>

Dave Wilson of Bloomberg notes that the improvement in Unemployment is bypassing those who have been unemployed the longest.

This is what I call the “Buggy Whip Conundrum” — those folks who have been looking for work the longest are most likely to have been in sectors that have imploded. The jobs are no longer there.

In other words, it is not that many of these people have lost their jobs — they have lost their industries as well .

In some cases, these jobs might return eventually. That would be things like Construction, Financial, Real Estate. In other areas — fabric/clothes, autos, etc. — those jobs are not coming back.

Hence, they need more than a job — they need a new set of skills and a new career . . .

Here’s Wilson:

Americans out of work more than six months have barely benefited from the longest decline in the country’s unemployment rate since 1994.

The CHART OF THE DAY compares the percentage of the U.S.
labor force in this situation with the comparable figure for those unemployed fewer than six months, according to data compiled by the Labor Department.

While the jobless rate dropped for the fourth consecutive month in March, the number of people going more than six months without work rose to 6.12 million. That’s more than four times the average since 1970, the period covered in the chart.

Those who exceeded the six-month threshold account for only
13 percent of the drop in unemployment since December, when the rate started shrinking. Their number fell by 206,000 as people out of work for shorter periods tumbled by 1.36 million.

Category: Data Analysis, Employment

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

39 Responses to “The Buggy Whip Conundrum”

  1. VennData says:

    Then, there are those people you ARE employed but are destroying value…

    IBM study shows financial industry ‘overpaid by $1,300bn’

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3adcb3e6-5c9c-11e0-ab7c-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Ia1jkFmR

  2. If you watched 60 minutes last night, and the revelations about possibly hundreds of thousands if not millions of falsified mortgage documents, you also got a view of the government mindset that keeps those unemployed, unemployed.

    Sheila Bair basically said that if an unknown number of victimized homeowners are not given a settlement, the effect could be injurious to our economy. The proposal to simply settle up with homeowners is what is wrong with the rich elite.

    The OPPOSITE is needed. HIRE 100,000 of these out of work people, especially those from 50 years on up, and have them be financial reviewers of the millions of fraudulently processed home mortgages. Even if the result is that 250 billion dollars goes back to homeowners who were defrauded, that would be far superior to doling out one size fits all judgements so that the government can then turn around and give the banks ANOTHER round of bailout money.

    Employing 100,000 unemployed middle aged people to review every home mortgage may be a perfect opportunity for the government to actually send financial resources directly to main street while avoiding another round of bailout money for wall street.

  3. curbyourrisk says:

    Anectdotal on this comment: Hence, they need more than a job — they need a new set of skills and a new career . . .

    I have spoken with many local people who are in this VERY boat. They believe they do not need anew set of skills or a new career. These people actually believe that since their industry has given up on them…the Government should support them. They truly believe that unemployment should cover them for the rest of their life. They feel they paid enough into the system, AND tht the system FAILED them….

    That’s what’s fucked up with out society. It’s never THEIR fault. {They believe}It is always someone else’s fault, and that person should pay for it….

  4. Greg0658 says:

    curbyourrisk I hear ya to a point – that stimulus of the system to achieve .. and my point to the kids – don’t get to caught up in this system – it will ring you out – thats what it does to achieve its cash position … can we go back to water wells & outhouses, chicken coops and gardens ?

  5. socaljoe says:

    I personally know several people who have turned down job offers in favor of playing beach volleyball and receiving government support. One of these people would be taking a cut in income if she went back to work.

  6. dead hobo says:

    BR observed

    This is what I call the “Buggy Whip Conundrum” — those folks who have been looking for work the longest are most likely to have been in sectors that have imploded. The jobs are no longer there.

    reply:
    —————–
    Absolutely fucking insightful. Obvious. In plain sight. Generally ignored.

    That being said, the shopping centers were packed last week. Retail will show big gains in the next two reports. Where is the cash coming from to fill the parking lots and pack the stores? What are the employment numbers missing?

  7. abUWS says:

    I have two thoughts to this post.

    A – Given the right conditions jobs absolutely can come back that had been lost to globalization. In my own business we are actually starting to be able to compete with the Chinese. It is a here-and there type of thing but where there were no niches to hide before it now seems things are going in reverse. The smaller jobs, or ones benefiting from speed, etc, are coming back in various industries. Some guy was talking about it on Bloomberg radio last week with regards to apparel. I can’t remember the day but I think it was the 4-6pm show. The biggest challenge is that much of the infrastructure a manufacturer relied on (suppliers) is gone. Those that remain also have to build up. I still have to buy a few parts from China because the price discrepancy is huge.

