. You -may- create a bubble in those industries too, unfortunately with this rampant oversupply...but good luck. Plus - use globalization against the globalists! If they're going to flood the supply...flood the demand! Look for jobs in countries that love their people like in Germany or France.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Yes. I've had to look outside of the US because of a lack of available skilled American workers. It's my daily frustration.

[-] 1 points by thesoulgotsoldontheroadtogold (148) 13 years ago

microsoft office suite, acctg, payroll and hr experience, an impeccable track record of confidentiality, excellent math and analytical skills, excellent written and verbal skills, persistence in communication and acquiring information (you WILL tell me what I need to know, or I will find out how to find out), high iq, do you want me to keep going?

[-] 2 points by LincolnCA (160) 13 years ago

They get the point Mets, but the game is making sure you don't know they get the point, because once they let you know they get the point they will actually have to do something about and adjust the status quo!

[-] 2 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

I think it's so much more than that! I'm irritated with the fact that I have to work 3 jobs to support my family in this terrible economy. Living at work for meger wages while the top percent uses us to climb up their ladders is not okay with me.

[-] 2 points by Publius (21) from Washington, DC 13 years ago

I am just like you. I want to work. I want to build things. I want to use my education, that I worked so hard to get, so that I can make this country a better place. To make it more clear how hard it is to actually find a job: I graduated at the top of my college, worked hard, received scholarships, and then went to a top20 law school.

At my law school I was the top of my class, made journal, worked hard, kept my nose to the grindstone and hoped that I could end up working as an attorney, not in a corporate law firm, but with the government, helping people with their legal problems.

Since 2010, all my plans were upended. I can't find a job, despite being very employable in any other kind of economic circumstance. I've scores of job applications and people won't even return my calls.

The point is that somewhere, while we did what we were told would give us success, the system broke down and jobs have vanished. If I can't get a job, and I have every factor going in my favor, then what chance does someone else have?

You asked how hard it should be, the answer is that it shouldn't be this hard. That is why we protest.

[-] 3 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

Contrary to what people are saying it sounds like you just want a foot in the door to get your career started, as do I. I don't want to flip burgers for the rest of my life after working hard for 4 years to get a BA in film production. (BTW even finding a job flipping burgers is hard these days) I don't want to go learn another career skill either, I'm already a skilled worker. I don't have more money to spend on more classes.

Somehow people assume that we've made bad decisions. We need to cure the nation of this ignorant attitude.

[-] 2 points by Publius (21) from Washington, DC 13 years ago

Precisely. At a time where every job requires a bachelor's degree, we are shutting out so much of the talent that our country has to offer. We didn't make bad choices, we did exactly what we were told to do. Now that it isn't panning out, through NO FAULT OF OUR OWN, we are being told we were stupid, we were lazy, we didn't pick right.

Last time I checked, a bachelor's degree is a symbol of being able to think, a sign of being skilled in itself. More importantly It is ridiculous to think that people with advanced degrees, who are certainly qualified, can't find jobs. When I go to my occupation tomorrow, I plan on telling whoever will listen, that I made all the right choices, and still can't find a job.

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 13 years ago

I like your response! When I finished college (a while ago) I had 2 job offers to choose from! Which, actually wasn't that great, I had only an average GPA. Others I knew had 3-5 offers!

Sadly, your lack of opportunity is the result of many many poor decisions by our government for the past 20 or more years.

So, we need to ask ourselves - what has happened to our country that we are in such terrible shape? I believe people are fundamentally good, so how can things be so bad?

My feeling is we have lost our democracy. 1% of the population buys their representation and 99% are left with the scraps. Our government no longer hears the voice of its people. The hear and act in the interest of the 1% that pays billions of dollars for their campaigns and elections. Money speaks too loudly in our government and it has diminished our democracy.

We need to get the money out of the political process by establishing publicly funded campaigns and elections. So the voices of the 99% can be heard again!

[-] 2 points by Bongo (6) 13 years ago

Until you have ONE leader with ONE demand you're just ranting, making noise, and won't be taken seriously. Ohhh, and BTW, you don't represent the 99%

[-] 1 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

Yes but we don't have to worry about our leader being assasinated like so many others that speak out for change.

[-] 2 points by annecurrey (30) 13 years ago

Because the super wealthy fix it that way. They want it that way. Give the masses crumbs and get them to turn on one another. The rich are ALL in bed together. It's not just the rich bankers, it's the rich Hollywood pigs who have the gall to come and join the protests when THEY are part of the problem. It's the motion picture industry, silicon valley, politicians and that INCLUDES our president who takes millions from Wall St. Get real people and wake up. It's us vs them and they are ALL in bed together.

[-] 1 points by Lork (285) 13 years ago

I've come up with a theory based on everything I experience, based on others' experiences and such -

http://occupywallst.org/forum/job-theory-still-polishing-it-a-bit-will-need-your/

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 13 years ago

I have a job. I'm trying to find one that pays better.

It doesn't exist. One job which you had to have a college degree for offered me 8.50 an hour? What a joke. How can I live on 8.50 an hour? How can I live on 10? I have student loans to pay and a life to live. We are not on Earth to work 80 hours a week. They can get 40 hours a week from me and in return I expect a pay I can live on prosperously. And when i say that I mean the following

I should be able to afford a decent home. I should be able to afford transportation. I should have healthcare. I should have 3 healthy meals a day (or 6 small meals a day) I should be able to have fun with friends on the weekends.

Is that too much to want in life?

I think that's all this movement is wanting to WORK for.

There's so many things that need to change.

[-] 2 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

Perfect trevor... The american dream. We don't want to be rich, just to be able to live our lives comfortably and freely.

[-] 1 points by Lork (285) 13 years ago

I have a theory and I need your opinion on it especially since this is a response to TechJunkie's asshole anti-human post -

http://occupywallst.org/forum/job-theory-still-polishing-it-a-bit-will-need-your/

[-] 2 points by mreynolds (26) 13 years ago

Yes I am conservative and I agree with you. And there are lot of problems in the banking industry and corporate structure. They also have done a lot of good too though. It takes a tremendous amount of organization to develop the computers we are all using now, and IBM, Apple, Verizon, and all the rest are the ones who made it happen.

And there is a lot of immorality among the people in these companies. But what Obama and the Democrats have done is extremely irresponsible. We all heard Obama criticize Bush for the Deficit, well Obama has made it much worse. And we have to pay it back. Even if the rich end up paying the interest (which is a big maybe) that's still money they'll be paying that we can't use for something else. And we have nothing to show for this deficit spending. Mainly it made Obama's friends rich.

It shouldn't be extremely hard to find a job. However if it's impossible for people to invest money, start a business, and make a profit, the only way to get a job will be to know someone in the government

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

"It takes a tremendous amount of organization to develop the computers we are all using now"

Yes it does take a tremendous amount of work to keep the computers and the mobile devices and the Internet working. That means JOBS. Learn appropriate skills and you can easily have one.

[-] 2 points by SIBob (154) from Staten Island, NY 13 years ago

It is not only the quantity of employment that is the problem. It is the quality. I mean, we had our borough president, James "Labor Is Killing Us" Molinaro in Staten Island bragging about bringing 'Trader Joes' employment to us. Great job, way to bring home the bacon. http://sibob.org/wordpress/?p=8012

[-] 1 points by jeepman133 (14) 13 years ago

The vast majority of Americans are what i refer to as sheeppeople. content to let things be until circumstances affect them directly. the horrible decision making on the part of our politicians has affected our standard of living to the point where the sheeppeople are now becoming lions and are pissed off and want change. i am in my 50's and this movement is long overdue. jobs what jobs? there all overseas.

[-] 1 points by angelofmercy (225) 13 years ago

www.craigslist.com there is a Jobs section.

[-] 1 points by e000 (371) 13 years ago

They're not missing the point. They're representing their perspective. Some people don't know how to do that without being aggressive, but that's what they're doing.

[-] 1 points by Howtodoit (1232) 13 years ago

Yes I agree and would like to throw in my two cents;

It's Time for a Million People March on Washington, D.C. to Reform Wall Street--Time to take back our Country from their Influence over OUR lawmakers! Here's how easily we can do it, a focused good start: Take away their powers "once again."

"We are here Congress because we want to REINSTATE the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wX which saved our country from the Great Depression by preventing banks and insurance companies from merging and becoming large brokerage firms; instead of Banks and Insurance companies--can't we learn a history lesson here Congress? Btw, why did most of you vote for its repeal in 1999? http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/

And also we want you to CHANGE the Commodities Future Modernization Act of 2000http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000 BACK to where it was before 2000, which since has deregulated energy markets and has allowed such scams as The Enron Loophole; whereas in the early 2000's Enron Corp. was charging 400 bucks plus for a kilowatt hour...They all when to jail for this. But, the Enron loophole is still not CLOSED, for example, allowing speculators to resell barrels of oil over and over again before it reaches the gas station owner. It's basically, legal gambling at our expense. What were those lawmakers thinking then? What are you thinking now? Either do the right thing, or you're part of 1%."

Reasons:

Why are oil prices high? The Enron Loophole

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbdtTGYQBMU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNp0y0SjOkY&feature=related

Rolling Stones Reporter: Truth about Goldman Sachs--how they have cornered the markets--basically, The Enron Loophole and the Repeal of Glass-Steagall Act in 1999. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waL5UxScgUw

[-] 1 points by Patron32 (79) 13 years ago

My mother was a child during the depression. She has told me many stories of how life used to be then. So many men would leave their homes and children behind out of shame, and the desire to go long distances so as not to be considered a "slacker". We must try to keep our living rooms civil while the demise of consumerism is going on. Once the dust clears, the old notions of success and "having your stuff together" will have dramatically changed. Thanks for posting! Keep it up. I feel for you, I deal with it myself daily.

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/94223

[-] 1 points by Couchboy (8) 13 years ago

"Goldman Sachs lost money on just one trading day in the first quarter, according to a securities filing on Tuesday. 5/10/11"

Let the naysayers explain how this is possible

[-] 1 points by poul (5) 13 years ago

if you stuff the white house with your people, it's not just possible, it's quite easy.

[-] 1 points by sundog (14) from Essex Fells, NJ 13 years ago
[-] 1 points by atheitarian (9) 13 years ago

If you want a job, go out and make one. Your problem is you want somebody else to give it to you.

[-] 1 points by jonvonleaderhosen (50) 13 years ago

What exactly are the changes that this movement is advocating for? I've seen the news coverage of it, but can't seem to decypher the cause. I realize the 99% represents those that are not rich, and the 1% represents those that are rich. What exactly does this movement want the 1% to do differently for the benefit of the 99%? The success of corporate America determines the amount of jobs they are able to provide. Labor unions and government regulations drive up the cost of doing business and decrease capital that could otherwise be used to create more jobs. It seems like if more jobs is the goal of this movement; the protests should be aimed at the government and at unions. I guess I am just confused about the purpose of this cause, but I am interested to know more about it so I can make an informed opinion on whether I am for or against it.

[-] 1 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

Stop buying our government officials for their benefit and profit. For our officials to Stop arguing about abortion, marriage, and small minded little things, and focus on stuff like our economy! Pay their taxes and stop using thier business and loopholes and offshore accounts to get out of paying it. Basically just to sum it up, we all want something a little different, but our main goal is to see change in what wallstreet and our government is doing now. Were losing our freedoms and livelihoods and it's not ok anymore.

[-] 1 points by shay (15) from Amsterdam, NY 13 years ago

Anyone who is dismissing us, is either part of the 1% who is scared that they won't be able to buy our government anymore or does not take the time to research and learn what we stand for and depends upon the main stream (corporate bought and run) media to tell them what their opinions on Occupy Wall Street should be.

[-] 1 points by deeber (4) from Hanover, NH 13 years ago

Most corporations are making profits without creating more jobs, which works well for them and their investors. They may ship jobs overseas or automate, or just make fewer people do more work, but on the whole they are not creating jobs. The total number of new jobs created in this country does not keep up with the total number of new workers. Not everyone has the intelligence or talent to be an investment banker or a stockbroker.

