Red Mosquito

tragabigzanda wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:If companies want to save on real estate they are going to also look to save on their payroll. The idea that all jobs can just be done from home isn't reality. Lots of jobs will just go away while the necessary amount of employees to keep the machine running will sit at home with their small dog and laptop.

What the pandemic is really telling us is that some people don't need to work and have no utility in our Neewwww NorrmmAAllL.

It's a cold, sobering reality. Waking up to the strength of this realization every goddamn day. And the punch never eases. No bruises, no calluses. Just a suckerpunch a day, every day.

I feel it too man. So much uncertainty. Like, do I still matter in society when this all ends? I don't know the answer.

Exactly. I'm with you.

Sorry you guys are experiencing this. Fucking sucks.

I hope this isn't read as arrogant, as it's intended to be helpful. But I'd seriously consider using this time to go back for a secondary degree, if there are no other viable employment options. There are decent chances of debt forgiveness in the pipeline, and anyway you'll qualify for great aid and grants if you're broke and are too old to be claimed a dependent on your parents' taxes.

Just something to consider.

Certainly a time to consider skilling up. It's a bit daunting to try and pinpoint something to pursue whenever this crosses my mind. A weird choice paralysis takes over.

verb_to_trust wrote: Certainly a time to consider skilling up. It's a bit daunting to try and pinpoint something to pursue whenever this crosses my mind. A weird choice paralysis takes over.

Trag's advice is good in general, but yeah, it's still very unclear how Humty Dumpty is gonna be put back together again. I bet there's lots of people out there (myself included) that would like to say goodbye to the job that shutdown, and see this as a good opportunity for change. But I don't see how individual states can facilitate these transitions on their own, and we have no real national leadership, so I feel like we're gonna be in the figurative wilderness for a while.

I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

verb_to_trust wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:If companies want to save on real estate they are going to also look to save on their payroll. The idea that all jobs can just be done from home isn't reality. Lots of jobs will just go away while the necessary amount of employees to keep the machine running will sit at home with their small dog and laptop.

What the pandemic is really telling us is that some people don't need to work and have no utility in our Neewwww NorrmmAAllL.

It's a cold, sobering reality. Waking up to the strength of this realization every goddamn day. And the punch never eases. No bruises, no calluses. Just a suckerpunch a day, every day.

I feel it too man. So much uncertainty. Like, do I still matter in society when this all ends? I don't know the answer.

Exactly. I'm with you.

Sorry you guys are experiencing this. Fucking sucks.

I hope this isn't read as arrogant, as it's intended to be helpful. But I'd seriously consider using this time to go back for a secondary degree, if there are no other viable employment options. There are decent chances of debt forgiveness in the pipeline, and anyway you'll qualify for great aid and grants if you're broke and are too old to be claimed a dependent on your parents' taxes.

Just something to consider.

Certainly a time to consider skilling up. It's a bit daunting to try and pinpoint something to pursue whenever this crosses my mind. A weird choice paralysis takes over.

I'm wondering if more states will consider legalizing marijuana for the tax revenue. That would be a good business to get into on the ground floor.

Mickey wrote:I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

Great points.

Hatfield wrote:
I'm wondering if more states will consider legalizing marijuana for the tax revenue. That would be a good business to get into on the ground floor.

Given the need for revenue + jobs, it would be ridiculous for states not to consider this.

Rob wrote:

Mickey wrote:I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

Great points.

Hatfield wrote:
I'm wondering if more states will consider legalizing marijuana for the tax revenue. That would be a good business to get into on the ground floor.

Given the need for revenue + jobs, it would be ridiculous for states not to consider this.

I've seen job postings for weed companies in Illinois but they seem to be really low level stuff. I think community colleges and such offer coursework on weed agriculture now though. It would be truly hilarious if I got in the weed game.

verb_to_trust wrote:

Rob wrote:

Mickey wrote:I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

Great points.

Hatfield wrote:
I'm wondering if more states will consider legalizing marijuana for the tax revenue. That would be a good business to get into on the ground floor.

