I'm on Season 3 of Shameless on BBC. Well first off I really REALLY want Frank to...well...to move on. Someone from the UK please tell me that the GIRO(?) whatever it is that's like our (USA) Unemployment checks? Is it that really relied upon? I know its television and all that but Holy Hell its putting out a serious vibe that those individuals are like a major drag on society. Much like ours though Frank is warping my perception of it. Really warping my perception.

Seriously, you live in one of the richest countries on earth, and are engaging in a debate about whether working people should be paid enough to be able to afford a tv. Incredible.

Who give a gak where he lives. Owning a TV is hardly an unalienable human right.

Unions had a place when the worker population was made of largely uneducated people. That's not the case anymore.

Wonder if anyone told these brilliant McDs strikers that if they unionize they're going to have to pay monthly dues that negate some of that pay increase they're seeking.

 cincydooley wrote:

Seriously, you live in one of the richest countries on earth, and are engaging in a debate about whether working people should be paid enough to be able to afford a tv. Incredible.

Who give a gak where he lives. Owning a TV is hardly an unalienable human right.

Unions had a place when the worker population was made of largely uneducated people. That's not the case anymore.

Wonder if anyone told these brilliant McDs strikers that if they unionize they're going to have to pay monthly dues that negate some of that pay increase they're seeking.

Why do you think the unions are backing them? They're hoping to get their foot in the door of that cash cow.

At times...when I do think of unions. I am not sure if I am for them or against them. Some of the actions they do are quite "dumb" to say the least

And yes. I know the people relying on fast food as a full time job ARE comparatively uneducated. But we're not talking Upton Sinclaire levels of uneducated.

 djones520 wrote:
Unions had their hay day, and their on their way out. From what I just read, it seems like that in Europe as well. Even some of the more unionized countries are seeing drastic drops.

Union memberships look like they're in terminal decline all over the developed world, yeah.

Seaward wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
You're either trolling or have become a complete idiot; either way I'll pander here:

-You fly planes and talk down about post-secondary education.

Can you point me to the post where I did that? I believe you're confusing me with someone else in this thread.

You said you like your money too much to be subsidizing others, in relation to post-secondary tuition subsidies.

Seaward wrote:

-The planes you fly were designed as a byproduct of a massive push for post-secondary education.

And that's just absurd. We were in the business of fighting wars via air power long before anybody started making the push for every American to go to college.

And as a result, there was a massive push for every American to go to college, because the average grunts weren't likely to design jet planes.

Seaward wrote:

-The people who gained a post-secondary education were the ones who designed the planes that you fly.

A useful post-secondary education. They weren't designed by history and English majors.

Ah, so again, you believe the purpose of education is vocational training. What a dull existence you must dream of plunging the world into, where everyone is their job. The corn farmers only talk about corn, and the electicians only read magazines about circuits, or would, if only there was a tradesperson who could break out of their shell and publish one. Education makes you a complete person, and the abstract skills that go along with it are useful in almost any field.

Seaward wrote:

In other words, it is very ironic that you hold such a negative position towards university, considering without such emphasis on universities in the past, your profession basically wouldn't exist and you'd be asking for a raise up to $15 per hour right now.

Well, you've got a point there. It's incredibly competitive to wind up getting aviation out of either the Academy or OCS. From there, it's incredibly competitive to get jets. From jets, it was (at the time) incredibly competitive to get Super Hornets over EA-6Bs or S-3s. But you've got a point. Without "such emphasis on universities in the past," people who fething land jets on aircraft carriers would be minimum wage earners. Because, really, all that separates them from you is a lucky break, right? You totally could've done something like that, if only it hadn't been for all those basketweaving classes or whatever.

Honestly? Yeah, probably. But the lifestyle didn't suit me. On a related note, didn't I just read about a drone landing on an aircraft carrier?

Seaward wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:
Whilst the knowledge taught in such courses may not be directly useful to a lot of jobs, it is the skills learned which count for the value of the education received rather than, particularly, the subject studied. There are plenty of degrees which do not tie in directly with jobs but the people who undertake them are more employable, generally, in higher level roles than those who did not attend university.

I understand that's what we liberal arts majors tell ourselves, but it quite simply isn't true. When I got out and wasn't getting that delicious Navy money anymore, I tried to make my history degree as appealing as possible when I was sending resumes around. Just like the thousands of other people out there with worthless BAs. I certainly wasn't hired for it.

That's unfortunate. My education in criminology and history definitely contributed to my being hired.

Everyone would probably agree that a majority of a college degree unless its specific. I'm starting to get the feel that one is better off getting a "Tech" education is more desirable. Though adding a degree though enhances that Tech education.

Az you have a Law Degree? Just asking because for the life of me I can't remember what you do in the RL if you had posted it in some other thread

He knows how to hide bodies... (from an old threads).

 Jihadin wrote:
I'm on Season 3 of Shameless on BBC. Well first off I really REALLY want Frank to...well...to move on. Someone from the UK please tell me that the GIRO(?) whatever it is that's like our (USA) Unemployment checks? Is it that really relied upon? I know its television and all that but Holy Hell its putting out a serious vibe that those individuals are like a major drag on society. Much like ours though Frank is warping my perception of it. Really warping my perception.

Yeah its a welfare check. I cant comment on much else because I am aussie and dont know much about chav culture other then they are scum.

 cincydooley wrote:
Who give a gak where he lives. Owning a TV is hardly an unalienable human right.

Who said it was an inalienable human right? Why in the feth should something have to be an inalienable human right in order for an incredibly wealthy society to think its lowest paid workers should have enough money to afford it.

Unions had a place when the worker population was made of largely uneducated people. That's not the case anymore.

The decline of unions has nothing to do with education, but with the evolution of better industrial relations systems and health and safety standards... which of course unions played an important part in putting in to place. The unions effected their own demise by delivering to the workers what they had demanded.

 azazel the cat wrote:
You said you like your money too much to be subsidizing others, in relation to post-secondary tuition subsidies.

And an increased minimum wage. And social security. And Medicaid. And everything else.

And as a result, there was a massive push for every American to go to college, because the average grunts weren't likely to design jet planes.

And here we see why a history degree is completely worthless. Azazel's got one, and believes that the push for university in America was designed by the government for the purpose of producing planes.

Ah, so again, you believe the purpose of education is vocational training.

No, but I don't believe guys who are going to end up working some hourly job need to go to college to get there.

Honestly? Yeah, probably. But the lifestyle didn't suit me.