[-] 1 points by chance2011 (3) 13 years ago

OccupyWallStreet Times Square Billboards. 20k VOTES gets us a billboard. http://goo.gl/EQuBp Please Vote & Share.

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 13 years ago

Mass production, demands mass consumption, but people can’t afford to consume if the wealth an economy generates is concentrated at the top. In consequence, as in a poker game, where the chips are concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other people can stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit runs out, the game stops.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8708) 13 years ago

Sadly, those people don't really care about anything but themselves and don't want to be disturbed in their cozy, narcissistic, slumber.

[-] 1 points by oceanweed (521) 13 years ago

end bush tax cuts , rebuild America bridges and roads , invest in middle class not banking class thats the occupy wall street message.

[-] 1 points by Ascension13 (46) from Tampa, FL 13 years ago

The media is admitting to 9.1 percent unemployment. What they don't tell you is they get those numbers by counting the number of people collecting unemployment benefits. The benefits only last so long.. a year I think? 18 months? After that you stop recieving them, job or not, and you're no longer counted as unemployed,

All those homeless people you see with signs like "I just need a job!" Aren't counted as unemployed. God only knows what the true unemployment rate is.

A bit off subject.. but I'd make a habit of directing any homeless you see to the local OWS protest. They're already used to being out in the cold for days, and at least there they'll get a share of any donated food.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

The unemployment rate for people with college degrees is less than five percent, which is close to full employment. (source: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm )

[-] 1 points by ojosdelangel77 (33) from Fort Smith, AR 13 years ago

Ah yes but as the link before you said that is not even an accurate count of unemployment let alone college degreed unemployed

[-] 1 points by LOVEPEACE (199) 13 years ago

There ARE lots of JOBS. In the military. That is why they have engineered the fake "crash" as a pretext for war. That is how his works. DEMAND PEACE NOW. Because they have a job for everyone. It's called war. And their new franchise is world wide. WWIII. Wake up everyone. Demand PEACE NOW.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah757 (9) 13 years ago

It’s pretty silly to suggest that the government engineered epic unemployment just to force people into the army, especially when the army is laying people off.

[-] 1 points by LOVEPEACE (199) 13 years ago

Right because we don't enforce our economic policy with violence and war. They won't have to force people when people can't buy food and believe they are about to be killed by our "enemies". That is how war goes. Don't believe me? Don't stand up for Peace now and unfortunately this is what is going to happen.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

why is OWS missing the point? where is the wiki and 1001 sub forums?

where is the paradigm shift?

why can't you all do your homework and thus not have to deal with the lower level base line trolling?


http://occupywallst.org/forum/corporate-oligarchy/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/thetruth-socialismcapitalismcommunismmarxism/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-versus-corporatism/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/no-war/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/help-me-understand/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-a-love-story/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/sociology/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/energy-101-solution/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ethics/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/break-your-left-right-conditioning/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/nader-kucinich-and-paul/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/5-facts-you-should-know-about-the-wealthiest-one-p/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/i-am-homeless-joe-jp-morgan-chase-accidentally-for/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/can-we-end-the-fed/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-end-the-federal-reserve-and-what-do-you-replac/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/where-are-we-and-how-do-we-move-forward/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/things-wall-st-did-were-not-illegal/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/teaching-the-occupation/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-forum-needs-structure/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-not-your-personal-billboard-for-your-politi/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/systems-theory-primer/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/organize-inform-take-action-effect-change/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/better-website-needed/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-playing-the-devils-games/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/nonviolence-the-only-path/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-not-against-capitalism/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-is-not-about-political-stripe-it-is-about-bas/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/national-initiative-for-democracy/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-third-political-party-the-movement-of-the-middle/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/300-fema-camps/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-a-false-flag-operation/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-this-will-not-work/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/paradigm-shift-now/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-proposal-for-focus/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-the-bullshit-posts-and-get-organized/

[-] 1 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

Wonder if people are also aware of the recent exposure of classified ads stating "must be employed" to apply for this job?

How does an unemployed person find work if that's the case?

[-] 1 points by jjrousseau714 (59) 13 years ago

Stiglitz and Krugman know the way

[-] 1 points by kilroy (58) from Orlando, FL 13 years ago

Jobs have been shipped over seas or eliminated thru technology. Jobs alone is not the answer. We need a new economy that allows everyone to participate to the best of their ability and be rewarded as such. Not SOCIALISM or COMMUNISM and not CAPITALISM.We need the 21st century ism. A new paradigm for the evolving world. To the brilliant people of the world define an economy that will provide for everyone but encourage the best to do better and reward them accordingly.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Every time that a job is eliminated through technology, new, higher-paying jobs are created. I created a software product that automates work that was previously handled by low-skilled office workers. As that product sells, and eliminates low-skilled jobs, it creates ever-increasing demand for higher-skilled, higher-paying jobs. Software developers, graphic designers, technical writers, technical sales, tech support.

Our economy can't create new jobs without innovation. Innovation eliminates low-skill jobs and creates high-skill jobs. The way to stay employed is to learn new job skills.

[-] 1 points by chuckhanger (19) 13 years ago

I get between four and ten job offers a week for $50,000 - $80,000 (I am a .NET developer), but every single one of them wants me to quit school (I am excelling in an MIT program) which I will not do. They want me to make them $4 million a day while they give me $80,000 a year. No thanks, I can make more on my own. I am already looking at companies in other countries because the ones here only care about money (it's sickening). They don't care about this country's progress, so why should I care about these companies?

[-] 1 points by Esposito (173) 13 years ago

If I had your skills I'd start my own company.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Mets, you are right - our manufacturing economy has been shipped overseas at the same time that many white-collar jobs have been outsourced. This is part of the crisis.
People on this forum who are saying folks are lazy and should 'get a job' only have room to say that because they are lucky enough to still have a means of support and they personally haven't been affected yet.
We are in a global depression. Greece's next default, which will be very soon, will trigger the chain reaction that will bring down our economy and the world. See the Greek depression http://rt.com/programs/keiser-report/central-bank-finance-crisis/ I believe as this collapse unfolds, we will return to a local economy - local schools, local politicians, local food, local organization, local currencies. Even the state is too big of an entity to be responsive to the people. The views here are too diverse to take a one-size-fits-all approach. And Washington DC is broken - they are stealing everything and screwing everything up from afar.
If we had sound money, local economies - everyone could trade labor/skills and produce some things on their own, barter with other people. America has some of the most vast natural resources on the planet.

[-] 1 points by antonio (4) 13 years ago

People are missing point because, they are once again, being mis-lead. This organization, although a just cause, is using the same scare tactics as our governments. END OF CAPITALISM, this is their point, it's not to find you a new job.

Occupy says greed is not the problem???? then whats the problem...the system....okay "rage against the machine" burn-outs (please no disrespect to "rage" fans, but this movment is boreing and indecisive. Thats why people are missing the poit, the point is not clear, and may never be.

BTWY most of us do have jobs.

www.inspiringcreativeawareness.com

[-] 1 points by antonio (4) 13 years ago

People are missing point because, they are once again, being mis-lead. This organization, although a just cause, is using the same scare tactics as our governments. END OF CAPITALISM, this is their point, it's not to find you a new job.

Occupy says greed is not the problem???? then whats the problem...the system....okay "rage against the machine" burn-outs (please no disrespect to "rage" fans, but this movment is boreing and indecisive. Thats why people are missing the poit, the point is not clear, and may never be.

BTWY most of us do have jobs.

www.inspiringcreativeawareness.com

[-] 1 points by messinan (11) 13 years ago

Would you be willing to spend say, $500 for a TV set that costs $ 100 if it comes from China ?????

[-] 1 points by messinan (11) 13 years ago

The only way we'll get jobs is if America has something to sell !

[-] 1 points by SmallBizGuy (378) from Savannah, GA 13 years ago

As long as everyone here views the "job creators" as evil and greedy, you won't find many people willing to "step-up" and create jobs.

[-] 1 points by wherezyoheadat (1) 13 years ago

it's because you have no leader, no concise message and include ridiculous stuff in your "demands" like have an equal rights amendment when there already is one. The rampant filth from your protestors not cleaning up after themselves doesn't help either. Some of your point are valid but no one is communicating them in an organized way... Seems like it's turning into a giant party, not a meaningful protest

[-] 1 points by BringBackGlassSteagallAct (67) 13 years ago

You all are great! I feel the only way we can get back on safe financial footing again is to close the Enron Loophole for oil speculators and bring back The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which prevented the current banking and insurance scams/loopholes. After all, it worked great until late 90's when Congress threw it out. Since then, like prior to 1933, we are experiencing what our country went though then, total Wall Street greed with no penalties, its all legal now...Thanks to the architects of our new system in 1999, President Clinton and Senator Gramm. Cheers to all that are involved! Jim

Why we need Glass-Steagall to be reinstated:

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wXj http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/

Why are oil prices high?

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wXj http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/

[-] 1 points by Danimal98367 (188) from Port Orchard, WA 13 years ago

Yes, go get a job. But if you expect me to hire you at wages that will quickly wipe out your student loans you're fooling yourself stupider.

I don't hire people just because they got a useless Liberal Arts degree. And I don't pay you more for a college degree than a High School degree when the job doesn't require you to know about Pre-Romantic Era Literature of China.

So sorry, but you wasted a lot of money learning a lot of nonsense. Now you're wasting a lot of time complaining and turning your nose up at entry level jobs because they don't pay enough for iPhones, AND an unlimited data plan when you have to also have Netflix, Cable TV, an internet connection, a laptop, a triple latte twice a day, designer cloths, and concert tickets every weekend.

For the 5 of you left who are skilled and humble enough to take an entry level job and work your way up, move to a right-to-work state. We're hring more than the union states.

[-] 2 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

I LOVE this!! As a college student myself, I find that a lot of my peers are more concerned with obtaining a degree that is more of a hobby than a skill. Personally, I love to read, draw pretty pictures, and sing. However, I know these things are great hobbys and enjoyments in my life, NOT careers. I am currently obtaining a degree in accounting with intentions of becoming a CPA. One of my roommates, however, is a liberal arts major who gets to draw pretty pictures for her finals, while I am burning my eyes learning about tax laws, financial statements, etc.

In addition to studying accounting, did I mention I work full-time and I am 22 years old? My roommate constantly complains about not having enough money to buy food, however, she told the restaurant she works at that she can only work 3 days a week and she goes clubbing every weekend, has an iPhone, and just purchased a brand new, expensive T.V.

This is only one example of the many people my age I have encountered who are not willing to give up a lifestyle or take time away from their social life in order to achieve success. I have found most individuals my age become "content" living off of other people and making excuses for why they cannot take care of themselves.

[-] 1 points by Danimal98367 (188) from Port Orchard, WA 13 years ago

That is an example of the 2 great traps of our day.

Trap #1 - You deserve everything you want RIGHT NOW. No need to scrimp and save and work for it, you've earned it, baby!

Trap #2 - College degrees that do not train job skills are still worthy investments. Businesses fell for this trap too. More and more people were entering the job market with degrees so businesses started seeing value in a degree, any degree, over non-degree applicants. For a shortwhile this may have been a legitimate thought, but it perpetuated bad education. It helped create the culture of a degree, any degree is valuable. Now businesses are learning that Liberal Arts degrees aren't giving them harder working/ better capable employees. And they cannot pay more than if the person didn't have a degree . . . which strains the person who just wasted 4 years and took out $60k in loans poorly.

[-] 1 points by WorldFreedom (62) 13 years ago

Jobs are of the old paradigm because they are an instrument of control.

OWS is all about Being The Change You Wish To See In The World.

As soon as you start to use old paradigm words and concepts such as "leader", spokesman", "left", "right" "demands" and so on and so on, you betray the very Ethos of OWS and the embryonic movement is lost. The "mainstream media will see to that..

