Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Unfortunately the way the government taxes precious metals is pretty unfair (taxed as "collectibles", I believe, at a high rate) >>> As far as I can tell, this used to be the case but changed a few years ago, and now precious metals get capital gains tax treatment if held over a year. I hadn't even considered this until you brought it up, but it looks like I'm okay on this one.
Originally Posted By Mr X Gold now at $1,008 per ounce, major indexes crashing (again) today, prestigious investment firm Bear Stearns price per share cut in HALF... Wow. Interesting times, that's for sure.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<This is the most patently absurd statement ever. Young people avoid these disciplines because they are lazy>> BS. Just a few years ago Engineering and CS departments were crowded. The kids wised up and are pursuing other more secure and financially rewarding careers. Become an engineer and you will be laid off and eventually no one will hire you. Norm Matloff of UC Davis has done a great deal of work documenting this. The kids aren't lazy. They just know that competing with scientists and engineers in Chindia is a losing proposition.
Originally Posted By jonvn Bill Gates was just saying this week how because there is such a shortage of high tech workers, he needs to be able to import more of them.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Become an engineer and you will be laid off and eventually no one will hire you. >> That is usually the case in any field if you don't work to improve yourself over time. That's generally the problem with "engineers." They stagnate, get focused on a particular niche or area of expertise, don't update themselves, become irrelevant to changes in their field. You'll find the same thing with Computer Science. A degree, by itself, isn't going to help someone advance their skills over a lifetime. I'm familiar with some of these folks that have struggled over time to hold their jobs or maintain relevancy in their field. It has nothing to do with the opportunities in their field, outsourcing, or "dead end" jobs. It usually has more to do with people not working to adapt their skills in an environment that requires adaptation. Computer programming languages change, computer interfaces change, engineering architectures change. If people don't update their skills to reflect changes, they'll struggle.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<hat is usually the case in any field if you don't work to improve yourself over time.>> I know plenty of people who are "current" and can't get a job because they are too old. Corporate America wants young, low paid singles who will work 60-80 hours a week, with no overtime compensation. Norm Matloff also disproved the canard that there are no qualified people to hire. He also also documented that most guest workers are not paid the prevailing wage. The bottom line is that Corporate America does not want to play by market rules. They want to hire people who fit requirements 100% and they want them for cheap. I have seen this first hand where I work. We have openings that we "can't fill". We have been able to find ideal candidates, but we low ball them and they turn down the offers. In some cases we even offer them less that their current salaries. Now if the market were allowed to do its thing, wages would rise and more people would be attracted to the profession. Instead, the captains of industry belly ache for more H1-B visas. We have an industry wide collusion to keep salaries down. And they wonder why engineering enrollments are down? If there was really a shortage of technical people, salaries would be through the roof (like in the 90's) as opposed to stagnant. The kids know which side of the bread is buttered, and its not the technical side. Like I said, competing with low paid engineers in Asia is a losing proposition.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<Computer programming languages change, computer interfaces change, engineering architectures change>> You make it sound like the unemployed are all Fortran and Cobol programmers. I know plenty of older Java programmers who can't find work. Even .Net experience is no longer a sure thing.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> The kids know which side of the bread is buttered, and its not the technical side. Like I said, competing with low paid engineers in Asia is a losing proposition. << The answer for these "kids" is ... sales. We've transitioned to a service economy, and the sales field is where you compete directly with your fellow americans. Either you produce or you don't. Cut and dried. But your job isn't going to be outsourced or off-shored or eliminated due to budget cuts.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Corporate America wants young, low paid singles who will work 60-80 hours a week, with no overtime compensation. >> Sorry, but the 40-something IT professionals that I am friends with don't work anywhere close to 60-80 hours a week. Most of them get to work from home at least one or two days a week. And based on the cars they drive and houses they live in, I'd say they were pretty fairly compensated. It's me, the non IT-oriented guy, who is always the one that has to turn them down on offers to take time off for the ski slopes, beach weekends, and other leisure activities.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Corporate America wants young, low paid singles who will work 60-80 hours a week, with no overtime compensation.*** And who is at fault for this, corporate America? They will get away with whatever they can, that's the way corporations function. It's the fault of those young singles who are willing to give over their lives for long hours at low pay.
Originally Posted By jonvn Computer programmers who think they are the smartest thing since god invented brains, don't like unions. Instead, they'll work long hours with no pay to make someone else rich. Really, they are a very stupid bunch and have no common sense at all. There definitely is an age discrimination thing going on. The thing to do is to unionize. Not just computer people, but everyone. This is the ONLY way to fight back against these corporataions, but people have been brainwashed into thinking that the only thing that will help them is bad. If it were not so horrible, it'd be funny.
Originally Posted By johnno52 Right Union anyone, yet for years many have put down the Unions for their relentless bargaining and persuing decent wages and benifits. This is the only protection workers have regardless of whether you are an Autoworker or an Engineer. Labor Unions have won the right to protect workers from these money driven multi national corporations. When Unions win decent wage settlements it drives other non union businesses to raise their employees wages to keep competitive for the good and skilled workers. As the multi nationals are taking all their manufacturing overseas the work force is deminishing. As evident with the Automotive buyouts being presented to the workers, they are offering them large sums of money to end their employment.This would not be, if they were not unionised.
Originally Posted By jonvn That's right. And stupid and desperate people will take those jobs. You think the auto makers had those unions in the first place because they were just such swell employers? Unions are the only way people in this country will ever get back anything. When people start realizing that walmart type jobs are not going to get them anything, and that working at McDonald's doesn't have much in the way of benefits, then unions will come back. They have to, or the public becomes serfs to corporations. What used to happen is that strike breakers got hurt, too. Years before, you didn't cross picket lines or you risked having bad things happen. Things are already looking pretty bad here, as it is. I don't think it's going to take much more to push the country into violence.
Originally Posted By pecos bill It really is as if we are beginning to swing full circle back to the troubled times in the early 1900's. Is it just me, or is it scary that we are even talking about such things? We dont need an Obama, a Hillary or a McCain, we need a Lincoln!
Originally Posted By SuperDry It's going to be nearly impossible for unions to solve the employment problems in the US in today's age of globalization. It might work for service workers (such as retail or restaurant) where there's no option to outsource, but for manufacturing, it will just make the problem worse. There are solutions, however. Take a look at Toyota. They make better, more reliable, more fuel efficient cars than US manufacturers, and are able to do so in American factories with American (non-union) workers that get paid fairly and are happy. What's the difference? Management style. They use non-US management and decision-making methods. It's highly ironic that the "experts" in the US can't see the example that's right in front of them, and instead are attempting to hone what they're already doing wrong so that it's just a bit less wrong but still along the same path.
