Slashdot Mirror


Gen Y Tech Savvy, But Not Interested in a Career

jcatcw writes "Young people aren't choosing computer science majors because they take technology for granted — it's something to use not something to make a career. "By and large, this generation is very fluent with technology and with a networked world," according to James Ware, executive producer at The Work Design Collaborative LLC, a Berkeley, Calif., consortium exploring workplace values and the future of the workforce. That future may be in managing technology, which requires skills today's college students don't have: writing, critical thinking, hard work and just plain showing up. One of their primary concerns is a flexible schedule and healthy work/life balance."

40 of 593 comments (clear)

  1. Lazy Kids ! by Irish-DnB · · Score: 5, Funny

    good. If this bears out then those of us out of college can charge more and more to keep everything running.

    --
    If it's too difficult, I can't understand it !
    1. Re:Lazy Kids ! by rikitikitembo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, if only I could charge the Doctor or the Lawyer what he charges me when I fix his computer.

    2. Re:Lazy Kids ! by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, if only I could charge the Doctor or the Lawyer what he charges me when I fix his computer. It's a question of ease of replacement. If it was as hard to find a computer technician as it was to find a doctor or a lawyer, you would be able to charge that much.

      In the case of both law and medicine, they have professional associations that basically work to control the 'supply' of professionals in the field. (Well, the Bar Associations aren't doing too hot lately, which is why the market has flooded, but they used to be better.) If it weren't for the AMA, doctors probably wouldn't be paid all that well, either. Think of all the other people in the medical field -- nurses, technicians/technologists, etc. -- very few of them are paid as well as actual doctors, because it's hard to become a doctor and there are certain functions that are legally restricted only to doctors.

      If you could get a lot of IT workers together and establish an "Information Technologists Guild" and bribe enough politicians into making it illegal for anyone not in the guild to open the case of a computer, then turn around and make it nearly impossible to join the guild, you'd probably make a fortune, too.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    3. Re:Lazy Kids ! by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The ABA did a better job controlling the supply of lawyers back before we lost a lawsuit which accused us of what was basically illegal monopoly/trust activities (it's a bit more complicated than that, though).

      In short, the ABA had worked to prevent law schools from proliferating to the point it's at today (nearly two hundred law schools!) in order to keep the field from being glutted with unintelligent and uneducated lawyers. Once the ABA was denied the ability to restrict the number of law schools, every crappy school in the country wanted a law school. Law schools typically have enormous cost/benefit ratios, due to the limited start-up cost and high return on investment (i.e. profitability of alumni). While this remained true initially, the crappier schools popping up today are failing at that too, dragging their schools even further down.

      You want fewer crappy lawyers? Lobby to allow the ABA to get back to its job of keeping those people out of our field.

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    4. Re:Lazy Kids ! by smellsofbikes · · Score: 5, Funny

      >what he charges me when I fix his computer.

      He charges you to fix his computer?
      That job *sucks*.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    5. Re:Lazy Kids ! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most legal activity should not be performed by lawyers.

      Just as business people simplify IT that requires specialists and is repetative, we should simplify legal activities that require specilists but happen repetatively.

      Seriously-- 99% of divorces could be handled by a "divorce specialist" who would make 60 grand a year instead of 120 grand a year. Law has gotten so big, it needs to be broken down and streamlined.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    6. Re:Lazy Kids ! by Marsell · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > You want fewer crappy lawyers? Lobby to allow the ABA to get back to its job of keeping those people out of our field.

      I have a better idea: let's change things to make lawyers less needed in the first place.

      I used to be in law school, and this is what I concluded before moving to a profession that produces value, not consumes it:

      a) Ignorance is not a defense, but
      b) It's easy to violate a law, often regardless of mens rea.

      Why is b) true? Because thanks to our wonderful common-law system, there's an ungodly number of statutes. These statutes are inter-related, not necessarily the way you'd expect, and the relationships are often only implied. Of course, it's not just enough to know what's on the books, but also know how their interpretation has been modified by precedents (and not just local precedents either; judgments from overseas can have an effect too). How is anybody other than some specialist in the area supposed to untangle that? So we have people who acted in what they believed to be a lawful manner being punished. I find it particularly charming when even legal experts are largely clueless outside their area of specialization. In fact, I'm charmed by the number of specialists who don't even know their own specialization all that well. This isn't a problem of education, this is a problem of out-of-control complexity.

