dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3
share rss forum feed

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to scross

Re: What country are sharp window air conditioners made?

Education is still key. The unemployment rate for those with college degrees is 4.1%. It's more than double for those without.

But yes, if a person decides to major in something stupid, then that's their call. But overall, college is still a winner.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.

iknow
Premium
join:2012-03-25
said by Badonkadonk:

Education is still key. The unemployment rate for those with college degrees is 4.1%. It's more than double for those without.

But yes, if a person decides to major in something stupid, then that's their call. But overall, college is still a winner.

not really, Prostitution can be a pain in the butt, for medical students. »www.myhealthnewsdaily.com/2291-m···ion.html in any country!.

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

Education is still key. The unemployment rate for those with college degrees is 4.1%. It's more than double for those without.

But yes, if a person decides to major in something stupid, then that's their call. But overall, college is still a winner.

Actual unemployment and underemployment rates are generally considered to be much higher than what is being reported, for various reasons. And while it may be true that these rates are much lower for college-educated people, I know a TON of young people these days who graduated college and are "employed", but are working as waiters and hostesses and sales clerks and such jobs that don't require a college education. Now, there's nothing wrong with these jobs, per se; some of them can be quite profitable (with tips and such) and/or lead to working your way up the corporate ladder (opportunity is where you find it, but you have to good looking for it, too). While being college-educated may have given them a leg up for even those jobs, who knows whether these young folks will ever find the kind of meaningful employment that they expected to find, or if they will ever get out from under the debt they may be under?

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to iknow
There was something on TV recently about this. It reminded me of a time I'd been to a country western bar in Minneapolis and the cute little waitress girl in cowboy hat, boots and fringe skirt told me that she did this in her spare time as she was attending law school.

I have to tell you, that I never saw girls in my law school classes that looked like her or sounded as ditzy. But when I read and see articles like this, it makes me wonder.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to scross
said by scross:

said by Badonkadonk:

Education is still key. The unemployment rate for those with college degrees is 4.1%. It's more than double for those without.

But yes, if a person decides to major in something stupid, then that's their call. But overall, college is still a winner.

Actual unemployment and underemployment rates are generally considered to be much higher than what is being reported, for various reasons. And while it may be true that these rates are much lower for college-educated people, I know a TON of young people these days who graduated college and are "employed", but are working as waiters and hostesses and sales clerks and such jobs that don't require a college education. Now, there's nothing wrong with these jobs, per se; some of them can be quite profitable (with tips and such) and/or lead to working your way up the corporate ladder (opportunity is where you find it, but you have to good looking for it, too). While being college-educated may have given them a leg up for even those jobs, who knows whether these young folks will ever find the kind of meaningful employment that they expected to find, or if they will ever get out from under the debt they may be under?

The unemployment and underemployment rate is significantly higher for non college educated.

When the economy recovers, those college kids will mostly end up doing better than their non-college educated counterparts.

When I came out of law school in 1994, it was a brutal time for law school graduates. I knew many that had well over $100K in loans but could only get $25-40K jobs. I was lucky in that I was able to get a job at a prestige firm at the very top salary range. But those positions were/are few and far between. Regardless, when I talked to a lot of these attorneys ten years later, they were mostly all doing fine. A few left the industry but found good and high paying employment in other capacities.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
reply to iknow
said by iknow:

said by Badonkadonk:

Education is still key. The unemployment rate for those with college degrees is 4.1%. It's more than double for those without.

But yes, if a person decides to major in something stupid, then that's their call. But overall, college is still a winner.

not really, Prostitution can be a pain in the butt, for medical students. »www.myhealthnewsdaily.com/2291-m···ion.html in any country!.

Don't ask me how I know this, but ten or fifteen years ago there was a sweet and sexy young thing (who was originally from England, too, IIRC) out of the Atlanta area who was attending medical school there, and who was offering her "services" to out-of-town men who might be traveling through the Atlanta area on business. She preferred these men to the locals for privacy reasons, and Atlanta was excellent for this, and she was making good use of the internet for finding potential clients and setting up appointments, which was a fairly novel use at the time.

And no, even though back then I made it down to Atlanta occasionally, I never made use of her services, although out of curiosity I did chat with her a bit about what she offered. I was a bit surprised to find that she had a boyfriend (probably her future husband, or so she thought) who was completely OK with this.

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

said by scross:

said by Badonkadonk:

Education is still key. The unemployment rate for those with college degrees is 4.1%. It's more than double for those without.

But yes, if a person decides to major in something stupid, then that's their call. But overall, college is still a winner.