    B – All the bailouts hurt the chance to recover as well. I know people who waited for the price of assets to drop to distressed levels so those who had saved in the “fat” years would be able to buy them up at much lower prices to put them to use. But those prices never seemed to come. Extend and pretend kept prices above the levels where the well capitalized were willing to come in. A well capitalized business is in much much better shape to compete and grow than the ones that are just hanging on.

  8. BobCarver says:

    “That being said, the shopping centers were packed last week. Retail will show big gains in the next two reports. Where is the cash coming from to fill the parking lots and pack the stores? What are the employment numbers missing?”

    Such easy questions! QE2 is producing the “wealth” via the stock market. “Where it pops, nobody knows.”

    See also Krugman today.

  9. dead hobo says:

    BR observed

    This is what I call the “Buggy Whip Conundrum” — those folks who have been looking for work the longest are most likely to have been in sectors that have imploded. The jobs are no longer there.

    another reply:
    ——————-
    Here’s a conundrum.

    If you plan ahead and live in such a way you save a significant percentage of your income, then you can weather the day your skills are outdated or your age is unattractive. Perhaps the cushion can pay for a new skill set for the golden years.Or maybe you will fortunate enough to retire at a vigorous age. The catch is overall Consumption falls, causing a decrease in GDP and an overall decrease in living standards.

    If you spend most of what you make and/or live to spend so that you risk middle age economic survival without considering the concept of downsizing, you will maximize GDP, wealth, and employment for people you will never meet who will think of you as parasites who need a handout as you age and become unattractive.

  10. NoKidding says:

    “Americans out of work more than six months have barely benefited from the longest decline in the country’s unemployment rate since 1994.”

    Thats kind of a slanted way to describe it. Would it not be more accurate to say “Americans out of work more than six months have participated in the country’s longest sustained employment decline in deacdes.”

  11. losamigo says:

    Look I agree with the main point of this post but I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that UE benefits have been extended to unprecedented levels (at least since WWII). I mean the 99ers are real and that hasn’t run it’s course yet. My view is that at least some are just not going to take a job until there UE benefits run out. When they do they’ll find something. Many will find work for less pay and their standard of living will be permanently affected. I’d also point out that people collecting UE benefits can be waivers for the purposes of undergoing job training to acquire new skills. There will always be folks that game the system. I have to believe that part of this is about gaming the system.

  12. StarvingEcon says:

    Barry you obviously don’t read enough liberal economists blogs, Paul Krugman and Brad Delong have already proven that there is no such thing as structural unemployment.

  13. darms says:

    Was a senior electronics tech from 1972 until 2008 when my engineering & design skills apparently got ‘buggy-whipped’ to Bangalore, India. I’m 54 and yes, I agree, I need new skills. Problem is I’m a technical person and the kind of work I do is technical. Consumer electronics repair for the first 14 years of my former career has totally burned me out on dealing with John Q. Public and the reality here is what few technical jobs remain are filled by fresh graduates or people who are vastly overqualified. WTF do you cold-blooded sorts like curbyourrisk or socaljoe suggest I do, deliver pizzas? Sell used cars? Real (hah hah) estate? Wal-Mart greeter? (I’d be fired within my first hour…) I don’t want any handouts, I want a damned labor market with opportunities that people like me can train for. Opportunities that offer a living wage. And the saddest part is that while I’m by no means alone in my situation, my wife & I are in far better financial shape than the large majority who share my situation – families with children & mortgages & car loans & credit card debt, et al. I shudder to think of what they are going through…

  14. romerjt says:

    Beach volleyball, don’t doubt it for a minute but anecdotes aren’t evidence and these comments are more heat than light and don’t get at the issue . . . . given a real chance, most people really do want decent employment, period and if you’ve read Barry’s book you know that the “free lunch, give me more” attitude among the unemployed is chicken feed compared to the same attitude and effects among the financial types – come on!

    in my humble opinion is the housing starts . . . down from 2m/yr to 500,000 . . when these numbers get back, even to 1M things will look a lot different, but given the way the wizards of finance have fucked up the industry and no realistic government response (I mean, robo signings, how do you get away with this crap?) this is going to take longer than is should.

  15. gordo365 says:

    I’m not sure I buy the conclusion. Where is the data?
    ____________
    This is what I call the “Buggy Whip Conundrum” — those folks who have been looking for work the longest are most likely to have been in sectors that have imploded. The jobs are no longer there.
    ___________

    Given sector implosion assumption – wouldn’t there be other sectors that can’t fill open jobs? Which sector has chronically unfilled jobs?

