|
On September 28 2009 13:21 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 13:01 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On September 28 2009 13:00 Amber[LighT] wrote:On September 28 2009 11:59 FragKrag wrote: hm this hits pretty hard for me. I don't think it's fair to blame everything on Obama though.
D: I'd say its pretty fair. He's not making it easy for college students to obtain loans during this recession, and the job market has taken such a hit that there's too much competition for college grads. The "entry level" positions are getting taken over by people who got laid off earlier this year. Idk what I'm gonna do when my contract expires  I agree the recession is Obama's fault. You're kidding right? This is just one of those "it's so obviously wrong it's funny" type of posts right?
The answer is in my post history.
|
Obviously the recession has nothing to do with the current president, but at the same time not one of Obama's economic advisers (I believe there are 12?) predicted this recession. It's beyond scary that these people are responsible for advising the president regarding the economy.
The worst part is that even though things will likely recover in the next several years, the "recession" following this one will happen shortly thereafter--the time between recessions has shrunk consistently since the depression--and in all likelihood will be even worse than this one.
Edit: I'd also like to add that--despite popular opinion to the contrary--the government cannot "create jobs" in a true sense, since the creation of jobs requires the concomitant generation of wealth. Since government can only redistribute wealth (although I personally hold they should not), this is impossible.
|
hmm good thing im still in college? hopefully it can end before i graduate :/
|
On September 28 2009 13:21 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 13:01 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On September 28 2009 13:00 Amber[LighT] wrote:On September 28 2009 11:59 FragKrag wrote: hm this hits pretty hard for me. I don't think it's fair to blame everything on Obama though.
D: I'd say its pretty fair. He's not making it easy for college students to obtain loans during this recession, and the job market has taken such a hit that there's too much competition for college grads. The "entry level" positions are getting taken over by people who got laid off earlier this year. Idk what I'm gonna do when my contract expires  I agree the recession is Obama's fault. You're kidding right? This is just one of those "it's so obviously wrong it's funny" type of posts right?
LOL,??? the recession started before he was even in office.
But anyway, this really makes me appreciate that I have a well paying job and it is pretty unusual for a 19 year old to have. I am an IT analyst for a law firm in Cleveland, the biggest in Cleveland actually. Funny thing is, i didnt even look for the job, it was offered to me while i was in High School because of the advanced classes i was taking involving computers. They thought they could get me to do the job for less money and I still managed to get 12 hourly for it. Now they are doing some paperwork to get me going full-time and pay for my schooling. Lucky me i guess.
|
I have a few friends that are trying to find work because they don't want to go to college.
Guess this sucks for them :/ So glad i'm in college instead of trying to look for work.
|
My roommates and I, a total of four people, are all currently unemployed. We're only getting by because one of us has really well-off parents.
I've still got two years of education left, though, so hopefully things will smooth over by then :D
|
On September 28 2009 13:41 GreEny K wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 13:21 Jayme wrote:On September 28 2009 13:01 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On September 28 2009 13:00 Amber[LighT] wrote:On September 28 2009 11:59 FragKrag wrote: hm this hits pretty hard for me. I don't think it's fair to blame everything on Obama though.
D: I'd say its pretty fair. He's not making it easy for college students to obtain loans during this recession, and the job market has taken such a hit that there's too much competition for college grads. The "entry level" positions are getting taken over by people who got laid off earlier this year. Idk what I'm gonna do when my contract expires  I agree the recession is Obama's fault. You're kidding right? This is just one of those "it's so obviously wrong it's funny" type of posts right? LOL,??? the recession started before he was even in office. But anyway, this really makes me appreciate that I have a well paying job and it is pretty unusual for a 19 year old to have. I am an IT analyst for a law firm in Cleveland, the biggest in Cleveland actually. Funny thing is, i didnt even look for the job, it was offered to me while i was in High School because of the advanced classes i was taking involving computers. They thought they could get me to do the job for less money and I still managed to get 12 hourly for it. Now they are doing some paperwork to get me going full-time and pay for my schooling. Lucky me i guess. 12 hourly is well paying?