      You'd expect that every citizen of society should clearly understand what is expected of them, right? If they break a law, which they of course knew about, there are repercussions. This is just. Instead you have cases being decided on fine nuances of meaning of single words thanks to whatever crazed set of precedent and statute some team of lawyers was able to drag together, rationalized by the excuse that it's a living law. Now toss in lawyers who charge sums of money that is beyond the reach of most people (and pro bono is a risible excuse to protect your guilty consciousness', because you fuckers almost never do it except for friends or cases that'll improve your visibility), and who only benefit by dragging cases out, and we have a problem. A few hundred to a few thousand dollars for a simple printout of some old template in your local copy of wordperfect or word, and it's not just a problem, it's pathetic unadulterated greed at everyone else's expense.

      In short, to your profession and those of you who 'graduated' to politics: fuck you. You're a leech on society and promulgate a fundamentally unjust and morally-repugnant system. I don't know how you sleep at night -- while your new associates naively slave away of course. If Diogenes was to wander into a law firm you'd try to sell him a lamp for $5,000, and yet you're supposed to help propagate justice?

      Advice for the rest of you: never use a lawyer unless the amount is -- or worth -- millions. Just move on; you'll save yourself much grief and debt.

  2. Critical thinking by superwiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is plainly not taught anymore. Most people don't even remember how logic was taught for the past 2000 years.... geometry.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    1. Re:Critical thinking by Billosaur · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. School used to be filled with logic and reasoning -- kids had to learn to think. Now schools are more interested in childrens' self-esteem and socialization. Frankly, part of the problem is that the newest crop of teachers don't know logic or have excellent critical reasoning skills. As each generation passes, we get further from the Aristotelian virtues and knowledge becomes more watered-down.

      Nowhere is that more borne out than in computer programming. Logic is the backbone of programming and if you haven't got a decent grounding in it, your coding skills are going to be atrocious, no matter what language you use. I remember when I was going to school to about 8 years ago to get a programming certification so I could shift careers. There I was, in my mid-30s with 18-year-olds all around, who were more interested in Napster and trying to download porn onto the school computers than actually learning the skills they needed. They used to razz me quite a bit, but I got through the whole set of courses with a 4.0 because I had the logical background that made going from pseudo-code to finished program easier.

      Until we get back to teaching fundamental reasoning skills in school, each succeeding generation is going to take their environment more and more for granted, and understand it less and less.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:Critical thinking by Otter · · Score: 5, Funny
      Critical thinking...Is plainly not taught anymore.

      Oh, plainly! Why, unsupported assertions that critical thinking is dead among These Lousy Kids Today hardly bear questioning!

    3. Re:Critical thinking by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is plainly not taught anymore. Most people don't even remember how logic was taught for the past 2000 years.... geometry.

      Though honestly, a very large percentage of people over the past 2000 years weren't really taught anything. Formal education has never been universal, and honestly I've been to senior citizens centers and believe it or not they don't spend their days discussing complex philosophical issues. The percentage of people who have the ability to think logically is pretty small, and of those only a percentage have the requisite training to really think critically. It's always been that way.

    4. Re:Critical thinking by Erris · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Critical thinking Is plainly not taught anymore.

      It's something you have to learn but can not be taught. Logic, history, facts, and opinions may be taught, but thought comes from experience and reflection. The more someone tells you they are going to teach you "critical thinking skills" the more you know they are going to try to indoctrinate you. The majority of people who think they can teach you critical thinking, lack the skill themselves.

      --
      DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
    5. Re:Critical thinking by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Funny

      Geometry teachers drive '95 Corollas; marketing executives drive this year's BMW.

      Using geometric principles, calculate the magnitude of the hotness of the women that each can attract.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    6. Re:Critical thinking by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      School used to be filled with logic and reasoning -- kids had to learn to think.

      When on earth did this happen? You think an elementary school in 1950 was a sort of mini-Lyceum? It's always been rote memorization and paperwork.

      Now schools are more interested in childrens' self-esteem and socialization.

      Ridiculous. Schools these days are obsessed with test results and cramming the ability to do these tests into the kids' heads. That whole self-esteem thing has been out of vogue for a while.

      Frankly, part of the problem is that the newest crop of teachers don't know logic or have excellent critical reasoning skills.

      I will agree that teachers today are probably not, on the average, as talented as they used to be. This is a result of the fact that for most of this country's history, 50% of the population was limited in their careers. If you were smart, female, and wanted an education, you were very likely to end up as a teacher. This isn't something that you can go back to, though.