  16. NeutralObserver says:

    I hear you @darms. Right on point. There are a lot of people commenting here who have never had the experience of being unemployed and they obviously have a holier-than-thou attitude. I too worked for my entire life in technology, and before that at a lot of blue collar jobs while attending university. So, the problem is that the few employers hiring do not want applicants with many applicable skills looking to change industries who may lack only a little experience in the new industry. They want only people who either have been doing that exact job (preferably working at one of their competitors) and can hit the ground running, or a new grad who is perceived to be more compliant and cheaper. So what is someone to do who has educated themselves in technology, worked until they reach 50 years old, lived frugally and now find their industry moved off shore? Are we supposed to live on our savings (a chunk of which was taken by Wallstreet while we were busy working producing something) and later Social Security for the next 35-40 years? Some of you might want to take a look in the mirror and ask yourselves if your comments are ignorant, thoughtless, selfish, and or just a reflection of the fear you feel inside because this might happen to you one day.

  17. rtalcott says:

    darms and NeutralObserver…I agree (personal experience)…so I don’t need to repeat what you both have said.
    rt

  18. TimmyB says:

    The term “Buggy Whip” is used to describe an industry that is lost due to changing technology. Demand for “buggy whips” crashed because of the invention of the automobile. No horses, no need for buggy whips. Its just like slide ruler manufactures going out of business because of the proliferation of electronic calculators.

    However, we do NOT have that here. Demand for autos and clothes hasn’t crashed because of technological changes. People still drive cars and wear clothes, same as before the crash. These are not dead or dying industries, so the comparison to “buggy whips” fails.

    What we had instead is the wholesale shipment of American blue collar jobs to China and other low wage countries. That was a political decision. Our government made the choice, because of political preasure from the top 1%, to ship American jobs overseas. Those jobs still exist. But instead of American blue collar workers, rural Chinese are doing them.

    Those jobs could easily come back, if our government’s policies changed. However, this in no way can be blamed upon technological inovation, as the decimation of the “buggy whip” industry can. It was a political decision to ship American jobs overseas. Technology didn’t kill American manufacturing. Greed did.

  19. Greg0658 says:

    I don’t have research to back this up – its opinion & real world observation … Healthcare was a good direction to tackle by our current POTUS (tough projects take time) … if your aged with experience and looking for a job that the employer is not required to carry you on a policy – you may find a job .. the flip side is if your young (probably still healthy) with new world training & time to grow into the job plus the empoyer is required to provide heathcare the odds are you are hireable.

    Beyond that aspect – folks in the aged category – usually have already bought the dream .. there is more return into the mans system – or you folks call it ROI to hire the youth.

  20. vader says:

    Well shucks, the last time I checked this downturn affected all areas, not just the obsolete ones. Continuing along this road, a folks with 6 months unemployed is almost untouchable in a challenging labor environment no matter the field they were once in and a folk 1 year or more is part of the living dead having lost skills.

    I had a 4 hour a day PT job at $12/hr. As best as I can determine, I lost money after transportation, meals and so on. Sooo you great and mighty financial thinkers, do I play volleyball on the beach or lose money at a Part Time job. Or is it that a buck or two at the end of the day in a minimum wage job is sufficient to motivate a person.

    Bottom line, if labor was tight, training for the marginal person would miraculous appear. In a downturn, where even getting a job is luck of the draw with all kind of rational and irrational filters in place to filter out the many folks looking at a given job, long term UE folks are not going to make it. Do thought experiment. You have the choice of 10 people for a position. 4 just graduated, 2 lost their job a month ago, 2 a couple of months ago, 1 six months ago and 1 a year ago. All things mostly equal, who gets filtered first. Yep the long term UE folks.

    Now imagine a 50 year old folk spending 20 grand to retrain. Assume 2 years course. Now who is going to hire that 50 YO out of work 2-4 years over a 20 YO when the hiring manager is 30.

    Then there is the issue of training folks for the jobs that actually exist at the time of graduation which may be nothing like what jobs existed at the start.

    The only way out is a demand for labor.