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 28 2009 14:00 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 13:41 GreEny K wrote:On September 28 2009 13:21 Jayme wrote:On September 28 2009 13:01 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On September 28 2009 13:00 Amber[LighT] wrote:On September 28 2009 11:59 FragKrag wrote: hm this hits pretty hard for me. I don't think it's fair to blame everything on Obama though.
D: I'd say its pretty fair. He's not making it easy for college students to obtain loans during this recession, and the job market has taken such a hit that there's too much competition for college grads. The "entry level" positions are getting taken over by people who got laid off earlier this year. Idk what I'm gonna do when my contract expires  I agree the recession is Obama's fault. You're kidding right? This is just one of those "it's so obviously wrong it's funny" type of posts right? LOL,??? the recession started before he was even in office. But anyway, this really makes me appreciate that I have a well paying job and it is pretty unusual for a 19 year old to have. I am an IT analyst for a law firm in Cleveland, the biggest in Cleveland actually. Funny thing is, i didnt even look for the job, it was offered to me while i was in High School because of the advanced classes i was taking involving computers. They thought they could get me to do the job for less money and I still managed to get 12 hourly for it. Now they are doing some paperwork to get me going full-time and pay for my schooling. Lucky me i guess. 12 hourly is well paying? For someone w/o a college degree getting an entry-level job? Hell yes it is.
|
I'm going to be fucked this summer. Will need to learn to live on bread ends and water.
|
I'm actually starting a job search for january, we'll see how it goes... This makes me worried although I'm not really in USA.
|
this is a real eye opener, i wish you guys best luck! Im a full time law student and I still have a $25AUD/hour job in retail. Is there a very stark discrepancy between work with a degree and work without a degree in the US? Here, i know many people who are career retail or hospitality that earn as much or more than people with degrees (not always the case, but it does happen).
On the other hand, I have friends who are working full time right now, since leaving high school that are earning a lot more than I am (I think $46,000AUD is the highest currently), but once I finish my masters (LLM in contract law and equity) in three years ill earn $100,000AUD+ - is it a similar situation in the US with regard to the importance of qualifications?
|
this is false, there's no way.
the highest US unemployment ever got to was 25%, and that was the shitter. the idea that we're in a 50% unemployment rate is just ludicrous.
false stats out the ass
|
On September 28 2009 14:16 mOnion wrote: this is false, there's no way.
the highest US unemployment ever got to was 25%, and that was the shitter. the idea that we're in a 50% unemployment rate is just ludicrous.
false stats out the ass
Overall unemployment != young people employment.
Glad you read the article.
|
On September 28 2009 14:07 jfazz wrote: this is a real eye opener, i wish you guys best luck! Im a full time law student and I still have a $25AUD/hour job in retail. Is there a very stark discrepancy between work with a degree and work without a degree in the US? Here, i know many people who are career retail or hospitality that earn as much or more than people with degrees (not always the case, but it does happen).
On the other hand, I have friends who are working full time right now, since leaving high school that are earning a lot more than I am (I think $46,000AUD is the highest currently), but once I finish my masters (LLM in contract law and equity) in three years ill earn $100,000AUD+ - is it a similar situation in the US with regard to the importance of qualifications? there definitely is, but at this point it seems like a Bachelors' counts for much much less... it seems that a lot of the jobs are getting taken by people who are overqualified (i.e. Masters degrees) but were laid off earlier in the year
|
On September 28 2009 14:18 Kaialynn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 14:16 mOnion wrote: this is false, there's no way.
the highest US unemployment ever got to was 25%, and that was the shitter. the idea that we're in a 50% unemployment rate is just ludicrous.
false stats out the ass Overall unemployment != young people employment. Glad you read the article.
kk, lets take a gander at the definition of unemployment shall we? Unemployment is the state of an individual looking for a paying job but not having one. Unemployment does not include full-time students, the retired, children, or those not actively looking for a paying job. based on my basic knowledge of economics
so the fact that this statistic includes 16-24 is a completely arbitrary and unrepresentative statistic of the state of the economy as it is now.