      As each generation passes, we get further from the Aristotelian virtues and knowledge becomes more watered-down.

      I just don't buy it. I think there are serious deficiencies in our education system but I don't buy the idea that as you go back you find a better and better one.

    7. Re:Critical thinking by niiler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think that in the past fewer people were better educated. Now, nearly everybody is literate, but at a much reduced level. Can you imagine *any* of our current politicians writing (not ghost writing, but actually writing) at the level of Jefferson, Franklin, or Adams?

    8. Re:Critical thinking by hodet · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Geometry teachers drive '95 Corollas; marketing executives drive this year's BMW. Using geometric principles, calculate the magnitude of the hotness of the women that each can attract.

      I know this is being modded funny right now, but I think it is the most insightful reason that has been provided up to now.

    9. Re:Critical thinking by haplo21112 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The schools don't even want talent, they don't want teachers who think, or who deviate from the prepared way they (the existing teachers and administration) have decided things should be done. My wife made a job change from high tech that was burning her out to being a teacher. What she has found is that despite her clear success in two different school systems now (State of MA, the famous MCAS tests) they are not interested in her brand of teaching.

      She got kids who had previously failed the MCAS tests to pass and not just pass, but pass by a wide margin...but she taught to a each child's needs and learning style. She stood up for the laws for the national laws and state laws for the special needs for the children she taught. A host of other things that the schools systems just plain didn't like.

      She was actually told to do what it ever it took pass kids, and by this I mean fudging test grades and class grades, pass them at all costs even if they don't deserve to pass...I'm not talking about the 64-65 one point bubble here...more like 23! Shock when kids acted like assholes, didn't do their work, and didn't make an effort she gave them failing grades, suggested they stay back...Oh My God! Think of Child! Last year, one parent WANTED the kid to stay back because of failing grades, the school system overrode the parent's opinion on the matter. Despite the parent's opinion and failing grades in 4 classes the kid was passed on to the next grade. Not even summer school required!

      --
      Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
    10. Re:Critical thinking by theantipop · · Score: 4, Funny

      But geometry teachers know all the best math-based pickup lines! "I like the area under your curves, let's integrate." Works everytime.

    11. Re:Critical thinking by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      "I'm not sure I agree with the grandparent but I can assure you that if rich white people lived in cities the schools would be fantastic."

      I dunno, if the culture of the populations in the 'urban' areas valued education (instead of ridiculing those that try) above the aspirations of being a star athlete or rap star, then I think you'd see a much larger change.

      The US already throws a TON of money at schools, which does nothing to help the red tape that eats it up, nor the apathy of many of the recipients.

      Education thrives in an environment where parents and children see the value of it. No amount of money can change this core need of a good educational system.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  3. "In my day . . ." by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yep, seems like pretty much every "new" generation gets the slam from the ones who came before. Us Gen X'ers were cast off as a bunch of slackers IIRC. In ten years we'll have some snotty Gen Y writer blasting the lazy post-college Gen Z's and ranting how the greedy Gen X'ers will consume the last remaining Social Security resources. Definitely nothing new to see here.

  4. Fluent? Not really... by JCSoRocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I work with Generation Y'ers and they aren't so "fluent with technology" that they don't need to get a CS education. Most of them still don't know the difference between RAM and a HD. They don't even know the units used to calculate the amount of RAM or the speed of a computer. Obviously, there are exceptions, but it's been my experience in a middle-class community of Gen Y kids that they don't know jack about a computer. Can they use an IPod? sure... but so can my 60 year old mom, big deal. That's like saying my Grandma used to be "fluent with technology" because she could use a typewriter back in the day. Having the ability to use it and having the ability to make it are two totally different things.

    --
    You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    1. Re:Fluent? Not really... by fullmetal55 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think what they meant is they're fluent with the USE of technology. Back in the 50s, most men knew how to fix their car, not just drive it. now most people take their car to a mechanic to fix when it breaks, sure they're more complex now, but that fits the comparison with technology too. The same thing is happening here with computers and technology. in the 90s, more computer users had at least an understanding of what went on under the hood. now, most people who use them, consider them closed boxes, and take them to a tech (mechanic) to fix when it breaks. sure the excuse is they're more complex under the hood, but the real reason is nobody wants to be bothered with how it works, they just want it to work. As Douglas Adams said, the three stages of civilization are "How", "Why", and "Where". How do computers work? (up to the 90s, still ongoing but less so) Why do computers work (current, figuring out what they're good for, developing products etc.), Where? most likely "where is it useful?"