Actual unemployment and underemployment rates are generally considered to be much higher than what is being reported, for various reasons. And while it may be true that these rates are much lower for college-educated people, I know a TON of young people these days who graduated college and are "employed", but are working as waiters and hostesses and sales clerks and such jobs that don't require a college education. Now, there's nothing wrong with these jobs, per se; some of them can be quite profitable (with tips and such) and/or lead to working your way up the corporate ladder (opportunity is where you find it, but you have to good looking for it, too). While being college-educated may have given them a leg up for even those jobs, who knows whether these young folks will ever find the kind of meaningful employment that they expected to find, or if they will ever get out from under the debt they may be under?

The unemployment and underemployment rate is significantly higher for non college educated.

When the economy recovers, those college kids will mostly end up doing better than their non-college educated counterparts.

When I came out of law school in 1994, it was a brutal time for law school graduates. I knew many that had well over $100K in loans but could only get $25-40K jobs. I was lucky in that I was able to get a job at a prestige firm at the very top salary range. But those positions were/are few and far between. Regardless, when I talked to a lot of these attorneys ten years later, they were mostly all doing fine. A few left the industry but found good and high paying employment in other capacities.

The unemployment and underemployment rate has been (historically) significantly higher for non college-educated individuals; this may or may not hold true from here on out. And about the "doing fine" thing: You're ignoring the fact that, every year, more or more students are coming off the line who may be competing for these very same jobs, and employers may even prefer them to the older group for various reasons. And law has been on the out-of-favor list for a while now; I've known lawyers who dumped their current jobs for jobs in IT and such, ten or more years ago.

The upshot is that attitudes such as yours may be seriously outdated. There are plenty of colleges and universities out there who like to perpetuate this line of thinking, and seem to be happy to continue massive building campaigns and raising tuition rates under the pretense that huge demand will always be there, as if spending more and more money for their particular brand of education will always be a no-brainer. But, as many are starting to point out (including some of the more progressive educators AND employers), this model is something like 125 years old now, and doesn't necessarily mesh well with the modern world, and is no longer cost-effective in many situations and hasn't been for a while.

Interestingly, on the employer side I've seen two different things. Fast-moving, progressive (usually technical) industries want people who know enough to be immediately useful (no matter how they acquired that knowledge), but are also flexible enough to keep learning (no matter how they acquire that knowledge). While many other industries keep to the traditional methods and are even making things more difficult, like requiring Master's degrees for entry-level jobs where before a Bachelor's was sufficient. The worst among them will take people who have a Bachelor's (or equivalent work experience), who have been doing the job for years, then require them to get a Master's (or Bachelor's, as the case may be) in order to move up the ladder or in some cases even to keep their current job. This is incredibly stupid, BTW, and is a great way to destroy your organization.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
said by scross:

The unemployment and underemployment rate has been (historically) significantly higher for non college-educated individuals; this may or may not hold true from here on out. And about the "doing fine" thing: You're ignoring the fact that, every year, more or more students are coming off the line who may be competing for these very same jobs, and employers may even prefer them to the older group for various reasons. And law has been on the out-of-favor list for a while now; I've known lawyers who dumped their current jobs for jobs in IT and such, ten or more years ago.

The upshot is that attitudes such as yours may be seriously outdated. There are plenty of colleges and universities out there who like to perpetuate this line of thinking, and seem to be happy to continue massive building campaigns and raising tuition rates under the pretense that huge demand will always be there, as if spending more and more money for their particular brand of education will always be a no-brainer. But, as many are starting to point out (including some of the more progressive educators AND employers), this model is something like 125 years old now, and doesn't necessarily mesh well with the modern world, and is no longer cost-effective in many situations and hasn't been for a while.

Interestingly, on the employer side I've seen two different things. Fast-moving, progressive (usually technical) industries want people who know enough to be immediately useful (no matter how they acquired that knowledge), but are also flexible enough to keep learning (no matter how they acquire that knowledge). While many other industries keep to the traditional methods and are even making things more difficult, like requiring Master's degrees for entry-level jobs where before a Bachelor's was sufficient. The worst among them will take people who have a Bachelor's (or equivalent work experience), who have been doing the job for years, then require them to get a Master's (or Bachelor's, as the case may be) in order to move up the ladder or in some cases even to keep their current job. This is incredibly stupid, BTW, and is a great way to destroy your organization.

I'm of the opinion that the degree matters. We have hundreds of job openings at my present company that mostly require BS/MS/MBA degrees with a few AAS type degrees.