Oh, I'm sure. On an unrelated note, here's a story about Arthur Miller: Death of a Salesman had just opened on Broadway the night before, and he was walking around his old neighborhood in Brooklyn, and he sees a hot dog vendor that he went to high school with, and he says, "Hey Jimmy, it's me, Arthur Miller!" And the hot dog vendor says, "Artie, how you doing? What you been up to?" And Miller says, "Oh, I'm a playwright now. I've got a play on Broadway." And the hot dog vendor says, "Hmm, play writing... I should've gone into that."

On a related note, didn't I just read about a drone landing on an aircraft carrier?

You did indeed. How's that related, though?

That's unfortunate. My education in criminology and history definitely contributed to my being hired.

It's not unfortunate at all. Business development is far more lucrative than anything I'd be using my history degree for.

 Seaward wrote:

And here we see why a history degree is completely worthless.

A history degree is defintiely worthless to someone whose aspiration is to design and build jets. However, someone who dreams of working in a library, or museum or historical society... yeah, a history degree is kinda necessary. I wouldn't know of too many history/art museums to hire a BSEE holder to give guided tours, as they wouldn't know very much history.

You're going to spend $50 large to give guided tours in a museum? Did you just say that?

 Frazzled wrote:
You're going to spend $50 large to give guided tours in a museum? Did you just say that?

nope I said history degrees are useful for working in museums, unlike something like an Electronics Engineering degree... probably not the best example, however I do know that the "big" areas where history degrees are useful/hired at are museums, schools, historical societies, and libraries....

 pities2004 wrote:

Major corporations, banks etc start at about 14-15 dollars an hour, which is much more demanding and requiring more life skills.


Fast food is not a career and should not be paid like one

False... I work in the banking industry, and our starting wages are around $8.50-$9.00/hr.

What I think most people aren't getting about this strike is that it has nothing to do with "living wage" or "overwhelming profits". The fact is that IF McD's caves (they won't), then the prices of their food will scale accordingly to keep the profit margins similar. Alternately, there are ALWAYS young kids who will work for dirt cheap. This strike is a joke... and I'm personally going to laugh when McD's just fires and replaces all the "striking" workers.

Welcome to America, where you gotta know how to play the game.

 Irkhalu wrote:
and I'm personally going to laugh when McD's just fires and replaces all the "striking" workers.

Are you living in an alternate universe where fast food jobs are highly sought after? What are they going to replace a full crew with? A bunch of part time only high school students? A bunch of unemployed college grads that will leave at the merest hint of a better job? Skilled trade people won't be there for obvious reasons. It won't be non-college grad adults as they just fired them. To replace a full crew with any kind of speed they would have to create incentives such as increasing pay, which is counter intuitive to the whole point.

Or, they fire as they hire. Not hard to do at all. Typical turn over in fast food is very high. If management wants to increase that for a cycle they will be able to without much problem.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
You're going to spend $50 large to give guided tours in a museum? Did you just say that?

nope I said history degrees are useful for working in museums, unlike something like an Electronics Engineering degree... probably not the best example, however I do know that the "big" areas where history degrees are useful/hired at are museums, schools, historical societies, and libraries....

OK. No disagreement there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Are you living in an alternate universe where fast food jobs are highly sought after? What are they going to replace a full crew with?

More illegal aliens. Its not a big deal.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Irkhalu wrote:
and I'm personally going to laugh when McD's just fires and replaces all the "striking" workers.

Are you living in an alternate universe where fast food jobs are highly sought after? What are they going to replace a full crew with? A bunch of part time only high school students? A bunch of unemployed college grads that will leave at the merest hint of a better job? Skilled trade people won't be there for obvious reasons. It won't be non-college grad adults as they just fired them. To replace a full crew with any kind of speed they would have to create incentives such as increasing pay, which is counter intuitive to the whole point.

As was stated above, you just fire them a couple at a time, filling their spots as you go. McD's always has a hiring pool of applicants because people know that is where you go when all else fails... you get a fast food job. They have a high enough turn-over rate as it is to consider it a non-issue.

 Ahtman wrote:

Are you living in an alternate universe where fast food jobs are highly sought after? What are they going to replace a full crew with? A bunch of part time only high school students? A bunch of unemployed college grads that will leave at the merest hint of a better job? Skilled trade people won't be there for obvious reasons. It won't be non-college grad adults as they just fired them. To replace a full crew with any kind of speed they would have to create incentives such as increasing pay, which is counter intuitive to the whole point.

Who cares who it is. It's a low skill, high turnover position. They'd gradly take unemployed college grads that are are easier to train, even if their stay is longer. Always going to be another 16-year old that wants to soup up his Ford Focus or Honda Civic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Irkhalu wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Irkhalu wrote:
and I'm personally going to laugh when McD's just fires and replaces all the "striking" workers.

Are you living in an alternate universe where fast food jobs are highly sought after? What are they going to replace a full crew with? A bunch of part time only high school students? A bunch of unemployed college grads that will leave at the merest hint of a better job? Skilled trade people won't be there for obvious reasons. It won't be non-college grad adults as they just fired them. To replace a full crew with any kind of speed they would have to create incentives such as increasing pay, which is counter intuitive to the whole point.

As was stated above, you just fire them a couple at a time, filling their spots as you go. McD's always has a hiring pool of applicants because people know that is where you go when all else fails... you get a fast food job. They have a high enough turn-over rate as it is to consider it a non-issue.

Exactly. And the ONLY reason these places aren't filled with unemployed college grads and hipsters now is because most of them think they're "too good" for those jobs. THATS the real problem.

I'd almost guarantee with my resume I could go find a menial part time job to supplement my primary income within 14 days if wanted to/needed to.

I know if they do strike, first thing im doing is going over the Mcdonalds, Buldozing my way past the picket line and getting an application.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I know if they do strike, first thing im doing is going over the Mcdonalds, Buldozing my way past the picket line and getting an application.

Hey HS--- HOw old are you and where do you live, and what's your level of ed? If it fits, I can see if there's anything entry levelish with the company I work for.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
You're going to spend $50 large to give guided tours in a museum? Did you just say that?

nope I said history degrees are useful for working in museums, unlike something like an Electronics Engineering degree... probably not the best example, however I do know that the "big" areas where history degrees are useful/hired at are museums, schools, historical societies, and libraries....

OK. No disagreement there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Are you living in an alternate universe where fast food jobs are highly sought after? What are they going to replace a full crew with?

More illegal aliens. Its not a big deal.