    2. Re:Fluent? Not really... by Billosaur · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which is the disconnect between technology and the mass market. The customer does not want to know how the computer works -- they only want it to work when they get it out of the box. Mind you, processor speed and hard drive are such that they really aren't the most critical factors in buying a PC anymore for your average user.

      This is why Microsoft rules the software landscape, Linux is finding it difficult to make inroads into the PC market, and why Apple has everybody enamored with the iPod. Familiarity breeds contempt, and contempt breeds lack of understanding. All the customer knows is that their laptop works when they turn it out and Windows pops up, and they can use that to load songs on their iPod. The behind-the-scenes does not interest them, which is why the general populace doesn't have a clue about Net Neutrality or DRM.

      I ascribe it to the fall of the hobbyist. In the heady days at the beginning of PC age, when guys were buying Altair kits and Ham radio ruled, I think there was a higher level of curiosity. But now I don't think ham radio clubs, computer clubs, or even astronomy clubs are popular anymore, given the instant access to information we have now. I see this trend continuing as long as technology does not require the user to put any thought into it.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    3. Re:Fluent? Not really... by nine-times · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This reminds me of an experience I had a couple years ago. My cousin (who is about 16 now) wanted to install some game on his computer. It was a Windows XP machine with a normal install wizard, and he was held up by some error or another. It wasn't a big deal so I don't even remember what the problem was, but it got me thinking.S

      I remembered being a kid, trying to play the latest Space Quest game from Sierra, and having to figure out which sound card I should choose during the install. My actual soundcard wasn't on the list, so I had to guess which one was more compatible, and it was a bit of trial and error. I remembered having to write custom AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files for different games to load different TSRs, and use different options of EMM386 or HIMEM.SYS. I remembered how impressed I was with myself when I figured out how to use AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS to make a little menu system that allowed me to choose the configuration I wanted while it was booting. I remembered trying to write little BASIC and Pascal programs to do things because... well, computers didn't do that much. I wasn't using my computer to store my music collection or watch movies. The big thing for me to do with computers in those days (besides playing games) was just to screw around with the computer to see what I could get it to do.

      And it kind of made me sad that my cousin would never go through that. Sure, he'll be more computer savvy than my grandparents because he's grown up with computers, but he'll probably never understand computers as well as he would have if he were a few years older. Working in IT for a few years, it seems like the most helpful people are those who are young enough that they had computers when they were kids (and therefore grew up thinking about them), but old enough to have experimented with computers back when they weren't so easy.

  5. Fresh Nostalgia by Stanistani · · Score: 4, Funny

    Remember when people would go around saying "I work with computers" when asked what their job was?
    Now that would sound like "I work with paper."

  6. Gen whatever isn't technology savvy by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These stories simply reflect the fact that, for any value of N, people in generation N-1 generally do not understand technology that became available during the childhood of generation N. This does not make generation N more technically savvy than generation N-1; by the time generation N+1 comes around, generation N will not understand the stuff they have. This was just as true for the baby boomers using remote controls and VCRs that their parents couldn't understand as it is for me using computers that the boomers have trouble with. It didn't mean that the boomers were geniuses because they could use a VCR.

    Probably sort of like how my mom can't figure out the internet really well, which I think is rather simple; on the other hand, I can't understand the compulsion 'them darned kids' have for constantly text messaging each other.

    Just because you can use mass-market electronic goods does not make one 'technically savvy'.

  7. Generation Why? by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I read an interesting science fiction story a few years ago (think it was in Asimov's or "Year's Best Scifi") called "Generation Why." It posited an interesting look at a future generation that scorned the work ethic of its preceding generation because it simply didn't believe in money, material possessions, and work for their own sake. This "generation why" essentially asked the question "Why should we break our backs working long hours away from our families just to have a 9,000 square foot house and a big SUV?", "Why should I learn things that aren't going to make me a better person?", "Why should I work a job that I hate just for a higher salary?", etc.

    Of course, this idea is nothing new. Every generation goes through a very similar idealistic phase. Generation Y is now entering its early 20's, and it's likely that this is the phase they're beginning to go through right now. So it's hardly surprising that they're rejecting formal instruction in a field that they already feel very comfortable in (as self-taught learners). Just part of them "finding their way."