I don't go for the "no matter how they acquired the knowledge" thing. I'd rather have a BSEE or MSEE coming out of school than knocking about for god knows how many years thinking I'm going to get on the job silicon design training. Or a BSEE coupled with an MBA rather than on the job training for both. No matter how hard a person tries, most will likely not move up the ladder as quickly as someone holding an ivy league MBA. Maybe the model is 125 years old, but it's still true now as it was before.

I'd choose patent law as a career over and over again. The field has exploded. So I don't know what lawyers you know that would dump a law career for an IT job, but as a patent attorney I'd never do that. The IP biz is going great guns now and it's not looking to slow down any time soon.

If the lawyers are ambulance chasers or if the undergrad degrees are in something not useful, then that's on the person making the decision. A good, useful college degree is still very valuable.

The thinking that "I don't need education and I'll learn it as I go is" what has led to the decline of the competitiveness of the US along with us becoming more and more of a welfare/entitlement state.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.


dogma
XYZ
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

When the economy recovers, ...

When??

The economy has recovered. This is it. You're in it.

Of course this is all my opinion, but our Japanification began 5 years ago. Between the net zero population growth and automation, there are no net new jobs on the horizon. None.

The published unemployment rate metrics are a sham any way you look at them. Baby boomers are retiring at 10,000 per day, or 300,000 per Month...yet the economy struggles to create 100,000 jobs per month. This is what I mean by "net new". That's 300,000 people leaving their jobs - permanently, who are effectively being replaced by 100,000 people.

That math don't add up...it adds down. (if there is such a thing) This is why 1 in 2 new college graduates are jobless or underemployed. It's not going to get better, it's going to get worse.

I've said this 1,000 times here; there can be no new demand for products and services if there are no new people here. And there are no. new. people. (net wise anyway). Add to this, the other dynamics of domestic public & private debt, the absolute drain on society of these millions of retirees looking for their checks every month, the killer of companies seeking to offer jobs first to robots/automation, and the fact that there is no technology we can create & produce domestically that can't be replicated elsewhere in the world almost immediately. The barriers to entry in the world of technology are rapidly becoming non-existent. And remember, almost every new commercially viable technology that we can make, is going to be some form of further automation that kills even more jobs.

But I'm glad you're optimistic.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
I am absolutely optimistic. Maybe I've had good luck my entire corporate life since 1987, but I have no doubt that a strong degree (albeit it may have to be an advanced degree) from a good college is still worthwhile. At least for the coming generation.

Remember, I don't have to outrun the bear. I just have to outrun you!
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.


dogma
XYZ
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
kudos:1
Exactly! Which is Pandora's paradox box:
said by Badonkadonk:

I'm of the opinion that the degree matters. We have hundreds of job openings at my present company that mostly require BS/MS/MBA degrees with a few AAS type degrees.

I wanted to comment on this as well.

We too have 100's of job openings, most of which require a degree. At least that's what's stated. Although I think the degree has become the new/defacto corporate aptitude test. Back in the day, companies use to give non-degree'd applicants aptitude test that revolved around a particular discipline and overall learning skills as well. But too many applicants that didn't pass those test sued, saying the test were biased in one form or another. Now companies just ask for a degree thinking that if someone finished college, they must have an aptitude for learning.

With respect to your organization have 100's of openings, like I said, our group does too. But this fact is in no way any indicator at all of the employment health of the country. As a matter of fact, for every new employee we bring on, I estimate that 5 other people loose there jobs someplace else. Because that's our business. Replacing a customers internal IT staff, with external services. 80% automated services.

So it depends on exactly what your company is doing right? I am willing to bet your company does something, be it manufacture a product or offer a service, that's more efficient than the competitors? Your company is gaining market share, while competitors (or whatever entity that your product/service replaces) are losing market share. If that's true, then while your firm is bringing on labor, somewhere someone's getting laid off...by an order of magnitude.

Like you said, all you gotta do is outrun someone else.
Expand your moderator at work

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
reply to Badonkadonk

Re: What country are sharp window air conditioners made?

No, you (perhaps) have hundreds of job openings that list these degrees as a requirement; the jobs themselves don't necessarily actually require them! This is just cheap and easy filter for excluding large number of potential job applicants in an buyer's market - though not necessarily an unreasonable one, at first blush.

(I could make a point here about having a degree in general vs. having a degree in a specific area, but I will save that for maybe later.)

And about that "perhaps": Just because these jobs are listed doesn't mean that they are real. Many may in fact be unfunded, some of them may have been listed (and re-listed) for ages now with no real intention of filling them, and so on. And if the company were that anxious to fill them (as one might assume), then the degree "requirements" would be treated as more of a preference, not necessarily a requirement. Trust me, if these people were really that needed, and the economy were in better shape (fewer potential applicants), then your company might soon find itself being very flexible here, as is almost always the case!