The old paradigm has totally failed. It does not work, never has worked, and can only bring misery and inequality, and eventually enslavement.

Trying to incorporate all or part of the old paradigm will not bring the changes we wish for.

The people on the ground at OWS are Living That Change, and doing so beautifully and perfectly in the spirit of the movement on the ground.

Please stop being an airmchair actyivist and demanding that OWS should conform to your ideals in accordance with your own needs.

Please Can We Simply Be The Change We Wish To See In The World, which requires no thought or effort - It Is Our Natural State of Being.

[-] 1 points by theainavl (124) from Asheville, NC 13 years ago

Because people are finger pointing assholes. They made it, they drank the magic juice and they are ok, so hey, you must be too! Its stupidity, they will bitch about the healthcare system but do nothing. Complacency gets you nowhere.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

don't get so frustrated. most of them know it's nonsense. people with agendas know on some level they are wrong by complicity for security or using politics to further a theological position in a religiously pluralized country, they have to say something based on the issue they are attaching it to even if they know it not to be true.

[-] 1 points by JudyR (3) 13 years ago

We need to also consider the quality of the jobs we want. Most jobs today involve creating things that people don't really need, that pollute the environment, and that are ugly. We need jobs creating things and services that meet human needs and that are also beautiful. People need to experience some pleasure and creative satisfaction in their work. Who wants to spend their life making plastic bags, air "fresheners," polyester clothing, etc., etc.

[-] 1 points by JeffBlock2012 (272) 13 years ago

I can see both sides of the discussion. I recently read of several farmers who reduced their annual request for immigrant workers under our government's temporary visa program, thinking with local unemployment being so high they could complete their crews with local workers. Most reported that the first day of harvesting, most of the Americans didn't come back after lunch. These farmers reported that with the now shortfall of hands, they don't know how they'll get their crops fully harvested. Granted, picking cucumbers in the field is very hard work.

But also I believe it's only a theory that a capitalistic economy expands to provide (good) jobs for all who seek a job. What if we simply don't need everyone to work to provide ALL of the goods and services needed by our society? Are jobs obsolete? http://articles.cnn.com/2011-09-07/opinion/rushkoff.jobs.obsolete_1_toll-collectors-robots-jobs?_s=PM:OPINION

I do not pretend to have the "answer". I'm in a minority of people who have created my own job, my own business, but have no idea what I would do if I had to seek employment in today's market...

[-] 1 points by JudyR (3) 13 years ago

We need to also consider the quality of the jobs we want. Most jobs today involve creating things that people don't really need, that pollute the environment, and that are ugly. We need jobs creating things and services that meet human needs and that are also beautiful. People need to experience some pleasure and creative satisfaction in their work. Who wants to spend their life making plastic bags, air "fresheners," polyester clothing, etc., etc.

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

Products are created based on the needs and wants of the people purchasing them. We are creating exactly what we want. This is how our economy is driven. It is called 'demand'. When a product or type of want is demanded, it creates an opportunity for an individual or a group of individuals to invent or put together the product to fill that demand. This demand creates jobs and provides the people with what they want.

No one is going to create a product or offer a service if it is not demanded. That would be a stupid business venture.

Nobody 'wants' to spend their life making plastic bags or air fresheners, but people do WANT to work in order to satisfy their own needs and wants.

At the end of the day, a job is a job. It is what you make of it. You can hate your job or you can love your job. It is completely up to you. Life is what you make it.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

Advertising agencies learned how to create artificial demand for products decades ago...

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

You are so dumb... artificial demand? No such thing... people purchase what they want to purchase. If I go to the store, no one forces me or tells me to buy something. Advertising is a means of getting a product to people and making them aware it exists. No one forces you to purchase what you don't want. Artificial demand? Where do you come up with this bullshit? haha... this is funny.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

I'm the dumb one?

Nobody is forcing you to buy anything, but they are using every trick in the book to try to convince you both on a conscious and subconscious level that you need their product, regardless of whether you actually do need it or not, or previously wanted it or not. If your not aware of this while your shopping then you as might as well be a zombie.

I'm not saying we need to do away with advertising but you should at least understand the basic principle of how it works.

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

Oh gosh, your right. Advertising agencies must have subconciously got in to my head and told me purchase a new car. I didn't want it. Therefore, I should protest against those evil banks for giving me that loan! I must have signed my name 15 times, but it was the advertising agencies and those mean awful banks that forced me to do it! Damn you evil advertisers and banks!

[-] 1 points by earthofus (4) 13 years ago

more and more our futures would get worse, if we should think nowaday's generally accepted principle(=only royal,contented 1% can get most goods for 99%...) is natural! But, I think, and I believe that realility is like that ; the world is made, and had been made, and has been made, and will have been, by 99%, not only 1%!!

[-] 1 points by earthofus (4) 13 years ago

more and more our futures would get worse, if we should think nowaday's generally accepted principle(=only royal,contented 1% can get most goods for 99%...) is natural! But, I think, and I believe that realility is like that ; the world is made, and had been made, and has been made, and will have been, by 99%, not only 1%!!

[-] 1 points by earthofus (4) 13 years ago

more and more our futures would get worse, if we should think nowaday's generally accepted principle(=only royal,contented 1% can get most goods for 99%...) is natural! But, I think, and I believe that realility is like that ; the world is made, and had been made, and has been made, and will have been, by 99%, not only 1%!!

[-] 1 points by earthofus (4) 13 years ago

more and more our futures would get worse, if we should think nowaday's generally accepted principle(=only royal,contented 1% can get most goods for 99%...) is natural! But, I think, and I believe that realility is like that ; the world is made, and had been made, and has been made, and will have been, by 99%, not only 1%!!

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 13 years ago

The people saying that are trolling for attention. It's simple enough rule... DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!

Ignore them and start concentrating on growing the movement and building bridges between one another. We need to build unity, regardless of party affiliation, or ideology.

We need to concentrate on ideas/goals/objectives that 99% of Americans would support.

[-] 1 points by genanmer (822) 13 years ago

Exactly what is the point of obtaining a job? It's to obtain money.

And what's the purpose of money? To obtain goods and services required to survive as well as 'perks'.

Jobs are not only being outsourced to other countries. They are now being automated by machines that are even more efficient than slave labor.

Most jobs can be automated which would mean more efficiency in creating the goods and services we need and desire. It creates abundance. Unfortunately, money requires scarcity in order to function.

So either we create a whole new system centered around maximizing sustainable abundance and distribute this wealth freely

OR we continue relying on money as means of unequal distribution and we continue our competition over resources.

The alternative to jobs and money is to become self-sustaining.

[-] 1 points by Markmad (323) 13 years ago

Perhaps because they do have family members working on wall street and fell the need to restore their reputation. Let’s face if you or anyone in your family do work for these institutions you must know very well how these banks and financial institution do run their business because you’re the one actually doing the stilling and therefore should be treated as a criminal.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 13 years ago

they realize that some expression of peaceful protest against the rape of America is absolutely necessary.

What do the Occupiers want? Mainly Economic Justice!

To get economic justice, you must have monetary justice and the American Monetary Institute has been working at gaining monetary justice since 1996. Their research results, The Lost Science of Money by Stephen Zarlenga, demonstrate that decades of research and centuries of experience shows that three things are absolutely needed: 1) The present form of the Federal Reserve System must be ended - it must become a part of our government - what people mistakenly think it is now! In the Treasury Department is best. 2) The accounting privilege that banks now have to create what we use for money out of debt, must stop once and for all. What's called fractional reserve banking must be decisively ended. 3) The Congress must understand and be empowered to create new money and spend it into circulation as money, not debt. For example the $2.2 trillion dollars the Engineers tell us is needed for infrastructure over the next 5 years. As the system progresses, health care and education, and grants to the states are made.

[-] 1 points by Nanoatzin (23) from Santa Paula, CA 13 years ago

Anyone else notice that one month after SB 1070 passed in Arizona that the US job market suddenly stopped improving while other states did the same thing?

This kind of immigration policy is messing up the housing and job market.

If we gave those 10-20 million illegals the boot tomorrow ... there would be millions of empty residences across the country ... taxes would go unpaid ... foreclosures would go up … http://lenderama.com/2007/12/29/illegal-immigration-and-the-housing-market/

This becomes obvious when you look at the drop in consumer demand caused by SB 1070 inside Arizona, and similar destructive policies began in many other states at the same time.

Vendors say illegal immigration crackdown prompted Mesa Swap Mart's closing http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizona/immigration/article_f1f25e2c-80b1-11df-995d-001cc4c002e0.html

Meanwhile, the economy of Mexico is improving.

In Mexico, an energized economy raises hopes. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-02-10-Mexicorising_N.htm

Mexican President says countries economy getting better http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Mexican-president-says-country-s-economy-getting-1734927.php

The US recession and the Mexican boom correspond with illegal immigrants leaving the US and going to Mexico.

Illegal immigrant population declines 1.7 million at the beginning of the recession http://www.cis.org/IllegalImmigration-ShiftingTide

Seems fairly obvious that illegal immigrants are taking their consumer demand with them back to Mexico when they leave the country, and that this is one source of the decline in consumer demand that is causing unemployment in the US and economic prosperity in Mexico.

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

"If we gave those 10-20 million illegals the boot tomorrow ... there would be millions of empty residences across the country ... taxes would go unpaid"

-- Taxes are going unpaid... this is the reason these immigration laws exist

[-] 1 points by Nanoatzin (23) from Santa Paula, CA 13 years ago

The #1 problem with the economy is reduced consumer demand, and our immigration laws are the #1 reason for reduced consumer demand.

Illegal aliens are taking their consumer demand with them when they return to Mexico, and that reduced consumer demand is causing unemployment.

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

Wrongo... Consumer demand is being driven down because people are losing their jobs. People are losing their jobs thanks to our awesome government and its horrendous policies.

Give business owners back their money, people will start getting their jobs back, and consumer demand will go UP!

[-] 1 points by noism (78) from Seattle, WA 13 years ago

Don't take it personally, a lot of these forums will evt. hopefully be modified, and redirected to the main point which is -GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION- this is still a new movement and everything new will have growing pains. :)

[-] 1 points by ffmbud2 (3) 13 years ago

how about if we all vote against any incumbent regardless of party. Throw all of them out. Most of them haven't had a real job in so many years, other than putting their out hand out to the lobbyists so they can keep their congressional positions. Lets have them find a job that's not working for a lobbyist law firm and see how hard it is. Vote out any incumbent with more than two terms of office!!!

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 13 years ago

By the way is anyone posting on this forum actually from the protests Im not.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

I am going to Zuccotti Park tomorrow for the first time with my camera. I gotta do something with that film degree.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 13 years ago

Good luck. Come back and post about what they say.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

I certainly will!

[-] 1 points by thesoulgotsoldontheroadtogold (148) 13 years ago

Ten years ago, at the age of 19, I could find a job easily. I want to work now just as much as I wanted to work then. And I have even better credentials on my resume than I did back then. But the jobs are nowhere to be found. Hard working, conscientious, college graduate with honors, never insubordinate at work. An employers dream. Who will hire me??? .... Yeah, that's what I thought.

[-] 1 points by jdog (146) 13 years ago

what is your degree/ area of expertise?

[-] 1 points by thesoulgotsoldontheroadtogold (148) 13 years ago

i have a bachelors of science, international business

[-] 1 points by jdog (146) 13 years ago

get your foot in the door somewhere, even if it is not what you need. it seems when you have a job it is easier to get a better one. keep pushing and a door should open.

and good luck!

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 13 years ago

the people that say things like that are paid to protest protesters. they are just monkeys making money opposing everything even their own freedom for money. the true sell outs.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

the answer is double think. we are less than one percent but easily more than the less than one percent we are actually in conflict with.

in order for us to become the 99 percent, obvious assorted mob psychology problems have to be solved. They can't be glossed over and every stripe of crack/meth/ideology group is another 10 percent of the population slaved to serve the corporate oligarchy THINKING that they are on their own team or side but fighting in ignorance for opinion based in ideology; not truth or science or evolutionary change just old ignorant stupid ideas dead men had centuries ago.

we have to do two things. Let all the sheeple know they have been duped and let them off the hook; and then fight them psychologically over it as they step into denial of whats obvious and true.

Formal logic gives a very simple answer. When your opponent attacks you personally, its because they don't have an answer to the issue you are raising.

The far right always looks for the victim to blame; on every issue.

Its easy for them to then say the poor are just lazy or whatever... its cognitive dissonance. look that up, its a kewl factoid word.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/thetruth-socialismcapitalismcommunismmarxism/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-versus-corporatism/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/help-me-understand/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-a-love-story/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/sociology/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/energy-101-solution/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ethics/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/break-your-left-right-conditioning/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/nader-kucinich-and-paul/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/5-facts-you-should-know-about-the-wealthiest-one-p/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/teaching-the-occupation/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-forum-needs-structure/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-not-your-personal-billboard-for-your-politi/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/systems-theory-primer/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/organize-inform-take-action-effect-change/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/better-website-needed/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-playing-the-devils-games/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/nonviolence-the-only-path/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-not-against-capitalism/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-is-not-about-political-stripe-it-is-about-bas/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/national-initiative-for-democracy/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-third-political-party-the-movement-of-the-middle/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/300-fema-camps/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-a-false-flag-operation/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-this-will-not-work/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/paradigm-shift-now/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-proposal-for-focus/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-the-bullshit-posts-and-get-organized/

[-] 1 points by ckreton15 (27) 13 years ago

ad hominem

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

It's funny, we're occupying Wall St. and the hater's are disregarding the current economic scenario. As if we're pissed off about the corruption, but we could give a fuck less about the state of the economy. Let's be clear, this protest is a direct result of the impending economic doom.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

thats our ace in the hole really. the economy is absolutely winding down entropically and i suppose thats the best reason why they are wasting their time protesting. It woud be smarter to spend their last dollars going in on land and seed stock so that they can eat when the system collapses.

Ultimately we do win this as the system must collapse, ie; the hardest thing about being a republican and facing an election now is that you have to deny all of manifest reality and the giant black clouds coming on the horizon.

As civilization winds down the hurt of it increases and the more pain there is the more wake up energy there is. Adversity paradox ensues. Ultimately its better for us if the system falters hard sooner rather than later because later there will be less energy in the system left to get out of the boiling pot.

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

haha! can't be so negative, that's why we're here: to fuck up the fucked up system, and bring about a system that doesn't know how to fuck up (for a while)

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

This is supposed to be the land of opportunity. That's the point... it's not anymore.

[-] 0 points by ExitWallStreet (4) 13 years ago

I am a hiring manager, and we are trying to fill positions all the time. Guess what, we have a hard time finding skilled people. I'm talking people who studied math, computer science.

Many of you are unemployed because you're young and unskilled, not because someone took the jobs away. You have to adapt to the changing landscape. Go learn a skill that is viable to today's service oriented, knowledge worker workplace.

It's hard because you guys are doing it wrong

[-] 0 points by beardy (282) 13 years ago

Because you are young, lazy and unemployed?

[-] 0 points by MimiNY (2) 13 years ago

I don't ever want to be considered one of YOUR 99%. I am a hard working middle-classer who considers herself lucky - yes, blessed! - to be living in America, where OPPORTUNITY is guaranteed. But riches are not. You have to earn your riches through hard work, doing jobs you may not like but you have to start someone. I refuse to take handouts from my fellow citizens; rather, I prefer to work for what I have and to share my good fortune as I see fit. As a group, you are woefully ignorant about how free enterprise and capitalism work. Take a business class! If you feel that "share the wealth" is the right way to go, then live in a failed country that follows that philosphy. Leave America to the industrious, like Steve Jobs. Why haven't you ever attacked him for his enormous wealthy, his dominance of that industrial space/market? I'll tell you why: because he created your "toys" for your enjoyment. Stop being selfish, stop being ego-centric, and stop demonizing the successful. Stop suffocating the industrious! We are the ones who create the very things you enjoy, like iPhones, sleeping bags, parks, food, social media, planes, clothes, etc. You are sadly mistaken if you think banks are the evil behind your problems. Government regulations - and regulations that are not enforced - are the problems. Anarchism will not stand in this country, nor will socialism. Take your fight somewhere else.

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

Well said!

The problem is... there are too many complainers who, like their video games, expect a "cheat code" and are not willing to play the game!

[-] 0 points by MimiNY (2) 13 years ago

I don't ever want to be considered one of YOUR 99%. I am a hard working middle-classer who considers herself lucky - yes, blessed! - to be living in America, where OPPORTUNITY is guaranteed. But riches are not. You have to earn your riches through hard work, doing jobs you may not like but you have to start someone. I refuse to take handouts from my fellow citizens; rather, I prefer to work for what I have and to share my good fortune as I see fit. As a group, you are woefully ignorant about how free enterprise and capitalism work. Take a business class! If you feel that "share the wealth" is the right way to go, then live in a failed country that follows that philosphy. Leave America to the industrious, like Steve Jobs. Why haven't you ever attacked him for his enormous wealthy, his dominance of that industrial space/market? I'll tell you why: because he created your "toys" for your enjoyment. Stop being selfish, stop being ego-centric, and stop demonizing the successful. Stop suffocating the industrious! We are the ones who create the very things you enjoy, like iPhones, sleeping bags, parks, food, social media, planes, clothes, etc. You are sadly mistaken if you think banks are the evil behind your problems. Government regulations - and regulations that are not enforced - are the problems. Anarchism will not stand in this country, nor will socialism. Take your fight somewhere else.

[-] 2 points by MyHeartSpits (448) 13 years ago

"It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

[-] 0 points by Wymarra (21) from Long Beach, NY 13 years ago

There are jobs out there. You just have to lower your expectations and be prepared to be work hard and get out of your comfort zone, work 60-70 hours a week, travel 3 hours one way, do something that repulses you and do it for as long as it takes. Good things will happen to you if YOU make the sacrifice, nothing is handed out in life (except food stamps).

[-] 0 points by SmallBizGuy (378) from Savannah, GA 13 years ago

Quit looking for a job, and go create some jobs. Waiting around for the government to create jobs, or businesses to start hiring will only make you more frustrated. Creating jobs is much more gratifying.

[-] 2 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

I can't just snap my fingers and create jobs. Starting a business takes money. LOTS of money. I don't have any and the banks aren't loaning theirs out. If you could loan me $30,000 to start my business I'll be happy to create some jobs.

[-] 1 points by SmallBizGuy (378) from Savannah, GA 13 years ago

I can't snap my finger and create jobs either. It is very difficult to start a business in this economy (it is also difficult to run one). The banks would loan you the money if you can give them a good guarantee that you will pay it back (with interest). Don't fault the banks for using good business sense.

What business did you have in mind?

[-] 0 points by youngz101 (2) 13 years ago

if what you want is a job, then you're protesting the wrong people. picketing the people to provide jobs is not going to get you hired. try protesting the people who create the policies that are preventing companies from hiring new employees. you can find their leader at 1600 pennsylvannia avenue, washington d.c.

[-] 1 points by pinki (40) 13 years ago

Well Said!! :)

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 13 years ago

"picketing the people to provide jobs is not going to get you hired." They're not providing jobs, dipshit. Have you been paying any attention?? They've only downsized workers, lobbied congress, and given themselves bigger bonuses every year,

[-] 0 points by youngz101 (2) 13 years ago

if what you want is a job, then you're protesting the wrong people. picketing the people to provide jobs is not going to get you hired. try protesting the people who create the policies that are preventing companies from hiring new employees. you can find their leader at 1600 pennsylvannia avenue, washington d.c.

[-] 2 points by OccupyingAustin (33) 13 years ago

They're all owned by Wall Street. The movement is going to the root of the vine.

[-] 0 points by Rmarks1701 (103) 13 years ago

You know, there are jobs out there. They may not be the jobs you want, or even like, but there are jobs out there. Take for example the corrections industry, I have not yet come across a state, or a private institution that does not have job openings available. In fact the facility I work at, hires about 10 new people every other week.Now you would think that soon enough we would be saturated with jobs, but the problem is the nature of the job means that of those 10 people that start, by the time training has ended 4 will have left. After 6 months there may be one left, after 2 years there is maybe 1 left from that entire 6 months of new hires.

With a turn over like that, there is always a job opening.

[-] 4 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

The corrections industry? Don't even get me started. Private prisons shouldn't be legal.

[-] -1 points by Rmarks1701 (103) 13 years ago

You know people have a negative view of private prisons, they should not do. I work for a private prison, and let me tell you some facts.

  1. We get audited by the ACA (Amercian Corrections Association) every year, the people who audit us are former wardens, the red cross, teachers, police officers and a whole bunch of others. This is not a simple "walk around" either, this is a week long audit where they look into everything from how an officer is hired, the background checks required to be hired etc to how offenders are treated, how easy is medical access to get, how easy it is to make a complaint to those in authority etc, to how the food is cooked, how it is prepared and served to even the cleanliness of the facility. If the unit fails on just one area, it has 6 months to get things right or it is closed down.
  2. We get audited by (in the case of where I am) TDCJ, for the same things.
  3. We get audited by an independent panel from outside the state.
  4. We get audited by the state (and not the corrections arm either)
  5. We get audited by the federal goverment to make sure we are complying with their rules
  6. We get audited by another outside organization to make sure we are treating inmates humanly.
  7. We get audited by our own company to make sure we are following their rules (which are tough).

If we fail ANY of these inspections and audits, we can be closed own. we also have collage students who are getting their degree's in criminal justice walking around occasionally (and they will report abuses they see).

All in all, a single private facility like the one I work for will get about 16 inspections a year.

Now county jails on the other hand, they need to be looked at and held accountable.........

[-] 2 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

My problem with private prisons has nothing to do with the amount of inspections that they receive.

Private prisons make money off of incarcerating people. They have a lobby and influence legislation. They lobby for stricter penalties to harsher laws. This is fundamentally flawed and backwards.

[-] 1 points by Rmarks1701 (103) 13 years ago

You are right, private prisons do make money off incarcerating people, but then by the same token a private facility can actually incarcerate someone for less money than the state can.

As to the lobbying, I cannot comment on that. The facility where I work at is not designed, nor intended to be a long term facility. Instead we give the offenders programs and education to help them stay away from the drugs/drink and help them to learn to think in such a way that they can become useful members of society.

How successful are we? we are waiting at the moment for the study on recevidism to be done so we know where to make changes to improve the success rate.

If we were all about money, we would not be trying as hard as we are to do this.

[-] 2 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

YOU are not all about money. But your corporation is. Every corporation is. That's the nature of a corporation.

[-] 1 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

the private prison companies lobby for changes in the laws that will benefit them. think about what that means.

they also do research on factors in a community that will create more "opportunity" for them and then work on getting contracts in those communities

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 13 years ago

I find there's absolutely nothing wrong with your choice of an occupation in private prisons. But the fact that this is the industry which is doing well is a strong indicator of the underlying problems. As times get harder and the helpless are left with no other options, crime will inevitably increase. The mere fact that incarcerations tend to increase in harder economic times indicates that these are people who would not turn to crime otherwise. Rather than having our governments invest in infrastructure, which may keep more people from becoming desperate enough to turn to crime, we're paying to have them incarcerated, which provides very little public benefit.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Our economy is creating plentiful jobs, they're just not the jobs that people want. The key is to align your skill set with the current economy so that you're qualified for the jobs that actually exist. Low-skill jobs are being eliminated, and replaced with high-skill jobs. Learn to build a web site, or to edit composite video, or to administer a Unix server. Many of these jobs are available to people with vocational training but no degree. You can qualify for a lot of them without any formal training at all. In many cases, the training can be completely free. For example, go to http://railsforzombies.com and you'll find free training that will qualify you for the THOUSANDS of available jobs that you'll find when you google "ruby on rails jobs". Just one simple example. No expensive college degree required. Only passion and ability. People around here are full of passion, at least.

One thing is certain: you're not going to find a job by hanging out with other jobless people in Zuccotti Park.

[-] 4 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

The competition for jobs in programming is incredibly stiff and the amount of jobs is dwindling.

Templates have killed graphic design jobs and templates, do-it-yourself CMS/shopping systems and overseas programmers have killed programming jobs.

I know programmers who have been out of work for over a year and can't even get interviews.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

I have written my own cms to compete with 1&1 and weebly and provide that power to freelance designers with a separate interface for the client(also customizable by the designer) and a backend editor for the designer. live editing. will be finished soon. holla@richardkentgates.com this will give freelancers the edge over corp design firms.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Can't you already do that with the free CMS systems like Joomla or Drupal?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

not hardly. they have one interface, no live editing you have to preview after changes, require modules unless you wana watch it struggle to cope with your custom scripts. save and load times are sooo slow. the list goes on. oh, and they are the biggest security risks outside windows, wordpress too. mine also doesn't use sql for a db so times are even faster. and user images don't require saving to file or db, they are saved as base64 on-page.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

what system is a faster record searching system than sql?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

flatfiles

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Interesting. I have been tempted in the past to avoid a db for certain tasks. But I can't imagine doing without it altogether. How do you do the equivalent of a complicated sql statement?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

thats a better conversation for a web dev forum. it's no dif than using sql, only you formulate the way it is stored and it doesn't require a secondary os like mysql to initialize before retrieving data, thats why i use flatfiles anyway.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Just a quick question, do you store each table in separate files or each record?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

flatfile are just that. an extensionles file or just even a .txt that you can row and table by using your directories or by "delimiters" look up php explode() and implode()

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

do you know of any sites that show bench tests in the difference between a db and flat files?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

stackoverflow.com

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

They must not be very good developers then, because for those of us who hire developers the biggest problem is a lack of qualified applicants. As a career developer for two decades, I know a lot of other developers. I don't know a single unemployed software developer. My every-day frustration is the lack of skilled American software nerds. While people on this site are talking about a recession, there is a boom happening in Internet technology that is forcing job creators like myself to hire foreigners. I don't hire Venezuelans because they're cheaper, because they're not. They make more than the average American hourly wage of $33/hour. I hire them because they can do it, and they're available, which is not a common combination among Americans.

[-] 3 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Maybe it is different in Miami but on Long Island there are 20 applicants for each job available. Getting a job is near impossible.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Miami is mostly service industry and its also full of people who refuse to learn new skills who are bitching about not being able to find jobs because they're all competing for the same jobs, just like in Long Island. Think outside of your box. The startup that I'm involved in right now, the one that's using Wall Street investment capital to create high-skill computer jobs, is in Las Vegas. One of the Venezuelans works from Mexico, the others are in Venezuela. The Swede works from Los Angeles. The Internet is an amazing thing, if you have the skills to take advantage of it.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

ah... so we educate everyone out of poverty right? so then who works at McDs? or are you taking the republican stance of continuing to disenfranchise 1/3 of the american population as surfs.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Please read what I just posted, a couple of post down, about the unemployment rate. There will always be more than enough low-skill, entry-level workers to work at fast food restaurants. The problem is that our economy needs more high-skill workers.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

if you work 40 then you should be able to provide without assistance, that is the entire point of a minimum wage.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

how many skilled job do we need? if educated would this fix unemployment and the fact that 47% make just enough to get by, not even enough to pay taxes or healthcare? how does that help people get off the system? you are still saying it's ok to f*k over the working class dude. no matter how you can it.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I'm not in the 1% so how could I be fucking the working class? I'm a guy who creates high-paying jobs. I'm a guy who is frustrated at the lack of applicants for those jobs that I'm successfully creating. Unemployment is only about FOUR PERCENT for people with college degrees. Thats solid proof that opportunities are available for the people who develop marketable skills.

Instead of speaking in the abstract, try this: do you think that digital photography was a bad thing? The innovation of digital photography made film nearly obsolete. How many factory workers in film plants lost their jobs because of digital photography? But at the same time, digital photography created new jobs and enabled entire new industries. Those new jobs tend to be higher-skill jobs than the film factory jobs, and they also tend to pay better. Is digital photography somehow an example of Wall Street "fucking over" the working class?

A normal part of an expanding economy (an economy that creates jobs) is creative destruction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction New innovations eliminate old jobs and create new ones. This is simply a fact of life. People who adapt succeed. People who insist that they are entitled to go through life without ever learning new job skills do not. This is not a new concept in 2011, and it isn't Wall Street's fault.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

you are still ignoring the working class. and let me help you understand something. Demand creates jobs. you people talk about this stuff like an art. It's F*ing numbers, there is no grey are their is no mysticism about it. what you do is fill that demand, you hire to fill the demand but you did not create the demand. none of your answer addresses how do get those working 40 hours a week on a sustainable economic platform. no gov cheese, no handouts. this gets people off the tax dime and boosts demand(the real job creator). if you do so create job, do it now, right now create 5,000,000 job. can't? thats because you don't create jobs.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Small businesses like the startup that I'm involved in are the ones creating most of the jobs. Small businesses created 65% of of the new jobs created over the last 15 years. (Source: http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/7495/8420 ) Telling a person who is actively creating new, high-paying jobs that they "don't create jobs" because they can't create five million jobs in one feel swoop is pretty silly.

Here's how "demand" works, with regard to job creation: I create demand for skills. Our company bootstrapped itself and is profitable, and each of the new jobs that I'm creating pays better than the average American hourly wage of $33/hour. Each of those jobs is a long-term, sustainable job, because our company is profitable. We're creating new demand for skilled workers. If those jobs aren't within reach of workers who aren't willing to learn new skills, then that has nothing to do with the demand for skilled workers that we're creating.

Once upon a time, it wasn't too hard to get a job simply by being literate. You could be a "secretary", which was a type of job that used to exist due to inefficiency. Innovation led to the creative destruction of those secretarial jobs, in the form of computers and mobile devices and the Internet. Now executives send their own emails from their iPhones and Blackberrys instead of having a low-skill worker type memos on pieces of paper to put into envelopes. Did our country lament the loss of the millions of secretarial jobs when that happened? Or did we celebrate all of the new, higher-paying jobs that innovation created?

You can't just refuse to adapt to a changing economy and then blame somebody else for your unemployment. Your marketability as a worker is your responsibility. It isn't Wall Street's responsibility to hand you a low-skill, high-paying job on a silver platter. But Wall Street IS doing a very good job of creating new high-skill, high-paying jobs, as evidenced by the 4% unemployment rate among people with college degrees.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

dude i won't talk with you on this any more. you are in some strange delusion of way more importance than you actually posses, also know as narcissism. you don't create jobs. demand creates jobs.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I create demand for skilled workers. When our startup company successfully markets our new product and people buy it, that creates ever-increasing demand for skilled workers. If not for small businesses doing what we're doing, 65% of the new jobs created in the last 15 years would not have been created. What bothers you is that the jobs that we're creating require skills that you don't have, and you're not willing to learn new skills and move into new industries. If you had been a secretary in the 80s and your job was eliminated in the 90s by computers, would you still be complaining today, 20 years later, that there aren't enough secretarial jobs? There aren't a lot of blacksmith jobs any more either. Anybody who chooses to complain that he can't get a job as a blacksmith instead of learning a new trade is simply failing.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

There is obviously not a problem on the demand side, or else our company would not be profitable, and we would not be hiring new people. Our economy is creating new demand for new things, and that demand creates new demand for high-skill workers. Low-skill workers lose out, so the obvious strategy is to develop new skills.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

look dude. it's not ok to leave anyone out. it's just not. and buying into this made up version of economics is how you are being used to balance things in favor of the top. you even kinda know it and admit it. bet you call yourself a christian don't you. i'm not ok with you or people that would stand by while another suffers. thats your thing and thats cool, but i don't like you.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Are you trying to make a case for why innovation is a bad thing?

Do you feel bad because blacksmiths have been left out? Why not? That used to be a pretty good gig, but now the entire profession is obsolete. Would we have been better off if the Industrial Revolution had not happened, so that blacksmiths could continue to practice their craft without having to adapt to changing times?

A long time ago, cloth "dyers" were in high demand. They had a very dangerous and difficult job, cramming cloth and dye into kettles. That profession is obsolete now. Now textile workers need a completely different skill set. They have to know how to operate machines. Looms, assembly-line machines, and computers. The new, high-skill jobs are safer and they pay better. Is this not a good thing?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

don't expect that i am buying your crap. you juke and jive like a politician, try to move the conversation before you have to back up what you just said or answer any questions. putting words in peoples mouths. i have family members like you, they're an embarrassment.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

That was ad-hominem. Job creation depends on the expansion of the economy. Expansion of the economy depends on innovation. Innovation not only creates new, high-skill, high-paying jobs; it also eliminates low-skill, low-paying jobs. It's called "creative destruction". Refute that instead of attacking me.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

demand only counts on an individuals needs. the population doesn't buy a toothbrush, an individual does. you guys keep trying to make this some mythical argument. 1 is 1 and 2 is 2 and no matter how much you talk, reality will not become what you say just because you say it.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

What did that have to do with what I said? What does an individual buying a toothbrush have to do with jobs? What does that have to do with obsolete blacksmithing jobs?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

really dude? i call you out about wandering with the conversation and you do it anyway. a.d.d. much.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I'm not wandering, I'm still talking about the original topic, which is jobs. I've been talking about innovation, creative destruction, and job creation. You labeled what I said as "made up economics" and said that it's not cool to leave anybody out. I responded that innovation naturally leads to low-skill workers getting left out, and that workers have to continue to develop new skills to stay relevant and employed. I provided the example of blacksmiths, a profession that innovation made obsolete. I asked: is it not a good thing that blacksmithing is an obsolete profession? You responded with an ad-hominem attack that had nothing to do with the conversation at hand. I stayed on-topic and summarized what I've been saying, and you responded with something about demand and individuals and toothbrushes that seems to have nothing at all to do with the topic at hand. I asked for clarification and you accused me of attention-deficit disorder. Are you capable of discussing this, or are you going to respond with another off-topic, ad-hominem attack?

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

hey guy, news flash, tech is going to replace the need for all labor and all but about 10% of us will be unemployed in the future. better start figuring out how the other 90% is going to survive when we get there. let me tell ya, understanding the basics like supply and demand is a good start. all the stuff you keep posting is not based on any real facts, only soundbytes. post everything you want but it will be the same i'm sure. do the research and post a link. you posted this "What bothers you is that the jobs that we're creating require skills that you don't have" php php-gd javascript xml html5 css3 and way back when, basic. also you are still in the delusion jobs are created out of thin air and refuse to admit without demand there is no job.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Obviously there IS a massive demand for web development jobs, or else why would I be struggling to find people to hire? Why would I be hiring Venezuelans? I pay them more than the average American worker earns, so it isn't to save money. If you're a web developer and you're unemployed then you're definitely doing something wrong, because the explosion in mobile web use has triggered the need for nearly every site on the web to be updated for mobile support. There are FAR more web development jobs available right now than applicants who can handle the work. If you're not able to find any listings then I can help: http://www.google.com/search?q=ruby+on+rails+jobs Web development, and the Ruby on Rails niche specifically, are just one example of a growth employment sector. Nursing is another. Health care in general. Technical writing, graphic design. There are jobs available for people willing to pursue them.

You're right about one thing: "better start figuring out how the other 90% is going to survive". You're finally acknowledging that unemployed people have a responsibility to find a way to survive, rather than expecting other people to solve their problems for them.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

no no, don't get confused. the burden is on all of us. when i cannot feed my kids with a job, be sure i will still feed my kids, this is reality.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

i did mention i'm a web developer? or what did you have in mind?