That is the biggest joke here TBH, The illegal aliens get all the jobs here. You have to know someone to get a job as a teenager. An because mcdonalds requires, atleast here, "Must be available all hours" they are not hiring teens that dont want to work friday night. And AMEN about "Too good for fastfood" my sister worke two weeks at mcdonalds before she left because she didnt get enough free time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I know if they do strike, first thing im doing is going over the Mcdonalds, Buldozing my way past the picket line and getting an application.

Hey HS--- HOw old are you and where do you live, and what's your level of ed? If it fits, I can see if there's anything entry levelish with the company I work for.

Nah, I have a job, Im just making a joke about how the will hire people when other picket. Thanks though.

 cincydooley wrote:
And the ONLY reason these places aren't filled with unemployed college grads and hipsters now is because most of them think they're "too good" for those jobs. THATS the real problem.

Actually most fast food places don't like to hire college grads because it has been proven over and over that it is a waste of training since they leave as soon as another job comes there way. If you walk into McD's and say "I have a Bachelor's in X!" they aren't going to say "Welcome aboard!", they are going to say "WTF are you doing here? Next". Unless you are a Philosophy Major in which case they will ask "what took so long?". Fast Food already has enough issues with turnover they don't need to compound it by hiring people they know will walk out the door in five minutes. Part time on-campus fast food is a bit different, as they tend to use college students where High School students usually go.

 cincydooley wrote:
I'd almost guarantee with my resume I could go find a menial part time job to supplement my primary income within 14 days if wanted to/needed to.

Finding a part time job to supplement a normal full time job is a whole different animal then trying to find a full time position that is your main source of income.

 Ahtman wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
And the ONLY reason these places aren't filled with unemployed college grads and hipsters now is because most of them think they're "too good" for those jobs. THATS the real problem.

Actually most fast food places don't like to hire college grads because it has been proven over and over that it is a waste of training since they leave as soon as another job comes there way. If you walk into McD's and say "I have a Bachelor's in X!" they aren't going to say "Welcome aboard!", they are going to say "WTF are you doing here? Next". Unless you are a Philosophy Major in which case they will ask "what took so long?". Fast Food already has enough issues with turnover they don't need to compound it by hiring people they know will walk out the door in five minutes. Part time on-campus fast food is a bit different, as they tend to use college students where High School students usually go.

I could see that.

I recall articles just prior to the Recession that Plumbers and Electricians were where the jobs were at. Then the recession hit and guess who lost all their jobs. Construction workers included plumbers and electricians.

Think about Medical doctors. Scientists are dilligently working on computers that can diagnose issues using programs, does anyone doubt that these will become better than actual people? Then, why do we need doctors? Nurse Practiioners can write down the data and feed it to the computer.

Poof, Doctors are no longer highly skilled professionals. They are in the trash heap of history. What is hot at the moment you graduate is not what will be hot in the future. Despite what many people will tell you, there is no way to know for sure. So you might as well do something you want to do and make the best of it.

Edit: Oh yeah, if you want to do the Styem v Liberal Arts Wars, this place has a lot of data.

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/education/cb12-196.html

STEM is winning at the moment.

 Ahtman wrote:

Actually most fast food places don't like to hire college grads because it has been proven over and over that it is a waste of training since they leave as soon as another job comes there way. If you walk into McD's and say "I have a Bachelor's in X!" they aren't going to say "Welcome aboard!", they are going to say "WTF are you doing here? Next". Unless you are a Philosophy Major in which case they will ask "what took so long?". Fast Food already has enough issues with turnover they don't need to compound it by hiring people they know will walk out the door in five minutes. Part time on-campus fast food is a bit different, as they tend to use college students where High School students usually go.

I guess that simply wasn't my experience when I was laid off. Granted, I only applied at two fast food joints and mostly manual labor places like FedEx and UPS and a few other trucking companies, but I didn't have a problem. I did get the "WTF are you doing here" comment from the 24 year old (complete estimate) that interviewed me though. I was truthful and they offered me a job on the spot.

Finding a part time job to supplement a normal full time job is a whole different animal then trying to find a full time position that is your main source of income.

Well thats sort of the point then, isn't it. These shouldn't be full time jobs. They're not intended to be. At all.

Honestly, I don't know why any fast food restaurant would even hire for full time if you weren't in management. There's literally no reason for them to. With AHA, there's no way I'd even offer more than 20 hours a week unless you were management.

 Easy E wrote:
I recall articles just prior to the Recession that Plumbers and Electricians were where the jobs were at. Then the recession hit and guess who lost all their jobs. Construction workers included plumbers and electricians.

Think about Medical doctors. Scientists are dilligently working on computers that can diagnose issues using programs, does anyone doubt that these will become better than actual people? Then, why do we need doctors? Nurse Practiioners can write down the data and feed it to the computer.

Poof, Doctors are no longer highly skilled professionals. They are in the trash heap of history. What is hot at the moment you graduate is not what will be hot in the future. Despite what many people will tell you, there is no way to know for sure. So you might as well do something you want to do and make the best of it.

Edit: Oh yeah, if you want to do the Styem v Liberal Arts Wars, this place has a lot of data.

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/education/cb12-196.html

STEM is winning at the moment.

I will never get the htred there is in this world for liberal arts. I thoroughly enjoy sociology, a very real science, Why should I not persue it as a major? alot better then what some of my friends do. It is about how hard you work, not your degree i believe.

I will never get the htred there is in this world for liberal arts. I thoroughly enjoy sociology, a very real science, Why should I not persue it as a major? alot better then what some of my friends do. It is about how hard you work, not your degree i believe.

No hatred for it, but don't come whining to me when you can't get a job in the real world. I'd challenge you on sociology being a hard science though.*


*Not like basket weaving. Now thats sciency!

 cincydooley wrote:
These shouldn't be full time jobs.

But they have to have a core of full time people to be able to run the joint, as does any restaurant, or really any business for that matter.

Thats what the iron men are for.

How is sociology not a hard science? Everything they do follows the scientific method. You form theories, test them and post results. People dont know it but society has benefited from sociology many times. And there is a hatred for it. I see it quite a bit on dakka.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
How is sociology not a hard science? Everything they do follows the scientific method. You form theories, test them and post results. People dont know it but society has benefited from sociology many times. And there is a hatred for it. I see it quite a bit on dakka.

It's because sociology gets the bum rap of being related with "social work" or "social justice" major(s) in some cases. These are generally jobs that people do for the altruism aspect of it. "I just want to help people" Helping people doesn't require a degree... yes there are useful aspects of sociology, but it gets wrapped up with those other two social majors/degrees I had earlier in the post.

Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

 Ahtman wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
These shouldn't be full time jobs.

But they have to have a core of full time people to be able to run the joint, as does any restaurant, or really any business for that matter.

You lovingly ignored the part where I said, "except for management."

@hotsauce - It's not that there's a hatred for the Liberal Arts, its just that many of the degrees are worthless when it comes to "real world" application. I know plenty of people have espoused that "the skills I learned taking an entire class on Percy Shelly have application in the real world" but guess what; I'd have learned those skills if I was taking a more functional content class too. Critical thinking skills and problem solving skills are going to be learned (or at least should be learned if you're at a school worth anything) in whatever area you go into. But I can tell you now that the CONTENT of the accounting class you take is going to have a much broader 'real world' application than the CONTENT of the Shelly class.

Of any "liberal arts" classes I took, my two intro philosophy classes were the ones that are serving me the best today. They were both, essentially, logic and critical reasoning classes, and I'd actually encourage everyone to take something like that, as it does teach you how to think and how to craft a logical response. My technical writing classes were also worthwhile, as they have direct business world applicability. I loved my Beat Generation class and my American Lit class, but quite frankly, most of the writing skills and thinking skill I used within them I didn't learn there; the majority of that I learned in high school. Honestly, if you're just learning how to write a research paper or how to dissect a poem in college, you should be angry with your high school. Those are skills you SHOULD be learning there.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
These shouldn't be full time jobs.

But they have to have a core of full time people to be able to run the joint, as does any restaurant, or really any business for that matter.

You lovingly ignored the part where I said, "except for management."

No, I didn't. You still need some people beyond the management to run the place. As someone with really strong opinion about how fast food operations, you seem to have little idea on how they actually work day-to-day.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
How is sociology not a hard science? Everything they do follows the scientific method. You form theories, test them and post results. People dont know it but society has benefited from sociology many times. And there is a hatred for it. I see it quite a bit on dakka.

It's because sociology gets the bum rap of being related with "social work" or "social justice" major(s) in some cases. These are generally jobs that people do for the altruism aspect of it. "I just want to help people" Helping people doesn't require a degree... yes there are useful aspects of sociology, but it gets wrapped up with those other two social majors/degrees I had earlier in the post.

Also the rigorousness of the application of scientific method is sometimes more questionable. However I am not going to heavily argue this point, as my knowledge of university level sociology is minimal and will concede to your point if others support.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
These shouldn't be full time jobs.

But they have to have a core of full time people to be able to run the joint, as does any restaurant, or really any business for that matter.

You lovingly ignored the part where I said, "except for management."

No, I didn't. You still need some people beyond the management to run the place. As someone with really strong opinion about how fast food operations, you seem to have little idea on how they actually work day-to-day.

Again no discussion of iron men. When will the lowly robot gets it credit???

 Frazzled wrote:
Again no discussion of iron men. When will the lowly robot gets it credit???

After the glorious iron men revolution, of course.

Iron men strike for $15 an hour! Outrageous!

 Ahtman wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
These shouldn't be full time jobs.

But they have to have a core of full time people to be able to run the joint, as does any restaurant, or really any business for that matter.

You lovingly ignored the part where I said, "except for management."

No, I didn't. You still need some people beyond the management to run the place. As someone with really strong opinion about how fast food operations, you seem to have little idea on how they actually work day-to-day.

Please, enlighten me. Granted, I've only worked at one fast food place when I was like 19, but we certainly didn't need any management there for D2D operations. Keyholders and supervisors certainly don't need to be full timers.

A part time superviser?

 Frazzled wrote:
A part time superviser?

Oh yeah. We had two morning shift supervisors and two evening shift supervisors. None of us were full time (I was an evening shift supe and worked like, 20-26 hours a week).

I mean, it's really not that hard.

My dad is a shift supervisor at a retail clothing store... He's part time, gets paid slightly above gak, and only works 20 hours a week... It's doable to be part time "management"

I mean, we were a bunch of 18-24 year olds and we managed not to ever burn the place down. It didn't really take a ton of effort to ensure that happened.

You'd be amazed at what a moderately motivated group of young adults can do on their own. /sarcasm.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
How is sociology not a hard science? Everything they do follows the scientific method. You form theories, test them and post results. People dont know it but society has benefited from sociology many times. And there is a hatred for it. I see it quite a bit on dakka.

It's because sociology gets the bum rap of being related with "social work" or "social justice" major(s) in some cases. These are generally jobs that people do for the altruism aspect of it. "I just want to help people" Helping people doesn't require a degree... yes there are useful aspects of sociology, but it gets wrapped up with those other two social majors/degrees I had earlier in the post.

It is true that alot of Profs are left leaning, and it is very tied into Politics sometimes. But I LOVE to research why the way things are. I mean why is it China still has selective abrtion problems and what are ways t fix it. Sociology is very often about trying to fix problems.

 cincydooley wrote:
You'd be amazed at what a moderately motivated group of young adults can do on their own. /sarcasm.

That group has pretty reliably not amazed me in most of their undertakings, with perhaps the sole exception of "making bongs out of stuff".

 cincydooley wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
A part time superviser?

Oh yeah. We had two morning shift supervisors and two evening shift supervisors. None of us were full time (I was an evening shift supe and worked like, 20-26 hours a week).

I mean, it's really not that hard.

Mmm. learn something every day.*



*OK thats a lie. I haven't learned anything since the last ice age.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

It is true that alot of Profs are left leaning, and it is very tied into Politics sometimes. But I LOVE to research why the way things are. I mean why is it China still has selective abrtion problems and what are ways t fix it. Sociology is very often about trying to fix problems.

Interesting.

 Ouze wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
You'd be amazed at what a moderately motivated group of young adults can do on their own. /sarcasm.

That group has pretty reliably not amazed me in most of their undertakings, with perhaps the sole exception of "making bongs out of stuff".

^^ This

I wonder if we will see a wave of strikes across the country now?

Bring it! Power to the People! Raise your Fist for Freedom!

 Easy E wrote:
Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

Um where?

Every call center i've worked at just requires you talk on the phone.

No degrees needed, hell barely a high school diploma. Wells Fargo Auto collections, classy

 pities2004 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

Um where?

Every call center i've worked at just requires you talk on the phone.

No degrees needed, hell barely a high school diploma. Wells Fargo Auto collections, classy

Yeah, no degree required at our call centers either.

For the one I work with, a fething CS degree is "preferred".

You can imagine how many people like that we've gotten.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
How is sociology not a hard science? Everything they do follows the scientific method. You form theories, test them and post results. People dont know it but society has benefited from sociology many times. And there is a hatred for it. I see it quite a bit on dakka.

