Why Are So Many People in their 20s Taking So Long to Grow Up?

[Bud Struggle]

We’re in the thick of what one sociologist calls “the changing timetable for adulthood.” Sociologists traditionally define the “transition to adulthood” as marked by five milestones: completing school, leaving home, becoming financially independent, marrying and having a child. In 1960, 77 percent of women and 65 percent of men had, by the time they reached 30, passed all five milestones. Among 30-year-olds in 2000, according to data from the United States Census Bureau (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/census_bureau/index.html?inline=nyt-org), fewer than half of the women and one-third of the men had done so. A Canadian study reported that a typical 30-year-old in 2001 had completed the same number of milestones as a 25-year-old in the early ’70s.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magazine/22Adulthood-t.html

I was an early 80's boy and I was up and out and on my own living in New York City (and on my second business) by 22.

[mikelepore]

leaving home, becoming financially independent

First the social commentators complain because the traditional support network of the family is eroded, people no longer live with parents and grandparents, who might watch the children, so they hire a stranger to watch the children, or leave the children home alone. Then the social commentators complain that you're immature if you don't move out of your parents' house and start a separate financial unit. I think these two positions are contradictory.

[#FF0000]

Increasing college tuition, jobs being less available and lower paying. I think that's mostly all there is to it, even tough I see a lot of more conservative folks blaming "entitlement culture" or something.

I'm 20 and I've been trying to move out since I was 18. Still at home with parents, but not for lack of trying.

[Jazzratt]

Some of the criteria for "adulthood" there make some hilariously outaded assumptions about people (marriage, for example is less and less popular and could be considered a heteronormative criterion in most places, also more and more people make a considered choice to be child free). As for a couple of the others that's pretty much down to market forces (the labour and housing markets are fucked).

A lot of these things are luxuries that modern school or university leavers simply cannot afford, especially in the case of housing and children. This is especially the case when the oppurtunities for financial independence (i.e paid employment) are getting scarcer whilst provisions for those who can't are getting increasingly more miserly.

[Thug Lessons]

Part of this is the way we raise children now. Many parents are very concerned that their children are free to concentrate on their education and so they don't get jobs while they're in high school, and often live on the dole the whole way through college. When they get out they don't have any job experience but they've done all this work getting their degree, so they expect a decent job. They don't want to be working for minimum wage in a restaurant. That explains a great deal about why so many people go back to live with their parents after college.

But the article does have a point, the social growth of individuals across the world, and especially in the imperialist nations, is changing. I don't think it's as simple as "not growing up". They're actually right in not putting marriage and children in their milestones list, because those are becoming less and less important to people in modern society while they used to be paramount. Many European nations, and even Russia if I recall correctly, have declining populations because birth rates are falling behind death rates.

[Havet]

...marrying

I'm never going to be over 20 by the looks of it, then. I don't plan to marry.

[Kotze]

Bud, I didn't want to go through some login process just to read an article by a newspaper that employs people like Thomas Friedman (http://www.nypress.com/article-11419-flathead.html), but let me take a guess about the content of their/your argument.

Let me guess, being able to operate a computer doesn't add to your adulthood score, despite the importance of IT skills in the job market today.

Let me guess, they suggest the rise in unemployment is the result of people being increasingly immature.

Let me guess, the USA of the 80s were a great time and place to believe in the chance of success for anyone, I mean you could just watch Reagan on TV and you knew you had a chance to succeed even if you were mentally ill.

[Thug Lessons]

Let me guess, they suggest the rise in unemployment is the result of people being increasingly immature.
To be fair, this trend began long before the rise in unemployment. The economic crisis may have exacerbated it, but young people just don't take jobs as much as they used to.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I'm sure this has nothing to do with things like:

The unemployment rate for young Americans has exploded to 52.2 percent [a post-World War II high, according to the Labor Dept.] meaning millions of Americans are staring at the likelihood that their lifetime earning potential will be diminished and, combined with the predicted slow economic recovery, their transition into productive members of society could be put on hold for an extended period of time.

My girlfriend and I have been out of school for 10 years or more and we are still dealing with debts from college and living paycheck to paycheck. We are marginally financially independent, but we have no desire to raise a child in an insucure kind of life where our heat could get turned off if we miss a bill, or a car repair would put us in debt, and where we could not pay for childcare or the hundreds of other expenses that go along with a child.

If it were the 1950s or 60s and I could expect job security, a more or less increasing paycheck as I put in time, then I might change my mind about having a kid. The reality is though that people don't have job security any more and this goes double for young people.

I also find it hypocritical that conservatives complain about poor people having children and not having the means to take care of the children the way conservatives think that these children should be cared for - and also criticize poor people for NOT having children? But then again most conservative arguments are self-contradicting and crazy... it's a new disease that I call Chronic Ideological Dissonance [CID].:lol:

[Jimmie Higgins]

To be fair, this trend began long before the rise in unemployment. The economic crisis may have exacerbated it, but young people just don't take jobs as much as they used to.Over the last 30 years, the mantra of business has been "flexible labor". People's lives are much more in flux because of the demands for jobs and I'm sure a Google search could turn up articles as far back as can be found online talking about how people need to change job constantly; don't become too specialized; horizontal promotions; etc. All these articles over the years in magazines like Time or whatnot with titles like "the Changing Workforce" etc are all because the employers don't want people to have job security like people had in the post-war period.

People are people and react to the environment that they have to deal with and so when we see observable surface changes in patters of raising kids and so on, generally the source of this is not that suddenly people decided to do things differently, but because they are reacting and adapting to a new environment.

If you lived in china two decades ago, would you argue that people killing or abandoning female newborns was due to people in China just not likeing girls, or would you recognize that a policy of one-child households was causing problems and even causing a minority of people to do something horrible? It's the same here, but dictatorships in business are less transparent and obvious than the dictatorships of governments, so in the US and Europe, we often treat changes in people's behaviors as being sudden cultural shifts for no apparent reason when really it is people dealing with lack of jobs, cut social services, loss of financial stability and so on.

[Bud Struggle]

Over the last 30 years, the mantra of business has been "flexible labor". People's lives are much more in flux because of the demands for jobs and I'm sure a Google search could turn up articles as far back as can be found online talking about how people need to change job constantly; don't become too specialized; horizontal promotions; etc. All these articles over the years in magazines like Time or whatnot with titles like "the Changing Workforce" etc are all because the employers don't want people to have job security like people had in the post-war period.

True it is time everyone found their OWN job security. But with all the workforce change come a MASSIVE influx of foreign labor from Mexico and points South. Those people have no problem with becomming a part of the American workforce.

And "illegal" or not, good workers are making their way up the American food chain. For a Capitalist in a lot of ways it is a glorious thing to behold. :)

[Jimmie Higgins]

True it is time everyone found their OWN job security. But with all the workforce change come a MASSIVE influx of foreign labor from Mexico and points South. Those people have no problem with becomming a part of the American workforce.

And "illegal" or not, good workers are making their way up the American food chain. For a Capitalist in a lot of ways it is a glorious thing to behold. :)Try again, I live in an immigrant neighborhood and bank repossession signs on houses here, 25% unemployment for non-whites show that this is not the case. People are suffering and struggling and living in multi-generation houses to make ends meet and every few months I see a family with a permanent yard-sale on their lawns as they are either being forced out or having to sell all their posessions to try and make ends meet. It's not glorious, it's fucking horrible to see families with kids have to go through this kind of shit.

How can you guys seriously believe that big statistical changes all come from suddenly X group in society just decides to start being lazy? Unemployment is up among the young... this has nothing to do with reduced opportunities for retired people to make a living and being forced to take jobs past retirement age! Detroit has high unemployment, I guess people there just got bored of having indoor head or an indoors to begin with, so they decided to leave their homes for no apparent reasons.:rolleyes:

[Thug Lessons]

People are people and react to the environment that they have to deal with and so when we see observable surface changes in patters of raising kids and so on, generally the source of this is not that suddenly people decided to do things differently, but because they are reacting and adapting to a new environment.
I agree completely. These developments should be seen as a direct reaction to the capitalist mode of production, but there is influenced from both directions. The changes in life course and family relations we see in Western societies, and around the world to a lesser extent, are a result of both capital's pressures and labor's responses. A full analysis of this would be an fruitful undertaking, but I'm not sure I'm up to it, and certainly don't feel like it at the moment. I'll try to expand later.


If you lived in china two decades ago, would you argue that people killing or abandoning female newborns was due to people in China just not likeing girls, or would you recognize that a policy of one-child households was causing problems and even causing a minority of people to do something horrible?
This is a bad example, because countries without a one child policy, most notably India, have the same problem. It is not a simple relationship of government/business policy translating to different life decisions. I see it as more fundamental, stemming from the consequences of the mode of production itself, from alienation, and from the tendency of capitalism to destroy traditional social structures.