(I'm tired and it's getting late, so rather than go on an extended rant, from here on out I will just hit the high points.)

Licensed professions like engineering (and law, and medicine) are based on the licensing tests. Historically, some people (autodidacts) have been able to pass these tests with plenty of study but little to no formal training. The requirement for formal training is a relatively recent development, but it is perfectly reasonable for most people. And if you ask an engineer, many will tell you that most of what they learned in school they don't actually use on a daily basis, if at all - as is true for my degree.

MBAs these days are generally worthless, from a practical standpoint; HBS MBAs are among the worst. In fact, the Ivy League MBAs that I've seen tend to start out relatively high in the food chain, then work there way DOWN the ladder, based on their lack of experience and often massive incompetence. I just recently saw this happen to someone I know (a Harvard MBA), who, via "world-class" creative financial engineering, helped turn his company from a boringly profitable one into one massively in debt and bordering on bankruptcy (he had plenty of help, of course), all the while telling the world about the company's financial "vision". So now he's done the "smart" thing and jumped ship, into a smaller organization with a smaller paycheck and lesser prospects, but at least he won't still be on the other ship when it finally goes down. An awful lot of people are going to get burned when it does, though, just as an awful lot of people have been already.

As a patent lawyer, you're most likely part of this nation's problem, not the solution. The current patent system is so screwed up that we might as well invalidate most patents and just start over from scratch. And if you haven't been keeping up lately, there are some judges now who seem to be willing to take a crap on the whole thing, which is encouraging.

Continuous "learning as you go" may be the most sensible thing to do these days, as fast as everything is changing. Willful ignorance is one thing, but learning just enough of the basics to get a good, solid start, then picking up the rest as you go by doing the job is actually a pretty smart (time-effective and cost-effective) way to do things. And, in fact, school doesn't really prepare you for the job that well, anyway; it just helps filter out the incompetent or the disinterested, which is why HR loves it so much. In my experience, you don't really start "learning" until you start "doing".

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
Just because Posner doesn't like how patents are being used doesn't mean that he'll be able to change anything. As for patent lawyers, you have no idea that I'm part of the problem. We defend against troll suits all the time, but rarely enforce our own unless it's blatant and directly in our industry. Or would you rather that our company just sit back and get hammered? If you're going to through crap out there, think about what you're saying.

I think a bigger part of the problem is people who discourage formal learning and think that we can stay competitive with the rest of the world. Personally, I don't think we can stay world class by giving handouts and saying it's okay not to go to school. The people that generally think like that are the ones who couldn't or didn't go to school. I hate to tell you, but when I was doing chip design, there wasn't a single non-engineer that had or would have been able to learn that on the job.

Finally, our company has many HBS grads (our CEO is one) and we're among the most successfull companies of the last 20+ years. Not even Apple has been able to match the consistency of success we've had.

So, even though you use lots of words in your response, it boils down to finding the right people and executing. Just because you have eperience with one HBS grad who messed up doesn't mean they all are corrupt/clueless.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.


Jack_in_VA
Premium
join:2007-11-26
North, VA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
said by Badonkadonk:

Just because Posner doesn't like how patents are being used doesn't mean that he'll be able to change anything. As for patent lawyers, you have no idea that I'm part of the problem. We defend against troll suits all the time, but rarely enforce our own unless it's blatant and directly in our industry. Or would you rather that our company just sit back and get hammered? If you're going to through crap out there, think about what you're saying.

I think a bigger part of the problem is people who discourage formal learning and think that we can stay competitive with the rest of the world. Personally, I don't think we can stay world class by giving handouts and saying it's okay not to go to school. The people that generally think like that are the ones who couldn't or didn't go to school. I hate to tell you, but when I was doing chip design, there wasn't a single non-engineer that had or would have been able to learn that on the job.

Finally, our company has many HBS grads (our CEO is one) and we're among the most successfull companies of the last 20+ years. Not even Apple has been able to match the consistency of success we've had.

So, even though you use lots of words in your response, it boils down to finding the right people and executing. Just because you have eperience with one HBS grad who messed up doesn't mean they all are corrupt/clueless.

World Class? We haven't been anything close to "world class" for a long time now. Once our educational system got dumbed down it's been downhill ever since.

The world class belief by Americans is mostly coming from those in denial or politicians trying to tweak the self esteem of citizens who have little hope.

