Support NeoGAF

[Ty4on]

When I say aviation, I mean as a Pilot. There's always jobs for Pilots. FAA cuts don't really apply to the pilots. With airlines having a forced retirement age, the market is always looking for new pilots.

Only thing that might hurt a bit is the new (stupidly high)* minimum hours for commercial First Officer, but there's tons of other pilot jobs other than the airlines.

* = While people might feel safer with a more "experienced" pilot, the truth of the matter is no one trains in large aircraft like that. Int the end, new first officers are coming from flying small one or two engine prop planes. Someone with 1000 hours in a 1 engine Cessna is not going to have an edge skill wise against someone with 500.

You probably know more about the wages than me, but this made quite an impression on me. Think it's mostly pilots and FO who fly domestic flights. If you hate Michael Moore, then there's this.

Are you considering flying cargo flights? I personally think it would be awesome flying the MD-11, as far as I know some are still using it.

 

[RJT]

I don't understand this. You take care of the problem at the source. Otherwise you're just dealing with symptoms. Why did Senators and Congressmen decide to put in laws that benefit the richest of the rich? Because the richest of the rich lobbied for it of course and they have incredible influence as it takes massive amounts of money to get elected.

Not when the source is human nature. Greedy people are greedy, that's a given. Society works by defining rules that make sure that the best decision for an individual is the best decision for the group. This is pointless. You might as well attack windmills, while you're at it.

 

[J-Rod]

I really hate this idea that what you have to study is something that will make you rich. Why look down on someone because they decided to pursue a dream or study what they love? Sure they wont be rich, and I'm not saying they should be. But I really hate this condescension, "You didn't study Business or Engineering? LOLOLOLOLOLOL!! Starve to death hippie!"

Nothing honorable about knowing the world doesn't revolve around what you want to do, but doing it anyway then trying to make it someone else's problem. How do you think it makes people feel who made sacrifices and prudent decisions upfront and went to an affordable no name mock-worthy college and got work that is not a fairy tale instead of blowing 60 thousand dollars doing whatever they wanted for 27 years?

 

[Menelaus]

Hear that, 14 million Americans? There's jerbs out there if you'll all just get off your fat lazy (probably librul, lol!) asses and... work... for them. You gotta work if you want jerbs!

Not sure what your point is. I go outside, I see nothing but help wanted signs in retail and fast food. Last I checked, those were jobs.

 

[ronito]

Nothing honorable about knowing the world doesn't revolve around what you want to do, but doing it anyway then trying to make it someone else's problem. How do you think it makes people feel who made sacrifices and prudent decisions upfront and went to an affordable no name mock-worthy college and got work that is not a fairy tale instead of blowing 60 thousand dollars doing whatever they wanted for 27 years?

It's only someone elses problem because we can only seem to employ people with cookie cutter degrees. I'm not saying these guys need to have a huge income but just a living wage. Our parents could get buy without a cookie cutter college degree and were given the opportunity to apply themselves. Most of us aren't saying "Pay for their college degree! And pay for their living!" what we're saying is "Give them a chance to earn a living wage and contribute to society other than serving their coffee."

I don't care what you say, a nation full of MBAs and Lawyers is what got us here. Do we really want to create even more?

 

[Bloodbeard]

Yeah it's annoying when people take out loans for a degree with no jobs prospects then are shocked they can't get a job with it.

I'm all for student loans (Will have $50000 myself when I'm done in a few years), but I'm getting a degree in aviation, and know I'll be able to get a job that can pay those loans back.

Also, $30,000 in credit card bills? How the heck is that anyones fault but their own?

Good luck to you, seriously you'll need it. My university is one of the top aviation schools in the country and I have known many pilots in my time here. You will be a student instructor for a few years outside of school, then if you're lucky, you'll be hired to fly for FedEx for 25k a year.

But I'm sure nothing beats flying, so you have that going for you.

 

[Azih]

Not when the source is human nature. Greedy people are greedy, that's a given. Society works by defining rules that make sure that the best decision for an individual is the best decision for the group. This is pointless. You might as well attack windmills, while you're at it.