|
On September 28 2009 14:21 mOnion wrote: so the fact that this statistic includes 16-24 is a completely arbitrary and unrepresentative statistic of the state of the economy as it is now. its only representing youth - 16 to 24 which represents the future of the economy and the people who are supposed to be paying for the baby boomers retirements
fact is more older people are staying in the workforce longer cos their super collapsed = fewer job openings
|
On September 28 2009 14:21 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 14:18 Kaialynn wrote:On September 28 2009 14:16 mOnion wrote: this is false, there's no way.
the highest US unemployment ever got to was 25%, and that was the shitter. the idea that we're in a 50% unemployment rate is just ludicrous.
false stats out the ass Overall unemployment != young people employment. Glad you read the article. kk, lets take a gander at the definition of unemployment shall we? Unemployment is the state of an individual looking for a paying job but not having one. Unemployment does not include full-time students, the retired, children, or those not actively looking for a paying job. based on my basic knowledge of economics so the fact that this statistic includes 16-24 is a completely arbitrary and unrepresentative statistic of the state of the economy as it is now.
No. Unemployment is based on the number of people receiving unemployment benefits divided by the number of working people. Las Vegas has a 12.8% unemployment rate. The real figure of unemployed for those aged 16-65 is probably above 17%.
Also, the article states, and I quote:
During previous recessions, in the early '80s, early '90s and after Sept. 11, 2001, unemployment among 16-to-24 year olds never went above 50 percent. Except after 9/11, jobs growth followed within two years.
That's a good basis for noting a problem.
|
is awesome32277 Posts
nvm VorcePA said it first.
|
On September 28 2009 14:21 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 14:18 Kaialynn wrote:On September 28 2009 14:16 mOnion wrote: this is false, there's no way.
the highest US unemployment ever got to was 25%, and that was the shitter. the idea that we're in a 50% unemployment rate is just ludicrous.
false stats out the ass Overall unemployment != young people employment. Glad you read the article. kk, lets take a gander at the definition of unemployment shall we? Unemployment is the state of an individual looking for a paying job but not having one. Unemployment does not include full-time students, the retired, children, or those not actively looking for a paying job. based on my basic knowledge of economics so the fact that this statistic includes 16-24 is a completely arbitrary and unrepresentative statistic of the state of the economy as it is now.
So someone at the age of 18+ is still considered a child? This is a strawman argument, you're pointing out that children are not included in unemployment numbers, when the definition of a child is (at least, in colorado) someone who is under 18. This article isn't trying to point out how horrible our economy is overall rather, it is trying to point out that kids who are younger will have a difficult time moving out of the parents home and into the world, and almost are forced to go to college and take out large loans without the chance of getting jobs.
Yes, this whole article may be arbitrary to the state of the entire economy, but it's not talking about the entire economy.
Maybe i'm taking this article the wrong way, but this is the way i see it.
|
On September 28 2009 14:27 Kaialynn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2009 14:21 mOnion wrote:On September 28 2009 14:18 Kaialynn wrote:On September 28 2009 14:16 mOnion wrote: this is false, there's no way.
the highest US unemployment ever got to was 25%, and that was the shitter. the idea that we're in a 50% unemployment rate is just ludicrous.
false stats out the ass Overall unemployment != young people employment. Glad you read the article. kk, lets take a gander at the definition of unemployment shall we? Unemployment is the state of an individual looking for a paying job but not having one. Unemployment does not include full-time students, the retired, children, or those not actively looking for a paying job. based on my basic knowledge of economics so the fact that this statistic includes 16-24 is a completely arbitrary and unrepresentative statistic of the state of the economy as it is now. So someone at the age of 18+ is still considered a child? This is a strawman argument, you're pointing out that children are not included in unemployment numbers, when the definition of a child is (at least, in colorado) someone who is under 18. This article isn't trying to point out how horrible our economy is overall rather, it is trying to point out that kids who are younger will have a difficult time moving out of the parents home and into the world, and almost are forced to go to college and take out large loans without the chance of getting jobs. Yes, this whole article may be arbitrary to the state of the entire economy, but it's not talking about the entire economy. Maybe i'm taking this article the wrong way, but this is the way i see it.
bustin out the strawman fallacy eh? nice to see someone else who actually studied logic. i didnt really take any time to phrase my opinion, i was just typing and eating ice cream ^^
idunno, i dont really care, i have a job so wtfusabbq?
|
|
|
|
|
|