If anyone thinks we are world class go to Google Images and type in the decline of Detroit which is representative of our once great manufacturing industries that provided millions with a steady job, income and benefits.

Everyone can't be a lawyer. Too many of them now anyway. We lead the world in the number of lawyers.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
True, but there are very few patent lawyers.

We're still world class. Just not everyone. In our company, all the cheap crap is outsourced. All the premium designs and products are done and manufactured in the US.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.


Jack_in_VA
Premium
join:2007-11-26
North, VA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
said by Badonkadonk:

True, but there are very few patent lawyers.

We're still world class. Just not everyone. In our company, all the cheap crap is outsourced. All the premium designs and products are done and manufactured in the US.

Then why is it a Lexus is designed and manufactured in Japan and a Mercedes in Germany? How about the Airbus aircraft that's beating the pants off Boeing? Look around the evidence of our decline is everywhere.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
The auto industry's arrogance sank them. As for Boeing, it's hard to compete with a state backed company.

I won't mention my company or our brands, but we lead in almost all the businesses in which we compete. And like I said, the premium products are done here. The cheap stuff is done elsewhere. So all the cutting edge design work is US based and the products command a premium so we can hire in the US and pay competitive wages. We use patents to keep out the Chinese. Once the patents are up and the low cost manufacturers move in, we're off to the next product.

You wouldn't believe the strategic planning that we do in all aspects of the business and the processes we have down to protect our technologies and how we stay efficient and lean. You don't get to be where we are and in the businesses in which we are by not executing.

Does it mean that Bubba won't be able to sit back and collect a boatload of money by doing nothing? Yes. Does it mean people without higher education may lose their jobs as we automate more? Yes. Does it mean that if you aren't among the top of your peers in the white collar roles that you'll be let go? Yes. Will you work harder than you used to? Yes.

But for those that make the cut, does it mean you'll have a job where the survival of the company is no longer in doubt? Yes. If you're retained, are you considered a top performer? Yes. Are you rewarded for that? Yes. Does it increase your job security? Yes.

We are competitive and leaders throughout the world.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.


Jack_in_VA
Premium
join:2007-11-26
North, VA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
And just how long do you think the millions of displaced workers that have been "let go" going to sit back and remain passive? The apocalypse in this country has been brewing for a few years now and once they realize the middle class is gone in spite of the politicians promises look out.

Goober you might have a good job but that is not representative of the vast majority now. Are you are part of the One Percent that are living high on the hog as the Occupy protesters pointed out.

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
reply to Badonkadonk
Maybe Posner or whoever can't actually change the system, but he sure can have an influence over how and when those patents get enforced, which is all that really matters in the end. But if you claim that you are on the "good" side of the patent system, then I will give you that.

I never said I discouraged formal learning, but the right mix of external, formal learning AND experience (which is just another term for OTJ learning, at least some of which may be more formal than not) is unbeatable, and trumps either one individually. But I do have a problem with how formal learning today is conducted - how it's delivered, how much time it takes, and how much it costs - and how the whole idea that "more is always better" is just taken as a given!

It's been a while now, but I can guarantee that at one time I (a software guy) knew more about the basics of state-of-the-art chip design than most engineers do (not necessarily chip design engineers, of course), because I was making a big effort to keep up with it by reading current books and articles outside of school. (I was even able to come up with a few "thinking outside the box" ideas myself.) And it's sad that some good ideas (which have been around for decades now) have never really made it out into the field in a big way, simply because of inertia within the industry.

About those HBS grads: Did they help start and build the company, or did they (like most HBS grads) only come along after the company was well-established, in order to help "improve" things? In my experience it's usually the latter, meaning that they ride the arc of company success while it's near the top, only to often see things go to hell in a handbasket (or to ultimately break up or sell off the company, maybe), due in large part to their own short-sighted decisions.

And it's not just "one HBS grad"! Remember Enron? That place was chock full of them, and they screwed things up so badly that they set new records for financial incompetence at the time (since surpassed, unfortunately). And perhaps the greatest "fail" of our time (Shrub) was also an HBS MBA grad, and he screwed the pooch so badly that HBS wanted to disavow him, and the faculty there started questioning their own teaching methods, going back decades.

Finding the right people and executing - agreed. Also, though, we should be finding the right people and executing them (figuratively, of course). I suspect that this country would be a lot better off if we just up and fired a lot of the MBA types; also if we just up and fired a lot of the people who trained them! And I believe it was Shakespeare who had something to say about lawyers, but I don't quite remember the quote.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to Jack_in_VA
I am and I earned it. This whole generic 1%-ers are evil thing is so misguided. I don't know when an why this country stopped being anti-success.