First we both agree that greedy people are greedy. But it hardly follows that we should throw up our hands and let the greedy do whatever the hell they want and set all the rules! That's what's been going on and you have to start pulling the influence away from them somehow. Occupying Wall Street is a great start.

If the greedy start subverting democratic processes to benefit themselves to the detriment of others then you deal with it.

I disagree with the statement that "Society works by defining rules that make sure that the best decision for an individual is the best decision for the group" I would say that society works by defining rules that balance the needs of the individual with the needs of the group.

 

[discoalucard]

Nothing honorable about knowing the world doesn't revolve around what you want to do, but doing it anyway then trying to make it someone else's problem. How do you think it makes people feel who made sacrifices and prudent decisions upfront and went to an affordable no name mock-worthy college and got work that is not a fairy tale instead of blowing 60 thousand dollars doing whatever they wanted for 27 years?

I don't think people understand how much college actually costs? Even that dude who majored in theatre with $30,000 in debt - over four years, that's $8,000 per year, $4,000 per semester...which is actually pretty cheap for a state school. $30,000 really isn't that high, and neither is $60,000.

Like practically every other counter argument, all it does is take away from the actual point of there not being jobs to be able to pay any of that back. To echo what Ronito said, 5-10 years ago you could major in anything the hell you wanted, and even if it wasn't remotely in your field, you could get a low-to-mid level financial/insurance/pharmaceutical/IT/whatever job fairly easily. Now a significant amount of those entry level positions have dried up, and there's nowhere for them to go except retail.

 

[RJT]

If the greedy start subverting democratic processes to benefit themselves to the detriment of others then you deal with it.

And you deal with it by fixing the democratic processes!!! What are you asking Wall Street people exactly? What do you expect them to do as a reaction to this protests?

 

[Dude Abides]

Not sure what your point is. I go outside, I see nothing but help wanted signs in retail and fast food. Last I checked, those were jobs.

(1) Make fun of theater major who works at Starbucks.

(2) Urge people complaining about a scarcity of jobs to work at Starbucks.

(3) Derp.

 

[TestOfTide]

Yep, Herbert Hoover did it.

He raised taxes on the rich, increased government spending, had an impossible to work with Democrat-controlled congress that fought him every step of the way. FDR's running mate, John Nance Garner, charged that Hoover was 'leading the country down the path of socialism' in the next election.

Then, years later, he was blamed for the Great Depression. The winners write the history.

It didn't help that one of things he did was cut veteran's benefits.

 

[Azih]

And you deal with it by fixing the democratic processes!!! What are you asking Wall Street people exactly? What do you expect them to do as a reaction to this protests?

Simply put Occupy Wall Street *is* having an amazing impact on the democratic process in Washington. They've gone from ignoring it to laughing at it/fighting it. Most encouraging is that it's pushing the agenda in D.C in the *right direction* which is towards dealing with Income inequality, concentration of wealth, a whole economic system geared towards the rich etc. Highlighting the root of the problem is the first step towards addressing it.

Why the Hell are the capital gains taxes so low and why the hell do they keep dropping? Wall Street Pressure on D.C of course.

Basically Wall Street (the richest of the rich) have been forcing governments to dance to their tune for decades now. You don't go after the monkey, you go after the organ grinder.

 

[Chichikov]

And you deal with it by fixing the democratic processes!!! What are you asking Wall Street people exactly? What do you expect them to do as a reaction to this protests?

I don't think anyone asking Wall Street bankers anything.
But again, campaign finance reform has been one of the main thing people in these rallies were calling for.

Yep, Herbert Hoover did it.

He raised taxes on the rich, increased government spending, had an impossible to work with Democrat-controlled congress that fought him every step of the way. FDR's running mate, John Nance Garner, charged that Hoover was 'leading the country down the path of socialism' in the next election.

Then, years later, he was blamed for the Great Depression. The winners write the history.

Hoover opposed the Revenue Act of 1932 (though he did sign it into law).
Plus, that was 3 years after the great depression started.

As the country was crumbling, he effectively told the people to walk it off -

Economic depression cannot be cured by legislative action or executive pronouncement. Economic wounds must be healed by the action of the cells of the economic body - the producers and consumers themselves.

He is vilified for a very good reason.