  21. Greg0658 says:

    another real world observation for you folks of the aged category having trouble finding work – try the non-union union halls (temp service benches) .. but be prepaired to bounce to an new trial location when that 90 day threshold hits and benefits must start on day 91

    and DH “In plain sight” ya I missed it “chicken coops and gardens” should have + “save that gallon of petro ride a horse”

  22. Jojo says:

    @vader said “Now imagine a 50 year old folk spending 20 grand to retrain. Assume 2 years course. Now who is going to hire that 50 YO out of work 2-4 years over a 20 YO when the hiring manager is 30.”

    Exactly! And the longer you are out of work, the more radioactive and undesirable you become to employers. Many also become more despondent as with limited (or no) financial resources, they can no longer fully participate in society. All they can do is “window shop” now, standing on the outside, looking in forlornly.

    Unfortunately your solution “The only way out is a demand for labor.” isn’t going to appear any time soon.

    We not only have the problem of outsourcing jobs overseas (and it is not only blue-collar jobs. White-collar jobs like accounts, analysis and taxes are also being offshored), but also the problem of automation inexorably eliminating jobs everywhere (not just in the USA).

    The real, real problem is that we simply have too many people and too few jobs to support an ever expanding worldwide population.

  23. DMR says:

    @jojo said: The real, real problem is that we simply have too many people and too few jobs to support an ever expanding worldwide population.

    The French had a disastrous relationship with this concept…so much so that economists gave it a name: The lump of labor fallacy…it is the false idea that there is only so much labor to go around and that work must be rationed out. In the real world, more people = more needs to be met and more hands to meet those needs. A larger population invariably leads to a larger economy as long as resources aren’t the immediate bottleneck.

  24. Greg0658 says:

    “A larger population invariably leads to a larger economy” .. correct to a point – every dog, cat, horse, pond koi fish, human being – kept living by the system leads to a larger economy for some supplier – but I see the taxpayer filling that cash flow in this politically correct world of super infrastucture factory suppliers

  25. willid3 says:

    don’t think we have a buggy whip industry that has imploded. we have exported lots of jobs that has led to end of jobs in those industries. unless every one stops driving. or buying or building houses, or any other building. the problem we also had (and still do) is finance got much bigger than it should have been. and it produces nothing but paper. and we have seen than even that, the financial wizards have done as cheap as possible. its always strange to see some say they need to compete ‘globally’ when they don’t have any international presence, and no foreign companies are coming to do that, since it would require a local presence, which negates their entire argument that they are competing globally.
    and not really sure that automation is as much a threat as it used to be. otherwise that paper and legal disaster MERS wouldn’t have been so bad. if we really wanted to solve for globalization we could. but that would impact the top 1% plan of having almost 99% of all income. and they have enough control to keep the government out of their way. of course as this plan continues, more companies will be out of business because they can’t find customers who can buy their offerings

  26. Jojo says:

    @DMR said “A larger population invariably leads to a larger economy”
    ———-
    Really? So why are there still 16+ million unemployed people (counting the officially discouraged). Why aren’t they all selling products and services to themselves and everyone else? Why is there no demand for these people in today’s economy?

  27. Jojo says:

    How To Find A Job: Just Be Willing To Flip Burgers And Work For Minimum Wage

    Do you want to know how to find a job in America today? It’s easy. Just be willing to flip burgers, wait tables or welcome people to Wal-Mart. You must also be willing to work for close to minimum wage with no health benefits. It’s not that complicated. On April 19th, McDonald’s is going to be holding its first “national hiring day” and it will be attempting to fill 50,000 positions. Hundreds of thousands of applicants are expected, so if you are going to apply be ready for some stiff competition. McDonald’s held a similar event last year in its western region and 60,000 people applied for just 13,000 jobs. But if you are one of the lucky ones, you too may soon be flipping burgers for minimum wage. Who said that finding a job was hard and that the U.S. economy doesn’t work anymore? All of us just need to be “flexible” and we all need to be willing to adapt to the “new economic reality”.

    Oh, you say that you can’t pay the mortgage and feed your family on what they would pay you at McDonald’s?

    You say that you are looking for a “good job”?

    Well, that is just too bad.

    Good jobs are becoming increasingly scarce. In fact, there are 10% fewer “middle class jobs” in the United States today than there were a decade ago.

    http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/how-to-find-a-job-just-be-willing-to-flip-burgers-and-work-for-minimum-wage

  28. ES says:

    A 50 something IT guy whose job was outsourced to Bangalore – you could be a math or science teacher, no need to flip burgers. I don’t understand when peole say – I am not going to be good or happy at this job. Who cares? You get paid. From there you can look for something better. At least that was my attitude when I was in the same sitution. I had MS in math but nobody would hire me because I didn’t have a work experince and job market was very bad. I was a street bookseller for 2 years. At least it paid for my food.