I don't begrudge any of the 1% their success. But there's a difference even within that designation that a lot of the OWS people don't get, although I did hear a OWS person acknowledge it in a TV interview. She said she didn't begrudge the working 1%, but had problems with those that inherited it or earned it without working for it.

In my case, I fall within the working 1% category, but I worked my ass off to get there and I still work hard. Worked hard in high school to get into a good EE program. Worked hard as an engineer to get into a couple of well-known Fortune 500 companies. Got into law school (not a great one because it was a last minute decision) and worked hard to get a top offer from a top firm. Came out in '94 with over $100K in private student loans, which meant higher interest rates and immediate payment.

I worked hard at my next two law firms to earn a good salary. I worked hard at the next two corporations to climb the ladder. The effort resulted in a high position where I am now and I'm in the top 10% salary range for my position.

I haven't worked on average less than 11-12 hours a day 5-6 days a week since 1987.

And even now, do I live high on the hog? No. But do I enjoy some nice things now and then? Yes, because I worked for it. No one helped me out and no one paid my way and I took no handouts and I didn't expect any.

Once people start taking pride and putting in an effort to better themselves, only then will we see all boats rise. Until then, only a few will be able to get there. And I have no problem with that.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to scross
Our HBS CEO has transformed the company--he and his majority of HBS EVPs. Increased profits, rate of growth, share price increase, etc. He's taken the company well beyond what the founders had when they stepped down from actively managing the business. We've skyrocketed. It's amazing. There's a reason why Wall St. and investors love us.

I've personally known several HBS MBAs that have done great to stellar jobs. Former CEO of Cummins, former CEO of Rambus, former CEO of Dana.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN

1 recommendation

reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

The auto industry's arrogance sank them. As for Boeing, it's hard to compete with a state backed company.

I won't mention my company or our brands, but we lead in almost all the businesses in which we compete. And like I said, the premium products are done here. The cheap stuff is done elsewhere. So all the cutting edge design work is US based and the products command a premium so we can hire in the US and pay competitive wages. We use patents to keep out the Chinese. Once the patents are up and the low cost manufacturers move in, we're off to the next product.

You wouldn't believe the strategic planning that we do in all aspects of the business and the processes we have down to protect our technologies and how we stay efficient and lean. You don't get to be where we are and in the businesses in which we are by not executing.

Does it mean that Bubba won't be able to sit back and collect a boatload of money by doing nothing? Yes. Does it mean people without higher education may lose their jobs as we automate more? Yes. Does it mean that if you aren't among the top of your peers in the white collar roles that you'll be let go? Yes. Will you work harder than you used to? Yes.

But for those that make the cut, does it mean you'll have a job where the survival of the company is no longer in doubt? Yes. If you're retained, are you considered a top performer? Yes. Are you rewarded for that? Yes. Does it increase your job security? Yes.

We are competitive and leaders throughout the world.

Well, at one time I might have speculated that you work with or for Motorola, but I'm not sure that they are really "world class" any more. In fact, I don't even know if they even exist as such any more. Didn't they have some kind of break-up? And didn't they sell off all or most of their patent portfolio? I do remember someone knowledgeable in these matters once speculating that, out of the thousands and thousands of Motorola patents in existence, probably only some ridiculously low number (a dozen maybe, if that) had actual technological value, with the rest just being legal fodder. And it's been a bit hilarious to see how pathetic these patent fights have turned out in court lately; Oracle vs. Google has been especially entertaining for me, because even I could easily find prior art. If only some of those overpaid, overeducated, but largely incompetent patent lawyers had done their jobs better, then maybe some of this crap could have been avoided!

And, in case you haven't been paying attention, with the latest economic woes a lot of those "top" employees have lost their jobs, too - along with their savings, and maybe their homes, and so on. And just because you're a survivor doesn't necessarily mean you're safe in the long term. I myself (being a "top performer") survived round after round of layoffs at a former employer, along with a relative handful of others in my area. They were whittling things down to "the cream of the crop", they said, and one of the VPs even flew out to tell us in person that we had all been personally selected BY HIM to stay, and what a great job we were doing, and that all of our jobs were safe, and so on and so forth. Luckily not all of use believed him!