 

[ToxicAdam]

It didn't help that one of things he did was cut veteran's benefits.

Really? Because Wiki says that it was in FDR's 1933 Economy Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_Act

Hoover opposed the Revenue Act of 1932 (though he did sign it into law).
Plus, that was 3 years after the great depression started.

As the country was crumbling, he effectively told the people to walk it off -
.

Well, I believe that was due to his hardline stance on a balanced budget.

 

[Chichikov]

Well, I believe that was due to his hardline stance on a balanced budget.

He opposed it mostly for ideological reasons - he thought that taxing the rich is a bad idea, and his administration was using the same job creators arguments as conservatives do today.
He supported a sales tax plan that would've yield less revenues.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

[BotoxAgent]

(1) Make fun of theater major who works at Starbucks.

(2) Urge people complaining about a scarcity of jobs to work at Starbucks.

(3) Derp.

some say it's a dying art XD

 

[ToxicAdam]

He opposed it mostly for ideological reasons - he thought that taxing the rich is a bad idea, and his administration was using the same job creators arguments as conservatives do today.
He supported a sales tax plan that would've yield less revenues.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Really, I view it more that he totally misread the financial situation they were in (blaming much of it on Europe's depression), had a partisan Congress that was unwilling to work with him on his ideas (forcing him into making choices he didn't necessarliy campaign on), then taking the fall for a problem his adminstration didn't create and wasn't allowed to help fix.

So, you're right, the more things change the more things stay the same.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Not sure what your point is. I go outside, I see nothing but help wanted signs in retail and fast food. Last I checked, those were jobs.

McDonald's and Wal-Mart stand ready to turn this recession around!

Also, what Dude Abides said.

 

[sangreal]

(1) Make fun of theater major who works at Starbucks.

(2) Urge people complaining about a scarcity of jobs to work at Starbucks.

(3) Derp.

I don't think anyone made fun of him for working at Starbucks. He was made fun of for his ridiculously irresponsible spending (30k on Theater? 30k CC debt? 2k in hospital costs but can't afford health insurance subsidized by Starbucks?). He should continue working at Starbucks while he considers bankruptcy to manage his CC and health care bills. Beats eating garbage

 

[Chichikov]

Really, I view it more that he totally misread the financial situation they were in (blaming much of it on Europe's depression), had a partisan Congress that was unwilling to work with him on his ideas (forcing him into making choices he didn't necessarliy campaign on), then taking the fall for a problem his adminstration didn't create and wasn't allowed to help fix.

It's never a single person, but I think claiming that his administration had the right idea but got fucked by congress is a misrepresentation of history.
Up until 32 he thought the situation will resolve itself, and even after that, most of what was done (the Emergency Relief Construction Act, the Norris-La Guardia act, the Revenue Act of 1932) was forced on him by congress, not the other way around.

 

[Deku]

Really, I view it more that he totally misread the financial situation they were in (blaming much of it on Europe's depression), had a partisan Congress that was unwilling to work with him on his ideas (forcing him into making choices he didn't necessarliy campaign on), then taking the fall for a problem his adminstration didn't create and wasn't allowed to help fix.

So, you're right, the more things change the more things stay the same.

Romney = FDR?

 

[ToxicAdam]

Romney = FDR?

While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced that we have now passed the worst and with continuity of effort we shall rapidly recover.

Hoover Address to the United States Chamber of Commerce, May 1, 1930

Hoover's "Recovery Summer"

 

[akira28]

Not sure what your point is. I go outside, I see nothing but help wanted signs in retail and fast food. Last I checked, those were jobs.

Are you a troll or just a DA?

The point is that the economy is being systematically dismantled so "job creators" can save money by paying foreign workers far less for labor, instead of paying American workers fair wages that they previously agreed to for that "abnormally high American standard of living", while they basically live on a different planet as far as income and size of inheritance they can leave their offspring. These companies are making more money than ever, CEOs are making more money than ever, but worker wages haven't gone up in 15 years? What the hell? Really? And you come here with that shit?

When they say wealth redistribution, that's it in a nutshell, but your future is on the line too. Or your kids. This corporate power intrusion into politics and artificially accelerated and recklessly stilted movement towards globalism has to be challenged before it gets too far. They're selling main street by the pound, whether we're living on it or not. And you come here telling us they have jobs are McDonalds, you don't even realize how dumb you sound, do you?

