Posted on 09/26/2006 5:20:47 AM PDT by .cnI redruM
Oh, that's right, you again. You're the guy who thinks we have no semiconductor industry in the the U.S. anymore. As for your bullsh++ NBA example, the last time you excreted it, I asked you to consider all the (American) basketball players playing in Europe and elsewhere overseas, as well as semi-professional ball here in the U.S. You fled.
so are you telling me I should start taking lessons in dribbling?
According to you, only if you can play at the NBA level. Don't think of getting an engineering degree unless you're guaranteed a research slot at Dupont.
those dotcom fantasy jobs were blown out of the system by the end of 2001. the steady offshoring by large cap US tech companies has continued unabated since then.
Real wages are most definitely cyclical, with the trend-line pointing upward. Generally speaking, discussions about the real wage don't occur unless a Republican president is in office.
When you have people with engineering degrees who can't make it to DuPont, that's one thing. But when they go to work at Lowes, something is very wrong. In fact, US tech is gradually becoming just like the NBA - its becoming a boutique profession, the "average" jobs are going offshore or are being staffed by H1Bs, so if you can't be a "star player", my advice is not to choose another field. Which is exactly what young people are doing. And as the CSM article points out, its not just tech, the imbalances between jobs being created and education levels, is a real phenomena.
should say "choose another field".
Wrong. Again, your CSM opinion-piece points out that our colleges are generating kids with degrees with no economic benefit. It says nothing of kids with degrees in marketable fields. In essence, you are pointing to some dolt with a gender studies degree and lamenting the sad state of engineering study. It won't wash here.
I think you misread my post. No where did I equate manufacturing with adding value.
Bingo. I've always been a fan of Bartlett but I don't know what Bush did to turn him so rabidly against him.
The title of his new book and some of the reviews I've read, leads me to believe that his bias against Bush is motivated by vindictiveness and is affecting his balance and objectivity.
no, it points out a BLS labor stat that shows that the types of jobs being created (in many categories, not all of course, there are no absolutes here) - requiring little or no college. and which direction is the trend taking us? with offshoring, the answer to that question is very easy. so long as knowledge jobs can be offshored, our economy will increasingly generate service and government jobs, health care and education, etc. there is no stopping that trend.
its easy to blow off these young people as "dolts" - in many cases, they are people who can't find jobs in their field of training, and are thus working in unskilled positions, with a mountain of college debt behind them.
its not they they should have otherwise gotten degrees in "marketable" fields, the jobs don't exist in those field to accomodate everyone, so increasingly, college makes little sense for more and more young people.
so much for the knowledge economy.
BUY GOLD
Illegals making lower wages (which drags down these averages) doesn't seem to bother Dems... but they can't resist any chance to try to rile up their base.
My point was that the article's author was cherry picking the numbers by selecting 1999 as his wage reference. 2001 would've been fair -- after the dot-com implosion.
Outsourcing was going full-bore through the 90s, however the dotcom 'fantasy jobs' (I'll use your phrase - its accurate), covered up this fact. And when the 'fantasy jobs' were gone, people looked up and many of those past jobs that were once available in manufacturing or Hi-Tech, were overseas.
The dot-com crash brought down the entire stock market (harming good companies in the wake); the normal economic down cycle; WTC; all of this combined to extend the downturn, and depress wages/jobs for a several year period. So it isn't puzzling to me why people aren't upset that their wages haven't grown significantly since the peak of the dot-com era (unless they suffer from amnesia).
Can't disagree with one word of your post.
Are you and I reading the same piece? Have you read it?
. . . the Bureau of Labor Statistics's 10 fastest growing occupations between 2004 and 2014, and you'll find that six of the 10 professions do not require a four-year degree, and four of these call for no academic degree at all. [emphasis added]Since when does a prediction count as fact?
Long Island is one of the few places on the planet where you'll find two dozen illegal immigrants living in a $600,000 home. The economic forces at work here are probably the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.