It's because sociology gets the bum rap of being related with "social work" or "social justice" major(s) in some cases. These are generally jobs that people do for the altruism aspect of it. "I just want to help people" Helping people doesn't require a degree... yes there are useful aspects of sociology, but it gets wrapped up with those other two social majors/degrees I had earlier in the post.

It can also get lumped in with Psychology, which is also viewed as a major pseudo-science..It's partly because when dealing with human reactions, emotions and thought processes, or even group think, there is honestly no real way to scientifically prove anything, because people are too individual.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:

Baxx wrote:
What do you pay in taxes?

Right now I pay myself 12$/hour, I only declare 35 hours a week and end up with 460$ bi-weekly, net. So Gross is 840$, net is 460$, I pay about 45% taxes. It's not all income taxes, though, as a wee bit goes to mandated UI, Provincial retirement fund (which should be bankrupt by the time I get to the age where I'd need it)

Quebec workers pay taxes to both their provincial government and federal government. Last time I checked, we were the only province to do so, it might have changed in the last few years, so don't hold me to that.

That money doesn't go very far... I do hope to find a job in a high school to supplement that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and since we have a little old lady doing the taxes for us... I rarely get anything back. When I did them on my own I might get a few hundreds from each government back come tax time.

Something's awfully wrong with those numbers, or you are in some sort of special bracket I never want to set foot in. 12$/Hour, 35 hours a week should get you a taxation rate of 16% prov, 15% fed. Montreal's municipal taxes only go as high as 13% for appartment buildings (I looked at Rosemont, assuming it would be the highest).

Uncanny. I am in Rosemont. You're right about the taxation rate, but our accountant keeps messing with my pay, for some reason. I told them to increase my taxation by 15%, and he added 15% per level of government. Nice, uh?

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
How is sociology not a hard science? Everything they do follows the scientific method. You form theories, test them and post results. People dont know it but society has benefited from sociology many times. And there is a hatred for it. I see it quite a bit on dakka.

It's because sociology gets the bum rap of being related with "social work" or "social justice" major(s) in some cases. These are generally jobs that people do for the altruism aspect of it. "I just want to help people" Helping people doesn't require a degree... yes there are useful aspects of sociology, but it gets wrapped up with those other two social majors/degrees I had earlier in the post.

It can also get lumped in with Psychology, which is also viewed as a major pseudo-science..It's partly because when dealing with human reactions, emotions and thought processes, or even group think, there is honestly no real way to scientifically prove anything, because people are too individual.

My teacher had a rebuttal to that. That is it about trying to prove ANYTHING about a group. There are always outliers. It about trying to discern why a certain pattern is repeated many times over. Like women getting paid less then men. It is true some get paid more, but there is enough of a pattern to discern that something is amiss. Just like Other sciences. I remember something in my geology class. When a faul splits in splits in 3s. 2 of those fissures will develop into water beds or oceans. one will not. There is one exception in our history where all 3 split into waterbeds. does that disprve the others? No. it is just an outlier.
The reason I think people dont like psychology or sociology? Other sciences teach you about the world, We teach you about yourself and you might not like it.

Jihadin wrote:Everyone would probably agree that a majority of a college degree unless its specific. I'm starting to get the feel that one is better off getting a "Tech" education is more desirable. Though adding a degree though enhances that Tech education.

Az you have a Law Degree? Just asking because for the life of me I can't remember what you do in the RL if you had posted it in some other thread

No, I never went to law school. Was going to, but then something else came along and caught my attention. And I have never said what I do (I'm private like that, I guess ...but someone paying very close attention for a very long time now could've perhaps worked it out)


@Whembly: I have no idea how to hide a body in this day and age. I know how to disappear bodies.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Everyone would probably agree that a majority of a college degree unless its specific. I'm starting to get the feel that one is better off getting a "Tech" education is more desirable. Though adding a degree though enhances that Tech education.

Az you have a Law Degree? Just asking because for the life of me I can't remember what you do in the RL if you had posted it in some other thread

No, I never went to law school. Was going to, but then something else came along and caught my attention. And I have never said what I do (I'm private like that, I guess ...but someone paying very close attention for a very long time now could've perhaps worked it out)


@Whembly: I have no idea how to hide a body in this day and age. I know how to disappear bodies.

Are...are you the "cleaner" that everyone talks about after a shoot-out? The one who makes pesky problems like dead bodies, as you say, "disappear"? Cause I've got a corpse stinking up the joint in my room ever since I fed my roommate too many prunes and his body is still excreting bodily fluids. Could you hook me up with some hydrochloric acid at least if you can't come?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The reason I think people dont like psychology or sociology? Other sciences teach you about the world, We teach you about yourself and you might not like it.

As a scientist and engineer, I used to lump all the pseudo-sciences together. Over time I can see the scientific method behind some of the work being done and I agree that it can be as rigorous as anything dealing with humans, human reactions and such complex systems can hope to be at this time - but it is very early days in establishing it as a true science; kind of how alchemy foreshadowed chemistry I would suggest that sociology foreshadows genuine understanding and manipulation of humanity. There is still a lot of bunk out there.

Granted my interest in sociology and other such fields is very limited, although three of the students on my last MSc course were on various neuro-psych undergraduate courses which was interesting to talk about.

 pities2004 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

Um where?

Every call center i've worked at just requires you talk on the phone.

No degrees needed, hell barely a high school diploma. Wells Fargo Auto collections, classy

Can I ask when the last time you worked at a Call Center was?

Sociology gets a bum rap because it is a pseudoscience using poor statistics and the trappings of science to make claims about the nature of things. if it wouldn't pretend toward rigor and would instead focus on building stro.g arguments from experience and logic like other well respected humanities disciplines, it would garner more respect. Science isn't the be all and end all of disciplines, but half assed science is pretty damaging.

Regardless of why sociology gets a bum rap, a sociology degree isn't very marketable. For that reason alone I would encourage my kid to look at something else.

It is marketable if that is the field you are going into. I plan to actually become a teacher someday with it. It is a very real science and I wish people would treat it that way.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
It is marketable if that is the field you are going into. I plan to actually become a teacher someday with it. It is a very real science and I wish people would treat it that way.

No. Its marketable if that field has...jobs. Many on the humanities side are finding there aren't now. All those dang Me Generation types just refuse to die.

Yes, the world only has room for Math and Science degreees!

That is exactly what I keep hearing from people. I hate math and I hate engineering, it is boring. But everyone says I should go into the field.
Yes, I should go into a field I hate and subsequently am no good at. Im sure to get a job if i hate the field.

