Pay Those Student Loans or Else....

[oscarsear]

Interesting this discussion on rehabilitation versus incarceration.  Ideally we would be able to wave a wand and correct all of societies ills but idyllic is fanciful, not necessarily practical.  Everyone wishes for the best from others but reality shows us otherwise.  There is a 77% recidivism rate for released convicts.  Within a few years nearly all released prisoners are rearrested, many reincarcerated and for no minor crimes.  So, liberal minded folks, how to we do better while this system is in play?  How do we fund it?  How do we implement it?  How do we protect a law abiding functional society in the interim?  It is easy to look beyond some imaginary horizon line into an elysian world but to define the real and hard pathways to that place is not so simple.   We are verging on a global economic collapse.  We have global military skirmishes aplenty and oodles of threatening sabers a rattling.  We have disease.  Humanity is wallowing in a cauldron steaming with needs both natural and manmade.  Wishing and hoping and dreaming won't fix a thing.  

 

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rprts05p0510.pdf

[Jim Naseum]

However, you make coding sound like any flunky can do it.

You are taking a page from twistedhammer dude who can't read threads and created idiotic interpretations of what I wrote.

For a lawyer, you aren't very careful about parsing arguments.

Never, ever did I imply any "flunky" can do it. Ever. I said any liberal arts GRADUATE could do it, except for the very highest levels. I said very bright kids do it. And they do.

The point remains that there are a few very high skill jobs at the top of tech, and then for each of those, there are hundreds of mundane tech jobs that any intelligent person can learn to do. "Coding" is just one task on the general tech field. I agreed that the highest jobs need well trained specialists with specific degrees.

Your rebuttal here is not up to standard for a lawyer.

C'mon guys, you can do better than making crap up can't you?

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Jeff Matthews]

Your rebuttal here is not up to standard for a lawyer.

 

I apparently misunderstood your position.  Shame on me.  I'm sorry.  Hehe. 

[Jim Naseum]

Your rebuttal here is not up to standard for a lawyer.

I apparently misunderstood your position. Shame on me. I'm sorry. Hehe.

Apology accepted, of course .

I had just read your totally excellent post about for profit schools, which fjd reposted last night, and was very impressed. Then i get two potshots.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Paducah Home Theater]

Is this program needed to fill the 300,000 tech jobs you referred to earlier?

Needed and required are strong words. Yes such programs help immensely especially in lieu of experience when you are young. No there is not a governing board that requires them for employment. Yes a highly motivated individual can make it big without such programs, but it is very hard.

For example, the MIS director for the Kentucky state government is actually my best friend from childhood, grew up across the road from him and he is who got me into audio. Dude has a degree in psychology/counseling or some crap, he was a case worker for child abuse situations, basically was the guy who took kids away from bad families. After one too many very disturbing situations he had enough, studied his butt off on his own and got a job as a help desk guy. Kept studying, kept climbing. Finally made director a few years ago. Only took him 20 years. Just a very exceptional case to do this, not normal whatsoever.

Yet, there's guys doing this in no time coming out of the TSM program. A good software or network engineering position is almost guaranteed coming out of programs like this, this one in particular.

Edited February 19, 2016 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[The History Kid]

Jeff,

That's why I selected a field I love over something in anticipation of a job. I will be happy if it is associated with my major, and that is not at all difficult to guarantee.

[Jim Naseum]

 

Is this program needed to fill the 300,000 tech jobs you referred to earlier?

Needed and required are strong words. Yes such programs help immensely especially in lieu of experience when you are young. No there is not a governing board that requires them for employment. Yes a highly motivated individual can make it big without such programs, but it is very hard.

For example, the MIS director for the Kentucky state government is actually my best friend from childhood, grew up across the road from him and he is who got me into audio. Dude has a degree in psychology/counseling or some crap, he was a case worker for child abuse situations, basically was the guy who took kids away from bad families. After one too many very disturbing situations he had enough, studied his butt off on his own and got a job as a help desk guy. Kept studying, kept climbing. Finally made director a few years ago. Only took him 20 years. Just a very exceptional case to do this, not normal whatsoever.

Yet, there's guys doing this in no time coming out of the TSM program. A good software or network engineering position is almost guaranteed coming out of programs like this, this one in particular.

 

 

The BLS, a reasonable authority, is not that excited about the growth in tech jobs. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2502348/it-management/it-jobs-will-grow-22--through-2020--says-u-s-.html

 

Most of what is lumped into 'tech jobs' are things like 'Help Desk' and "IT Support," and even just data analysts. These are largely jobs one learns from the specific institution, and their unique requirements of that institution. Sharp people can easily do these jobs.

 

YES! We need engineering degrees, and all kinds of science degrees. But we need broadly educated people to direct the future of society.

[Paducah Home Theater]

Most of what is lumped into 'tech jobs' are things like 'Help Desk' and "IT Support," and even just data analysts. These are largely jobs one learns from the specific institution, and their unique requirements of that institution. Sharp people can easily do these jobs.