[Bud Struggle]

Try again, I live in an immigrant neighborhood and bank repossession signs on houses here, 25% unemployment for non-whites show that this is not the case. People are suffering and struggling and living in multi-generation houses to make ends meet and every few months I see a family with a permanent yard-sale on their lawns as they are either being forced out or having to sell all their posessions to try and make ends meet. It's not glorious, it's fucking horrible to see families with kids have to go through this kind of shit. Yea there was a downturn. Up to then people were moving here in droves. They still are to an extent. And overall the best and the brightest of that wave are doing well.


How can you guys seriously believe that big statistical changes all come from suddenly X group in society just decides to start being lazy? Unemployment is up among the young... this has nothing to do with reduced opportunities for retired people to make a living and being forced to take jobs past retirement age! Detroit has high unemployment, I guess people there just got bored of having indoor head or an indoors to begin with, so they decided to leave their homes for no apparent reasons.:rolleyes: I don't disagree that unemployment is up among the young whites--but it has been that way for a while and it is because they refuse to take jobs for which they are wonderfully qualified for (and little else) that is why America had the great influx in Mexican labor. American HS drop outs didn't and don't want to clean toilets. And sombody's got to do it. America doesn't need Poly Sci grads or English grads or (god help us) Economic grads. They are unemployable in their chosen fields.

That's it in a nutshell.

(FYI I should talk: I'm a Classics major with a Philosophy minor. :) )

[Conquer or Die]

There is no need to live life when it can be automated or drug induced with government dole and private surplus maintaining the biological functioning.

The Zombification of the working class is pathetic. Curable only through violence.

[Ele'ill]

We’re in the thick of what one sociologist calls “the changing timetable for adulthood.” Sociologists traditionally define the “transition to adulthood” as marked by five milestones: completing school, leaving home, becoming financially independent, marrying and having a child. In 1960, 77 percent of women and 65 percent of men had, by the time they reached 30, passed all five milestones. Among 30-year-olds in 2000, according to data from the United States Census Bureau (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/census_bureau/index.html?inline=nyt-org), fewer than half of the women and one-third of the men had done so. A Canadian study reported that a typical 30-year-old in 2001 had completed the same number of milestones as a 25-year-old in the early ’70s.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magazine/22Adulthood-t.html


Perhaps it has to do with the level of technology- and the higher level of money and education required to either be exposed to it or to get a job involving it.

It also has to do with pretty much everything everyone else in this thread said.

[Bud Struggle]

Perhaps it has to do with the level of technology- and the higher level of money and education required to either be exposed to it or to get a job involving it.

It also has to do with pretty much everything everyone else in this thread said.

But sooner or later don't you desire to be the Captain of your Fate--the Master of your Life? I would be a "sooner" than "later" kind of person myself. Maybe there is some sort of psychological difference between Capitalist and Communists.

[Ele'ill]

But sooner or later don't you desire to be the Captain of your Fate--the Master of your Life? I would be a "sooner" than "later" kind of person myself. Maybe there is some sort of psychological difference between Capitalist and Communists.

I don't understand how this applies to what I said.

Edit- Without going into detail I've been my captain, engineer, cook, medic, and gunner from a young age. My reward is not being in jail for the most part and being alive. If I had money or even better- the same opportunities that those who have money have- I'd likely be able to contribute more to everything in my life and outside of it. In advance- spare me the 'college grants and scholarships' stuff. Already did that- other issues came up such as housing.

To take advantage of social services you have to be in the right spot- otherwise not even those apply.

[Bud Struggle]

I don't understand how this applies to what I said.


Well this sounds like a perfect storm between effete and elite:


Perhaps it has to do with the level of technology- and the higher level of money and education required to either be exposed to it or to get a job involving it.

[Ele'ill]

Well this sounds like a perfect storm between effete and elite:


I still don't understand-

[Bud Struggle]

I still don't understand- People should get a job and work their way up not look for some exhalted position just because they got a little education.

Earning a living is HARD work. Earning a great living is VERY HARD work.

It just is.

[Ele'ill]

People should get a job and work their way up not look for some exhalted position just because they got a little education.

Earning a living is HARD work. Earning a great living is VERY HARD work.

It just is.

Ah, so you're a step ahead in the time table I was referring to.

In order to be ABLE to earn a living is where I was at and is what I was pointing out.

The majority of the people in the United States don't earn a living with more hard work than it would take to 'earn a living' and obviously to 'earn a great living'

I personally would only dedicate 'hard work' towards something that actually benefits the world around me. In my opinion that's the way it should be. Right now people are exerting their hard work against each other's best interests.

[Comrade Marxist Bro]

The people responding seriously have already more-or-less nailed it down.

However, if people are also taking more time to grow up and enter the working world because they're too busy playing video games and masturbating to videos and online porn... does that mean that society is not only breaking down, but that capitalism is destroying itself with its own products?

[#FF0000]

People should get a job and work their way up not look for some exhalted position just because they got a little education.

Earning a living is HARD work. Earning a great living is VERY HARD work.

It just is.

Except that isn't really viable anymore. My dad did that. It took him 20 years to get from working on tugboats to dispatching them, and that's only because he spent another 5 in the Navy.

[Thug Lessons]

Except that isn't really viable anymore. My dad did that. It took him 20 years to get from working on tugboats to dispatching them, and that's only because he spent another 5 in the Navy.
What isn't viable? Working hard and getting a promotion or a raise? Did they stop promoting people? I've gotten several raises and a promotion over my short career, and my brother-in-law worked his way up from a dishwasher to the head chef at a fairly prestigious private club. Capitalism is horrible but things haven't gotten so bad that it's stagnant.

Besides, working minimum wage full time you should get over $15,000 a year, which minus taxes comes to around $1000 a month, which is more than enough to live on in most cities. At least get a job at UPS. It's hard work, but it's union work and the pay is decent, plus people are promoted based more or less on pure seniority. Work your way up to driver and you'll be making as much as a doctor typically does per hour.

[Ele'ill]

Besides, working minimum wage full time you should get over $15,000 a year, which minus taxes comes to around $1000 a month, which is more than enough to live on in most cities.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:





At least get a job at UPS. It's hard work, but it's union work and the pay is decent, plus people are promoted based more or less on pure seniority. Work your way up to driver and you'll be making as much as a doctor typically does per hour.

There aren't enough positions open for the amount of people needing them.

[Thug Lessons]

:laugh::laugh::laugh:
I lived on less than that for a long time. It's not an easy life but you can eat, afford rent, pay the bills and still have something left over. My roommate is living on something like $125/week unemployment plus ~$200 monthly in foodstamps.


There aren't enough positions open for the amount of people needing them.That's true, especially right now. It's a terrible time to be looking for a job, but that will most likely improve eventually.

[#FF0000]

What isn't viable? Working hard and getting a promotion or a raise? Did they stop promoting people? I've gotten several raises and a promotion over my short career, and my brother-in-law worked his way up from a dishwasher to the head chef at a fairly prestigious private club. Capitalism is horrible but things haven't gotten so bad that it's stagnant.

Besides, working minimum wage full time you should get over $15,000 a year, which minus taxes comes to around $1000 a month, which is more than enough to live on in most cities. At least get a job at UPS. It's hard work, but it's union work and the pay is decent, plus people are promoted based more or less on pure seniority. Work your way up to driver and you'll be making as much as a doctor typically does per hour.

All my dad's coworkers people a little older than me with college degrees. He's 50. That's sort of my point.

[Ele'ill]

I lived on less than that for a long time. It's not an easy life but you can eat, afford rent, pay the bills and still have something left over. My roommate is living on something like $125/week unemployment plus ~$200 monthly in foodstamps.

And I've been working homeless with a false residence. Spare me.

You cannot accomplish shit in those conditions- for every step forward there's ten back not your own. Fuck that shit with an emphasis on shit.


That's true, especially right now. It's a terrible time to be looking for a job, but that will most likely improve eventually.

And in that time people become homeless and tens of thousands of dollars in debt- on top of what they already owe.

[Ele'ill]

The idea isn't to see how long you can last without dying because of the lack of basic necessities.

[Thug Lessons]

And I've been working homeless with a false residence. Spare me.

You cannot accomplish shit in those conditions- for every step forward there's ten back not your own. Fuck that shit with an emphasis on shit.
I agree with your sentiment completely. It's not an easy life to live. It's particularly frustrating because you're working so much but getting so little in return. I doubt I'd be a socialist of my tendencies if things were otherwise. But many people, including a few on this board apparently, are extremely discouraged about the situation to the point that they throw up their hands in the air and say "why bother?" That's a defeatist attitude. You need to get a job to live, so take what you can get. This is separate from any political analysis of the situation.


And in that time people become homeless and tens of thousands of dollars in debt- on top of what they already owe.
Well the credit situation is so awful right now I doubt they'll be getting too many more loans to begin with.


The idea isn't to see how long you can last without dying because of the lack of basic necessities.
I never had that experience living on minimum wage, though I was working full time. It also may have been worse back when it was $5.15 an hour. But regardless starvation rates in Western countries are negligible. There is hunger, no doubt, and malnutrition, but posing it as question of life or death is hyperbole.

