Salary increases, as I stated earlier, are far, far better than the alternative of salary decreases.
There is no fallacy in that fact, either.
Posted on 07/31/2003 11:53:32 AM PDT by Florida_Irish
Salary increases, as I stated earlier, are far, far better than the alternative of salary decreases.
There is no fallacy in that fact, either.
There are not many of those kind of jobs left, and there will be even less of them as more people become unemployed and seek them out. There is also no guarantee that those kind of jobs will pay much money, if they can be found...
That's hilarious. You won't even back away from the fact that the sole statistic you have cited hurts your case when reality, i.e. the inflation rate, is applied to it. I'm at least honest enough to admit that what I am seeing is a broad trend which cannot be picked up well yet with statistics, yet there is plenty of evidence that it is happening. You, however, won't even concede that when the rate of inflation exceeds the wage increase, that it's bad. Who is being the slippery one here?
Or perhaps you meant to say: where C/C++ and CORBA would have been just fine.
When the last reference to Java is eliminated from the last resume, the IT world will breathe a giant sigh of relief.
And when these CEO's talk, they basically claim that their core business is making money for the stockholder.
So I guess they should outsource everything except Accounts Recievable!
However, the problem with unemployment now is NOT training, but with job availablity. We have many well-trained and experienced workers - IT, engineers, etc. - who cannot find work. What makes you think that giving a former manufacturing worker $3,000 of training will make any improvement on his job chances when those folks can't even find work, and when the very jobs that person would be qualified to do in the tech sector are the ones being shipped overseas in the largest quantities?
BTW, I can debate just fine without insults. But I do use them when they're appropriate. And YOU'RE a fine one to talk - you come barging in with a post that disparages me, but have the temerity to get after the tone I subsequently use on you.
This ain't about IT. Lots of workers need retraining, but that doesn't always mean that they need IT training.
Nah, they already outsource that too.
OK, then, Southack, then maybe YOU can tell us what good-paying jobs someone can get with $3,000 of training.
No, actually you can't. You misconstrue. You obfuscate. You reach. You grasp. You spin. You twist. You put words into the mouths of others. You take things out of context (IT everything, you obsess), and you frequently insult.
On top of all of that, you make claims such as that you are going to leave the debate, as if stomping your little foot and running away will somehow get you some extra attention and clout.
Moreover, you talk loudly and boldy, then you back away from being able to provide data (e.g. your "middle class is shrinking" claim).
Sorry, Southack, you seem to forget that you did just that to me - saying that I had claimed that incomes were dropping when I said no such thing (but, as irony would have it, the very statistic you cited showed that net incomes did indeed drop). And as for not leaving this thread, I said I was through with you - but since you persist in your completely inane ramblings, I still feel compelled to answer a couple of them. And, like I told carton, I save insults for when they are appropriate to a particular poster. Most folks here I had just a fine debate with. You, however, didn't even begin to recieve the derision you earned.
We are now changing subjects. We are not longer debating the subject of the President's remarks... we are now talking about how training will improve a person's job chances when these folks can't even find work...
It all depends on who is looking for a job. Let's say the person looking for a job has one skill. He is able to put widget a in hole b. In this job market... not much call for a widget guy. So, $3,000 worth of training will be the difference between his getting hired or not.
Now, meet the average administrative assistant. Good skills on word, good on excel, does good on powerpoint. Laid off due to down sizing... $3,000 will enable that person to be able to include some desktop publishing, maybe some web design... her portfolio is fatter. So the $3,000 has helped.
Now, meet the Kmart employee... He's resume says he can stock shelves. $3,000 may enable him to go to a tech school to learn a skill. That will make him more employable.
Vice President of Marketing is downsized. $3,000 isn't going to help him much.
The IT sector... jobs disappearing overseas...no, $3,000 isn't going to help that person. But, let's be honest, IT workers are a dime a dozen. And in every class I sit in at the university is 1/2 IT or IS or something.
But that doesn't justify the outsourcing of jobs.
BTW, I can debate just fine without insults.
I will believe that when I see it.
And YOU'RE a fine one to talk...
Oh, unbunch your shorts...
you come barging in with a post that disparages me
Chances are you will survive my opinion of your debating style...
About a decade ago one of my sisters paid $90 for one of those trashy TV "get rich quick" schemes. In this case, it was the Carlton Sheets "no money down" real estate program (or some very similar program).
She's cleared more than a million a year for each of the last several years now, and she only works part time.
She did, however, also get her real-estate license, something that you **can** do with a $3,000 training budget.
I have a brother-in-law who owns several MailBoxes Etc. stores. I don't really know what he had to pay for his initial training to run the first one, so it may not apply to your $3k limit here, however, ever since UPS bought in, his business has doubled and he is now opening up several new stores.
Look, making money is easy (risky, but easy). That's not to say that everyone is going to flip houses and become a millionaire. For one thing, very few people want to risk their existing wealth on such gambles.
But jobs are out there. Our economy just grew by 2.4% in the last Quarter alone. Moreover, opportunities are out there.
Yeah, the high-flying days of the 1990's IT world may be gone. Woe is us in IT, but that doesn't mean that everyone else sees the world from such a depressing perspective.
Go get your real-estate license with your $3k from Bush. Go get a professional driver's license or a commercial pilot's license (though $3k would be mighty hard-pressed to get the commercial level, and certainly wouldn't get an Airline Transport Pilot license).
Go get scuba certified and teach diving. Do whatever works for you, but keep in mind that sometimes **you** have to personally change to keep up with the world.
Change is hard. We all fight it. We all want things to be the way they used to be.
Such is life.
Really? What was your claim about salaries, then?!
With the bulk of that being increased government spending, I believe.
Yes, but would you have preferred the **alternative** to growth?!
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.