Yes I suddenly realize this thread is now troll entertainment for the board. I know you don't believe in anything, really, and that's just too bad for you.

 

[Dude Abides]

I don't think anyone made fun of him for working at Starbucks. He was made fun of for his ridiculously irresponsible spending (30k on Theater? 30k CC debt? 2k in hospital costs but can't afford health insurance subsidized by Starbucks?). He should continue working at Starbucks while he considers bankruptcy to manage his CC and health care bills. Beats eating garbage

It's not always clear when a post consists entirely of meme photos, but the import of the post was "lol dumbass theater major complaining because he has to work at Starbucks. That shitty job is what you get for being an arty farty loser." Seems a bit incongruous to then urge people to work at Starbucks as if it's the path to success.

 

[ToxicAdam]

 

[BobsRevenge]

When they say wealth redistribution, that's it in a nutshell, but your future is on the line too. Or your kids. This corporate power intrusion into politics and artificially accelerated and recklessly stilted movement towards globalism has to be challenged before it gets too far. They're selling main street by the pound, whether we're living on it or not. And you come here telling us they have jobs are McDonalds, you don't even realize how dumb you sound, do you?

Mainstreet actually is literally getting sold. Public property is being sold to private entities because local governments can't sustain themselves.

Take, for instance, the Chicago parking meter deal:
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/busi...bi-own-all-of-chicago-s-parking-meters/18627/

They sold to Bank of America who sold to interests in the Middle East. And the whole thing turned into a disaster.

Increasingly, local governments are going to have to resort to these kinds of deals to stay above water. So the selling isn't even abstract, it is literal. Banks literally buy up public interests and sell ownership to private and/or foreign investors, because the economy they fucked up can't afford to pay for it anymore. But they can.

 

[alstein]

(1) Make fun of theater major who works at Starbucks.

(2) Urge people complaining about a scarcity of jobs to work at Starbucks.

(3) Derp.

I think it's ok to have a society with most of the jobs being menial, provided that there's enough income redistribution to make those jobs not have menial value. (increase the safety net and the wages would have to rise to attract labor)

Eventually, if the trends continue, people will no stake in preserving current society. That's when things get really bad/dangerous. That's not handwringing, that's just what economic theory would suggest.

 

[Chichikov]

Large corporations don't lobby the government to have more power.
In fact, where it comes to Wall Street, they lobby it to have less.

But I will march with any person who support a meaningful campaign finance reform.

 

[Menelaus]

It's not always clear when a post consists entirely of meme photos, but the import of the post was "lol dumbass theater major complaining because he has to work at Starbucks. That shitty job is what you get for being an arty farty loser." Seems a bit incongruous to then urge people to work at Starbucks as if it's the path to success.

It's not a path to success. It's the only valid path for a person that demands they make 40k for having slept through 4 years of medieval lit. You CAN make 40k with that degree and that attitude, and it's called a shift manager.

 

[akira28]

It's not always clear when a post consists entirely of meme photos, but the import of the post was "lol dumbass theater major complaining because he has to work at Starbucks. That shitty job is what you get for being an arty farty loser." Seems a bit incongruous to then urge people to work at Starbucks as if it's the path to success.

These are people who have been trained by the social meritocracy of our school systems. Admittedly our schools can be rather impersonal and low on empathy, and oh, look at our society... School is where we spend most of our time as kids. It's definitely not warm or friendly, more like an enclosed nature preserve. It rewards right answers, correct choices, and well, what happened when you got the the F? Shame at least. Disdain, that's the idea. Or if your dad was particularly old fashioned, you got the crap kicked out of you at home of course. That represents a large part of our win or lose society. He didn't go for a doctorate so he deserves to eat garbage, or work at Starbucks and quit yer complainin'! Why didn't he make the good choices like I did? Stop hating on the system and get back to work!

 

[kame-sennin]

Did this video of the police attacking Boston protesters get put up?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uADWx4bczuQ

It's not too clear of a video, but there are also clips of the Boston mayor saying "civil disobedience will not be tolerated". Really underlines why civil disobedience is so important.