If that's the case... why don't they? Why do we have a crisis on our hands in the form of people working almost minimum wage jobs to pay off a mountain of debt? I.T. would pay much better, no? I mean, anybody can do it no?

Seriously, here is the real problem:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-bill-r-path/repaying-college-loans-on_b_4502678.html

48% of people with four year degrees are working jobs that do not require that much education, and 37% are working jobs that only requires a high school diploma. In 2012 there were 284,000 college graduates making minimum wage. There's more available tech jobs than that. The way you talk, all of them should just be engineers / tech workers, and are already fully qualified to do so. Yet, we still have this issue.

Edited February 19, 2016 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[Jim Naseum]

If that's the case... why don't they? Why do we have a crisis on our hands in the form of people working stupid almost minimum wage jobs to pay off a mountain of debt? I.T. would pay much better, no? I mean, anybody can do it no?

 

I think it was previously explained. But, I will do it again, but briefly.

 

1. There is a massive excess labor pool in the USA. More jobless than jobs.

2. Whenever there is a labor surplus the job market becomes a "buyer's market." The employers can be excessively fussy.

3. Employers, knowing the market is flush with labor, directs HR to select the highest, best scholastic candidates to fill jobs in spite of what the job entails. e.g. If you can get a Ph.D. to do help desk work, it pads the prestige of the firm.

4. These masses of "tech jobs" don't pay that well except at the top of the pyramid. Offshoring is driving prices down too.

 

That's it in a nutshell. 

[Jim Naseum]

We are not creating enough jobs to meet the demand for jobs. It is an absolute advantage to all the business sector to permanently maintain a large surplus labor pool. 

 

It was the reverse when I got our of college in the 60s. There was a labor shortage. We could get a new job every afternoon if we wanted to. And each new job would be a raise in pay. Of course, I am exaggerating for effect, but no one ever worried about getting a job. 

 

Then, things changed. Capital controls were removed and global trade agreements were put in place to drive labor costs down. "Offshoring" suddenly meant the "world was your labor pool" and companies used this to drive wages steadily down in the engineering disciplines. 

 

In 1980/1 for example, SUN was starting a large new project in Silicon Valley and needed around 300 software engineers. A decent engineer then was making around $100k. SUN however, took the project to India, where they could pay 1/10th as much, including subcontracting overheads! Guys in the valley then, making $100K, had to compete with a guy in India making $5k. by all these means, wages were steadily driven down even as productivity rose by 3% or 4% per year. 

 

As this effect took hold, business created a PERMANENT labor surplus in the US. A permanent "buyer's market."

Edited February 19, 2016 by jo56steph74

[NOSValves]

I've got an idea. How about just paying back your 'loans'?

 

Keith

 

 

Well that would just be too darn much to ask...

[DoubleJ]

 

I've got an idea. How about just paying back your 'loans'?

 

Keith

 

 

Well that would just be too darn much to ask...

 

Nice seeing you posting again, Craig!!!!

[Paducah Home Theater]

1. There is a massive excess labor pool in the USA. More jobless than jobs.

2. Whenever there is a labor surplus the job market becomes a "buyer's market." The employers can be excessively fussy.

3. Employers, knowing the market is flush with labor, directs HR to select the highest, best scholastic candidates to fill jobs in spite of what the job entails. e.g. If you can get a Ph.D. to do help desk work, it pads the prestige of the firm.

4. These masses of "tech jobs" don't pay that well except at the top of the pyramid. Offshoring is driving prices down too.

 

That's it in a nutshell.

I just don't believe that when it comes to technology jobs, and it seems that no insider believes it either. Case in point, where I work we've been trying to find a good website designer, for years. Nobody can do the work. This isn't a job where a Ph. D is needed, or desired. What is needed, is that somebody can do the work, period. The few who are actually good at it are working where they can get a 6 figure salary, in big cities, working for the largest companies. This isn't exactly a job that pays peanuts though. The details on the situation is the exact opposite of what you are trying to say, yet, that's kind of the norm. This same thing is playing out all over the place.

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20120815/FREE/120819950/michigan-begs-for-100000-engineers-after-auto-industry-rebound

"If their skills are even on the edges of automotive, they can get a job," said Watt, whose iTalent LLC in Troy finds engineering and information technology workers for companies in nine states. "There's an extreme shortage. There's way more demand than supply.""

 

 

I think the mistake here is assuming that nearly all tech jobs are low level help desk type jobs.  That's not what we are hurting for.  I'm talking about actual engineering positions, not glorified McDonald's workers.  

Edited February 19, 2016 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[BigStewMan]

Jeff,

That's why I selected a field I love over something in anticipation of a job.

Wise beyond your years my friend.

[Jim Naseum]

 I'm talking about actual engineering positions, not glorified McDonald's workers.  

 

I live in California. And, we have a huge tech industry here. So, my experience is relative to here. Perhaps in some parts of the country, things are different.