So, of course, within a month they announced major office closures all across the country (more of that "Ive League financial engineering" gone sour), and they almost had to close down the entire corporate operation, too, plus they cut field operations to the bone. That was something like 25,000 jobs gone, almost overnight. They are still around but operating with basically a skeleton crew, have been getting royally screwed over since day one by the outsourcing providers who they thought would save them, and are on a long-standing corporate "death watch". Current projections show that they will probably be out of cash within twelve months, if not sooner, and their lines of credit have already been exhausted, so they have resorted to selling off their prime assets in order to stay afloat. But you know it's kind of hard to run a successful and profitable business (it has been neither of these for several years now) once you've lost your best employees, and sold off everything else of value. Apparently that's something they didn't get taught at Harvard!

As far as education goes: Perhaps I should describe my attitude towards it as there being a need for more of a "lean, just-in-time" system - one where you learn much of what you need to know when you need to know it, not years earlier when it may have grown stale or out of date over time. And we really shouldn't be rewarding people just because they stayed in school for a really long time, or just because they went to the "right" schools, or whatever. Again, this is a big part of what's WRONG with this country today, not what's right!

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN

1 recommendation

reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

Our HBS CEO has transformed the company--he and his majority of HBS EVPs. Increased profits, rate of growth, share price increase, etc. He's taken the company well beyond what the founders had when they stepped down from actively managing the business. We've skyrocketed. It's amazing. There's a reason why Wall St. and investors love us.

And that's EXACTLY what happened with the HBS types at my former employer, too. We went from being a ho-hum, also-ran company to a Wall Street darling, our stock went from the teens to close to 100, our profits (on paper, at least) soared, we went on a major acquisition binge, and our new management was being lauded as "world class" and "unbeatable" (they themselves started to believe this, too, and said some things on the record that were embarrassing for many of us at the time, and are extremely embarrassing now in hindsight). And then the bottom fell out (oops!), so now they're hanging on for dear life. If you really knew anything about how Wall Street works you wouldn't be at all surprised by this, and you would know that Wall Street types jump from company to company doing this, and that there is even a playbook for it, so it's all very predictable.

You: "It's amazing."
Me: "DON'T DRINK THE F'ING KOOL-AID!!! PREPARE TO ABANDON SHIP!!!"

Those of us who didn't drink the Kool-Aid found it very difficult to reason with those who did, many of whom have since gotten royally screwed. The lucky ones either left voluntary and cashed-out while the stock was still relatively high, or maybe got cut loose and did the same. But the people who ultimately ended up with ownership of the company (after much "creative" financing) have lost something on the order of $20 billion or so. This isn't counting the dollar value of the loans which have been taken out, trying to keep things afloat, and which will probably never be repaid (these are in "interest-only" mode right now, and the company still can't keep up with the payments).

"Former CEO of Cummins, former CEO of Rambus, former CEO of Dana." So were these folks fired, were they forced to take early retirement, did they resign in disgrace, or what?

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

I am and I earned it. This whole generic 1%-ers are evil thing is so misguided. I don't know when an why this country stopped being anti-success.

Funny thing about "success": You can work very hard, go to the best schools, work for the best companies, have all the trappings of personal success (big paycheck, big house, fancy car, etc) and still be remarkably unsuccessful (destructive) in the bigger picture. Patent-troll lawyers fall into this category, and many financial types (basically con-men and thieves), and many politicians - as do Mafia types, as do drug dealers, and so on. In a lot of cases, the fancy pedigree just gives you a license to steal with almost no questions being asked. People like me see through this veil of legitimacy, though, and we do ask the questions, and we usually see how things are ultimately going to turn out in the end.

And I worked hard, too, my friend - I worked full-time during the day, went to school full-time at night, I often worked 72-hour days (this didn't always play well with my schoolwork), weekends and holidays, too, when necessary. And in school I usually ran circles around the other students (even the grad students), because I was smart and attentive, and in many cases I had already learned advanced stuff on the job while they were still covering the basic stuff in school. And I saved my money and I watched my debt (by working full-time I generally avoided student debt), so that when my employer closed up shop I was able to retire for several years at age 46. And now at 50 I'm still semi-retired (I pick up projects on occasion), and will probably pick up more work now that the economy is perking up a bit, if I find things that interest me - or that are boring but pay well because nobody else is willing or able to do them.

I've already told my prep-school, teenage daughter not to automatically assume that she will do a four-year or longer degree, and that there are other options out there which we will explore together (on-line classes and such), because I might like to take some current classes, too. Stanford, MIT, Harvard - they're all getting into this game in a big way now. (Many other institutions are, too, but the big names get most of the attention, of course.) Stanford has been saying for a while now that their certificate programs - which generally equate to nine to eighteen hours of college credit - are proving to be as effective (if not more so) than their degree programs, and they are one of the schools having problems keeping students around to finish a full degree in a timely matter, anyway, because demand is so high at the moment.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to scross
The CEOs of Cummins and Dana retired. They were my dad's generation. They're probably in their mid-70s now. Rambus CEO is now CEO of some other tech company. He's probably only in his early 50s.