  29. socaljoe says:

    Apparently they’re still be making buggy whips in china.

    Seems to me the fulfillment of Ross Perot’s prediction is more appropriate.

  30. mathman says:

    Some more pleasant reading:

    http://www.financialarmageddon.com/

    If that doesn’t convince you that the corrupt Washington-Wall Street establishment cares far more about their interests than yours, and thinks nothing of lying to further their aims, then nothing will.

  31. Julia Chestnut says:

    Barry, I am almost as certain that the problem is not structural. In fact, I think that the problem of those who are unemployed staying unemployed can be largely chalked up to prejudice among employers: with a very, very large pool of applicants to choose from, there is no need for employers to accept any shortcoming in the resumes of those they interview (much less hire). Employers consider any break in your employment a liability. The longer you are unemployed, the more stale your skills seem to a potential employer and the more they figure that you have cooties. It really doesn’t matter what your skill set is: if you don’t currently have a job, good luck finding one.

    If it were structural problems, we’d see a clear pattern of one group being hired out of long-term unemployment while another languished. Instead, the pattern looks to be a pure linear correlation between length of unemployment (regardless of sector) and pitiful reemployment prospects.

    We’re wasting people, whole lives of work, because employers have a deeply-set prejudice against the unemployed. Perhaps we didn’t see it as clearly in past recessions because of prior use of “lay offs” and cutting people’s hours to part time that were more frequent in the manufacturing context. Service employers just see people as completely expendable, and fire them with no prospect of hiring them back – which throws them back into the pool to try and find another employer to take them after they have been publicly shunned by another employer.

  32. davver1 says:

    @julia

    Employers make their best guess at a persons skills given available information about the candidate. That isn’t “prejudice”, its a decision making process. LT unemployment is a legitimate data point to use in a hiring decision, and you would probably find a strong correlation with performance in aggregate.

    People treat employment like a referendum on who they are as a human being. Employment decisions are just choices made by self interested agents trying to maximize their well being. They use imperfect data, make approximations, and take pragmatic shortcuts. They make guesses about you based on aggregates. They can easily be getting it wrong. There is no referendum on a person’s worth going on, just some people make the best guesses they can about marginal productivity given what they know.

  33. darms says:

    Yeah, McDonald’s is supposed to be hiring 50K 04/19 and those ‘kind’ folks have budgeted $518M to pay the wages and salaries of their new hires. But quelle suprise, $518M/50K = a whopping $10,360 per employee! Man, that would almost cover the rent on a 2 bedroom apartment where I live!On another note, many of these now outsourced jobs didn’t really need to be outsourced. Case in point, recently I tried to buy some Magnalite cookware. 15 years ago I bought a nice set, made in USA. It wasn’t cheap but it’s good stuff. What I found last fall was cookware that looked exactly the same yet now clearly marked “made in China”. Apparently the powers that be shipped all the molds & casting machinery to China making no changes except for the “made in China” stamp. And it wasn’t as if the Chinese product was less expensive, no it was considerably more than I paid last time. BTW, not only did I not buy it, Magnalite (& their parent World Kitchen, LLC) has lost my business forever, the only products of theirs I will again purchase will be used ones from garage sales & thrift stores.

  34. Jojo says:

    @Julia Chestnut said “Employers consider any break in your employment a liability. The longer you are unemployed, the more stale your skills seem to a potential employer and the more they figure that you have cooties. It really doesn’t matter what your skill set is: if you don’t currently have a job, good luck finding one.”

    Too true! And there are no acceptable reasons as why you lost previous jobs. You could have worked for one of the many companies with poor management, poor products, poor marketing, poor pricing, revolving doors or some combination but it is always YOUR fault that you lost the job working for the company that was unable to execute its business plan. I once worked for a small public company where the average sales employee lasted 9 months or less. This company has nearly 100% turnover in sales yearly and has had only one profitable year since 1997! Yet the company is still in business, still and still trying to sell the same old crappy products. I have worked for a number of similar companies.

    Point is, it is not always the employee who is at fault for losing a job.

    As to rusty skills – most jobs are redundant work repeated ad infinitum. You don’t really need very special skills for most jobs, just normal business experience and a knowledge of the buzz words used in that particular industry. Do people forget how to communicate because they have been out of work? Do they forget how to sell? For get how to use Excel, Powerpoint, etc? Do you ever forget how to ride a bike? No. You may be a little rusty but that should be rectified in a few weeks.