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

How can you call me a selfish bitch for creating high-paying jobs?

Are you going to fight to restore jobs for blacksmiths? For secretaries? For livery stable workers? None of those are promising vocations because of innovations that changed our economy and created other, newer types of jobs.

[-] 1 points by brokeandstarving (62) 13 years ago

i would like more information on how to gain access to what you are saying techjunkie.....seroiusly....do you have a website i can visit....i have read all of your posts and am very curious...i understand the concept you are talking about

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Yes, I can only make suggestions within the realm of what I personally know, but I do have a suggestion for a way to develop marketable job skills within a period of months. For free. Please visit http://railsforzombies.org if you think that you might be interested in web development. It's not as hard as you think, because technology is becoming more and more sophisticated. If you learn how to harness that technology then you will be very marketable, because there are far more web development projects in progress than there are sufficient web developers to work on them. You can see that by googling "Ruby on Rails jobs".

[-] 1 points by brokeandstarving (62) 13 years ago

interesting! thank you, i will check it out......i am someone in the workforce who falls into the category that you are talking about. my job skill is not equal to the job force. im 40 and its time to sink or swim...i choose to swim....im glad i ran across this thread and read it completely....maybe there is hope

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

The problem is that a lot of jobs have the same insufficient amount of openings to hire all the available workers. The BLS says there is 1 job opening for every 5 unemployed economy-wide.

Some people will benefit from learning a different skill. But when you are unemployed, broke or have a family to take of, going to school is not an option.

And even if everyone was able to get retrained, you still have far more unemployed than job openings. So you will remain unemployed, just with more student loan debt.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

The unemployment rate for people with college degrees is less than five percent, which is close to full employment. (source: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm ) which means that a very small percentage of people with student loans are stuck with no means of paying off their student loans. Despite the rhetoric from Occupy Wall Street protesters.

The fact that the unemployment rate is about 14% among people without high school diplomas, but about 4% for people with college degrees, is clear evidence of what I keep saying here: our economy is becoming more productive, which means that the low-skill jobs are being eliminated due to innovation and "creative destruction", and they're being replaced with high-skill jobs. The worker's responsibility when this happens is to develop new job skills and pursue the high-skill jobs. The low-skill jobs are not coming back. Face that and move on.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

The unemployment rate among recent graduates is 8%.

And the underemployment rate is usually double the unemployment rate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/business/economy/25gradjobs.html?pagewanted=all

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

From the article that you just posted:

"The 8 percent unemployment rate [for college graduates under age 25] is lower than the nation’s overall 9.9 percent jobless rate."

A person under 25 has an even better chance than the average American of any age, IF they have a college degree. This is more solid evidence that developing job skills does work, and that your future is in your own hands.

The attitude that I'm resisting is that of entitlement. You're not entitled to a job, you have to work for it. Those of us with jobs understand that. We've been working for our whole lives to get to where we are. Nobody handed my job to me. I literally created my own job, by developing marketable job skills and then tapping into un-met demand for the new kind of product that our startup company created.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

I agree that having a degree will give you a better chance at landing a job.

But I don't agree that you are not entitled to a job and that you have to make up your own job if necessary. That is crazy.

The economic system should give everyone a job and give them a job that pays them enough to live a good life. The degree to which it doesn't is the degree to which it is broken. Having a job to work is not a hand out!

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Our economy doesn't "give" people jobs, it creates opportunities. And it is doing that right now. What you make of those opportunities is up to you.

And a person who creates their own job is called an "entrepreneur". We live in a country where anybody can do it. Anybody. You could even some day become one of the 1% if you're good at it.

[-] 1 points by azelikov (16) 13 years ago

Unfortunately today it does NOT create jobs or whatever opportunities. And sorry, if you are thinking that our economy now is healthy I can call for checking how adequate you are. It is not healthy and Wall Street gamblers caused the absence of opportunities. When they will be punished, then society will restore trust in social justice and will be more confident in future. Until that saying that un(der)employed are no good is saying that your ancestors are no good because they are dead.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

I want people to have the guaranteed opportunity of getting a well paying job. I'm not sure of the benefit of wanting anything less than that.

Entrepreneurship is great. But having to launch a business when you are unemployed and need an income is a terrible predicament because the likelihood of that working out is small.

Anyone can do it but few succeed. Reaching the top 1% is based purely on luck or family heritage. The market is unpredictable.

Our economy should be based on equal pay for equal effort. Your standard of living and quality of life shouldn't be a casino.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

"guaranteed opportunity" is an oxymoron. And who is going to "guarantee" job openings for people? The government? How could the government possibly "guarantee" jobs for people if there is no demand for those jobs?

You want to "demand the good life", which means that you want somebody else to hand it to you. You're trying to dodge responsibility. The path to the good life is in your hands, not somebody else's.

You're advocating a controlled economy, that provides to each according to his needs and takes from each according to his abilities. Is that correct?

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

"to each according to his needs and takes from each according to his abilities. Is that correct?"

That is communism.

Communism is a hypothetical stage society will reach once it develops the technology to eliminate scarcity. Once you eliminate scarcity, you don't need money or property or government. Technology enables you to reach such an abundance that you no longer need goods and services to be rationed with money, people can take all they want, and automation is so advanced, all the jobs nobody wants to do is done by machines so you don't need to pay people to work.

No society has ever achieved communism. We do not have the technology to achieve it. I advocate the use of money, prices, markets for goods and services and working for an income. So I do not advocate communism.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Guaranteed opportunity is not an oxymoron. If an opportunity means "a set of circumstances that makes it possible to do something," a guaranteed opportunity simply means the circumstances are guaranteed to happen.

I demand a system that works well for everyone, I don't demand anyone hand anyone anything.

The path to the good life is not solely in your hands. You do not have absolute control over what success you attain in your life. The good life is certain if I was born a Trump, not so certain if I was born in the ghetto to crack parents.

I do demand a controlled economy. But I do not demand a command economy if that is what you mean. I think a market should allocate goods and services. But I do not think people should be treated like a good in a market.

It is inhumane to treat people like commodities, like heads of cattle or bushels of wheat, where your entire standard of living and means of survival depends on your ability to sell yourself in an open market.

I think capitalism should be replaced with democracy where you are guaranteed a job and paid an equal income for equal effort. If we allocated income equally based on effort, everyone would be wealthy. There would be no poverty or middle class or unemployed or homeless or uneducated. And there would be little crime.

Our income is allocated so unequally that if we just allocated total income equally to every worker, regardless of what job you did, everyone would get paid $127,000 per year. That is more than what 97% of all workers currently make.

But the only fair, democratic way to allocate income is to pay an equal income for equal effort. Income should not be based on privilege, who you know, what family you were born into or how lucky you are in the market.

Effort is just a function of the amount of time you work and whether the job you do is mentally or physically difficult. People who work twice the hours should obviously get paid twice the income. And people who work the difficult jobs, the jobs in science, computers, engineering, medicine, construction, mining, or farming, should get paid more than the people who work jobs that are not difficult.

The final compensation plan would be directly voted on by the population, but if you paid difficult jobs twice the amount as jobs that are not difficult, since that is likely enough of an incentive to get people to do more difficult work, based on the American economy in 2010, that system would pay an income of $230,000 per year for the difficult jobs and $115,000 per year for the rest of the jobs.

That is enough to make everyone wealthy. It is at least 3.5 times more than what the average worker makes now, more than what 97% of all workers currently make and the pay for difficult work is higher than the average wage of every profession including surgeons, CEOs, lawyers, and engineers.

And so long as we have democratic control over how much our jobs pay, we should have democratic control over what jobs we do.

55% of all the jobs we do can be automated with existing technology. We don't need people to be waiters or office clerks or drivers or cashiers or salespeople.

Wasting a human life, the most sophisticated piece of machinery in the universe, on moving a plate of food from one end of the room to another is a criminal waste of the most valuable resource we have.

If we made a deliberate effort to automate every job possible, we could cut the work week in half. And the only work people would have to do is the kind of fun activities that you would be doing if you didn't have a job to go to. There would be no difference between work and play for everyone.

And when we have democratic control of the economy, we no longer have to charge interest because it costs absolutely nothing to digitally increase your bank account when you get a loan.

Eliminating interest will cut your monthly mortgage in half.

When every citizen has access to a job with those incomes and those benefits as a right, there would be no social problems.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

By your own definition of "opportunity", our economy IS creating opportunities. Our economy is expanding. Health care keeps growing. There are more web jobs than web workers.

To suggest "replacing" our economy with anything else is unrealistic. And to suggest replacing it with "democracy" is to confuse an economic system, capitalism, with a system of government, democracy.

Obviously any hypothetical economic system that's based on democracy would continue to be stacked against young people, since young people tend to not vote. Only 24% of eligible voters aged 18-29 bothered to vote in the 2010 mid-term elections. ( http://occupywallst.org/forum/vote-or-else-this-will-all-be-a-pointless-exercise/ ) In that election, the Tea Party and conservatives gained influence because liberals didn't bother to show up.

And finally, your solution is what you've been complaining about! "If we made a deliberate effort to automate every job possible, we could cut the work week in half." Automating jobs is what I do! It's what you're complaining about! My software product automates a job that was formerly handled through manual labor by low-skilled office workers. My product eliminated a lot of low-skilled jobs, and as our product continues to sell, that creates high-skilled software development jobs, and graphic design jobs, and technical writing jobs, and technical sales jobs, and customer support jobs, and on-site installation jobs. This is exactly what you've been complaining about! If we automate away waiter jobs and office clerk jobs (which I'm doing) and cashiers (it's impossible to automate away affective sales people, sorry) then all of those low-skilled workers will be UNEMPLOYED!

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

"economic system that's based on democracy would continue to be stacked against young people, since young people tend to not vote"

Democracy is also not mob rule or rule of the majority or voting. It is equal power.

That equal power will get young people equal income for equal effort which will likely be more than triple the income they would have received in an unequal system like capitalism. So they certainly will benefit from it.

"This is exactly what you've been complaining about! If we automate away...all those workers will be UNEMPLOYED!"

We will never run out of work to do. A democratic economy, unlike a capitalist economy, is accountable to society. So it is required to provide full employment. Since we will never run out of things to do and ideas to try, we will never run out of work for people to do.

A capitalist system relies on private individuals to invest in order to expand. A democratic system will just provide all the investment we need to maintain full employment.

"it's impossible to automate away affective sales people"

Any sales job can be automated by simply providing all the decision making marketing material online. You don't need to talk to a sales person to find out if you should purchase that good or service.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

You clearly have never run a business if that's how you think that marketing works. The startup that I'm involved in is absolutely driven by our sales staff, who are many orders of magnitude more successful at booking sales than our web site alone. The reason why they're so much more effective is because they receive performance-based compensation. "Sales commissions". When they make a sale, they get paid. When they make lots of sales, they get paid a lot. They want to get paid a lot, so they aggressively pursue sales. And so our company continues to grow, and the high-paying, high-skill jobs that we're creating (by automating away low-paying, low-skill jobs) are all dependent on those sales people. Without those sales people, we would not be expanding and creating jobs.

In my humble opinion, you really should learn more about economics before you propose replacing our entire economic system with your uninformed Utopian experiment.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

I have been a very successful business owner. I know how business works and I am educated in economics. I don't doubt your start-up is driven by a sales force. That is necessary in this system.

In a democratic system it is not.

I'm not saying your company does this, but if you need to use high-pressure or manipulation to get people to buy, that kind of company will not survive.

The point of production is consumption. The point of advertising is to inform consumers. If your company gets funded, it is because it adds value to the marketplace. So it will be plugged into the infrastructure that is set up specifically to inform consumers of the good or service's availability and given equal billing among the competitors.

Just like we have common roads that everyone uses, we will have common infrastructure that everyone uses to get informed about making the right purchases.