 

[Dude Abides]

I think it's ok to have a society with most of the jobs being menial, provided that there's enough income redistribution to make those jobs not have menial value. (increase the safety net and the wages would have to rise to attract labor)

I think so too. One of the problems is that we appear to think everyone can be a middle-manager if they just get a business degree and nobody wants to learn a trade or enter blue-collar profession. One way to make blue-collar jobs livable is through labor unions.

It's not a path to success. It's the only valid path for a person that demands they make 40k for having slept through 4 years of medieval lit. You CAN make 40k with that degree and that attitude, and it's called a shift manager.

You're making a lot of assumptions based on the statement that s/he has a B.A. in theater. Must be all that ball-squeezin'!

 

[Pollux]

Good luck to you, seriously you'll need it. My university is one of the top aviation schools in the country and I have known many pilots in my time here. You will be a student instructor for a few years outside of school, then if you're lucky, you'll be hired to fly for FedEx for 25k a year.

But I'm sure nothing beats flying, so you have that going for you.

My dad had a friend who was like 45 when we knew her who was a pilot. She made peanuts but "she got to fly" and every time she said that she would get this dreamy look in her eyes.

If flying's your dream then do it, but its very hard to make a decent living on it.

On the other had we also know a guy who is a private pilot for Procter and Gamble and is making bank on it. He's also a retired US Army general in the aviation branch which might have had something to do with him landing that job.

 

[Timedog]

Why would you only make 25k a year as a pilot with fedex? Drivers make that much or more.

Low hours or something?

 

[Princess Carl]

Large corporations don't lobby the government to have more power.
In fact, where it comes to Wall Street, they lobby it to have less.

But I will march with any person who support a meaningful campaign finance reform.

The underlying message is important though, everyone isn't seeing the big picture; the relationship between wall street and Washington.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Tea Party and Occupy need to unite. I know this sounds crazy, but nothing good will happen if we continue to hate one another.

 

[chaostrophy]

Nothing honorable about knowing the world doesn't revolve around what you want to do, but doing it anyway then trying to make it someone else's problem. How do you think it makes people feel who made sacrifices and prudent decisions upfront and went to an affordable no name mock-worthy college and got work that is not a fairy tale instead of blowing 60 thousand dollars doing whatever they wanted for 27 years?

The creative industries are not fairy tales, they exist in real life. NYC, Chicago, and most other major world cities have several theaters each, NYC has Broadway, Chicago has the Theater District, etc. They each employ plenty of people- actors, costume and set makers, lighting and sound techs, etc. The theater district in Chicago is in the Loop, occupying very expensive real estate. If theater were some unessential fringe part of the economy, the theaters could not afford that space.

What's ironic is that this forum is dedicated to appreciation of the output of one creative industry, yet there are people ITT basically saying it's irresponsible to learn the skills to do a job in one. Does everyone really want all their games, movies, tv shows, books, etc. to be created only by people with rich parents who can take care of them if they can't find jobs in those fields? For me that situation would mean a much greater loss in quality of life than raising my taxes a bit.

 

[bill gonorrhea]

Not sure what your point is. I go outside, I see nothing but help wanted signs in retail and fast food. Last I checked, those were jobs.

My Brothers business has been trying to someone for the past 3 months. He gets 15 phone interviews a week and only 3 show up in person. He says its just people making the round to get their unemployment check.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

What's ironic is that this forum is dedicated to appreciation of the output of one creative industry, yet there are people ITT basically saying it's irresponsible to learn the skills to do a job in one. Does everyone really want all their games, movies, tv shows, books, etc. to be created only by people with rich parents who can take care of them if they can't find jobs in those fields? For me that situation would mean a much greater loss in quality of life than raising my taxes a bit.

This is an interesting comment. Nothing to do with Occupy, but I really do feel as though my peers, today's young graduates and professionals, the future of society, are incredibly cynical and overly pragmatic. Most of their art, music, entertainment borders on irony and includes some kind of smug notion that it's all about money and fun, and that anyone denying it is "less than." It's depressing.

 

[timetokill]

Exactly why I laugh at people who are saying "kick the libertarians out of Occupy!"