 Easy E wrote:
Yes, the world only has room for Math and Science degreees!

Plus Marketing. Thats where all the cool kids hang out.
And Culinary Arts. Always attempting to build a better cake!

I tried Culinary..............My Proffessor didnt like my jelepeno icecream with ghost pepper chocolate sauce.

You can't make money in the Culinary Arts. The cake on FOOD network is a lie!

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I tried Culinary..............My Proffessor didnt like my jelepeno icecream with ghost pepper chocolate sauce.

So? Did it taste good? Would people pay money for it?

He said it tasted like ass.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
He said it tasted like ass.

And you're going to let the narrow-minded palette of a single person stop you from being the next Food Network Star?

Yes yes I am. Now back to watching a movie that saly parrallel my sad no existent love life.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
It is marketable if that is the field you are going into. I plan to actually become a teacher someday with it. It is a very real science and I wish people would treat it that way.

So the point of Sociology is to teach Sociology?

While also studying and researching it.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
While also studying and researching it.

Again, not a field that is gonna pay the bucks nor be in high demand anytime in the near to mid-term future. If you are happy with it and can actually get a job in it, good for you. As an investment in your future (time and $$s spent on your education) it does not have a high pay off at all, and in act is a risky investment. To be even slightly competitive you will need a PHD in it, and that is a huge investment.

 Easy E wrote:

 pities2004 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

Um where?

Every call center i've worked at just requires you talk on the phone.

No degrees needed, hell barely a high school diploma. Wells Fargo Auto collections, classy

Can I ask when the last time you worked at a Call Center was?

Today. (I actually develop software for call centers)

Unless you are talking about very specialized call centers like banks, insurance companies, health assistance, etc, there are no degrees required for the average tele-marketing call center operator. The computer even tells the operator what exact sentences he has to use while interacting with a client...

Bank call centers certainly don't require a degree.

 cincydooley wrote:
Bank call centers certainly don't require a degree.

Depends on the type really, we have a new trend in bank call centers over here in that the operator has the same skill set and responsibilities as a regular customer manager that works on a physical branch. He is supposed to advise the customers that are on his portfolio about investment opportunities, stock, loans, etc. Those types of operators are required to have a degree in much the same way as their "physical" counterparts do.

That is how things work here, I have no idea if they are any different in the US.

PhantomViper wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Bank call centers certainly don't require a degree.

Depends on the type really, we have a new trend in bank call centers over here in that the operator has the same skill set and responsibilities as a regular customer manager that works on a physical branch. He is supposed to advise the customers that are on his portfolio about investment opportunities, stock, loans, etc. Those types of operators are required to have a degree in much the same way as their "physical" counterparts do.

That is how things work here, I have no idea if they are any different in the US.

In the US... there are many investment firms that'll handle that.

 CptJake wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
While also studying and researching it.

Again, not a field that is gonna pay the bucks nor be in high demand anytime in the near to mid-term future. If you are happy with it and can actually get a job in it, good for you. As an investment in your future (time and $$s spent on your education) it does not have a high pay off at all, and in act is a risky investment. To be even slightly competitive you will need a PHD in it, and that is a huge investment.

Like i said, it is something i throughly enjoy and love. The only thing i love slightly more is film. But I dont want a job in film. Yes I know it isnt going to pay the big bucks, But few ays things do.

PhantomViper wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Bank call centers certainly don't require a degree.

Depends on the type really, we have a new trend in bank call centers over here in that the operator has the same skill set and responsibilities as a regular customer manager that works on a physical branch. He is supposed to advise the customers that are on his portfolio about investment opportunities, stock, loans, etc. Those types of operators are required to have a degree in much the same way as their "physical" counterparts do.

That is how things work here, I have no idea if they are any different in the US.

I think we must just be mixing meanings of call center. In the US there are typically service call centers and collections call centers for banks. Neither, that I'm aware of, require degrees. Sorry for the mix up.

Wait, I thought all call centers where in india?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Wait, I thought all call centers where in india?

Sure seems that way, doesn't it?

Add "Communications Degree" to the list of useless degrees. And, yes, if you want to earn the big bucks, you will take math and computer programming (java/C#) and learn both competently. Who cares if you like it or not? That's what vacations in the Bahamas are for. I'll bet you'll like those. And a nice house in the good area of town. And a nice car. Try getting these with a sociology, communications, or lib arts degree.

What is the point of a nice car if i have to drive it to a job I utterly loathe?

Hotsauce, sociology is not a science. But that's okay. It doesn't have to be a science to be a useful or important field. The problems looked at by sociology are not suited to the scientific method due to the large number of obscure variables and the trouble with taking statistical information from humans. But that doesn't mean the old fashioned methof of building airtight arguments cannot be used. Sociology gets a bum rap from scientists because some sociologists use very poor science like methods to push a social policy motivated by ideology rather than evidence.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 pities2004 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

Um where?

Every call center i've worked at just requires you talk on the phone.

No degrees needed, hell barely a high school diploma. Wells Fargo Auto collections, classy

Can I ask when the last time you worked at a Call Center was?

Today. (I actually develop software for call centers)

Unless you are talking about very specialized call centers like banks, insurance companies, health assistance, etc, there are no degrees required for the average tele-marketing call center operator. The computer even tells the operator what exact sentences he has to use while interacting with a client...

I can promise you that the above is just about correct.

Entry-level positions in call centres not only do not require degrees, but typically will shun them. Many call centers will require some type of personality evaluation, and will only select those candidates which a moderate aptitude and a low motivation, because the single greatest drain on the cost-versus-productivity of call centres is their high turnover rate. As such, a moderate aptitude is about the best you can hope for before the typical person will start to express motivation and may seek employment elsewhere, or move on in another fashion, and thus contribute to the turnover rate.

Da Boss wrote:Hotsauce, sociology is not a science. But that's okay. It doesn't have to be a science to be a useful or important field. The problems looked at by sociology are not suited to the scientific method due to the large number of obscure variables and the trouble with taking statistical information from humans. But that doesn't mean the old fashioned methof of building airtight arguments cannot be used. Sociology gets a bum rap from scientists because some sociologists use very poor science like methods to push a social policy motivated by ideology rather than evidence.

It's considered a "soft science" when it is done properly and paired closely with statistical analysis.

'Soft science' to me means 'I want to make you believe something counter intuitive, so I've done a t test for significance on some heavily smoothed data and written out a method to make it look like I'm doing science! Now I don't have to make any sort of argument because of the Science!' It discredits science and leads to bloody awful social policy.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
What is the point of a nice car if i have to drive it to a job I utterly loathe?

So you can go to job interviews in style as you climb the ladder to better jobs?

 Breotan wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
What is the point of a nice car if i have to drive it to a job I utterly loathe?

So you can go to job interviews in style as you climb the ladder to better jobs?

winner, winner chicken dinner!

I had to work through several jobs to land where I want. Use it as a stepping stone.

SO I should take course I utterly hate?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I give up. It is clear that people here just only conform to their idea that the there are several good degrees and nothing else in this educational field can be useful

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
SO I should take course I utterly hate?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I give up. It is clear that people here just only conform to their idea that the there are several good degrees and nothing else in this educational field can be useful

You need to decide what you want out of life. If a job you love (assuming you can actually get one) is the most important thing, go for it. Personally I can tolerate a lot to make enough to do and have the things I really enjoy. Going 10s of thousands of dollars into debt to study something You Really Like but which will be hard to find employment, let alone employment which allows you to pay off the debt you incur during your studies just isn't something I would advise anyone to do. Incurring debt without a way to get out of it is just a bad move, even if it means you have fun in school. At some point most people realize they can separate work from not work, and use the money earned through work to fund what they enjoy...

I am no where near incurring dept in anyway. All my general education has been paid for. And my entire first year of university has been paid for already.

Listen, math and science aren't the ONLY things that will get you jobs. You need to take classes that have practical application. Now, is it true that programming degrees are abundant right now (I think last time I looked there are like, 3 jobs for every one degree holder), but it's not the only thing.

Sauce, if you're interested in sociology, look into project management and development. While not as abundant as programming, there is a high level of need for those positions. And those positions all involve a sort of sociology; you have to be able to read people, figure out how they work, figure out the best ways to motivate them, and then figure out the practical application of putting their specialized work to use. It's funny, but it's really the scenario from Office Space, except the position iis pretty highly valued now.

 Easy E wrote:

 pities2004 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

Um where?

Every call center i've worked at just requires you talk on the phone.

No degrees needed, hell barely a high school diploma. Wells Fargo Auto collections, classy

Can I ask when the last time you worked at a Call Center was?

I've worked in, what, 6 different call centers? Three of them which are actually big ones, either for tax calculation assistance, relay service for the deaf and mute or a few other things. High school diplomas are asked for, but they never actually required proof of them. Most middle management jobs don't require a degree either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
Hotsauce, sociology is not a science. But that's okay. It doesn't have to be a science to be a useful or important field. The problems looked at by sociology are not suited to the scientific method due to the large number of obscure variables and the trouble with taking statistical information from humans. But that doesn't mean the old fashioned methof of building airtight arguments cannot be used. Sociology gets a bum rap from scientists because some sociologists use very poor science like methods to push a social policy motivated by ideology rather than evidence.

I don't see why everyone here bashes on sociology. As far as low employment degrees goes, that's not the worse. Psychology is at the bottom (and that's a realler science!) and anthropology is much worse than sociology. Also, the demand for sociology follows the demand for economy, which follows a cycle that will start ascending again in 2017.

Also, sociology (when it is done properly and doesn't attempt to be social philosophy), is as much as science as any other. A science is an set of beliefs held for true and believed to be demonstrable, about a particular object. Sociology produces such knowledge ; for example, we know that during the time Durkheim made his study of suicides, that societies of Protestant affiliation was much more prone to suicide than societies of Catholic affiliation, which were still more prone to it than Jewish societies. That's as much a hard knowledge as knowing at what temperature ice forms from water.

If you want to bitch about a pseudo-science, bitch about anthropology, where it is actually impossible for the observer to distance himself from his object of study.

Doesn't anthropology deal with human evolution isn't that pretty sciencey?

 Cheesecat wrote:
Doesn't anthropology deal with human evolution isn't that pretty sciencey?

Anthropology has to do with studying culture, both modern and past.

 Cheesecat wrote:
Doesn't anthropology deal with human evolution isn't that pretty sciencey?

Anthropology is a pretty huge field with a lot of different areas of specialization.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
SO I should take course I utterly hate?

Well, it depends.

If your goal is to have a lot of money and try to retire early, then yes - you should absolutely take courses and even jobs that you hate if they are strongly likely to lead to better paying jobs.

If your goal is to pick something that makes you happy and can accept that you won't have as much financial success, then you should do that instead. You have to find your middle ground between the financial security you want and the lifestyle you wish to enjoy. Teaching doesn't pay well, but there are certainly people who are happy and fulfilled teaching.

I know perfectly well I can easily move into substantially higher paying positions either by relocating, or by continuing my programming education. I have chosen not to because I have inexpensive tastes, lots of free time, and a relaxing job I enjoy. I know I am trading off more money for those things and I am content with that decision.

You have to pick the balance you like as well. Also, stop listening to these guys about how there are only a couple of degrees that are worth anything, it's stupid. The exact flavor of your undergrad degree isn't that meaningful anyway if you decide you want to further with your education regardless of what it's in: Mitt Romney did pretty well with his B.A. in English, after all. You decide when to stop.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
Doesn't anthropology deal with human evolution isn't that pretty sciencey?

Anthropology has to do with studying culture, both modern and past.

I thought it was the study of humanity in general both from a biological and social perspective.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
Doesn't anthropology deal with human evolution isn't that pretty sciencey?

Anthropology has to do with studying culture, both modern and past.

I thought it was the study of humanity in general both from a biological and social perspective.

It depends on what part of the field you focus on. There are multiple subdisciplines.

Da Boss wrote:'Soft science' to me means 'I want to make you believe something counter intuitive, so I've done a t test for significance on some heavily smoothed data and written out a method to make it look like I'm doing science! Now I don't have to make any sort of argument because of the Science!' It discredits science and leads to bloody awful social policy.

I've underlined the part that basically removes any relevance the rest of the quote might have. What you believe, at least in this case, is not what is, no matter how hard you believe it. Sociology is at times as much a hard science as anything; often when combined with statistical analysis. Honestly, it sounds as if you don't understand the difference between qualitative and quantitative research, and are relying on the erroneous belief that sociology is the social-policy equivalent of the 19th-century armchair psychologists.

It isn't.

hotsauceman1 wrote:SO I should take course I utterly hate?