    # davver1 :said “Employers make their best guess at a persons skills given available information about the candidate. That isn’t “prejudice”, its a decision making process. LT unemployment is a legitimate data point to use in a hiring decision, and you would probably find a strong correlation with performance in aggregate.”

    Wrong! See above. Too many people are just plain lazy. They don’t want to hear explanations for being unemployed and they don’t want to try to understand why someone might be unemployed. It is so much easier to (like you do) jump to a conclusion that any job loss must always be the fault of the employee, not the crappy employer or manager they worked for.

    I’ve seen this much in the technology sales world. Employers are always advertising for people who were successful in their prior jobs. But success in this area is often not only based on YOU but also the sales territory, quota numbers and company support. I’ve seen people who were wildly successful come into a position and fail miserably (because they were just lucky in the past). And I’ve seen marginal people who wound up being very successful. There’s no one size fits all explanation for unemployed people!

  35. davver1 says:

    @Jojo

    If you work for a bad company, get a new job. Don’t wait to get laid off. The best candidates find ways to work for top companies, where they learn top skills and work habits. Losers stick with shitty companies where they learn bad habits until they get laid off. I’ve been there. I’ve worked at a shitty company that was about to do layoffs. I found a way out and got a better job.

    “As to rusty skills – most jobs are redundant work repeated ad infinitum. You don’t really need very special skills for most jobs, just normal business experience and a knowledge of the buzz words used in that particular industry.”

    So basically you don’t have any great skills, and your wondering why someone doesn’t just hand you a cushy job. If your “experience” really isn’t worth all that much why shouldn’t a company hire an EL to do your job for 1/2 the money if all of your “experience” can be learned in a few weeks. If you’ve got ten years of experience doing one year of experience ten times, don’t be surprised when your valued like someone with one year of experience.

    Lastly, its not lazy that these people don’t try to verify your whole damn life story. Hiring is a cost to the company, they have practical constraints. Do I care if you’re an exception to a rule if finding out if your an exception costs more then hiring you is worth? Making practical decisions about hiring costs does not equal lazy.

    “There’s no one size fits all explanation for unemployed people!”

    Duh. Who cares. Hiring is not a referendum on a person! Employment is not about fairness and justice! It is a practical process that weighs the cost of acquiring data on people against the benefit of that data. Some data is more efficient in this matter then other data, and current employment is one of them.

  36. Jojo says:

    @davver1 – BS!. It’s easy to spew platitudes when sitting in your holier than thou throne.

    If you wind up in a crappy company job, you are expected to stay the course for at least one year. Otherwise you get branded as a quitter and or job hopper. But let’s say you stay your year, but you are on the verge of being let go. Then you have to take whatever job is available, which might be another crappy company. Rinse and repeat. Oh noooooo.

    Work for two crappy companies in a row and you might not be able to get in a good company afterwards. Add a 3rd one and you are pretty much floating in the water face down.

    You might have done better than your compatriots at these crappy companies but if what you accomplished isn’t on par with what others in the industry [claim to have] accomplished, then you are SOL. No one cares.

  37. davver1 says:

    “No one cares.”

    Of course! Is this some kind of revelation? Nobody cares if you are getting a “fair shake” or if people “understand your circumstances”. Companies are merely trying to figure out the best hires given limited information constraints. Why the hell should they try to sort through whatever BS story you’ve got when they can just take someone that doesn’t need a story to get hired? Either you do whatever you need to do to have what companies want, or you don’t. Put simply, winners find a way to win. If you don’t find a way to win, you’re aren’t a winner. Had tougher circumstances becoming a winner then someone else did, nobody gives a fuck. Either overcome whatever difficulties you have or live with the consequences. Nobody cares, fairness doesn’t matter. Business is not some goddamn life philosophy or religion, its just business.

  38. Jojo says:

    @davver1 – Well I can’t argue with your last post.

    What you describe is exactly why working for corporations in the USA sucks and why this county is so screwed up.

    As for “winners find a way to win”, all’s fair as they say, in order to win, right? I’ve know some number of people whose appearance of being a winner was merely a mixture of bravado and “creative” resume writing. I guess it keeps working until it doesn’t. Maybe I need some tiger’s blood to help me along…. :)

  39. mikaeel says:

    The guy who just told the old IT guy to be a math teacher obviously didn’t hear, they’re laying off teachers and using more lay offs as a threat to lower the remaining ones salaries. The low hanging fruit is gone America and so may be the glory days.