 

[Chichikov]

The underlying message is important though, everyone isn't seeing the big picture; the relationship between wall street and Washington.

But the analysis of the problem and the solutions are completely opposite.
How can you expect people who think that there is not enough regulation and taxation over banks to agree with people who think that there is too much regulation and taxation over them?

I really don't see a common message there.

Exactly why I laugh at people who are saying "kick the libertarians out of Occupy!"

I'm not saying to kick anyone, I just wonder how can libertarians can get behind a movement that calls for higher taxation and more regulation.

 

[Karma Kramer]

I'm not saying to kick anyone, I just wonder how can libertarians can get behind a movement that calls for higher taxation and more regulation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWs6g3L3fkU

This movement needs to be more about campaign reform and opening up a new dialogue that embraces our differences so we can function better as a democracy.

 

[goomba]

Do the tea party an Occupy both agree the Federal Reserve is the real problem?

 

[Frank the Great]

OWS should really focus on campaign finance reform as the one issue to rally behind. get money out of politics, end institutionalized corruption. this is something most regular folk agree with.

 

[Miletius]

Acknowledging that the problem exists and that both sides of the fence are concerned about it
would be the best thing Occupy Wall Street can do at this point. Getting money out of politics is something almost every American will agree needs to happen. Some people would argue the best way to do that would be to restrict the rights of government, others argue we need to restrict the rights of corporate interests and the top one percent.

But at least saying this is the problem and this is why we are in the streets about it would garner a lot of sympathy from the Tea Party and other traditionally Republican factions of society. Maybe then we could work together to make that happen.

 

[timetokill]

I'm not saying to kick anyone, I just wonder how can libertarians can get behind a movement that calls for higher taxation and more regulation.

I think the movement is calling for more than just those things. And like any movement, if the general premise is there, you go with it. Kind of like Obama voters -- I'm sure you didn't all vote for him because he was going to support the Patriot Act.

That said, I don't think that taxing the 1% higher necessarily means "Bigger government."

In general, I think the solution has to be weakening both the government and the corporations at the same time. Right now there are a lot of government practices that makes big business a lot more powerful than it would be otherwise. The stuff that protects Big Pharma, the insane corn subsidies, etc. are government policies that give the corporations free reign to fuck the common man.

I guess all I'm saying is that there is a generally common goal, and some common means. Disagreements on a few issues and isolating those groups goes against the whole "we are the 99%" concept.

 

[Lax Mike]

Basically Wall Street (the richest of the rich) have been forcing governments to dance to their tune for decades now. You don't go after the monkey, you go after the organ grinder.

Looking at it from the other side, however, there could be the sentiment that these protestors are playing the same role in the government's affairs as you how you described Wall Street. Though instead of seeing "fat cats" using their financial power to sway the government, they are seeing a "mob" attempting to do the same thing.

Politicians in the system are caught between the two, since they must please both these wealthy businesses in order to see money necessary for them to successfully campaign and enact their ideas, as well as the vocal opponents of these businesses, whose votes (and ability to sway other voters' views) could prove essential when elections come around.

 

[Zabka]

Large corporations don't lobby the government to have more power.
In fact, where it comes to Wall Street, they lobby it to have less.

But I will march with any person who support a meaningful campaign finance reform.

It's not that simple. Many large corporations lobby for regulations to negatively affect competition. Recently UPS has been lobbying for FedEx to be reclassified so its employees can unionize.

 

[jamesinclair]

It's not that simple. Many large corporations lobby for regulations to negatively affect competition. Recently UPS has been lobbying for FedEx to be reclassified so its employees can unionize.

Heres another example, a couple of years ago, Mass. added sales taxes to many items which were previously untaxed.

Guess who lobbied to get all satellite dishes taxed?

 

[empty vessel]

Looking at it from the other side, however, there could be the sentiment that these protestors are playing the same role in the government's affairs as you how you described Wall Street. Though instead of seeing "fat cats" using their financial power to sway the government, they are seeing a "mob" attempting to do the same thing.

There is a salient distinction between the two. One (Wall Street) uses money, the other (mob) uses people (voters). This being a democratic country, which do you think ought to garner more attention from representatives?