Apparently…..it isn’t a job

[Nail Soup]

4 hours ago, Crusoe said:

So, you enjoy your job as a careers advisor, then? 😄😉

God help anyone who I advised!

[BigRedX]

2 hours ago, Daz39 said:

I remember those careers quizzes - we had a whole morning to do one with hundreds (probably not that many) of multiple-choice questions. Mine told me to become a Teacher or an Accountant. School and Family basically pushed me into Finance. I hated it, and would much rather have done Geology or Marine Biology or something fun. 

 

IMO Marine Biology is over-rated and it's not all Jacques Cousteau or battling giant squids in your midget submarine. I spent a year studying it at University and I have to say that most exciting Marine Biology orientated thing I did during that year was counting lugworm casts on a cold and windswept Swansea Beach. And at the time Swansea was one of the more exciting university locations that offered the course. To give you an idea of how less than riveting I thought it was, at the end of the year I switched to Town and Country Planning!

[Nicko]

22 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

 

IMO Marine Biology is over-rated and it's not all Jacques Cousteau or battling giant squids in your midget submarine. I spent a year studying it at University and I have to say that most exciting Marine Biology orientated thing I did during that year was counting lugworm casts on a cold and windswept Swansea Beach. And at the time Swansea was one of the more exciting university locations that offered the course. To give you an idea of how less than riveting I thought it was, at the end of the year I switched to Town and Country Planning!

My brother in law studied Oceanography at Swansea, in the hope he would spend 6 months a year working in some paradise location and have 6 months a year off.  He made sandwiches for a few years after leaving Uni, and ended up running a small textile company.  He avoids eating shellfish but otherwise learnt little of use.

[mikel]

2 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

 

Not blaming the students, blaming the governments, although the governments of the day and the people who vote them in are often the people who benifitted from those things.

OK, but I keep hearing people saying its all the fault of the baby boomers, they had it easy, cheap housing, full employment blah blah. That was then, things have changed, not better or worse, just different. Yes, I got my first mortgage in 1977, but it swallowed both of our salaries and we had no carpets, curtains or furniture. Couldn't afford a foreign holiday till 1988 and could not afford to have children. You make life choices and what to spend your money on. Whining about the past is futile, and mostly sepia tinted. 

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, mikel said:

OK, but I keep hearing people saying its all the fault of the baby boomers, they had it easy, cheap housing, full employment blah blah. That was then, things have changed, not better or worse, just different. Yes, I got my first mortgage in 1977, but it swallowed both of our salaries and we had no carpets, curtains or furniture. Couldn't afford a foreign holiday till 1988 and could not afford to have children. You make life choices and what to spend your money on. Whining about the past is futile, and mostly sepia tinted. 

 

I wasn't specifically talking about housing, although there are issues there,  more education / social structures, although with housing, although it was tough with interest rates, you could actually get a mortgage, even going without carpets and curtains. I got a mortage as a junior engineer on my own salary (on a small house). that same house now, on an equivalent salary I would have no chance to get - in fact probably on my actual salary.

 

I am not blaming the people who have the houses, I am blaming years of underinvestment in not building houses, and people not really voting for that as a priority. All people ever really want to do is pay less tax and moan that there are no services any more, but that is human nature.

[Dan Dare]

7 hours ago, ezbass said:

The amount of folk I know who have degrees, some of them doctorates, and are doing nothing vaguely associated with their field of study, perplexes me.

 

It makes perfect sense. There is a big difference between education and training. Education develops the whole person. Training enhances a person's ability to perform in a certain role. 

 

The fact that someone may have an interest in and a talent for a particular subject at the age of 18-25 doesn't mean that will be the case for the rest of their lives. As people develop and learn/see more of the world, their interests and desires can change, often markedly.

 

There may very well be few opportunities to work in the field one has studied. Studying a subject to degree level and beyond does not mean you will only be proficient in that subject. The methods and techniques you learn  and the abilities you acquire whilst learning will transfer across a wide range of related and unrelated topics.

 

1 hour ago, mikel said:

OK, but I keep hearing people saying its all the fault of the baby boomers, they had it easy, cheap housing, full employment blah blah. That was then, things have changed, not better or worse, just different. Yes, I got my first mortgage in 1977, but it swallowed both of our salaries and we had no carpets, curtains or furniture. Couldn't afford a foreign holiday till 1988 and could not afford to have children. You make life choices and what to spend your money on. Whining about the past is futile, and mostly sepia tinted. 

 

Absolutely. When we boomers bought our "cheap" houses, they weren't cheap by the standards of the day. We were in a similar position to the one you describe. Yes, we owned a house (or rather, the building society did. They graciously allowed us to live there in return for a hefty monthly payment), but it was furnished with hand-me-downs from relatives and junk shop finds. We had no car for several years (sold them to put towards the deposit). We took camping holidays and life was strictly no frills for quite a while. I'm not bleating about it. We made our choices and knew it would come good in the end. However, it boils my p*ss when I'm told we "had it easy", etc.

[msb]

The expression “house poor” comes to mind. The bank’s interest rates were higher , and there were times one had to juggle at the end of the month. But at this point the mortgage has been paid and I am truly the lord of my little manor.

Your mind set changes when you become a property owner , if anything breaks it’s up to you to fix it.

We have a small house , but a big yard , and Herself is a gardener.

And I’m thankful we did it. 
It was not always easy. For much of it I was self employed and paying business rent and a mortgage.
I was the last one to get paid.

[Jack]

2 hours ago, Nicko said:

My brother in law studied Oceanography at Swansea, in the hope he would spend 6 months a year working in some paradise location and have 6 months a year off.  He made sandwiches for a few years after leaving Uni, and ended up running a small textile company.  He avoids eating shellfish but otherwise learnt little of use.

One of my friends in my biology lectures was doing marine biology. Now she's an exotic tour guide and her Facebook is just her riding through the desert on horseback, climbing mountains and going whale watching. So it works for some. 

 

Edit sorry not the post I planned on quoting but it seems stuck there now... 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Jack

[tauzero]

On 06/10/2022 at 01:26, Acebassmusic said:

I did apply for the army bands and managed to get 2 weeks work experience in the real army (it was something they did at the time) firing guns, push ups, night excercises, push ups, marching, push ups, assault course, more push ups etc. I was quite warming to the idea until I spoke with some of the regulars who informed me that as a bandsman you have to have 2 roles 1) the musician / ceremonial side and 2) first aider. Fine I thought, until they asked me where first aiders work..... usually front line with no weapons and only a little red cross on your arm to protect you (or double as a target! ) It was at this point I decided to re-evaluate my career options 🤣

 

"The lifespan of a hospital corpsman from the time his foot hits the water till the time he almost gets to the beach is seven seconds" - Bill Cosby, "Medic"

 

 

[tauzero]

On 06/10/2022 at 10:45, ezbass said:

Given the cost of a university degree, I’ve long been touting the idea, to anyone who’ll listen to my ravings, that businesses, etc should sponsor degrees and you pay them back by working for them for a number of years. The amount of folk I know who have degrees, some of them doctorates, and are doing nothing vaguely associated with their field of study, perplexes me.

 

Surely non-vocational courses are to broaden the mind and encourage one to learn about learning? That's why that nice Mr Sunak wanted to do away with them, because they didn't contribute economically.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/sunak-vows-to-crack-down-on-university-degrees-that-do-not-improve-earning-potential-12667369

[BigRedX]

On 06/10/2022 at 18:57, Dan Dare said:

Absolutely. When we boomers bought our "cheap" houses, they weren't cheap by the standards of the day. We were in a similar position to the one you describe. Yes, we owned a house (or rather, the building society did. They graciously allowed us to live there in return for a hefty monthly payment), but it was furnished with hand-me-downs from relatives and junk shop finds. We had no car for several years (sold them to put towards the deposit). We took camping holidays and life was strictly no frills for quite a while. I'm not bleating about it. We made our choices and knew it would come good in the end. However, it boils my p*ss when I'm told we "had it easy", etc.

 

Also we (or at least all the people I knew) started with small, cheap houses in the less desirable areas, whose only concession to modernisation was the fact that the toilet was inside the dwelling. I was in my 30s before I lived anywhere that had central heating - before then in was gas fires in the downstairs rooms and a portable fan heater to take the chill off in the bedroom upstairs. The plan would be to do as much renovation as you could afford (usually doing most of it yourself) before moving to something a little bit bigger/better. Often the renovations would be building society mandated such as damp-proof courses, rewiring and insulation. 

 

Of course all those relatively cheap houses in need of modernisation have nearly all be modernised and are therefore no longer relatively cheap. The less desirable areas have either become "gentrified" or are now completely undesirable places to live.

[mikel]

On 06/10/2022 at 18:09, Woodinblack said:

 

I wasn't specifically talking about housing, although there are issues there,  more education / social structures, although with housing, although it was tough with interest rates, you could actually get a mortgage, even going without carpets and curtains. I got a mortage as a junior engineer on my own salary (on a small house). that same house now, on an equivalent salary I would have no chance to get - in fact probably on my actual salary.

 

I am not blaming the people who have the houses, I am blaming years of underinvestment in not building houses, and people not really voting for that as a priority. All people ever really want to do is pay less tax and moan that there are no services any more, but that is human nature.

Don't get me started. A few pence on income tax and NI 50 years ago and we could now have a half decent state pension. It's not rocket science, if you have a baby boom, you will have a retirement boom 65 years later. Led by donkeys. 

[Lfalex v1.1]

11 minutes ago, mikel said:

Don't get me started. A few pence on income tax and NI 50 years ago and we could now have a half decent state pension. It's not rocket science, if you have a baby boom, you will have a retirement boom 65 years later. Led by donkeys. 

Oh. You missed the unsustainable final salary schemes the Boomers had that those who followed either had closed part way through or were denied completely. 

 

Boomers may have started "poor" and got richer,  but later generations will start mediocre at best and get poorer.

Not to worry. Life expectancy is beginning to fall, so it'll even itself out in the end 😉

 

I agree,  though.  Led by Donkeys. Or maybe Ostriches.

[Dan Dare]

3 hours ago, Lfalex v1.1 said:

I agree,  though.  Led by Donkeys. Or maybe Ostriches.

 

I have to disagree. Led by thieves would be more accurate.

[Nicko]

18 hours ago, Lfalex v1.1 said:

Oh. You missed the unsustainable final salary schemes the Boomers had that those who followed either had closed part way through or were denied completely. 

 

Boomers may have started "poor" and got richer,  but later generations will start mediocre at best and get poorer.

Not to worry. Life expectancy is beginning to fall, so it'll even itself out in the end 😉

 

Let's not forget that the boomers paid for the state pensions of those who were the first beneficiaries of the welfare state.  It should have been obvious that the funding model for this was based on an ever expanding workforce - and that has never really been sustainable.   It's not the fault of the baby boomers - its a fault of the way the system was designed.  The youth of today are now paying the pensions of the boomers, even though the boomers are relatively wealthy compared to the workforce.  As post boomer* my financial plans have assumed that the whole state pension system will collapse and I'll be left to fend for myself.

 

* Only just.

[mikel]

23 hours ago, Lfalex v1.1 said:

Oh. You missed the unsustainable final salary schemes the Boomers had that those who followed either had closed part way through or were denied completely. 

 

Boomers may have started "poor" and got richer,  but later generations will start mediocre at best and get poorer.

Not to worry. Life expectancy is beginning to fall, so it'll even itself out in the end 😉

 

I agree,  though.  Led by Donkeys. Or maybe Ostriches.

I got "Richer" because I was always careful with the little money I earned. Never owned a new car, very few foreign holidays. At one point out mortgage interest rate hit 16%. Paid off the mortgage 7 years ago, and since then interest on my hard earned savings is laughable. Don't tell me we had it easy, or are now reaping the rewards. Swings and roundabouts. 

[Dan Dare]

On 08/10/2022 at 17:34, Lfalex v1.1 said:

Oh. You missed the unsustainable final salary schemes the Boomers had that those who followed either had closed part way through or were denied completely. 

 

Boomers may have started "poor" and got richer,  but later generations will start mediocre at best and get poorer.

Not to worry. Life expectancy is beginning to fall, so it'll even itself out in the end 😉

 

I agree,  though.  Led by Donkeys. Or maybe Ostriches.

 

It's sad that you, like so many others, have fallen for the myth that is being peddled presently, which is that the financial ills of recent generations are the fault of those "greedy Boomers", who "bought all the cheap property" (already dealt with above), grabbed all the pension funds (also dealt with above), etc, etc.

 

Surely you can see that the vast majority of us so-called "Boomers" were/are just ordinary folk who bought a single, modest home and accepted the pensions and conditions of employment that were on offer during our working lives. We worked (for 50 years in my case), paid our taxes (which, incidentally, helped fund the education, health services, etc of subsequent generations), just as those who came before us did.

 

There are some very dodgy people who have a vested interest in setting ordinary people at each other's throats - divide and rule and all that - and you have swallowed their nonsense. You need to look elsewhere for the culprits who are responsible for the current state of affairs.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Dan Dare

[cheddatom]

Saying that property was easier to buy for boomers is not the same as blaming them for the current financial woes

[mikel]

34 minutes ago, cheddatom said:

Saying that property was easier to buy for boomers is not the same as blaming them for the current financial woes

We all know who to blame for the current financial woes, and its not the ordinary person, working or retired. 

[Nicko]

10 minutes ago, mikel said:

We all know who to blame for the current financial woes, and its not the ordinary person, working or retired. 

Well the ordinary persons voted for successive governments who have failed to address the problem so in a way they are responsible.

[chris_b]

8 minutes ago, Nicko said:

Well the ordinary persons voted for successive governments who have failed to address the problem so in a way they are responsible.

 

The political system is responsible. The two party, first past the post system is to blame. If your choices are limited to toffs from Eton or Hampstead lefties, you have no sensible choice at all.

[Grimalkin]

10 minutes ago, chris_b said:

 

The political system is responsible. The two party, first past the post system is to blame. If your choices are limited to toffs from Eton or Hampstead lefties, you have no sensible choice at all.

 

Then, like the US, you have to hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. It should be easier in our present circumstance, one party is pathologically insane and has/is causing the ruination of the country. And I'm no fan of the other either.

[Nicko]

16 minutes ago, chris_b said:

 

The political system is responsible. The two party, first past the post system is to blame. If your choices are limited to toffs from Eton or Hampstead lefties, you have no sensible choice at all.

There is nothing stopping the ordinary person joining a political party.  If enough ordinary people did that perhaps the parties would begin to understand what the ordinary person wants.

 

I should also clarify that my comment was really in response to the issue of boomers and cheap housing - and it's important to realise that the issue of house price inflation over and above wage inflation is not a recent phenomenon connected to a specific colour of government.  

[Grimalkin]

4 minutes ago, Nicko said:

There is nothing stopping the ordinary person joining a political party.  If enough ordinary people did that perhaps the parties would begin to understand what the ordinary person wants.

 

I should also clarify that my comment was really in response to the issue of boomers and cheap housing - and it's important to realise that the issue of house price inflation over and above wage inflation is not a recent phenomenon connected to a specific colour of government.  

 

Neoliberalism. That's why wages have stagnated for the last 40 years. Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor. In a true free market, the banks would never have been bailed out. 

[Nicko]

1 minute ago, Grimalkin said:

 

Neoliberalism. That's why wages have stagnated for the last 40 years. Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor. In a true free market, the banks would never have been bailed out. 

Actually, the Bank of England blames unprecedented periods of low interest rates for the stagnation in wages.  House prices have risen because we aren't building enough of them and have, over a short period in the 20th century, moved from a nation of renters to a nation of homeowners.