Also, I give up. It is clear that people here just only conform to their idea that the there are several good degrees and nothing else in this educational field can be useful

Learn about the things that interest you. I loved taking criminology and history, and I have a great job that utilizes both. And I did it without having to compromise. Now, I'm not saying that my situation is typical at all, but what I do intend to mean is that if you have a background in a field that you are passionate about, then you will find work in its field. That work might not pay you 250k a year, but honestly, how much better do you feel you need to eat? I would rather go to work and earn a middle class income doing something that I love, than begrudgingly dragging myself to work every day for a better wage in exchange for my soul and passion.

I recognize that I'm kinda speaking from the privileged position of earning an excellent wage and doing what I like, but ultimately the decision is up to you, and I think you should make the decision based on what you would want to spend 30-some-odd years doing, rather than making a career choice based upon the abstract notion that traditional "hard" sciences are the only option.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Learn about the things that interest you. I loved taking criminology and history, and I have a great job that utilizes both. And I did it without having to compromise. Now, I'm not saying that my situation is typical at all, but what I do intend to mean is that if you have a background in a field that you are passionate about, then you will find work in its field. That work might not pay you 250k a year, but honestly, how much better do you feel you need to eat? I would rather go to work and earn a middle class income doing something that I love, than begrudgingly dragging myself to work every day for a better wage in exchange for my soul and passion.

I recognize that I'm kinda speaking from the privileged position of earning an excellent wage and doing what I like, but ultimately the decision is up to you, and I think you should make the decision based on what you would want to spend 30-some-odd years doing, rather than making a career choice based upon the abstract notion that traditional "hard" sciences are the only option.

Best advice in the thread by far.

Oh no, wherever will I get my $5 ratburger served by a disinterested pimplebot?

Do you guys know if this is strictly Mcdonalds & Burger King that are striking, or are Subway employees striking as well?

 Irkhalu wrote:
What I think most people aren't getting about this strike is that it has nothing to do with "living wage" or "overwhelming profits". The fact is that IF McD's caves (they won't), then the prices of their food will scale accordingly to keep the profit margins similar.

I reckon I've probably posted five replies in this thread explaining why stuff similar to the above is junk economics. I reckon in other minimum wage threads I've posted explanation nearing 30 times now, maybe more. Truly, it is one of great junk economic theories, notable for its silliness and the fact that it will not die.

Anyhow, if McDonalds could just up their prices at will, they would have done so already. Prices are as they are because it represents the optimal point of variable profit, increasing them will result in a decline in sales that . If a fixed cost input increases on McDonalds alone, then the company just has to wear it. If it impacted McDonalds competitors like KFC as well, then you'll see a price increase that covers some, but not all of the price, depending on the level of substitition between the various companies.

And beyond the economics of it... just pretending the above claim was true, what kind of a selfish, hateful bs world must people live in where 'oh sure, the lowest paid workers would have slightly better living standard, but a Big Mac would cost me 12c more so it must not happen' becomes an economic argument?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:
Yes, the world only has room for Math and Science degreees!

There's plenty of science and math areas that have completely terrible employment prospects. The world gets a hell of a lot from physicists, but it only needs a small portion of the ones it trains. Some of the rest end up moving in to other high level math jobs like hedge funds, and the rest go back and do other degrees. The same is true of the most high end specialisations.

Stuff like sociology has pretty solid employment prospects - its just that the pay is pretty crappy for a position needing a degree. But then the same is true of nursing, and I don't think you'd see many people claiming that people shouldn't do nursing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:
Again, not a field that is gonna pay the bucks nor be in high demand anytime in the near to mid-term future. If you are happy with it and can actually get a job in it, good for you. As an investment in your future (time and $$s spent on your education) it does not have a high pay off at all, and in act is a risky investment. To be even slightly competitive you will need a PHD in it, and that is a huge investment.

If people were generic robots with a single function to maxmise earning potential, the above would be good advice.

A very strange thing has happened. In economics, starting a long time ago, people made assumptions that everyone knew weren't really true, but were important to making the models simple enough to demonstrate a general principal. ie It was assumed that people weren't really always seeking maximum profit, but trying to model their real motives in would have made utility maximisation graphs horrendously messy and obtuse and told us nothing about how the population as a whole tends to work.

Over time those models explained a lot of things very well, and people started to internalise them. But here's the weird thing - they started to internalise the assumptions as well. The idea that 'profit maximising' wasn't just a good enough assumption, but a thing that was actually true for all people, at all times. They started living their own lives that way, thinking that was all they were supposed to do.

The result is, well, some remarkably terrible advice, both at a policy level and a personal level.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 pities2004 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Neither does anwering a phone, but most call centers require a degree too.

Um where?

Every call center i've worked at just requires you talk on the phone.

No degrees needed, hell barely a high school diploma. Wells Fargo Auto collections, classy

Can I ask when the last time you worked at a Call Center was?

I've worked in, what, 6 different call centers? Three of them which are actually big ones, either for tax calculation assistance, relay service for the deaf and mute or a few other things. High school diplomas are asked for, but they never actually required proof of them. Most middle management jobs don't require a degree either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Since the recession, I have seent he "qualifications" needed to be a decent applicant raise from no degree of any kind to College degree. Granted the geographic area I work in, all Call Centers are specialized and they are all at the "escalation" level. I.e. you have all ready talked to some low wage contractors in a different country before you get to the ones in my geographic area. Of course, this is usually also accompanied by some sort of quota and inbound sales requirement as well. Now, a lot of the Call Centers in my area won't look at anyone without a degree because there are enough unemployed people out there that they can be picky.

However, many of the people working in the call centers have been in these positions a number of years because they got in before the degree requirements, and now they are stuck on the bottom rung of the corporate ladder. If you need a college degree just to get in the door now, how are these non-college grads going to move up the ladder?

Again, this may not be a universal across the country gig, but specific to my local Call Center environment.

 Breotan wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Wait, I thought all call centers where in india?

Sure seems that way, doesn't it?

Add "Communications Degree" to the list of useless degrees. And, yes, if you want to earn the big bucks, you will take math and computer programming (java/C#) and learn both competently. Who cares if you like it or not? That's what vacations in the Bahamas are for. I'll bet you'll like those. And a nice house in the good area of town. And a nice car. Try getting these with a sociology, communications, or lib arts degree.

No. You become a chemical engineer. Indians will do the programming.

Bah, computer algorithms will be able to do whatever you want to do better than you can soon enough.

Just drop out and be a reality TV star, until we have robots that can do that too.

 Frazzled wrote:

No. You become a chemical engineer. Indians will do the programming.

Actually, the Indians are getting too expensive. Last time I checked, the hotness for tech is China/Korea.

Maybe. Its hard to keep up.