OT: New grad/profession/school pay….

[Arraya]

[quote=no_such_reality]
Cheap labor may be taking all of the unskilled labor now. That’s the leftovers of Ford’s biggest invention. Eventually, robotics will replace all of them, (I hope). [/quote]

Actually, we could run basic necessities, food, utilities, transportation etc.. on like 5% of the population with properly applied technologies. The reality is we don’t need that many people working and we certainly don’t want millions trained for our remaining jobs lowering our skilled workers wages. Heck, one of the ways we keep employment up is making shitty products that break down all the time and shipping plastic crap around the world that wind up in land fills within six months.

[quote=no_such_reality]
Frankly, I don’t think so, I think we’re about to stall into a second stagnant medieval period, stalled just like then, by the abundance of cheap labor caused by surging populace and ignorance.[/quote]

Agreed, late-stage capitalism is going to be ugly. But, abundance of cheap labor? It was feudalism for God’s sake! I do agree with ignorance part, which was public policy. We were burning scientists at the stake for going against religion, kind of like we do today with environmental scientists.

[meadandale]

Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[meadandale]

Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[meadandale]

Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[meadandale]

Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[meadandale]

Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[CA renter]

[quote=meadandale]Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[/quote]

Okay, but we can tie this all together with the housing bubble… 😉

When “starter” homes in bad neighborhoods are being listed at $500K, gas is priced at $3.00 or more, food and other commodity costs are rising, healthcare costs $1,000+/month for a healthy family, student debt/tuition costs are through the roof, etc., is it any wonder young people feel that $40K is too low?

Our politicians need to make some hard decisions. We cannot forever prop up asset prices (with taxpayer money, no less) while expecting our working people to labor for less and less money. One or the other: we either need higher wages or lower prices. We can’t keep blaming our youth for all our society’s ills.

We’ve allowed our politicians to sell working Americans down the river in favor of their large corporate sponsors (and the wealthy elite, in general). Time for a change.

[CA renter]

[quote=meadandale]Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[/quote]

Okay, but we can tie this all together with the housing bubble… 😉

When “starter” homes in bad neighborhoods are being listed at $500K, gas is priced at $3.00 or more, food and other commodity costs are rising, healthcare costs $1,000+/month for a healthy family, student debt/tuition costs are through the roof, etc., is it any wonder young people feel that $40K is too low?

Our politicians need to make some hard decisions. We cannot forever prop up asset prices (with taxpayer money, no less) while expecting our working people to labor for less and less money. One or the other: we either need higher wages or lower prices. We can’t keep blaming our youth for all our society’s ills.

We’ve allowed our politicians to sell working Americans down the river in favor of their large corporate sponsors (and the wealthy elite, in general). Time for a change.

[CA renter]

[quote=meadandale]Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[/quote]

Okay, but we can tie this all together with the housing bubble… 😉

When “starter” homes in bad neighborhoods are being listed at $500K, gas is priced at $3.00 or more, food and other commodity costs are rising, healthcare costs $1,000+/month for a healthy family, student debt/tuition costs are through the roof, etc., is it any wonder young people feel that $40K is too low?

Our politicians need to make some hard decisions. We cannot forever prop up asset prices (with taxpayer money, no less) while expecting our working people to labor for less and less money. One or the other: we either need higher wages or lower prices. We can’t keep blaming our youth for all our society’s ills.

We’ve allowed our politicians to sell working Americans down the river in favor of their large corporate sponsors (and the wealthy elite, in general). Time for a change.

[CA renter]

[quote=meadandale]Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[/quote]

Okay, but we can tie this all together with the housing bubble… 😉

When “starter” homes in bad neighborhoods are being listed at $500K, gas is priced at $3.00 or more, food and other commodity costs are rising, healthcare costs $1,000+/month for a healthy family, student debt/tuition costs are through the roof, etc., is it any wonder young people feel that $40K is too low?

