Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:

Same here, outside of my tutoring I get paid minimum wage, and at Costco you have to work an ungodly amount of hours to even get top-step pay, which sucks when they push newer employees to work super efficiently (beyond what should be expected at least for a single person) but there's no real incentive to do so (as many of the full-time workers there know), I'm just lucky to have relatively good benefits in comparison to other minimum wage jobs.

Is Costco (I'm assuming we're talking about the wholesale grocery chain, right?) that much different in Canada from the US??

Here in the US it is one of, if not THE best grocery chain to work for, they simply do not pay minimum wage (usually they start off at $12/hr, but if local min. is higher, they go up proportionally), and have a solid reputation of treating workers right.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
If I can give my feelings as a Millennial.
I feel as if I was just funneled through a system that wants my money and nothing more. I was constantly told to go to college and get a degree. I went, got told to learn what I love, did that, left college with some debt(only 15000, not the 300000+ of some of my centemparies) that is paused because vi work for a non profit. I couldn't find anything after college. Got screws by temps. I'm just happy that now I work where I made double minimum wage.
But even if I work full time, I can't afford to live on my own. Like at all.
It's frustrating to go through all what the previous generation told me to do, but not come out even in the middle, it feels like I was led down the wrong path.

 trexmeyer wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
If I can give my feelings as a Millennial.
I feel as if I was just funneled through a system that wants my money and nothing more. I was constantly told to go to college and get a degree. I went, got told to learn what I love, did that, left college with some debt(only 15000, not the 300000+ of some of my centemparies) that is paused because vi work for a non profit. I couldn't find anything after college. Got screws by temps. I'm just happy that now I work where I made double minimum wage.
But even if I work full time, I can't afford to live on my own. Like at all.
It's frustrating to go through all what the previous generation told me to do, but not come out even in the middle, it feels like I was led down the wrong path.

College is a scam. I went to a coding boot camp and got a job making 3x minimum wage+ immediately. Roughly the same or more than what I would have made with the degree I was pursuing (assuming I could get a job in that field since it seems cutthroat). I think rent is roughly one fifth of my take home pay IIRC. Web/Mobile app development is a great field with a lot of opportunities, but sadly many (if not most) of the people trying to get into are not good developers and show little potential.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Anyways, I am afraid that my generation (I was born in 1999) is going to have it even worse.

According to our calculations, the increase in student loan debt between 2005
and 2014 reduced the homeownership rate among young adults by 2 percentage
points. The homeownership rate for this group fell 9 percentage points over
this period (figure 2), implying that a little over 20 percent of the overall decline
in homeownership among the young can be attributed to the rise in student
loan debt. This represents over 400,000 young individuals who would have
owned a home in 2014 had it not been for the rise in debt.

 Easy E wrote:
Some more information about the impact of student debt on buying a house.....

https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/consumer-community-context-201901.pdf?mod=article_inline

From the Fed's research:

According to our calculations, the increase in student loan debt between 2005
and 2014 reduced the homeownership rate among young adults by 2 percentage
points. The homeownership rate for this group fell 9 percentage points over
this period (figure 2), implying that a little over 20 percent of the overall decline
in homeownership among the young can be attributed to the rise in student
loan debt. This represents over 400,000 young individuals who would have
owned a home in 2014 had it not been for the rise in debt.

Education Debt and Student Loans
Among young adults who attend college, it is increasingly expected that at least a portion of their education will be financed through a student loan or through other forms of borrowing. The survey asks respondents about their use of borrowing to finance their education and the status of any loans that they incurred. The results show that the repayment status of student loans is highly correlated with the respondents' family background and the type of institution that they attended. In particular, individuals who either did not complete their degree or who attended a for-profit institution are disproportionately likely to fall behind on their student loan payments.
Student Loans Overview
Thirty percent of adults report that they borrowed money to pay for expenses related to their own education, including 17 percent who currently owe money on these loans and 13 percent who borrowed money that they have since repaid. Among those who completed at least some education beyond high school, 43 percent acquired at least some debt to finance that education, and 53 percent of those who completed at least a bachelor's degree acquired at least some debt in the process. Consistent with the higher rate of borrowing among recent cohorts of college attendees, the fraction of adults who have ever borrowed for their education is slightly above that observed in the 2015 survey. Further reflecting recent increases in educational borrowing, for each level of education, the likelihood of borrowing is highest among those ages 18 to 29 (figure 27).
While education debt is often in the form of student loans, this is not the exclusive form of borrowing to pay for higher education expenses. Among respondents who report that they currently owe money for their own educational expenses, 94 percent report owing money on student loans, but 20 percent have education-related credit card debt, 5 percent have a home-equity loan or line of credit used for education expenses, and 4 percent have education debt of some other form.40
Among respondents who report that they currently owe student loan debt for their own education, the mean level of this debt is $32,731 and the median is $17,000.41 (The median amount of education debt is consistently lower than the mean due to some individuals with large levels of debt.) Considering other forms of debt for one's own education, the median amount of education-related credit card debt among those who have this debt is $2,500 and the median education-related home-equity loan is $10,000. Looking at all debt acquired for the respondent's own education combined, the median level of education debt is $19,000 (table 29).
Not all respondents who have outstanding education debt are currently making payments on all of their loans. Thirty-eight percent of respondents with outstanding student loan debt from their own education indicate that one or more of their loans are in deferment, so they do not currently have to make payments on that loan. Among those who indicate that they currently are making payments on one or more loans for their own education, the average monthly payment is $393, with a median monthly payment of $222.
The burden of education debt also extends beyond just the person obtaining the education. One way in which some parents or other family members assist with education debt is through direct assistance to help the borrower make loan payments. When borrowers are asked whether anyone else, such as a parent, is helping with debt payments for their education, 19 percent report that this is the case.42 The frequency of such assistance is greater among young borrowers. Fifty-two percent of borrowers under age 25 report that someone else is assisting them with these education debt payments, which is partially reflective of the high rate of assistance among those who are still enrolled in school (table 30).

