Martini, a personal observation, but it seems that what you’re currently working at are the makeshift jobs that support you as you are developing your real career - something dealing with writing, firearms, and the law (lobbyist, store owner, column writing, etc). From the last post, it is obvious that what you’re currently doing jobwise (and have been doing the last couple of years), is not what you want to do career-wise. And that’s OK, it’s part of the investment we have to make in ourselves, especially if you don’t want to punch a time clock.
It sucks that other people have had a hand in making this more difficult, but f 'em. You’re the one going places while they are doing nothing but staying home, catering to world-travelers.
Btw, I didn’t buy my first house until I was 30 and didn’t have my first child until I was 34. If you’re 24, you’re not exactly behind the curve.
You young whipersnappers! Hell, they say 40 is the new 30. So, that would make 24 the new, er, 14. Plenty of time to re-invent yourself several times over…hell, plenty of time to just wait and see if the worm turns and your skill sets don’t become valuable.
For guys like me, well…fuck it I still have time to re-invent myself a time or too if I want too. 40 something is the new 30 something after all. Plus, there is a thread in GD currently about living forever so…
Thanks for the kind words of encouragement, JohnT. I’d say you’re right, too… I’d like to spin it off into more of a career (Other people have, after all!), but it’s a bit difficult with the current anti-gun climate in this part of the world.
As for the Law Degree… well, I signed up for it on the theory that “Law Is A Smart Person’s Degree”, but the problem is that it’s rapidly turning into the new Arts degree, which isn’t helping.
Sorry, XT, but you’re mistaken. 40 is the new 30 (hence I’m really 26) but to make up the years, we had to redistribute, and after 40 the years get added on.
Kinda, yeah. But the British economy really did need Thatcher’s changes; it as getting into serious trouble, being so over-regulated you could hardly go to the bathroom without getting approval from three seperate ministries in writing.
Sounds like you need to move. I certainly hope you’re not advocating setting public policy about employment laws based on your desire to live somewhere that doesn’t have the kind of jobs that match your skills.
Electronics companies are outsourcing designs left and right. As for cutting costs, that’s the easy part. Quality is an issue, but during negotiations the outsourcee certainly claims high quality. Sometimes they’re right.
As an example - and outsourcing is not always overseas - what PC computer company competes on technology today? They all compete on price or channel or perceived quality. They’ve basically outsourced everything to Intel or AMD and Microsoft. They take an Intel design, get the boards made in China or Taiwan, load Windows, slap a label on it and they’re done.
I’ve been working on advanced products all my career, but the dot bombs don’t qualify. They did have stupid business models.
The argument is that this would lead to new jobs. If the money let them cut prices, which grew the market, then the new jobs would be needed to meet the new demand. If the market were inelastic, the price cut would not increase sales, and thus there would be no new jobs.
There have been studies showing that layoffs are not associated with increased competitiveness. Job cuts when new processes eliminate the need for jobs, yes. But, Southwest, the most competitve airline, is also the airline that hasn’t laid people off.
Layoffs are also necessary when a market segment has gone away, or when someone has screwed up and botched a product.
I know. I paid the dues for my daughter. But she made them back her first week of work. That she wasn’t trying to live on her acting income helped.
[Ugly American]Hey Frogs! Get the fuck back to work, you lazy pussies. I’m going on vacation to Paris in two weeks![/Ugly American]
But seriously, please don’t fuck up my vacation, French kids. I don’t give a fuck whether or not you flush your economy into the toilet. But can you just hold it together from April 12-15? I want so much to be a gracious American tourist, to try to speak the language, not be too loud, spend a lot of money, nod thoughtfully at all the high culture, etc. But it’s a little hard to do all that when the fucking country is paralyzed. So respectfully, I humbly request that you get your shit together and stop this nonsense tout de suite, s’il vous plait?
Some. Some of the ones that crashed sound like potentially good models to me. Some were clearly reaching. What would be your point?
[quote]
The argument is that this would lead to new jobs. If the money let them cut prices, which grew the market, then the new jobs would be needed to meet the new demand. If the market were inelastic, the price cut would not increase sales, and thus there would be no new jobs.
[quote]
You misunderstand the argument. I never claimed that new jobs would open up in any one given company/industry, and certainly not in the one that cut the jobs.
Southwest also, IIRC, doesn’t have the kind of unionization of other airlines. It’s not carrying the kind of job load most major airlines are. Second,y you still misunderstand the point: competitiveness is only a temporary step. As long as each company is pushing its own costs down as far as possible, competitiveness stays relatively the same over the long haul. Secondly, it still frees up labor for more productive purposes.
That is from improved productivity, and I totally agree. However, for an efficiently run business, giving a tax break does not improve productivity, and should not effect sales or the need for employees (unless the market is very elastic). Similarly, layoffs don’t improve productivity either, unless they are related to dumping a non-productive division.
So, as I said at the beginning of this digression, cutting insurance costs probably has no or very little impact on employment, but can increase wages (hah!) or more likely, improve profits.
Voyager you are dead wrong on the outsourcing jobs being a bad thing, sure it can sting a little in the short-run, but in the long-run it is beneficial to the economies of both economies. Although foreign workers may work dirt cheap they are generally much less productive than American workers, though I don’t know about the French. And let’s not forget that job outsourcing works both ways.
Plenty of time to re-invent yourself several times over…hell, plenty of time to just wait and see if the worm turns and your skill sets don’t become valuable.
!! Ouch! I didn’t get the memo!