Our politicians need to make some hard decisions. We cannot forever prop up asset prices (with taxpayer money, no less) while expecting our working people to labor for less and less money. One or the other: we either need higher wages or lower prices. We can’t keep blaming our youth for all our society’s ills.

We’ve allowed our politicians to sell working Americans down the river in favor of their large corporate sponsors (and the wealthy elite, in general). Time for a change.

[CA renter]

[quote=meadandale]Timely commentary by Ruben Navarrette…

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/25/staying-home-and-holding-out/

A few years ago, before the current recession took hold, I was speaking to a group of high school students and wound up being given a pop quiz.

I assured my audience that by setting high goals, working hard, making sacrifices and never giving up, they could be successful. One student quickly raised his hand and asked for my definition of success. I told him it went beyond material wealth to doing something you love and find fulfilling, but still gives you enough economic sustenance to prevent you from abandoning ship and moving on to something else. The student smiled and gave me an enthusiastic thumbs-up.

I think about that encounter whenever I interview an academic who has studied the work habits and job preferences of so-called Millennials, ages 18 to 29. Or when I read about surveys of young people who put job satisfaction before concerns about salary or security. And I wonder if my answer did more harm than good.

In the context of the immigration debate, I’ve written a lot about Millennials not having much of a work ethic – especially for the hard jobs their parents and grandparents did a generation or two ago. And it’s not just the worst jobs that some young people are avoiding. It’s almost any job.

The unemployment rate for young Americans hovers at about 14 percent, compared to the national rate of 9.5 percent. Another 23 percent of young people are not even looking for a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But there’s another side to this coin. For those young people who do want to work, and those who went to college and perhaps even graduate school with the expectation that acquiring more education would automatically lead to a good job, many don’t believe in the concept of paying their dues. They tell reporters and survey-takers that they want to be assured they won’t spin their wheels in a dead-end job.

Life offers no such assurances. And besides, dues-paying worked pretty well for earlier generations, who seemed to have more respect for the concept of work in general. You took a job even if it wasn’t your ideal job with the hopes that other opportunities would open up and you’d move on. For the young worker of the 20th century, any kind of job was considered valuable, if nothing else because it provided a way of becoming self-sufficient and moving out of your parents’ home.

Today, with many Millennials not willing to work their way up and holding out for their dream job, even if it means turning down what earlier generations would have considered good offers of other employment, it’s no wonder that more and more 20-somethings are still living with mom and dad. The Pew Research Center found that in 2008, when the recession began, the percentage of the population that lived in households where at least two generations were present inched upward to 16 percent. In good times, that figure might be as low as 12 percent.

The stay-at-home youths include 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, who was the subject of a recent article in The New York Times. The unemployed college graduate lives with his parents in Grafton, Mass., while searching web sites for corporate job openings and sending out resumes for those he finds acceptable. After a host of interviews, he was recently offered a job as an associate claims adjuster for an insurance company. The position paid $40,000 a year, more than enough to get him out on his own. Nicholson turned the job down, preferring to hold out for the corporate position he really wanted – one that would give him an opportunity for career advancement.

It’s difficult to feel sorry for someone who, just out of college, turns down a starting job that pays $40,000 a year to wait around for something better. And I wonder how many other young Americans out there are making similar choices.

Now that the Congress has approved a bill to extend unemployment benefits, the mainstream media are churning out stories intended to make unemployed Americans look helpless and sympathetic. Some of them are both. But some are neither.

[/quote]

Okay, but we can tie this all together with the housing bubble… 😉

When “starter” homes in bad neighborhoods are being listed at $500K, gas is priced at $3.00 or more, food and other commodity costs are rising, healthcare costs $1,000+/month for a healthy family, student debt/tuition costs are through the roof, etc., is it any wonder young people feel that $40K is too low?

Our politicians need to make some hard decisions. We cannot forever prop up asset prices (with taxpayer money, no less) while expecting our working people to labor for less and less money. One or the other: we either need higher wages or lower prices. We can’t keep blaming our youth for all our society’s ills.

We’ve allowed our politicians to sell working Americans down the river in favor of their large corporate sponsors (and the wealthy elite, in general). Time for a change.

[EconProf]

That’s a great piece by Ruben Navarrette from the U-T, who often shows uncommon wisdom in his opinion pieces.
At the risk of offending many parents and their boomerang offspring, I suggest that sheltering their mid-twenties something children at home is doing them a great disservice. Yes it is a great money-saver, but it enables the returnee to be ultra-picky about the job they will accept, avoid the tough choices about living on their own, and dodge the trial and error stumbles that make someone an adult.
It is by falling on our face a few times that we finally take pride in succeeding. When parents, especially mothers, do too much for their kids, they are robbing them of accomplishing success in the face of adversity. Many commentators on this thread have cited the obstacles they have overcome, and done so with obvious pride. Kids need to take prudent risks, be adventuresome, and carve out their own future.
I suggest the new college graduate be given a time limit to stay with the parents, say two months rent free, then market rent for six months for that spare bedroom and no more free food. Oh, and don’t even think about overnight guests!

[EconProf]

That’s a great piece by Ruben Navarrette from the U-T, who often shows uncommon wisdom in his opinion pieces.
At the risk of offending many parents and their boomerang offspring, I suggest that sheltering their mid-twenties something children at home is doing them a great disservice. Yes it is a great money-saver, but it enables the returnee to be ultra-picky about the job they will accept, avoid the tough choices about living on their own, and dodge the trial and error stumbles that make someone an adult.
It is by falling on our face a few times that we finally take pride in succeeding. When parents, especially mothers, do too much for their kids, they are robbing them of accomplishing success in the face of adversity. Many commentators on this thread have cited the obstacles they have overcome, and done so with obvious pride. Kids need to take prudent risks, be adventuresome, and carve out their own future.
I suggest the new college graduate be given a time limit to stay with the parents, say two months rent free, then market rent for six months for that spare bedroom and no more free food. Oh, and don’t even think about overnight guests!

[EconProf]

That’s a great piece by Ruben Navarrette from the U-T, who often shows uncommon wisdom in his opinion pieces.
At the risk of offending many parents and their boomerang offspring, I suggest that sheltering their mid-twenties something children at home is doing them a great disservice. Yes it is a great money-saver, but it enables the returnee to be ultra-picky about the job they will accept, avoid the tough choices about living on their own, and dodge the trial and error stumbles that make someone an adult.
It is by falling on our face a few times that we finally take pride in succeeding. When parents, especially mothers, do too much for their kids, they are robbing them of accomplishing success in the face of adversity. Many commentators on this thread have cited the obstacles they have overcome, and done so with obvious pride. Kids need to take prudent risks, be adventuresome, and carve out their own future.
I suggest the new college graduate be given a time limit to stay with the parents, say two months rent free, then market rent for six months for that spare bedroom and no more free food. Oh, and don’t even think about overnight guests!

[EconProf]

That’s a great piece by Ruben Navarrette from the U-T, who often shows uncommon wisdom in his opinion pieces.
At the risk of offending many parents and their boomerang offspring, I suggest that sheltering their mid-twenties something children at home is doing them a great disservice. Yes it is a great money-saver, but it enables the returnee to be ultra-picky about the job they will accept, avoid the tough choices about living on their own, and dodge the trial and error stumbles that make someone an adult.
It is by falling on our face a few times that we finally take pride in succeeding. When parents, especially mothers, do too much for their kids, they are robbing them of accomplishing success in the face of adversity. Many commentators on this thread have cited the obstacles they have overcome, and done so with obvious pride. Kids need to take prudent risks, be adventuresome, and carve out their own future.
I suggest the new college graduate be given a time limit to stay with the parents, say two months rent free, then market rent for six months for that spare bedroom and no more free food. Oh, and don’t even think about overnight guests!

[Author]

Posts