 

If you look at the Labor Participation Rate, it's at a low since 1970. Around 62% (approx). This identifies a very large surplus labor pool.

[Paducah Home Theater]

I live in California. And, we have a huge tech industry here. So, my experience is relative to here. Perhaps in some parts of the country, things are different.

 

The problem with tech jobs in commiefornia especially around San Francisco is that the cost of living is ridiculously high.  I turned down a $50 an hour job there.  Just wasn't worth it.  If you can make less but stay in a rural'ish area in the heartland, you can often come out way ahead.  That's what people don't get.  We are starting to see a migration out of there due to this, some technology companies are relocating to odd places like Nebraska.  Austin is booming right now due to this, lower cost of living while keeping the same quirky culture.  

[Jim Naseum]

 If you can make less but stay in a rural'ish area in the heartland, you can often come out way ahead.  That's what people don't get.

 

Oh, I think they get it all right. Californians WANT to be in a progressive culture. So, you're only kidding yourself with the "commiefornia" comment imagining everyone here is dying for an opportunity to get to the heartland. Not. 

 

Yes, there are some percentage of people who will move anywhere to make more money. But, most people put culture and lifestyle ahead of income. There's 33 million people here for a reason. 

[BigStewMan]

But, most people put culture and lifestyle ahead of income.

Yep. 

[garyrc]

...  There is a 77% recidivism rate for released convicts.  Within a few years nearly all released prisoners are rearrested, many reincarcerated and for no minor crimes.  So, liberal minded folks, how to we do better while this system is in play?  How do we fund it?

 

 

 

High recidivism is no surprise given that it is hard to get and hold a job with a conviction on your record.  Perhaps there should be an "assigned risk" system in which corporations over a certain size (not Mom and Pops) would have to employ a number of ex-cons in exchange for the privilege of being in business and selling goods and/or services to Americans.  There could be modest tax breaks to sweeten the arrangement.  Of course this would be much more palatable if there was some serious attempt to rehabilitate people while they are in prison, albeit for shorter terms. 

 

As far as funding is concerned, we are already paying what it might cost to re-introduce selected convicts to society.  Someone once calculated (early '70s) that, for the cost of keeping someone in prison, court costs, rearrest and prosecution costs, etc., we could hire 3 individuals (specially trained in job availability, counseling and perhaps marshal arts) to be with one early released, ankle sensor wearing, ex-con 24 hours a day, in 8 hour shifts, to keep him/her away from crime and drug cultures, and to be with him/her in pursuit of jobs with employers who would know about the ex-con's record.  Each night, an "accompanist" would discuss the day's work with the ex-con, with the goal of improving relationships at work, including with the employer, doing a better job, etc.  There could be group sessions with ex-cons working at the same company.  Over a period of time (the duration of which would be based on data collected when the program was new), the treatment could be reduced.  This would not be excepted to work perfectly, of course, but the actual "reality" oscarsear alluded to is that with our current system people are released angry, resentful, often unskilled in human relationships, and virtually unemployable due to their record.

Edited February 19, 2016 by garyrc

[Paducah Home Theater]

 

 If you can make less but stay in a rural'ish area in the heartland, you can often come out way ahead.  That's what people don't get.

 

Oh, I think they get it all right. Californians WANT to be in a progressive culture. So, you're only kidding yourself with the "commiefornia" comment imagining everyone here is dying for an opportunity to get to the heartland. Not. 

 

I think the majority of people with a tech career tend to follow the money, which typically ends up being in a big city.  The most passionate want to be in the middle of Silicon Valley but most are following the money.  

 

As for wanting to get into the heartland, I was talking about companies.  Believe it or not, some companies tend to favor freedom and lower taxes / salaries if they can maintain the same quality of workforce.  

 

 

"A hostile business climate sends more companies to friendlier states"

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/17/editorial-businesses-flee-californias-high-taxes-a/

 

 

"The Golden State’s hostile business environment continues to drive thousands of companies away"

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426974/businesses-leave-california-texas

 

 

"Joseph Vranich, an expert on corporate relocations, has counted more than 200 major companies with tens of thousands of employees that have left the Golden State over the last four years. 

http://dailysignal.com/2014/05/08/california-leavin-businesses-politicians-state-denial/

 

 

""California's a fantastic place to live. Don't get me wrong. It's just not a great place to do business,""

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/finance/2013/july/shooting-the-golden-goose-californians-flee-taxes/?mobile=false

 

 

"A new study from the San Francisco-based Pacific Research Institute has ranked the regulatory climate for small businesses in California the worst out of all 50 states"

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/why-are-all-these-california-companies-moving-to-texas-here-are-a-bunch-of-reasons/

 

 

"Roughly 9,000 California companies moved their headquarters or diverted projects to out-of-state locations in the last seven years"

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html

 

 

California Wins ‘Worst State to do Business’ for 11th Year

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/27/california-wins-worst-state-to-do-business-for-11th-year/

 

 

 

 

yay, progress.  

Edited February 19, 2016 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters