What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

What Will Future Jobs Look Like? (1 Viewer)

I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I think his point is that life will be harder in the future and so he's glad he won't have to worry about children trying to make their way through that more challenging future.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
Ask those college graduates today who can't get jobs, or settle for part time/minimum wage jobs, yet are in debt with tens of thousands of student loans.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
Ask those college graduates today who can't get jobs, or settle for part time/minimum wage jobs, yet are in debt with tens of thousands of student loans.
Did they borrow a dollar from each bank?

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.

Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
Ask those college graduates today who can't get jobs, or settle for part time/minimum wage jobs, yet are in debt with tens of thousands of student loans.
Obviously different college majors offer different career options. The same goes for high demand vs. low demand trade skills. I don't believe just going to college and getting a degree is synonymous with proper education.

I'm not expecting our economy to linger at sub 2% GDP and 7%+ unemployment forever anyway. Are you?

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
Ask those college graduates today who can't get jobs, or settle for part time/minimum wage jobs, yet are in debt with tens of thousands of student loans.
Obviously different college majors offer different career options. The same goes for high demand vs. low demand trade skills. I don't believe just going to college and getting a degree is synonymous with proper education.

I'm not expecting our economy to linger at sub 2% GDP and 7%+ unemployment forever anyway. Are you?
Yes, he is. Spock is Chicken Little.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.

Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:
Average salaries for nurses in California hovers just below $100K and most are unionized which is about as close as you can get to guaranteed no layoff. I would actually argue that no job should be guaranteed no layoff.

Maybe we just differ on what we consider a successful career opportunity.

Either way, I had a completely different reading of that presentation.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.

Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:
Average salaries for nurses in California hovers just below $100K and most are unionized which is about as close as you can get to guaranteed no layoff. I would actually argue that no job should be guaranteed no layoff.

Maybe we just differ on what we consider a successful career opportunity.

Either way, I had a completely different reading of that presentation.
My cousin's fiancee knows what the average RN salary is here in CA. 100K is for experienced, not entry level. You also have to take into account the cost of living where you live as well when considering if you are successful or not financially, not just your salary.

Problem is despite the RN demand, they want experience, and not just externship. She wasn't lucky like me to have family pay her way through school which is far more expensive than my day. So she's in massive debt and is working as a bank teller making $14/hour and having to pay $500/mo toward her student loans. She's 32. Unless you know someone that can get you in the door or get lucky, you are pretty stuck in this catch 22. It's 5 years and counting for her.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.

Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:
Average salaries for nurses in California hovers just below $100K and most are unionized which is about as close as you can get to guaranteed no layoff. I would actually argue that no job should be guaranteed no layoff.

Maybe we just differ on what we consider a successful career opportunity.

Either way, I had a completely different reading of that presentation.
My cousin's fiancee knows what the average RN salary is here in CA. 100K is for experienced, not entry level. You also have to take into account the cost of living where you live as well when considering if you are successful or not financially, not just your salary.

Problem is despite the RN demand, they want experience, and not just externship. She wasn't lucky like me to have family pay her way through school which is far more expensive than my day. So she's in massive debt and is working as a bank teller making $14/hour and having to pay $500/mo toward her student loans. She's 32. Unless you know someone that can get you in the door or get lucky, you are pretty stuck in this catch 22. It's 5 years and counting for her.
Why didn't she pursue her nursing career in an area that pays less but she could get the experience she needs to transition into a higher paying job? That's pretty common. I would argue that the salaries in California should be lower so that the market can accommodate more, younger nurses, but that's largely a union decision. I have a friend that actually took her nursing degree and became a lab technician to stay where she wanted. She does quite well.

Most established professionals I know have had to bounce around a bit before they could get the experience they need to settle down. I'm in the process of making a move I really don't want to make, but sometimes you have to go where the jobs are.

Now that she has been out of the market for 5 years she pretty much has to go back to school and retrain. She's probably better off trying to make a career out of banking at this point. Has she tried to advance out of her current position? Branch positions open up quite often. She may have to take a position that lengthens her commute, but I work with a lot of people in the banking industry that started their careers by walking up the branch hierarchy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
Ask those college graduates today who can't get jobs, or settle for part time/minimum wage jobs, yet are in debt with tens of thousands of student loans.
Obviously different college majors offer different career options. The same goes for high demand vs. low demand trade skills. I don't believe just going to college and getting a degree is synonymous with proper education.

I'm not expecting our economy to linger at sub 2% GDP and 7%+ unemployment forever anyway. Are you?
I believe it's highly likely the economy wont experience steady long term growth until the baby boom generation is purged from our overall demographics. Until then it will be a lot of ups and downs, with the downs outweighing the ups.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.

Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:
Average salaries for nurses in California hovers just below $100K and most are unionized which is about as close as you can get to guaranteed no layoff. I would actually argue that no job should be guaranteed no layoff.

Maybe we just differ on what we consider a successful career opportunity.

Either way, I had a completely different reading of that presentation.
My cousin's fiancee knows what the average RN salary is here in CA. 100K is for experienced, not entry level. You also have to take into account the cost of living where you live as well when considering if you are successful or not financially, not just your salary.

Problem is despite the RN demand, they want experience, and not just externship. She wasn't lucky like me to have family pay her way through school which is far more expensive than my day. So she's in massive debt and is working as a bank teller making $14/hour and having to pay $500/mo toward her student loans. She's 32. Unless you know someone that can get you in the door or get lucky, you are pretty stuck in this catch 22. It's 5 years and counting for her.
Why didn't she pursue her nursing career in an area that pays less but she could get the experience she needs to transition into a higher paying job? That's pretty common. I would argue that the salaries in California should be lower so that the market can accommodate more, younger nurses, but that's largely a union decision. I have a friend that actually took her nursing degree and became a lab technician to stay where she wanted. She does quite well.

Most established professionals I know have had to bounce around a bit before they could get the experience they need to settle down. I'm in the process of making a move I really don't want to make, but sometimes you have to go where the jobs are.

Now that she has been out of the market for 5 years she pretty much has to go back to school and retrain. She's probably better off trying to make a career out of banking at this point. Has she tried to advance out of her current position? Branch positions open up quite often. She may have to take a position that lengthens her commute, but I work with a lot of people in the banking industry that started their careers by walking up the branch hierarchy.
She's trying for LVN too to no avail. So then what was the point in becoming an RN? Save the massive college debt and go for a cheaper degree then. She hates the banking biz but has to do it to survive. Commuting 60 miles a day in the traffic here is far enough.

Point is it's getting harder to get into even brainless positions these days than it used to be. You work harder and more and are getting paid less than 20 years ago. Someone told me this 20 years ago and I didn't believe it. I mean cost of living always goes up rarely down but salaries don't keep up. 20 years from now it will be worse. That I believe.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
Ask those college graduates today who can't get jobs, or settle for part time/minimum wage jobs, yet are in debt with tens of thousands of student loans.
Obviously different college majors offer different career options. The same goes for high demand vs. low demand trade skills. I don't believe just going to college and getting a degree is synonymous with proper education.

I'm not expecting our economy to linger at sub 2% GDP and 7%+ unemployment forever anyway. Are you?
I believe it's highly likely the economy wont experience steady long term growth until the baby boom generation is purged from our overall demographics. Until then it will be a lot of ups and downs, with the downs outweighing the ups.
I have never seen more over 65 people out there still working than I do now days. Anywhere from bagging groceries on up. They are taking up jobs that younger folks could be doing and this wasn't the case even a few years ago. People just can't completely retire because the cost of living and taxes are always going up while income isn't.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.

Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:
Average salaries for nurses in California hovers just below $100K and most are unionized which is about as close as you can get to guaranteed no layoff. I would actually argue that no job should be guaranteed no layoff.

Maybe we just differ on what we consider a successful career opportunity.

Either way, I had a completely different reading of that presentation.
My cousin's fiancee knows what the average RN salary is here in CA. 100K is for experienced, not entry level. You also have to take into account the cost of living where you live as well when considering if you are successful or not financially, not just your salary.

Problem is despite the RN demand, they want experience, and not just externship. She wasn't lucky like me to have family pay her way through school which is far more expensive than my day. So she's in massive debt and is working as a bank teller making $14/hour and having to pay $500/mo toward her student loans. She's 32. Unless you know someone that can get you in the door or get lucky, you are pretty stuck in this catch 22. It's 5 years and counting for her.
Why didn't she pursue her nursing career in an area that pays less but she could get the experience she needs to transition into a higher paying job? That's pretty common. I would argue that the salaries in California should be lower so that the market can accommodate more, younger nurses, but that's largely a union decision. I have a friend that actually took her nursing degree and became a lab technician to stay where she wanted. She does quite well.