Higher Education and Human Capital
Whether an individual attends college and completes his or her degree has long been understood to be a major determinant of lifetime income and financial well-being. However, as both real college costs and the percentage of students borrowing to pay for education continue to rise, some have questioned whether the relationship between higher education and lifetime returns may now be more complicated.
The survey asks respondents about their educational experience, their perceptions of the value of their degree, and--among those who did not complete a college degree--why they did not continue their education. The survey also considers the financing of education and the use of student loans, which is discussed in the "Education Debt and Student Loans" section of this report.
Consistent with findings in the 2015 survey, results of the 2016 SHED show that most adults who went to college believe that the value of their education meets or exceeds the costs, although the perceived value of higher education varies widely depending on program completion, type, and major. In particular, while most respondents who have a degree from traditional public or nonprofit institutions report that their education was worth the cost, perceptions of the value of one's degree are less positive among non-completers and among respondents who graduated from a for-profit school.
Value of Higher Education by Educational Characteristics
In order to monitor the perceived value of higher education, the survey asks respondents who completed at least some college whether they believe that the lifetime financial benefits of their postsecondary education outweigh the lifetime financial costs. Overall, 53 percent of adults with at least some college education feel that the benefits of their education exceed the costs and an additional 26 percent feel that the costs and benefits are about the same. Just 19 percent believe that the costs of their education exceed the financial benefits that it produced.
While individuals generally view their education as worthwhile, responses to this question vary based on several characteristics of the education.33 Among non-completers, who attended college but failed to complete at least an associate degree, 36 percent feel that the education was worth the cost, whereas 26 percent feel that the costs outweigh the benefits.34 For those who completed additional education, the likelihood of viewing the degree as beneficial is much greater. Among these degree completers, 64 percent feel that the benefits of their education outweigh the costs, compared to just 16 percent who feel the costs outweigh the benefits.
Self-perceptions of the value of one's education also vary based on the type of institution attended. Among non-graduates, the type of institution attended has no statistically significant impact on the self-perceived value of the education. However, among those who completed their degree, substantial differences emerge based on where the individual went to school (figure 22). Sixty-five percent of graduates from public or not-for-profit institutions report that the value of their degree exceeded the cost. Among graduates of for-profit institutions, just 40 percent feel this way.35
Figure 22. Overall, how would you say the lifetime financial benefits of your bachelor's degree, associate degree, or most recent educational program compare to its financial costs? (by completion of at least an associate degree and institution type)

Note: Among respondents who completed at least some college. Degree completers are those with at least an associate degree or a bachelor's degree. Bachelor's and associate degree recipients are asked to report on their perceptions of that degree. Those without at least an associate degree are asked to report on their most recent educational program.
Additionally, this difference is not purely due to the selectivity of the institutions. The Carnegie Classification categorizes schools based on how selective (accepting a small number of applicants) or how inclusive (accepting a larger share of applicants) they are.36 Among respondents who completed a degree from a public or nonprofit school that the Carnegie Classification rates as a part-time, two-year, or inclusive institution, 56 percent feel that the benefits outweigh the costs, which still exceeds the percent with this level of satisfaction regarding the value of their degree among graduates of for-profit institutions.
As was observed in previous years of the SHED, there is also evidence that the field of study impacts how people with similar levels of education value their degree (table 24). While sample sizes for any given degree are small, among respondents who completed at least an associate degree, those with degrees in engineering are the most likely to report that the benefits of their degree exceed the costs.
Table 24. Overall, how would you say the lifetime financial benefits of your bachelor's or associate degree program compare to its financial costs? (by field of study)
Percent
Field of study Benefits outweigh costs About the same Costs outweigh benefits
Engineering 76.3 13.8 9.5
Business/management 70.2 18.4 11.1
Life sciences 69.8 17.9 12.3
Computer/information sciences 68.8 12.6 18.6
Physical sciences/math 65.7 19.5 14.9
Education 64.7 19.2 15.4
Health 62.8 25.1 10.9
Law 54.1 15.5 30.1
Humanities 54.0 20.3 25.8
Vocational/technical 51.2 32.2 16.6
Social/behavioral sciences 50.2 28.7 20.3
Other 48.4 22.0 29.0
Undeclared 34.2 50.1 11.8
Did not state 51.1 19.8 19.0
Note: Among respondents who completed at least an associate degree.

30% of people who earned a law degree don't think the benefits outweigh the cost, 26% of people with humanities degrees don't think the benefit outweighs the cost and 20% of people with behavioral science degrees don't think the benefits outweigh the costs. That's way too many people who believe that they are worse off because they went to college.

XuQishi wrote:

30% of people who earned a law degree don't think the benefits outweigh the cost, 26% of people with humanities degrees don't think the benefit outweighs the cost and 20% of people with behavioral science degrees don't think the benefits outweigh the costs. That's way too many people who believe that they are worse off because they went to college.

I would be very surprised if it was different here in Germany, and college here is technically free. Everybody and his dog has a law degree (and most holders won't earn much because there are so many of them) and the other two branches tend to end in terribly paid jobs. Humanities in particular because these are not geared toward being capable in the industry, most courses - and I belong to the people who went into the humanities - are basically worthless in the industrial environment. Given that you lose several years at college that you pay for over someone with vocational training (who gets paid during training) and most jobs for, say, language majors pay worse than bricklaying or annoying people at the DMV there's really hardly any reason to go to college to study anything not STEM unless you want to get into academia, which is also already overflowing. I mean, we have like a hundred PhD for each tenured position and you get fired after six years of post-doc work if you don't score one of those positions (seriously, that is the law) that is not something that someone should really think about if the idea is not to just marry rich.

Sadly nobody warns (or at least warned during my time) young people enough that if you want to make a decent living, it's STEM or Economics, the rest is nice for your personal development, but quite worthless outside of academia.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:


Yes, but in Germany, don't you have much more rigorously "pathed" education from an early age?? As I understand things, there's a test that German students take at a certain age (correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it around the 11-13 year old range?) that somewhat determines what pathway a student goes down into their teenage and college/technical school years?

 Overread wrote:
Actually most baby boomers I've spoken too speak about how when they were really young it was tougher, but it was more about not having much because everything was post-war and there just wasn't much around.
But they had a lot of hope and jobs were so easy they could lose one in the morning and have another by the afternoon.

And that was without having to move counties/towns as well. Even in the countryside there were jobs. Today you can lose your job and spend months if not years sometimes hunting down another steady job.

es, but in Germany, don't you have much more rigorously "pathed" education from an early age?

and this out of the 2900 a month I get to keep after taxes

XuQishi wrote:
After primary school, i.e. 4 years with a reassessment 2 years later.
You could change paths later (either by finishing the path you were on and adding to it, or before that by passing a test), but apparently it wasn't such a terrible predictor...

 Khornate25 wrote:
Most of my friends are electricians, plumbers, engeeners and etc.
Most of them are broke or on welfare.

I think that this has more to do with the fact that we are seeing the last days of the economic boom that followed WW2.

nfe wrote:

XuQishi wrote:
After primary school, i.e. 4 years with a reassessment 2 years later.
You could change paths later (either by finishing the path you were on and adding to it, or before that by passing a test), but apparently it wasn't such a terrible predictor...

I'm sure. However, the data tends to suggest that streaming kids into different schools based on performance at an arbitrary age becomes self-fulfilling prophecy: it has incredible impacts on aspirations, self-confidence, social, teacher, and parental support, opportunities etc.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Khornate25 wrote:
Most of my friends are electricians, plumbers, engeeners and etc.
Most of them are broke or on welfare.

I think that this has more to do with the fact that we are seeing the last days of the economic boom that followed WW2.

Or just that so much wealth is in the hands of the wealthy (26 people own half the world's wealth) that naturally wages and quality of life for the overwhelming majority suffer. If a 100k people starve because that billionare just can't settle for hundreds of millions we as a people have decided that's OK and does not need to change.

XuQishi wrote:
After primary school, i.e. 4 years with a reassessment 2 years later.
You could change paths later (either by finishing the path you were on and adding to it, or before that by passing a test), but apparently it wasn't such a terrible predictor. We had a bunch of people joining us from the Realschule (the middle path, ends after 10 years) after they had their diploma, but most of them dropped out a year later, I think only one managed to get the Abitur in the end. Gymnasium was significantly harder. Mind that I'm almost 40, so that was 20+ years ago.
That said, you could always try getting the Abitur in evening classes later as well. That just takes a ton of discipline and I respect the hell out of anybody who does it successfully.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Or flunctuatuins in the housing market and demographic shifts have had a negative impact on construction trades. That might be more of a culprit than some villainous billionaire profiteering somehow from ruthlessly screwing over Canadien tradesmen because reasons.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Khornate25 wrote:
Most of my friends are electricians, plumbers, engeeners and etc.
Most of them are broke or on welfare.

I think that this has more to do with the fact that we are seeing the last days of the economic boom that followed WW2.

Or just that so much wealth is in the hands of the wealthy (26 people own half the world's wealth) that naturally wages and quality of life for the overwhelming majority suffer. If a 100k people starve because that billionare just can't settle for hundreds of millions we as a people have decided that's OK and does not need to change.