If you need to beat people over the head in order to get sales, that kind of company will not survive. Marketing is not going to be a system where whoever shouts the loudest wins. Everyone gets fair billing so consumers can make good purchases.

If you tell me what business you are in, maybe I can give you an idea of how that specifically would work.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Yes, our economy is creating opportunities, but not enough to guarantee everyone a job and an income high enough to live a wealthy lifestyle. Less than 3% of workers have that today. It should be guaranteed to everyone.

"is to confuse an economic system, capitalism, with a system of government, democracy"

Democracy is a Greek word for people power. It is a system where power rests with everyone equally. It can be used to run a government, an economy, a single business, a family or it can be used in deciding what to cook for dinner.

In a fully democratic society, democracy would run our government and economy. That means everyone would be granted the birth right to the equal freedom to act, speak, and think; to equal votes; to equal treatment under the law; and to EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL EFFORT.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

In our actual democracy that actually exists, everyone does have a right to equal freedom to act, speak, and think; to equal votes; and to equal treatment under the law.

Everyone does not have a right to equal pay for equal effort. If you completely work your ass off to create a product that isn't marketable, and I work half-days and end up creating a marketable product that sells really well, then I'm going to get paid better than you. Our economy isn't governed by an elementary school teacher who grants gold stars for effort. Our economy rewards success. If you can put in less effort but you're effective at getting results, then you're going to do a lot better than somebody who puts in a lot of effort but who is poor at getting results. That's how it should be, because results matter. Effort doesn't matter, results matter.

The biggest thing that keeps me coming back to this site, other than an interest in passing out my virtual pamphlet on voting ( http://occupywallst.org/forum/vote-or-else-this-will-all-be-a-pointless-exercise/ ) is this flawed, entitlement thinking that's so common here. People with film school or Latin studies or art history degrees who think that they're entitled to their dream job simply because they put in the time at school. People who used to have low-skill jobs who are out of work due to productivity innovations who feel that government should preserve their jobs so that they don't have to learn new job skills, regardless of economic conditions. That kind of thinking doesn't offend me or threaten me, but it's just sad. If a person blames other people for their problems then it might make them feel better temporarily, but the opportunity cost of spending time blaming other people is that you're not spending time on doing what you can do to improve your own situation. In the context of jobs, what you can do to improve your situation is to develop marketable job skills. You can react to a changing economy.

I'm posting this message from a bed & breakfast in Monterey Bay, California. I can travel from Miami Beach to Monterey Bay or wherever I want, because I've been successful at effective effort, not just effort. Monterey Bay is the location of the famous Cannery Row, from the John Steinbeck novel. Cannery Row was the center of the sardine industry for a very long time. Thousands of workers used to process sardines and pack them into tin cans. In the 1950s, the sardine industry collapsed, because the sardine fisheries collapsed due to overfishing. The thousands of Cannery Row workers were rendered obsolete due to changing economic conditions. The scarcity of sardines made it too expensive to sustain canning businesses, and all of those workers became unemployed.

How would your democratic economy handle those workers? Would it continue to pay them what they were paid before, since they were putting in the same effort? Their effort was no longer economically sustainable, but they could have easily continued to put in the same work for the same pay if the government or somebody had guaranteed them steady pay based on their effort. Can you see why it can't work? "Effort" isn't what counts, results are what counts. Catching, processing, and selling sardines at a profit was what counted. When that became economically unsustainable, no amount of "effort" mattered any more. And if the government had continued to artificially maintain wages for those workers even though their efforts were no longer economically viable, then the opportunity cost would have been to divert capital from other industries that WERE economically viable. Distorting the economy by artificially maintaining wages has the effect of reducing output, which contracts the economy, which eliminates jobs. We learned this lesson during the Great Depression, when FDR artificially maintained wages and prices, which prolonged the depression. (More on this: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123353276749137485.html )

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

I'm not saying I'm the smartest guy in the room, but I have enough sense to understand that a guaranteed $115k or $230k (along with the rest of the benefits) is a far, far, far better deal than our current one.

I know some people say it won't work. They could be right. But all the evidence says they are not.

It is hard to accept that because we are brought up in a culture with an agenda set by the billionaires and multi-millionaires in power. And they have billions of incentives to make sure that the agenda teaches everyone that any alternative to capitalism is not viable.

But there is clearly a conflict of interest in this advice. They have an incredible bias. Their entire lifestyle is at stake.

When you look at the evidence, you see that 30% of the economy is already democratically owned. And it works. And all the different parts of a democratic economy are already in practice and they work.

NASA works, the National Science Foundation works, schools work, public universities work, Veterans Hospitals work, police departments work, fire departments work, the FBI works, the CIA works, the military works, the post office works, garbage collection works.

I think a democratic economy will work. It will significantly improve nearly everyone's standard of living. And I think everyone in power will do everything possible to convince you it won't work only because they don't want to lose their position in life.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I'm probably not the smarted guy in the room either, but I'm smart enough to see that if you guarantee everybody a $115k/year salary, then nobody would ever bring a new product to market. Why would they? Nobody would ever innovate. What would be the point? If you're going to make the same salary whether you succeed or fail, then what's the point in fighting to succeed? Foursquare badges?

You're welcome to establish a commune, where you divide your income democratically among your people like you're suggesting. The first thing that you're going to discover is that you'll have a limited amount of money to divvy up, and suddenly you'll be very concerned with productivity, efficiency and effectiveness, because the more effective your people are, the more money you have to divide up between them. You'll suddenly resent the people in your commune who accept a paycheck but don't produce results.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

It turns out people like inventing things and developing new ideas. And if they are going to get paid, they would rather get paid building something they invented instead of building someone else's invention.

People take pride in the work they do. Not every employee in today's system earns a profit from the company. But it takes the effort and fight of those employees to keep businesses successful. It turns out that when you pay people and provide the right work environment, they fight for their company's success anyway.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

We have decades of research on what motivates people and how to get results out of them. The best way to compensate workers is to pay them well and to pay them a flat salary so that the issue of money is off the table and they can just focus on doing great work.

If you are incompetent or a slacker and refuse to work as hard as everyone else, you would be fired just like you would today.

But what all the research says, to get workers to take pride in their work and give their best effort, is the job should give them autonomy which treats them like responsible adults, an opportunity to master the tasks they are performing and a transcendent purpose to work towards.

Trying to manipulate people with monetary rewards actually hurts performance in the majority of work we do.

This is backed by studies done in many different fields including research done by the Federal Reserve.

The overwhelming majority of people already get paid this way. Most get paid a flat salary in today's system with little opportunity for advancement within your job. Nearly every union job, for example, tops out in pay after 4 years.

And this is also how doctors are paid at the Mayo Clinic, one of the best hospitals in the world. Not paying for individual performance is part of their philosophy.

View this quick TED Talk on compensation incentives which provides the evidence that the compensation model based on equality will not only work, it will work better than our current system:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y

Plus there are a ton of ways to effectively motivate people other than monetary rewards. Google the emerging field of gamification which is applying game mechanics (such as completing set tasks for points to level up and acquire medals and outscore the competition and reach the top of the leaderboard) to all real world activities like work, exercising, dieting, learning, etc.

It makes otherwise boring tasks fun. Advocates believe gamification will transform society and will be a part of everything we do. They think game designers will eventually be in charge of developing sophisticated systems that will turn everything we do in our lives into a fun and engaging experience.

Belts in karate or rank and medals in the military are crude examples of gamification.

View this video for gamification's potential: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NzFCfZMBkU

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

In my job, I'm treated as a responsible adult because I earned that privilege. I work hard because I enjoy what I do and take pride in it, but I work hard for my specific employer because our startup pays me well. If they didn't, then I would work somewhere else. I have the option of working where I want because I have proven that I'm effective at what I do. You want everything that I've earned, but you want it for free. You feel that you're entitled to it, without working for it.

Are you SERIOUSLY trying to suggest that I would work as hard to build the startup that I'm participating in building if I were paid in Foursquare badges instead of money?!?

We have a system that works really well. It's hard for people who don't play the game well to understand this, but the system rewards the right people. People who are effective, who can achieve provable, repeatable results, are paid well. They live good lives. They earn benefits. People who are ineffective do not. People who don't have the skills that our economy needs, do not.

The solution to the unemployment problem is not to change the system so that ineffective people are rewarded as well as effective people. That eliminates any motivation to be effective. The solution to the unemployment problem is for ineffective people to learn to be more effective.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

You would work hard because you were paid $115k, took pride in your work and enjoyed what you do.

You are on some trip if you think you and an elite few are the only effective workers in this country and all the poor, struggling and unemployed deserve all the suffering they have to put up with.

Were you the guy in the tea party rally yelling at the guy in the wheelchair who needed healthcare?

Everyone is not as spectacular as you. But they deserve a high standard of living too because we have the technology and resources to deliver it and they are working just as hard as everyone else.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I work hard for the chance to make a lot more than $115k. But only if I succeed. And FYI, it takes a lot more than 40 hours per week.

I do not think that I and an elite few are the only effective workers in this country, but I do reject the idea of paying anybody six figures regardless of what they can accomplish. Whereas you've been saying that people are entitled to be paid simply for punching the time clock, regardless of the results. Unfortunately for you (fortunately for me I guess) results do matter. Donald Trump has a more luxurious life than you do because he's been very successful at generating profit.

The original author of the post that we're replying to went to film school. You brought up Donald Trump as an example of a rich guy who makes you jealous. That was an appropriate example for you to bring up, and I'd like to share a Donald Trump quote with you now:

"After I graduated from the New York Military Academy in 1964, I flirted briefly with the idea of attending film school... but in the end I decided real estate was a much better business."

Do you understand why I posted that quote?

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

If you were hired by some company to program their website and you built the site they wanted, I think you should be considered a success. And you should get paid top dollar for that success.

If it turns out the site is a dud, you should just move on to building websites that are not. When the person who came up with the dud idea wants to a launch a new idea, the fact that his last one was a dud should be taken into consideration when he seeks funding.

So if that person has ambitions of becoming a Zuckerberg celebrity, he is going to be plenty motivated to see his creation become a success.

There is plenty of incentive to be the guy who created facebook instead of just one of their hundreds of programmers, even if you aren't getting paid $7 billion.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Mr. Spectacular, if you are currently working at some company to program their website and you are not getting a guaranteed $230,000 income, you are getting a shitty deal.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

You think the chance at earning $115k+ for working hard is a better deal than getting a guaranteed paycheck of $115k+ for working hard. I do not. I think that is ridiculous.

I also think we will get better results from people by guaranteeing their pay than by only giving them a chance at the pay as the TED Talk proves.

I never said people should get paid merely for punching a time clock. They should get paid based on effort. If they don't perform, they will be fired by their manager who is responsible for the company's viability.

Trump has a more luxurious life than me because his father gave him $50 million.

You brought up that quote to further demonstrate how ridiculous our current income allocation system is?

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Freedom is the ability to act without coercion or restraint. Everyone does not have an equal freedom to act. Lack of money is an enormous restraint on your freedom. I do not have the same freedom to do things as Donald Trump.

A democratic system only pays if you produce results. If you are ineffective or incompetent at your job, you will get fired. If a company does not have enough revenue to cover expenses, it will get shut down and everyone gets fired.

You can't get paid to produce things nobody is buying.

Our current system does not reward success. Only 3% of workers make an above average income. Income is allocated mostly by privilege, who you know, what family you were born into or how lucky you are in the market.

People who go to college to learn some skill should be entitled to a job that they love and that pays enough to make them wealthy. I still don't understand the logic of wanting a system that does less than that.

You are fighting for a system that is giving you a bad deal. There is a 97% chance you are making a below average income. I don't know what you are so gung-ho about.

If you have your dream job and it pays you more than you need, then great. But you have to recognize that is not true for the vast majority of workers and it is not because of any fault of their own.

