2 trends in my area

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea][quote=sdrealtor]The world definitely shifted about 30 years ago to placing much greater value on a college degree at a minimum and advanced degrees are often the entry card to success. Yes there are and always will be those without out higher education who succeed against the odds. But those cases get fewer and fewer. Even those with college degrees must commit to lifelong education. If you dont, you are not in the game and have to deal with what comes your way.
[/quote]

Agreed but with some reservation. Kids can not expect any better life with a college degree if “college” is something like University of Pheonix and /or “degree” is in sociology, psychology etc. If that is what one wants to do, it is better to not take up all those student loans.[/quote]

Couple thoughts on this:
My dad always told me that college was like high school.
In other words, it is a pre-requisite to getting a job but it won’t get you one necessarily.
He pointed out that he is a pediatric neurologist and stroke researcher and that he majored in philosophy.

I spent my time studying cognition and decision-making in groups and now I sell houses.

In my last year, I too, all grad-level classes (all my former TA’s).

I find selling houses helps to direct my contrary nature in constructive directions.

While I am glad I did college, I never thought of it as really a direct stepping stone.

My 2 bits.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[sdrealtor]

College is not about teaching them to run a business it is about teaching them to think critically, solve problems, work in groups, meet deadlines, take responsibility for themselves and run in educated social circles. Its not necessarily the degree, its what it takes to get the degree that prepares you to compete in this world.

[sdrealtor]

College is not about teaching them to run a business it is about teaching them to think critically, solve problems, work in groups, meet deadlines, take responsibility for themselves and run in educated social circles. Its not necessarily the degree, its what it takes to get the degree that prepares you to compete in this world.

[sdrealtor]

College is not about teaching them to run a business it is about teaching them to think critically, solve problems, work in groups, meet deadlines, take responsibility for themselves and run in educated social circles. Its not necessarily the degree, its what it takes to get the degree that prepares you to compete in this world.

[sdrealtor]

College is not about teaching them to run a business it is about teaching them to think critically, solve problems, work in groups, meet deadlines, take responsibility for themselves and run in educated social circles. Its not necessarily the degree, its what it takes to get the degree that prepares you to compete in this world.

[sdrealtor]

College is not about teaching them to run a business it is about teaching them to think critically, solve problems, work in groups, meet deadlines, take responsibility for themselves and run in educated social circles. Its not necessarily the degree, its what it takes to get the degree that prepares you to compete in this world.

[Coronita]

delete

[Coronita]

delete

[Coronita]

delete

[Coronita]

delete

[Author]

Posts