So I'm to blame, even though the collapse in the economy began even before I graduated? I, or the young lady referenced in the original post, were supposed to be expert labour market economists, before we committed tens of thousands of $$$ to training for professions for which demand did not exist in the worst economic downturn the USA has ever experienced? As I said earlier, I've figured out a system to make decent money despite the downturn, and I most certainly do not manage the money of others (I've had others ask though....). The beauty of the system I use is in just how simple it is. So I think its utterly pathetic that you would fault me, or the young lady, for investing many thousands of dollars, and many years of our lives, in trying to better ourselves by becoming professionals. We have no control over the economy. We had no control over employers' shift from domestic to foreign labour. We had no input into legislative policy that created the H1-B visa program. Since we've effectively been shut out of the economy for the past decade, how possibly can people like us be blamed for just how terrible it is? You make no sense whatsoever, and your comments clearly are intended to bully, or to be a thug, and not constructive. We're not the people with capital -- but the people with capital need to step up to the plate and start doing productive things with it, instead of pissing it away in housing Ponzi schemes or whatever has been the excuse of an 'economy' in the past decade.
I find that when someone else is judging your success or failure, you never win. I dropped out of comp sci, and people say, so you have no paper. Then I see people who take up $75,000 of debt to get a liberal arts degree, and people tell me, thats what education costs. I made my decisions, and I try to adapt with the economy. But come on, Bruce Kovner used to drive a cab, is he a big time loser too? Trading isn't really a profession. Its an opportunity. You either are in a situation at a given time where there is opportunity, or you're not. Sure, latent ability and desire will take you far, but depending on your start point, there is a huge difference in the type of person who succeeded in the past, compared to a trader in todays environment. It's not that much different in theory, from how the job Market rewards or taxes its participants. I think the traditional jobs we see that are career in nature have dwindled, and new one time only jobs appeared in the late 90s. People didn't realize that these opportunities were temporal in nature. So there should be a jump back into careers that are wide with their brush, like accounting, hard skills like trade skills, or other types of degrees like nursing. But the system is designed to obfuscate these labor demands due to the demand for profit (or the administration is simply inept, I cant tell for sure). So people get fooled by their career before they even have the ability to analyze the job Market or demographics, etc... Instead they think that they can just do what they want and be rewarded for it. That being said, for a trader, there is no easy way into the profession, otherwise every Stanford grad would be on wall street running a 5.0 sharpe ratio hedge fund, but we don't see that. Trading requires a technical skillset, but it also relies on changing tides, instinct, creativity, and access to capital, as compared to a labor driven startup like dot coms, software, etc.... I guess the point of the tough love posts here is that you cannot rely on consensus, but only your own will to adapt and change to the job Market, and you have to ignore the fact that even after 10 years, the new participants in the education led job Market are encouraged to be minions.
Can't speak for other industries, but I can say for a FACT that if you have IT experience, the job market in the city I live in is crazy right now. I get at least one call/email a day from a recruiter looking for IT people.
If LeBron James made 759 free throws, and some bully on a ladder knocked the ball out of going into the net 759 times, does that mean he's a bad free thrower? Should he give up, even though he may be perfectly fine at free throwing? Of course not. He should just arrange for the proverbial cr*p to be beaten out of the loser who is standing on a ladder knocking his throws out of the net. I suspect Americans will soon be at that point, where they are completely sick and tired of the people who are holding back progress. The ones who can, are already finding different basketball courts in which to play .
Oooh! Another guy with a system. And it is really simple too. He is so good that other people have asked him to manage their money. I am sure that pitz is just begging to have someone ask him how he does it. He is in debt because of student loans, has no experience to speak of whatsoever, but he can make decent money because he has this system. Does this system of yours involve renting out your girlfriend or moving weed from Canada to the United States? Because you need money to make money and from what you have been saying you do not have a penny. At least that is what you have been saying. You have been shut out of the economy? There are plenty of jobs available but they do not pay well. If you were willing to work at market wages (as opposed to wages that you set), I am dead certain that even with your crappy resume you would have a job anytime you wanted one. Face it pitz, you are just too vain to confront market realities.
are you saying there is no role for drones in today's society? not everybody can be a chief. if most people were not drones nothing would get done.
In the IT/Electrical/Computer Engineering field, the concept of a 'market' wage doesn't exist because the tech firms haven't been hiring domestic workers at any price. Its not just a matter of lowering one's salary expectations, when one's resume doesn't even get looked at on a pile of 200-500 others for one job. I most certainly have not ever attempted to dictate a salary that was at market, or above market. And the numbers/math doesn't lie -- when the USA grows its population by 10%, doesn't grow its job numbers at all, and when a large number of the jobs that remain are shifted from high-value manufacturing and science, to low-value 'service' or housing construction jobs -- just WTF do you think happens to the people who trained for high-value careers?