Most established professionals I know have had to bounce around a bit before they could get the experience they need to settle down. I'm in the process of making a move I really don't want to make, but sometimes you have to go where the jobs are.

Now that she has been out of the market for 5 years she pretty much has to go back to school and retrain. She's probably better off trying to make a career out of banking at this point. Has she tried to advance out of her current position? Branch positions open up quite often. She may have to take a position that lengthens her commute, but I work with a lot of people in the banking industry that started their careers by walking up the branch hierarchy.
She's trying for LVN too to no avail. So then what was the point in becoming an RN? Save the massive college debt and go for a cheaper degree then. She hates the banking biz but has to do it to survive. Commuting 60 miles a day in the traffic here is far enough.

Point is it's getting harder to get into even brainless positions these days than it used to be. You work harder and more and are getting paid less than 20 years ago. Someone told me this 20 years ago and I didn't believe it. I mean cost of living always goes up rarely down but salaries don't keep up. 20 years from now it will be worse. That I believe.
If she wanted to be an RN she needed to find an RN position in an area that there was demand. You can't be an entry level nurse in California without connections. I would have loved to stay in the city I went to college, but there were no jobs there for me. I would have then liked to have stayed where I had my first job, but the cost of living was too high for my family. I raised my family for 10 years elsewhere and dealt with commuting three hours each way a few times a week for meetings. In the end it hurt my career a lot, but that was the choice I made. Now I actually have to move again which sucks, but my career is stagnating being so remote.

The US economy is crappy in some areas, but it's booming in others. If you can't find an opportunity where you are at then you have to be willing to move.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
Ask those college graduates today who can't get jobs, or settle for part time/minimum wage jobs, yet are in debt with tens of thousands of student loans.
Obviously different college majors offer different career options. The same goes for high demand vs. low demand trade skills. I don't believe just going to college and getting a degree is synonymous with proper education.

I'm not expecting our economy to linger at sub 2% GDP and 7%+ unemployment forever anyway. Are you?
I believe it's highly likely the economy wont experience steady long term growth until the baby boom generation is purged from our overall demographics. Until then it will be a lot of ups and downs, with the downs outweighing the ups.
I have never seen more over 65 people out there still working than I do now days. Anywhere from bagging groceries on up. They are taking up jobs that younger folks could be doing and this wasn't the case even a few years ago. People just can't completely retire because the cost of living and taxes are always going up while income isn't.
They are supplementing income and are likely more reliable than many younger workers. It makes sense for companies that have a lot of entry level positions with historically high turnover. It hurts the future economy though. This is really where young people should be building a work ethic.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
There's a creativity benefit to interacting with others in the workplace. People are social beings, generally, and we seek out interactions with others. For these reasons, I think many people will continue to cluster in cities, where there's more to do and more people to interact with.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
But think about how many message boards you could scam if you did. You could tell everybody they have cancer and ask them to send you money for example.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
There's a creativity benefit to interacting with others in the workplace. People are social beings, generally, and we seek out interactions with others. For these reasons, I think many people will continue to cluster in cities, where there's more to do and more people to interact with.
Cities are much more productive too.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
There's a creativity benefit to interacting with others in the workplace. People are social beings, generally, and we seek out interactions with others. For these reasons, I think many people will continue to cluster in cities, where there's more to do and more people to interact with.
When the economy hit the skids there was a big shift in corporations to cost cutting and that more consolidation and less telecommuting. Even in the tech industry where telecommuting is more common employees are still generally close to a hub for meetings and interaction. It's very rare to have someone telecommute full-time.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
There's a creativity benefit to interacting with others in the workplace. People are social beings, generally, and we seek out interactions with others. For these reasons, I think many people will continue to cluster in cities, where there's more to do and more people to interact with.
We were talking about age groups last night when talking about this possibility. I agree with you about social creatures, and I think younger people in particular will move to the urban centers. However, if people can choose to move away from giant metro areas later in life I think many will. Just think if you could move anywhere you wanted, avoiding high tax, high traffic and high stress areas for those less congested. Pick a perfect school district for your kid in Idaho or wherever? Avoid NY state taxes, LA traffic or Chicago winters.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
There's a creativity benefit to interacting with others in the workplace. People are social beings, generally, and we seek out interactions with others. For these reasons, I think many people will continue to cluster in cities, where there's more to do and more people to interact with.
When the economy hit the skids there was a big shift in corporations to cost cutting and that more consolidation and less telecommuting. Even in the tech industry where telecommuting is more common employees are still generally close to a hub for meetings and interaction. It's very rare to have someone telecommute full-time.
Times are changing Grandpa.

 
Great talk. I like his optimism and can-do attitude. Wouldn't mind seeing some of our leaders & media spread that message, but I realize that fear and hate is a better seller.

 
I guess I don't see the times are tougher thing. Maybe I just missed it, but I live in Michigan, am 31 and every friend/acquaintance I know with a college education is working in the career they hoped for except for 3 people and that is more a result of their own choices: one got a degree in creative writing, wants to be a writer, but never actually writes anything, another is a lawyer, but is an ### and burned too many bridges in his first high job with a very powerful law firm, and other has just chosen to party instead of pursuing his career.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
I'd love to start telecommuting more and spending less time on trains every day. I'd also love to be able to move further from Manhattan and thereby live in a lower cost of living area on a bigger property for the same money.

With a good internet connection and phone line, I can do most of my "work" from anywhere. The trouble is that more and more I'm confronting non-"work" stuff in my workday -- personnel issues, office issues, billing issues, client development issues -- and less sitting around doing research or writing a brief. The end result is that, unfortunately, I don't see a full time telecommute anywhere in my near future.

That said, I do think it would be possible for me to work remotely two days a week and limit my time in the office to three days a week. The trouble is that there's still a serious stigma attached to that, and you can't really be considered a serious player around a law firm (and I bet in other environments) unless you are the guy who is there with boots on the ground on a daily basis. A guy who works from home would probably not be taken all that seriously, whether deserved or not.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
I'd love to start telecommuting more and spending less time on trains every day. I'd also love to be able to move further from Manhattan and thereby live in a lower cost of living area on a bigger property for the same money.

With a good internet connection and phone line, I can do most of my "work" from anywhere. The trouble is that more and more I'm confronting non-"work" stuff in my workday -- personnel issues, office issues, billing issues, client development issues -- and less sitting around doing research or writing a brief. The end result is that, unfortunately, I don't see a full time telecommute anywhere in my near future.

That said, I do think it would be possible for me to work remotely two days a week and limit my time in the office to three days a week. The trouble is that there's still a serious stigma attached to that, and you can't really be considered a serious player around a law firm (and I bet in other environments) unless you are the guy who is there with boots on the ground on a daily basis. A guy who works from home would probably not be taken all that seriously, whether deserved or not.
Definitely, telecommuting is still not as widely accepted as it could be, or possibly should be. Especially in certain industries.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
I'd love to start telecommuting more and spending less time on trains every day. I'd also love to be able to move further from Manhattan and thereby live in a lower cost of living area on a bigger property for the same money.

With a good internet connection and phone line, I can do most of my "work" from anywhere. The trouble is that more and more I'm confronting non-"work" stuff in my workday -- personnel issues, office issues, billing issues, client development issues -- and less sitting around doing research or writing a brief. The end result is that, unfortunately, I don't see a full time telecommute anywhere in my near future.

That said, I do think it would be possible for me to work remotely two days a week and limit my time in the office to three days a week. The trouble is that there's still a serious stigma attached to that, and you can't really be considered a serious player around a law firm (and I bet in other environments) unless you are the guy who is there with boots on the ground on a daily basis. A guy who works from home would probably not be taken all that seriously, whether deserved or not.
Definitely, telecommuting is still not as widely accepted as it could be, or possibly should be. Especially in certain industries.
Agree. I get that there are things I can't do -- or can't do as well -- from out of the office, and there's definitely a feeling of not being "in the mix" when I'm not there, but I think most of the hangups are in our minds.

 
There could be lots of us who could telecommute one or two days a week if employers would only be more open to the possibility. Not only would that cut the employee's commuting costs by 20-40%, it could also reduce traffic in major metro areas by 10-20%, which is a pretty big deal.

Re: the Boomers continuing to work past early retirement age, one benefit to this is possibly reducing overall SS outlays over the next few decades when they will be under the most stress. Not only will some percentage of those seniors croak soon after finally retiring but they will be feeding the pot while they continue to work.

 
With the move to telecommuting and generally away from brick and mortar establishments, it is interesting to think about how this impacts population shifts. If you are paid a set wage and you can work anywhere in teh country (or world for that matter), will people move away from cities or move to them? Theoretically there will be less traffic because people are working from home, and cities offer more amenities. Then again why live anywhere near a city if you can live in a low cost area in a small town?

Was having this conversation last night with some people. We definitely are entering a new era in jobs, job creation, becoming less dependent on brick and mortar operations and more dependent on the global internet infrastructure. As the internet has mad the world smaller, it has created new opportunities for business and government alike to streamline operations and work smarter. I think big changes in the way our parents and grandparents thought about "work" are coming, sooner than later.
I'd love to start telecommuting more and spending less time on trains every day. I'd also love to be able to move further from Manhattan and thereby live in a lower cost of living area on a bigger property for the same money.

With a good internet connection and phone line, I can do most of my "work" from anywhere. The trouble is that more and more I'm confronting non-"work" stuff in my workday -- personnel issues, office issues, billing issues, client development issues -- and less sitting around doing research or writing a brief. The end result is that, unfortunately, I don't see a full time telecommute anywhere in my near future.

That said, I do think it would be possible for me to work remotely two days a week and limit my time in the office to three days a week. The trouble is that there's still a serious stigma attached to that, and you can't really be considered a serious player around a law firm (and I bet in other environments) unless you are the guy who is there with boots on the ground on a daily basis. A guy who works from home would probably not be taken all that seriously, whether deserved or not.
Definitely, telecommuting is still not as widely accepted as it could be, or possibly should be. Especially in certain industries.
Agree. I get that there are things I can't do -- or can't do as well -- from out of the office, and there's definitely a feeling of not being "in the mix" when I'm not there, but I think most of the hangups are in our minds.
For me, there is less and less of a difference. Even if I work from my office, I teleconference with people in other states, Europe or Asia 80% of the time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toilets will have special magnets and vacuums. Making toilet paper unnecessary.
They already do this in space. Was pretty cool to see how astronauts take care of their daily grooming/living in space. I'm sure they are ecstatic when they get to their own homes!

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:
Average salaries for nurses in California hovers just below $100K and most are unionized which is about as close as you can get to guaranteed no layoff. I would actually argue that no job should be guaranteed no layoff.

Maybe we just differ on what we consider a successful career opportunity.

Either way, I had a completely different reading of that presentation.
My cousin's fiancee knows what the average RN salary is here in CA. 100K is for experienced, not entry level. You also have to take into account the cost of living where you live as well when considering if you are successful or not financially, not just your salary.Problem is despite the RN demand, they want experience, and not just externship. She wasn't lucky like me to have family pay her way through school which is far more expensive than my day. So she's in massive debt and is working as a bank teller making $14/hour and having to pay $500/mo toward her student loans. She's 32. Unless you know someone that can get you in the door or get lucky, you are pretty stuck in this catch 22. It's 5 years and counting for her.
Why didn't she pursue her nursing career in an area that pays less but she could get the experience she needs to transition into a higher paying job? That's pretty common. I would argue that the salaries in California should be lower so that the market can accommodate more, younger nurses, but that's largely a union decision. I have a friend that actually took her nursing degree and became a lab technician to stay where she wanted. She does quite well.

Most established professionals I know have had to bounce around a bit before they could get the experience they need to settle down. I'm in the process of making a move I really don't want to make, but sometimes you have to go where the jobs are.

Now that she has been out of the market for 5 years she pretty much has to go back to school and retrain. She's probably better off trying to make a career out of banking at this point. Has she tried to advance out of her current position? Branch positions open up quite often. She may have to take a position that lengthens her commute, but I work with a lot of people in the banking industry that started their careers by walking up the branch hierarchy.
She's trying for LVN too to no avail. So then what was the point in becoming an RN? Save the massive college debt and go for a cheaper degree then. She hates the banking biz but has to do it to survive. Commuting 60 miles a day in the traffic here is far enough.Point is it's getting harder to get into even brainless positions these days than it used to be. You work harder and more and are getting paid less than 20 years ago. Someone told me this 20 years ago and I didn't believe it. I mean cost of living always goes up rarely down but salaries don't keep up. 20 years from now it will be worse. That I believe.
I'd like to hear more about nursing hob prospects in Cali. I'm considering a move to Silicon Valley, and my wife is currently in nursing school. If this happens, she would be moving there as a 40 year old RN, fresh out of school, with no connections at all.

Fortunately, her income is supplemental - we can (and do) live on my income now. That means we can afford her to take per diem or contract jobs until she can get better established.

 
Re: telecommuting - I read recently that some big tech companies, specifically Yahoo!, were reigning in their telecommuting program, insisting that folks get back in the office. It may not be quite as great as we all had hoped.

 
There could be lots of us who could telecommute one or two days a week if employers would only be more open to the possibility. Not only would that cut the employee's commuting costs by 20-40%, it could also reduce traffic in major metro areas by 10-20%, which is a pretty big deal.

Re: the Boomers continuing to work past early retirement age, one benefit to this is possibly reducing overall SS outlays over the next few decades when they will be under the most stress. Not only will some percentage of those seniors croak soon after finally retiring but they will be feeding the pot while they continue to work.
This doesn't work out quite in the same way as you think it would. SS payouts are scaled for when you leave the workforce and if you have a surviving spouse they take on the benefits. The other thing that works against this is that if you work to 65 you are nearly certain to live to 85. There are benefits to remaining active and working for longevity. If anything the effects are 180 degrees from where it would be to help out SS in the manner you describe.

 
Re: telecommuting - I read recently that some big tech companies, specifically Yahoo!, were reigning in their telecommuting program, insisting that folks get back in the office. It may not be quite as great as we all had hoped.
I work from home (albeit for myself), and I can tell you that it is not easy. There is a definite disconnect.

I know everybody says "I'm more productive", but that's really not their call (overall, the company / boss decides how productive you are.) I suspect most folks aren't as productive as they think.

Also, be careful what you wish for - blurring work and home life is... it's a little odd even for me, and I get to call the shots. Being told what to do (or being verbally reprimanded) in your own home? Yuck.

 
Just switched to 2 days working from home last month and it was the best thing I did.. :thumbup:

Two less days of driving 35+ miles( usually 50 minutes due to traffic) one way to downtown St. Paul.

I still get up at the same time as normal. But now instead of logging in at 6:30am, I'm on by 5:30am.. and I tend to stay online to at least my normal quitting time of 3:30pm.

Since I don't spend as much time on the road, I have found my self still working at 4pm.

So my company is getting an extra hour to hour and half of my time on the days I work at home.

I can say I do get a lot more more done at home.. No interruptions of those around me.. and a lot less :rant: on my part due to co-workers and their annoying habits.

Although my situation is probably different from many.

Our team is spread out throughout the US and UK with only one other team member in the same area as me and he only drives in once or twice a month.

Also, My direct Manager lives in Florida, and his manager lives in Connecticut.

 
Re: telecommuting - I read recently that some big tech companies, specifically Yahoo!, were reigning in their telecommuting program, insisting that folks get back in the office. It may not be quite as great as we all had hoped.
I work from home (albeit for myself), and I can tell you that it is not easy. There is a definite disconnect.

I know everybody says "I'm more productive", but that's really not their call (overall, the company / boss decides how productive you are.) I suspect most folks aren't as productive as they think.

Also, be careful what you wish for - blurring work and home life is... it's a little odd even for me, and I get to call the shots. Being told what to do (or being verbally reprimanded) in your own home? Yuck.
Working from home has two "musts" IMO:

1. Dedicated work space separated from the rest of the house. (An office space of some sort).

2. Draw a distinct line between work and home.

#2 is pretty easy you just have to have the discipline. #1 boils down to the architecture of your house so can be tough for some.

I don't find it very difficult, but my kids are in school and daycare and when they are home they know not to come in the office unless I tell them they can. I know I'm doing just fine because folks have no real idea I work from home so I assume I'm being as productive as I would be in the office....certainly productive enough for management based on reviews.

