Support NeoGAF

[DragonSworne]

My job is to impove and automate workflow processes within fortune 500 companies. The biggest challenge I find is just how outdated a lot of these companies are. Not technology wise, that's easy to fix, but process wise. There is so much waste, manual work, lack of quality, and paper, (oh god paper!). It's the year 2012, shit like this shouldn't be the norm.

But it is the norm, and it's because of these companies who are afriad of change and technology. A lot of them hire people into positions because of their "experience".

I have found that the younger workers, when the new technology and automated processes are in place, are better, faster, and drive the cost of operation significantly down than compared to the older workers, even if you let the older workers continue to use with their old process.

Companies should be hiring young, not old. It's a simple rule and will lead to success. But for some reason, they won't because of the lack "experience".

 

[Zyzyxxz]

As much as I dislike my $11 an hour job... I guess I should be thankful I even have a job.

Not too worried though, I'm only 20 and working part time. I'll start panicking if I'm 25 and haven't set on a career path yet.

Haha yeah... I'm 25...

 

[Captain Sparrow]

employers are forcing their employees to be more and more efficient, not hiring while making record profits. Some manufacturing may come back to the us but not fast enough. We also have more debt bubbles about to pop and increases automation makes human workers useless

Automation has been happening for hundreds of years.

 

[XMonkey]

Bullshit

That there is loser talk. Keep losing, loser.

You can't protect shit; it never works in the long term. In the long term, what works is cutting the throats of the wealthy and letting everybody else drink their blood.

Oh, ok. You should maybe get to work on that then. I'm sure you can cut a few throats without our help.

 

[JCX]

The most frustrating part of the "must have 2-5 years experience) bullet on job listings is that I've found some where I fit all of the requirements beyond the years.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

The most frustrating part of the "must have 2-5 years experience) bullet on job listings is that I've found some where I fit all of the requirements beyond the years.

From what I've read if you feel like you qualify there's no harm in trying even if you have one year unless they specifically state that you must fit the requirement because often times employers might relax on the requirements if you impress during the interview.

 

[Ivan A Nguyen]

From what I've read if you feel like you qualify there's no harm in trying even if you have one year unless they specifically state that you must fit the requirement because often times employers might relax on the requirements if you impress during the interview.

I want to take a minute to Co-sign this. I've talked to a lot of recruiters and many of the things on a job listing are part of a search for a dream candidate. If you feel like you can do the job you are applying for, then you should apply for it.

 

[speculawyer]

Interesting. First thank you for the reply.

Sadly I have something I have to take care of and can't dig in much deeper. I will leave you with this question, and maybe later this weekend I can check to see if you responded.

A decline in house values should effect both older home owners as well as younger ones. So if the younger persons house has went down in value so has the older one's ( caveat all real estate is local ). So I am not seeing how that is a determining factor. I could just be failing to extract your point out of the sentence correctly.

EDIT: If the same person invested his $20k in the stock market instead of the house he would still have a significant increase in his investment. So whether he put it in the house or the stock market he would still get growth out of it.

Regardless take care and thank you.

Yes, of course the drop in home prices hurts the older people to. But if there is a difference between a house you bought at 20K going to 500K and then dropping to 400K and a house you bought at 500K dropping to 400K.

People from the previous generations benefited greatly from all the previous growth as long as they had some ownership. Even if the only thing they owned was their house, at least that house gained value. But most also had some retirement money in the market.

For the past 5 years, the housing market has been going down. For the past 10 years, the stock market has been pretty flat. So that has really made things hard in recent years for everyone. Growth is the magic answer that almost everyone wants. But it just isn't easy to do anymore due to a combination of competition from cheap foreign labor and rising energy prices. But maybe we can discover a 'next new thing' to kickstart the economy. I hope so.

 

[RedSwirl]

As much as I dislike my $11 an hour job... I guess I should be thankful I even have a job.

Not too worried though, I'm only 20 and working part time. I'll start panicking if I'm 25 and haven't set on a career path yet.

I reached that point before I even fucking knew it man, and I don't have that $11 an hour job anymore.

 

[12STS]

Yes, of course the drop in home prices hurts the older people to. But if there is a difference between a house you bought at 20K going to 500K and then dropping to 400K and a house you bought at 500K dropping to 400K.

People from the previous generations benefited greatly from all the previous growth as long as they had some ownership. Even if the only thing they owned was their house, at least that house gained value. But most also had some retirement money in the market.

For the past 5 years, the housing market has been going down. For the past 10 years, the stock market has been pretty flat. So that has really made things hard in recent years for everyone. Growth is the magic answer that almost everyone wants. But it just isn't easy to do anymore due to a combination of competition from cheap foreign labor and rising energy prices. But maybe we can discover a 'next new thing' to kickstart the economy. I hope so.

The worst aspect of the housing situation isn't necessarily that the older generations benefited so much as the fact that their success became "common knowledge" and buying houses as investments became a "no brainer". The economics of these "investments" rarely make sense anymore as investment vehicles alone when you factor in all the ancillary costs of ownership.

Parents are sending millions of young adults out into the world with the a very short list of economic advice; a)buy a home and b)work for whatever company will hire you as long as they'll keep you. Unfortunately, the sum of this advice largely ignores that the housing market will never again see the growth that it saw during previous generations and that employment is largely transient for younger generations.