    Just a thought.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Generation Why? by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, I was going to read that story, but then I thought, meh, what would it achieve?

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  8. Sign of the times... by decipher_saint · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was on the bus the other day and there were some high school bimbos (let's not waste words here) and they were all a twitter about the goings on of their MySpace accounts. On and on they yammered about which boys they liked and who's on what list and then they started talking about CSS, that is to say Cascading Style Sheets.

    There is a point in your life when you realize that the world has changed, that "nerdy" topics aren't so nerdy anymore, especially now that they are in the mainstream.

    Generation Y (ugh!) is undeniably using the tools around them to get things done, just as my generation did a decade ago with more primitive technology. But suffice to say, the reason to get a job in the tech industry is not because you want to play with what you're already using but because you want to create something new. This is not for everyone and I think regardless of the "tech level" society seems to achieve there will always be a minority of tech-career oriented people.

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
  9. What makes "tech savvy" a big deal? by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is a video professor ad where a woman laughs that her four year old is often more comfortable with a computer than she is. A lot of older people just don't realize that **comfort** is not a particularly big deal. Yes, most middle and upper class people in Gen Y are "comfortable with a computer" and other gadgets. So what? When I was in college two years ago, it didn't stop many of them from making many of the same mistakes that their equally **computer illiterate** parents made like not updating their software and trusting everything that came into their inbox that didn't look automatically like spam.

    So you can plug your iPod in and sync up your media collection with it. How is that a practical use of your computer, the sort of thing that drives the economy?

    I have to wonder... were there ever articles like this talking about basic skills like driving? "Younger generation more comfortable with horseless carriage?" Being able to use a computer? BFD. Who cares. Being able to write software, integrate components and mess with hardware are the skills that stand out.

  10. Crappy writer by KevinIsOwn · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From TFA:

    While they may not possess the tech skills of old -- expertise in outdated areas like NetWare, Cobol, even ColdFusion programming -- this new generation packs a punch with mastery of things like HTML programming and a complete comfort level with business basics like Microsoft PowerPoint and Excel, not to mention Web 2.0 advances like blogging and social networking.
    How does knowing HTML pack a punch in comparison with COBOL? Does this writer even know how all these "Web 2.0 advances" are being made? And even though I wouldn't use ColdFusion, that's one way blogs and social network sites get created. This writer is incredibly unqualified to be writing any article about technology. This isn't the only stupid line in there.
  11. liking to drive doesn't make you a mechanic by misanthrope101 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Familiarity with Facebook and Bittorrent is different than choosing a career as a programmer or network administrator. Familiarity is not maintenance and/or development. The number of people familiar with using automobiles is a little larger than the number who choose a career as a mechanic.

  12. Re:It is from how they've been raised... by mrjb · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unlike how we grew up....many of today's kids don't play outside much. They don't get out and meet and interact with the kids in the neighborhood, which teaches some good people skills.
    How is this unlike how we grew up?

    --
    Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
  13. There are three levels... by ChrisA90278 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are three kinds of "technology "fluent": To use the old car analogy

    1) Can drive a car, knows all about car companies and which models have leather seats and what "anti-skid brakes" do

    2) can fix a car. Can figure out what part is broken and do a "remove and replace" repair

    3) Can design a car. Knows how to design body sheet metal so that it absorbs energy in an impact. Can model flame propagation inside a combustion chamber,

    With cars e have drivers, mechanics and engineers. With computers it is users, service techs and engineers. So what the article says is that even though many kids are computer users few want to become engineers. Well "good" the ratio of users to engineers should be about 100,000 to one or maybe 500K to 1. It only take 10 guys to set up a cool web site that a million people can use.

  14. Today? Work/Life Balance. by juuri · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Children today are lazy, lack respect and have no faith" - Rough translation of Mesopotamian saying.

    What really goads me lately is this massive latching on by the current mainstream press that Work/Life balance is some evil concept. It's as though striving to have a life outside your work simply isn't tolerable. Don't these tools who feed this party line when writing the articles want a life as well?

    We are entering a time of extreme excess for the bulk of humanity in 1st world nations, it's okay if we all want to slow down some and enjoy this new world we have. Frankly if we all really worked as hard as people did thirty or fourty years ago we'd either run out of work or resources quickly. This is why we need to continue to push an information economy because its central resource is people something we still have plenty of (for now).