And middle aged workers living paycheck to paycheck with a family and mortgage to support do not have the luxury of taking a few years off, coming up with a bunch of money and learning a new trade that they are going to start at the bottom of. So I don't blame them for wanting to keep their job propped up. A changing market is not their fault. It is unfair that they should suffer because of it.

In a democratic system, you would get paid to go to school. It is a part of work. School is not a consumption item. It doesn't punish you because the market changes.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

My absolute favorite quote from this web site so far was from your post:

"People who go to college to learn some skill should be entitled to a job that they love and that pays enough to make them wealthy."

Second favorite quote:

"I do not have the same freedom to do things as Donald Trump."

Why do you feel like you're entitled to all of the same perks as Donald Trump? What gave you the idea that society owes you? Why do you think that you deserve to be paid enough to make you wealthy, regardless of how successful or effective you are? Why should everybody win the same rewards, no matter what they can accomplish or cannot?

You talk about fairness. How would it be fair for a person who is successful to be brought down to the level of people who are unsuccessful? Why would anybody work hard to get ahead if they knew that the system would equalize everybody in the end?

You fantasize about a system that only pays if you produce results. That's the system that we have! That's the system that you're complaining about!

You fantasize about a system that turns ineffective and/or incompetent people into unemployed people. That's how it works! That's what you're complaining about!

You say in one paragraph that you think that ineffective people should be unemployed, but then a few paragraphs later you say that ineffective people should be entitled to jobs, even if they have ineffective skill sets like music history or Latin studies. We already have a system that turns ineffective people into unemployed people! That's what you've been complaining about!

You say that if a company can't respond to changing economic conditions then it should be shut down and everybody should be fired, but then you say that a changing market is not the worker's fault and they shouldn't be fired.

Do you not even realize that you're contradicting yourself?

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

I didnt say I was entitled to the same perks as trump. Not everyone can live like a billionaire. We don't have the resources for that. I said I do not have the same freedom to act as trump to show how your claim that we all do have the the same freedom to act was not true.

"What gave you the idea that society owes you?"

The fact that I paid for the education it wanted me to get.

I believe that society should work well for everyone. I do not believe society should be sink or swim. It is uncivilized and barbaric. We don't have to live like animals in nature on the African Plains. We can be civilized, humane and treat people equally so that society works well for everyone regardless of genetics or heritage or luck. All humans deserve the dignity of being treated equally.

Your definition of success is ridiculous.

I believe you should be expected to work hard and be competent in your job. If you accomplish that, then you are a success.

I believe if trump and I work the same 40 hours at a job of similar difficulty and put in the same effort producing things people are buying, we should get paid the same.

That is the only system that is fair. And getting paid that way will pay enough to make me wealthy, that is why I believe I should be entitled to a wealthy income.

I don't think your job should be a casino. I dont think you should win anything. I think you should get compensated for the work you do.

"How would it be fair for a person who is successful to be brought down to the level of people who are unsuccessful"

How is it fair that only 3% can earn an above average income? You think 97% of the workforce are a bunch of losers? Poverty and financial struggle for people who work hard is not acceptable and not fair.

If we had a fair system, no "successful person would have to be brought down to the level of people who are unsuccessful"

I believe incompetent people should be fired. But I also think they should be trained so that they are competent. They shouldn't be unemployed.

I believe insolvent companies should be shut down. But those workers should be re-hired in another company that is hiring. The system is responsible for providing full employment.

If there are no jobs in latin or music history, they should not be offered as degrees.

None of that is a contradiction.

[-] 1 points by levelthefield (7) 13 years ago

Amen! I took over a website that originated offshore and I've been trying to migrate it here, but am finding that the US is definitely lacking in competitive dev and programming nerds. Our public high schools should be teaching HTML, CSS php, javascript, etc. Are they?

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

I completely agree, and apparently they're not. And not only that, the community college in my area teaches abstract computer science concepts using Java to their computer students, instead of teaching them to build web sites.

[-] 1 points by azelikov (16) 13 years ago

Ha! You know what should be taught - do you know how many jobs are in building web sites? Zip - too many people already there. By the time they graduate "HTML, CSS php, javascript, etc" will be replaced with something else. All this backward thinking is bs. You should continously educate yourself and good base is the best.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Congratulations, you've been quoted.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

This is a defeatist rationalization for not learning a marketable skill. It's a justification for blaming some key else, rather than improving yourself. There are far more web projects than web workers right now, partly due to the explosion in mobile web use. The Internet is not going to go away. And people who put more effort into blaming others than improving themselves are doomed to fail.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

I have a film degree and I'm damn good at what I do. I can edit composite video. I can also perform 80 other different roles on a film set. I have vocational training AND a degree. I've worked two unpaid internships and for 8 months since I graduated and theirs plenty of those - but no jobs. I recently applied to be a camera rental tech at an equipment rental house and when I went in for my interview I was told that I was one out for four people getting interviewed for the job out of 300 applicants.

So much for that "vocational training".

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Well then my advice didn't align as well with the current economy as I hoped because I reached too far for examples when I should have stuck to what I know. I hire web developers and I can't find enough of them. All of my colleagues who hire web developers are in the same situation. There are a lot of jobs available for people wi the right skills. Sorry that one of my examples was inappropriate.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

So your telling me that 4 years of training and a degree was a waste of my time and I should just try something else?

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Apparently so, yes. Repeating the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity, right? So you're painting a picture of a person who needs to learn some new skills. Hopefully you'll be able to incorporate your film experience into your career some day. But if you refuse to consider learning new skills after you realize that your current skill set isn't marketable then that's nobody's fault but your own. You can't blame Wall Street for a poorly-chosen major in college.

When I went to college, long before you did, it was already obvious what kinds of jobs would be available in the future. So I learned to program computers. I've always been in high demand. I could have gotten a degree in Latin studies, but a degree is not a guarantee of a job. You have to align your skills with the economy. I understood that when I was ten years old.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

So now your telling me that I was stupid for getting a film degree? As if somehow filmmakers are less important in the world?

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Importance isn't what we're talking about. Marketability is what we're talking about. You're responsible for making yourself marketable. And no I'm definitely not calling you stupid.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

When I first enrolled in college in 2006 the job market in the film industry didn't have a negative outlook. Neither did most other jobs. We didn't have a jobs crisis in 2006. Now I'm supposed to just switch professions? I don't have the money to go back to school or the time to dedicate toward learning how to be a web programmer. It's a skill that takes years to learn I can't just wake up tomorrow and say "I think today I'm going to be a web designer!"

If we all went by your logic, people would be switching careers frequently.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Yes, I'm sorry to have to be the one to tell you this flat out, but if you're not succeeding at marketing your current skills then you need to develop new skills.

I graduated in 1997. You may be too young to remember this, but by about 1999, everybody and his brother was a "web designer", which is a term that you barely hear any more. It used to refer to a low-skilled person who could get a basic, static web site online without much dynamic functionality. There was a big Internet boom and everybody wanted a piece. When our entire industry evaporated in 2001 (because of Wall Street mistakes) most of those people had to go and learn new skills. The low-skill "web designer" jobs were mostly eliminated, and replaced by high-skill web software developer jobs. Adapting to changes in the economy is just a fact of life.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

How would you like me to learn these new skills? Spend more money? Go back to school again? By the time I get out that industry could have gone down the toilet too. And don't tell me I don't need a degree. You just said yourself that your industry was purged of all it's low skill workers.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

"skill" does not equal "degree".

I learned my lesson from the start of my conversation with you to stick to what I personally know, so my particular pointer to a free training resource that can definitely lead to a job is above. Rails For Zombies. That's just what I know, it can't possibly be the only option. The web and filmmaking do synergize in interesting ways, and if you learn a more marketable skill now then you have many years ahead of you to look for ways to blend your passion for film into your career. But if your film skills are not in demand at this very moment then it's your responsibillity to adapt. Those web designers in 2001 didn't camp out on Wall Street and bitch about the mistakes made in the dot-com crash, demanding that the government or somebody hand them web designer jobs. They recognized that times had changed and they moved into other industries. The web development industry didn't start to boom again for another five years, so anybody who failed to either move to a different industry or develop higher skills lost out.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

A free online crash course in web development does not qualify me for anything. Videocopilot.net has a free crash course in motion graphics - taking it doesn't qualify you for anything either. In order to get good at something you have to work long and hard and dedicate your life to it. I'm not willing to re-dedicate my life over and over again to several different careers.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Well then you're going to fail to adapt and you should plan for a long period of unemployment. Working long and hard and dedicating your life to it is definitely part of the deal. The self-trained Venezuelans who I've been hiring are winning jobs that Americans don't want, because the Venezuelans are willing to put in the studying and the Americans are not. The Americans tend to feel entitled to jobs, whereas the Venezuelans understand that it doesn't work that way.

[-] 1 points by Mets (53) 13 years ago

Your really contradicting yourself. Your telling me that I can take a crash course and be qualified, but your hiring Venezuelans because you can't find qualified Americans. I'm sorry man but that's BS. First of all I personally know a handful of qualified American web designers who are out of work.

So lets say, hypothetically that I take your crash course and then decide to dedicate my life to web design. What happens if the market changes in two years and I can't find work in web design? Then according to you I'd have to choose something else... again. This is flawed logic.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Do you think that people are going to stop using the Internet? Anyway, the web, specifically, is not the point. The point is that you're not entitled to your dream job just because you went to college and got a degree. Plenty of people graduate and then find out that they can't get a job with the degree that they earned. This is why parents freak out when kids want to major in English, or music. This is nothing new and it isn't Wall Street's fault. It isn't Wall Street's responsibility to create your dream job for you. But Wall Street IS creating jobs that you could have, if you were willing to adapt to the ever-changing economy. If you insist on banging your head against the wall, looking for a job that you already know doesn't exist, then that's your failure, not Wall Street's.

[-] 1 points by OccupyingAustin (33) 13 years ago

Some opponents here are bandying about the idea that you should have chosen a different field of study. I've seen them saying that of artists, teachers, lawyers, doctors, technicians, and more; so what exactly do they think the "right" industry is? The only field with any job security these days is Wall Street exec.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

False, there is nursing, web development, there are many careers in high demand right now. The "right" industry is the one that's booming right now. Law is definitely not a good pick right now. Workers in a non-planned economy have a responsibility to adapt to changing times.

[-] 2 points by OccupyingAustin (33) 13 years ago

Nursing will become flooded if it hasn't already, and R&D is already tipping over into "outsource the s--t out of that" territory.

You don't see anything wrong with telling children "Forget about your dreams, talents, aptitudes, and desires, you'll either be whatever the floundering economy wants most at the moment when you grow up or you'll starve"? Do you not think that future generations deserve better than that?

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Nobody is entitled to their dream job just because they desire it. Finding a career that you love that ALSO pays the bills is the ideal. Finding a job that you don't necessarily like that, but that pays the bills is a normal stepping stone toward that. Finding a job that you loves that doesn't pay the bills is a financial mistake that will least to debt, and I'm not teaching my child to set themselves up for failure like that.

It isn't hard to figure out why computers and nursing will continue to be in high demand for decades. The American population is aging, and increasingly dependent on computers and the Internet.

[-] 1 points by OccupyingAustin (33) 13 years ago

"I'm not teaching my child to set themselves up for failure like that."

=

"Forget about your dreams, talents, aptitudes, and desires, you'll either be whatever the floundering economy wants most at the moment when you grow up or you'll starve. Who you are doesn't matter. Happiness doesn't matter. Money does."

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 13 years ago

Obviously money matters, or else why would all of these people be protesting? I found a way to do what I love AND pay the bills, in a way that makes me happy. But it wasn't easy. I had to work a lot of crappy jobs before I got to where I am now. It's called "work" for a reason!

Teaching kids to ignore economic realities doesn't do them any good. Encouraging a kid to get an art history degree ins't doing him any favors. Teaching a kid to find ways to use his unique talents to pursue his dreams is a good thing, but they have to pursue their dreams within the confines of economic reality.