 
I am so glad I chose not to have kids. Life is tough as it is and gets tougher as time goes on. With all the technology and automation coming out, you will either be rich or poor in the not too far future.
I'm not seeing the connection between that video and the decision not to have children. Could you expand on that?
I'm saying that being what is happening with the middle class, I'm glad I don't have kids who will have it harder than many of us have it now. It already is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking, much less toss in more advancements in automation and technology. You better be something else or you have a better chance of being considered poor some day.
He didn't say the entire middle class would have it harder. He said the middle class would continue to separate largely based on education choices. Why wouldn't you just have children and properly educate them?
What do you mean by properly educate them? I have a bachelors degree from University of Washington which at my time was one of the top 10 universities in the US. I was blessed that my dad paid it all or I'd be facing student loans with interest and poor for a lot of years if not forever. Even doctors are making less than they used to. That's why you see pcps starting to go to the way side. Insurance companies determine how much a doctor gets and those allowable amounts are getting smaller and smaller. That's just one example. I remember when you couldn't go wrong becoming an RN. It was guaranteed a no layoff job. Today the demand is still there but notice there are layoffs in that field too.Everyone in my family is college degreed in meaningful careers "in demand". It used to be enough. Now you even find ads for no brainer type of jobs that prefer a bachelor's degree. Wow. Wasn't like this 20 years ago! :shock:
Average salaries for nurses in California hovers just below $100K and most are unionized which is about as close as you can get to guaranteed no layoff. I would actually argue that no job should be guaranteed no layoff.

Maybe we just differ on what we consider a successful career opportunity.

Either way, I had a completely different reading of that presentation.
My cousin's fiancee knows what the average RN salary is here in CA. 100K is for experienced, not entry level. You also have to take into account the cost of living where you live as well when considering if you are successful or not financially, not just your salary.Problem is despite the RN demand, they want experience, and not just externship. She wasn't lucky like me to have family pay her way through school which is far more expensive than my day. So she's in massive debt and is working as a bank teller making $14/hour and having to pay $500/mo toward her student loans. She's 32. Unless you know someone that can get you in the door or get lucky, you are pretty stuck in this catch 22. It's 5 years and counting for her.
Why didn't she pursue her nursing career in an area that pays less but she could get the experience she needs to transition into a higher paying job? That's pretty common. I would argue that the salaries in California should be lower so that the market can accommodate more, younger nurses, but that's largely a union decision. I have a friend that actually took her nursing degree and became a lab technician to stay where she wanted. She does quite well.

Most established professionals I know have had to bounce around a bit before they could get the experience they need to settle down. I'm in the process of making a move I really don't want to make, but sometimes you have to go where the jobs are.

Now that she has been out of the market for 5 years she pretty much has to go back to school and retrain. She's probably better off trying to make a career out of banking at this point. Has she tried to advance out of her current position? Branch positions open up quite often. She may have to take a position that lengthens her commute, but I work with a lot of people in the banking industry that started their careers by walking up the branch hierarchy.
She's trying for LVN too to no avail. So then what was the point in becoming an RN? Save the massive college debt and go for a cheaper degree then. She hates the banking biz but has to do it to survive. Commuting 60 miles a day in the traffic here is far enough.Point is it's getting harder to get into even brainless positions these days than it used to be. You work harder and more and are getting paid less than 20 years ago. Someone told me this 20 years ago and I didn't believe it. I mean cost of living always goes up rarely down but salaries don't keep up. 20 years from now it will be worse. That I believe.
I'd like to hear more about nursing hob prospects in Cali. I'm considering a move to Silicon Valley, and my wife is currently in nursing school. If this happens, she would be moving there as a 40 year old RN, fresh out of school, with no connections at all.

Fortunately, her income is supplemental - we can (and do) live on my income now. That means we can afford her to take per diem or contract jobs until she can get better established.
This is very beneficial for someone beginning such a career where everyone wants experience. Since she doesn't have to worry about income off the bat, if she can't find a full time job, she can either take a contract or part time job or volunteer at a clinic or hospital she would like to eventually work at. Nothing shows interest more than volunteering and folks there can see she's a great worker and would be an asset to have on staff rather than doing nothing until you get a paying job.

She should also check out online RN forums and organizations in the Bay Area and establish some contact and possible connections. She should get her name and interest out there where ever she can.

My cousin's fiancee who is inexperienced and stuck in the bank at the moment found that she would need to go to Fresno or some boony place at least 2 hours away to get a job.

I have a friend who graduated in dentistry a couple years ago. No one in the Bay Area would hire her to join their practice right out of school. She's not tied down so she took a job in Fresno for a year to get experience. Now she's a dentist in Redwood City here in the Bay Area.

Despite the cost of living and such, I love living here with all the different cultures, arts/museums, beaches, mountains, SF nearby, and the fantastic weather. Whatever your interest it's not too far away to get to.

Good luck to you guys if you move here!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: telecommuting - I read recently that some big tech companies, specifically Yahoo!, were reigning in their telecommuting program, insisting that folks get back in the office. It may not be quite as great as we all had hoped.
I work from home (albeit for myself), and I can tell you that it is not easy. There is a definite disconnect.

I know everybody says "I'm more productive", but that's really not their call (overall, the company / boss decides how productive you are.) I suspect most folks aren't as productive as they think.

Also, be careful what you wish for - blurring work and home life is... it's a little odd even for me, and I get to call the shots. Being told what to do (or being verbally reprimanded) in your own home? Yuck.
I telecommute 100% and agree with everything but the bolded... I don't get that at all.

 
Re: telecommuting - I read recently that some big tech companies, specifically Yahoo!, were reigning in their telecommuting program, insisting that folks get back in the office. It may not be quite as great as we all had hoped.
I work from home (albeit for myself), and I can tell you that it is not easy. There is a definite disconnect.

I know everybody says "I'm more productive", but that's really not their call (overall, the company / boss decides how productive you are.) I suspect most folks aren't as productive as they think.

Also, be careful what you wish for - blurring work and home life is... it's a little odd even for me, and I get to call the shots. Being told what to do (or being verbally reprimanded) in your own home? Yuck.
Working from home has two "musts" IMO:

1. Dedicated work space separated from the rest of the house. (An office space of some sort).

2. Draw a distinct line between work and home.

#2 is pretty easy you just have to have the discipline. #1 boils down to the architecture of your house so can be tough for some.

I don't find it very difficult, but my kids are in school and daycare and when they are home they know not to come in the office unless I tell them they can. I know I'm doing just fine because folks have no real idea I work from home so I assume I'm being as productive as I would be in the office....certainly productive enough for management based on reviews.
:goodposting:

#1 will make or break ya, no doubt. If you're working in the dining room or living room, forget it.

 
Re: telecommuting - I read recently that some big tech companies, specifically Yahoo!, were reigning in their telecommuting program, insisting that folks get back in the office. It may not be quite as great as we all had hoped.
I work from home (albeit for myself), and I can tell you that it is not easy. There is a definite disconnect.

I know everybody says "I'm more productive", but that's really not their call (overall, the company / boss decides how productive you are.) I suspect most folks aren't as productive as they think.

Also, be careful what you wish for - blurring work and home life is... it's a little odd even for me, and I get to call the shots. Being told what to do (or being verbally reprimanded) in your own home? Yuck.
Working from home has two "musts" IMO:

1. Dedicated work space separated from the rest of the house. (An office space of some sort).

2. Draw a distinct line between work and home.

#2 is pretty easy you just have to have the discipline. #1 boils down to the architecture of your house so can be tough for some.

I don't find it very difficult, but my kids are in school and daycare and when they are home they know not to come in the office unless I tell them they can. I know I'm doing just fine because folks have no real idea I work from home so I assume I'm being as productive as I would be in the office....certainly productive enough for management based on reviews.
:goodposting:

#1 will make or break ya, no doubt. If you're working in the dining room or living room, forget it.
Laptop meet couch. Been there.

 
Re: telecommuting - I read recently that some big tech companies, specifically Yahoo!, were reigning in their telecommuting program, insisting that folks get back in the office. It may not be quite as great as we all had hoped.
I work from home (albeit for myself), and I can tell you that it is not easy. There is a definite disconnect.

I know everybody says "I'm more productive", but that's really not their call (overall, the company / boss decides how productive you are.) I suspect most folks aren't as productive as they think.

Also, be careful what you wish for - blurring work and home life is... it's a little odd even for me, and I get to call the shots. Being told what to do (or being verbally reprimanded) in your own home? Yuck.
I telecommute 100% and agree with everything but the bolded... I don't get that at all.
I guess my point there is your home is your refuge from work. Bad day at work? Come home and it's washed away to a degree.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top