Anyway, I have nothing other than to say that your company, your career and your experiences are not mine, won't be and never have been. We all make choices and take certain risks Some lose and some win. I've positioned myself to try to win in most cases. Does that mean I take less risk and have less reward? Probably. But I'm comfortable this way. Others are more comfortable with the woe-is-me attitude that's so prevalent today.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to scross
I wish I cared, but I really don't. Everyone has to make their own way through the world and make their own choices. I've made mine. You've made yours.

My point was that those OWS cretins can suck it if they want handouts. Until they work for something rather than just whine and complain, they can hang for all I care.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.


tmh

@verizon.net
reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

I am and I earned it. This whole generic 1%-ers are evil thing is so misguided. I don't know when an why this country stopped being anti-success.

I don't begrudge any of the 1% their success.

It's funny. When I first heard the media use the concept of the 1%, my very first thought wasn't about how unfair this all is. Rather, it was "Okay, now what does it take to be the 1%"?

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
reply to Badonkadonk
said by Badonkadonk:

I wish I cared, but I really don't. Everyone has to make their own way through the world and make their own choices. I've made mine. You've made yours.

My point was that those OWS cretins can suck it if they want handouts. Until they work for something rather than just whine and complain, they can hang for all I care.

You certainly have made your choices. You've made your choice to lie down with dogs, so don't be surprised when you get fleas. Remember - you've been warned!

And about those "OWS cretins": While I don't necessarily agree with everything they say or everything they do, in the vernacular their activities (and the activities of others before them) are what is known as "foreshadowing". Historically, the "haves" (even if they came by it honestly) have been vastly outnumbered by the "have-nots". And if the haves do things to make the situation worse, or if they simply choose to ignore the have-nots, then before long the masses rise up and just take what they want, usually in the bloodiest of fashions. This has happened a great many times throughout history, and you ignore this lesson at your own peril. (It would be very Darwinian if you did, though.)

Even the lying corporate VP that I mentioned earlier knew this, because it was one of the things that actively scared him. He had talked about precisely this scenario before, while discussing tough economic times and the general misfortune of other companies, some of which we acquired. He was shaking like a leaf as he gave each of us our individual walking papers (mine were quite generous, thank you very much), and there were several people who picked up on this and toyed with him a bit. Unfortunately for him, unlike the CFO who showed up to give us the initial bad news en masse, this particular VP wasn't deemed worthy by corporate of having a personal security guard, so he had to deal with each of us individually, all alone, face-to-face. It didn't help that he had been "friendly" with some of the female employees (this was quite common within the management ranks, as it turns out - even among the very top brass, who should have known better), so they were able to blackmail him and negotiate even more generous severance packages (God bless 'em).

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to tmh
said by tmh :

said by Badonkadonk:

I am and I earned it. This whole generic 1%-ers are evil thing is so misguided. I don't know when an why this country stopped being anti-success.

I don't begrudge any of the 1% their success.

It's funny. When I first heard the media use the concept of the 1%, my very first thought wasn't about how unfair this all is. Rather, it was "Okay, now what does it take to be the 1%"?

Exactly right. That's the attitude that's been lost and which helped propel this country to success. Now, success is a dirty word and something apparently to be ashamed of. We've become apologists and handout seekers instead of dreamers and innovators.

said by scross:

You certainly have made your choices. You've made your choice to lie down with dogs, so don't be surprised when you get fleas. Remember - you've been warned!

And about those "OWS cretins": While I don't necessarily agree with everything they say or everything they do, in the vernacular their activities (and the activities of others before them) are what is known as "foreshadowing". Historically, the "haves" (even if they came by it honestly) have been vastly outnumbered by the "have-nots". And if the haves do things to make the situation worse, or if they simply choose to ignore the have-nots, then before long the masses rise up and just take what they want, usually in the bloodiest of fashions. This has happened a great many times throughout history, and you ignore this lesson at your own peril. (It would be very Darwinian if you did, though.)

Lying down with the dogs? Because I've worked hard and found success? Thanks for the warning. Kind of scary, but I think I'll just keep on keeping on. I'm not nearly an E or C level employee, so I don't think the villagers are planning on burning down my castle any time soon.
--
I spent the last two years of high school in a daze. I . . . tried drugs enthusiastically. --Barack "Choomer-in-Chief" Obama. I'm so proud of our prez.