Given the need for revenue + jobs, it would be ridiculous for states not to consider this.

I've seen job postings for weed companies in Illinois but they seem to be really low level stuff. I think community colleges and such offer coursework on weed agriculture now though. It would be truly hilarious if I got in the weed game.

Because you're white?

Mickey wrote:I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

I think the error is thinking that education and curating a skill set is a one and done thing. You keep at it until you are ready to retire. You continually read the market and and build on what you have to transition to the market demands. Waiting until you are unemployed to do it is akin to looking for the life vest after the boat has sink. Use your time to continually re-invest in yourself. At a certain point your employer will pony up the cost of just about any skill set upgrading, it's down to you invest the time.

Self wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

Self wrote:Only 33 deaths in MA today.

Every time I see any US-based stats on this, it just blows my mind.

For the sake of comparison, my state (South Australia) has a population roughly equivalent to that of Nebraska. Nebraska alone has had more COVID-19 deaths (100) than our entire country (97, at last count).

I know. And that's a very low number for us. It's been over a hundred a day for almost a month.

Back up to 174 today. :/

surfndestroy wrote:

Mickey wrote:I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

I think the error is thinking that education and curating a skill set is a one and done thing. You keep at it until you are ready to retire. You continually read the market and and build on what you have to transition to the market demands. Waiting until you are unemployed to do it is akin to looking for the life vest after the boat has sink. Use your time to continually re-invest in yourself. At a certain point your employer will pony up the cost of just about any skill set upgrading, it's down to you invest the time.

Don’t confusing being credentialed and being able to actually do something.

Lockdown has ended here today. Shops are open again, but with social distancing and tracking of who enters and when - gyms and hairdressers are back in some type of capacity - movie theaters can open, but at this stage it seems only the small independent ones have, and we can finally take the kids to the playground.

Bi_3 wrote:

surfndestroy wrote:

Mickey wrote:I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

I think the error is thinking that education and curating a skill set is a one and done thing. You keep at it until you are ready to retire. You continually read the market and and build on what you have to transition to the market demands. Waiting until you are unemployed to do it is akin to looking for the life vest after the boat has sink. Use your time to continually re-invest in yourself. At a certain point your employer will pony up the cost of just about any skill set upgrading, it's down to you invest the time.

Don’t confusing being credentialed and being able to actually do something.

Try reading that one again, friends.

surfndestroy wrote:

Mickey wrote:I also would want to push back against the tendency to read under/unemployment as a hurdle that can be overcome by "skills." And specifically, I'd want to ask--which skills? It's pretty clear, for example, that the massive push for "learning to code" over the last decade (especially in urban charter schools, just as a note!) will have the net effect not of making more people employable but making more coding jobs flexible/precarious--gig work, in other words. Nor is it particularly easy to predict which skills will be in high demand--remember when law school was a golden ticket to the middle class?--and I wouldn't undersell the personal freedom of being debt-free right now. This doesn't mean that individuals can't improve their station by bumping out their resume a bit, especially if they have free time on their hands, but there's a thin line between offering that advice and naturalizing underemployment as a skills deficiency rather than a created problem wherein the common-sense solution further serves the needs of capital.

I think the error is thinking that education and curating a skill set is a one and done thing. You keep at it until you are ready to retire. You continually read the market and and build on what you have to transition to the market demands. Waiting until you are unemployed to do it is akin to looking for the life vest after the boat has sink. Use your time to continually re-invest in yourself. At a certain point your employer will pony up the cost of just about any skill set upgrading, it's down to you invest the time.

This isn't wrong in the abstract, but this requires money & time. Life comes at you fast, and for the 30-40 somethings with kids and other responsibilities in life, this is really difficult.

If people's answer to this is to go out and get a degree of some kind, I feel like the value of a degree would just go down. I just don't think we're gonna "college!" our way out of this. Low wage jobs have been hit hardest, these people are in the least likely position to have the time & money to pursue this path. A jobs program (available to all) or UBI seem like good ideas. I can't think of much else that won't take a long time to see results.