    I'm amazed when talking to people on the East Coast and they mock West Coast things like Work/Life balance with derision and a wave of the hand. Unless you *really* enjoy your job above all else, what's wrong with wanting it to have less importance in your life? For most of us, work, is a means to an end. This is your only life, enjoy it! Take a vacation! Get drunk/high! Have sex! Do whatever makes you happy as long as it doesn't directly impede the joy of others.

    --
    --- I do not moderate.
  15. Clearly lacking in decency, theology and geometry by bobobobo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Indeed, children these days are clearly lacking in theology and geometry. Their lack of logic and materialistic endeavors casts doubt upon their very souls! I would regale you with some astute philosophical musings from Boethius, however Lady Fortuna's wheel has spun me downwards and my closed valve is causing me to bloat. To the lavatory I go to seek respite!

  16. Re:Nah it'll just be outsourced by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "Corporations are to be blamed. "Flexible schedule and healthy work/life balance" is something all companies should be able to provide. This is something so trivial there is no excuse. What benefit is 9 to 5?? None whatso ever. I should be able to come in at 4 pm in hte afternoon unquestioned. OTOH how the bloodyass does the management execs justify deserving 10x the salary of the normal employee."

    Other's have already pointed out the 9-5 situation (people being there when they need to interact together), but, there is a more general point I'd like to address. This sense of entitlement, that the world needs to adjust to 'my' lifestyle and needs. Unless you are going to own and run your own business, that ain't gonna happen. Maybe this attitude comes from parent who start themselves jumping through hoops anytime the kids wants something or has to be somewhere (all activities structured and scheduled). Parents quit saying "NO". Unless you can employ yourself, and control your destiny....your expected to meet the requirements of the place of employment you choose. The world is not out there to conform to your lifestyle. That pretty much is a thing of the past after you leave college. Hey, if you can find a job that allows shift work like you mentioned...choose that one, but, they are few between, and most I know of.....don't earn that much and are largely janitorial.

    With age and work experience...and years of accomplishments, comes increased position and pay. I'm not saying it is always justified, there will always be jackasses that make it to the top, but, then again...I never say someone is overpaid. Obviously someone is willing to pay those people that much, and frankly, I want to be one of them. I really, really like the things money allows me to do....and rather than try to customize the system around my wants, I try to figure out how to use it to make my gains.

    Unless you can either learn to work the system, or work for yourself....you're gonna be left behind, and while it may be sad, the world really doesn't care about it.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  17. Chicken or Egg? by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    at the level of Jefferson, Franklin, or Adams?
    Is anyone of that caliber going into politics today?
    --
    Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
  18. Re:Nah it'll just be outsourced by shaper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's funny, I do run my own business. I like to call it Me, Inc. I provide a service (my time and skills) to the highest bidder the market. Currently, the highest bidder is my employer and part of the price they pay for my services is a mutually negotiated and agreed upon balance between my time spent with them and the time I spend elsewhere.

    I don't understand why, when 2 parties negotiate conditions in a relationship (contract, purchase, service, etc), if both of the parties are businesses, it's just a part of doing decent, respectable business, enlightened self-interest, free-market economics, etc. But when one of the negotiating parties is a business and the other is a worker/employee, then the worker's enlightened self-interest is characterized as entitlement (or socialism, if they do it collectively).

    Why is it so hard to conceive of individuals as little self-owned businesses with valuable services to provide to employers at mutually negotiated prices? And let the market decide which way the prices go. After all, capitalism is all about free markets, right? And labor is another market. Regulated, like most markets, but still a market, nonetheless. I have seen many business people who tout free market economics when it benefits them and then with straight faces denounce the workings of the labor market when it swings in favor of the worker.

  19. Re:Nah it'll just be outsourced by imgod2u · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Employees demanding more is hardly new. People wanting more is what drives a capitalistic world. Just because the most recent generation value certain things (freedom of lifestyle) and demand those from employers does not make it any less of a demand than, say, demanding a higher salary or benefits for family members, etc.

    This idea that people are "entitled" is nonsense. Everyone wants as much as they can have and more. Employers want hard-working employees for cheap. Employees want to work less for more pay (or other types of compensation). A compromise is reached. That's how it's *supposed* to work. Attitudes like "be grateful for what they give you" only cause one side to gain an advantage and speaks of a subservient mentality.