[Ele'ill]

I agree with your sentiment completely. It's not an easy life to live. It's particularly frustrating because you're working so much but getting so little in return. I doubt I'd be a socialist of my tendencies if things were otherwise. But many people, including a few on this board apparently, are extremely discouraged about the situation to the point that they throw up their hands in the air and say "why bother?" That's a defeatist attitude.

You're mistaking a defeatist attitude for an attitude of 'enough is enough- it's time to fight back'.

We need less passive victims and more 'combatants'.



You need to get a job to live, so take what you can get. This is separate from any political analysis of the situation.

It isn't just a job- it's a 'job system' and we're opposed to it for obvious reasons.




I never had that experience living on minimum wage, though I was working full time. It also may have been worse back when it was $5.15 an hour. But regardless starvation rates in Western countries are negligible. There is hunger, no doubt, and malnutrition, but posing it as question of life or death is hyperbole.

I worked 80-90 hours a week- above minimum wage and the same situations continued to occur.

[Thug Lessons]

You're mistaking a defeatist attitude for an attitude of 'enough is enough- it's time to fight back'.

We need less passive victims and more 'combatants'.
That's all well and good, but even revolutionaries need to eat, and support themselves more generally. Wouldn't you agree that people who are unemployed should go find a job, even if it's a crappy job that doesn't pay well, in addition to any action they might take to change the situation?


I worked 80-90 hours a week- above minimum wage and the same situations continued to occur.Those are absurdly long hours to work, my apologies. Were you supporting anyone? I could see how you'd be struggling to support a family on that income, but based on my own experience it seems hard to believe you'd be struggling to even pay for rent, bills and food for a single person on over $25,000 take-home pay a year if you're living within your means. I suppose the situation might be different if you live in a city with extremely high prices, such as New York.

[Ele'ill]

That's all well and good, but even revolutionaries need to eat, and support themselves more generally. Wouldn't you agree that people who are unemployed should go find a job, even if it's a crappy job that doesn't pay well, in addition to any action they might take to change the situation?

I don't think anybody is advocating starving to death.

A couple things on this but first- No.

There are a lot of companies hiring part time positions- these part time positions generally (most often do not) offer a promised set of hours- what ends up happening is low hours up front- followed by enough hours to negate food stamps or other services followed immediately by a drop off in hours- (followed by a spike in hours followed by a drop off etc..) This can cause havoc with applying and reapplying for those said services.



Those are absurdly long hours to work, my apologies. Were you supporting anyone?

It was under an unwritten clause that stated 'there would be long days, and there would be short days' Had I not worked them I would have likely lost my job through forced 'performance related incidents'.

The subject of me supporting someone or someone(s) is irrelevant- pretend I wasn't and pretend I was.


I could see how you'd be struggling to support a family on that income, but based on my own experience it seems hard to believe you'd be struggling to even pay for rent, bills and food for a single person on over $25,000 take-home pay a year if you're living within your means. I suppose the situation might be different if you live in a city with extremely high prices, such as New York.

I've lived in various cities North to South- East to West and rent for a studio or even a one bedroom is often up into the 800's per month. When you consider previous debt- medical bills (with or without insurance), utilities, car insurance, phone (land or cellular), gas, food, school, it of course adds up to a total that is not reasonable.

The idea of relocation to an area with 'affordable rent' would mean relocating to an area outside of my driving range to work- into an area with high police violence and away from schools.

[Thug Lessons]

A couple things on this but first- No.

There are a lot of companies hiring part time positions- these part time positions generally (most often do not) offer a promised set of hours- what ends up happening is low hours up front- followed by enough hours to negate food stamps or other services followed immediately by a drop off in hours- (followed by a spike in hours followed by a drop off etc..) This can cause havoc with applying and reapplying for those said services.
I would only agree with this in cases where someone is receiving enough money in social services to outweigh potential earnings, which is fairly rare. And it certainly doesn't apply to anyone living with their parents, which is what this thread was supposed to be about originally.


It was under an unwritten clause that stated 'there would be long days, and there would be short days' Had I not worked them I would have likely lost my job through forced 'performance related incidents'.
Then you were on salary? Because otherwise you'd be working overtime and making big bucks. Your case was more a result of being dicked around by your employer, and you shouldn't have been forced to work that many hours for whatever pay you were receiving, which may well have not been enough to support yourself if you had a great deal of debt and were in the process of paying it off.

[#FF0000]

Then you were on salary? Because otherwise you'd be working overtime and making big bucks. Your case was more a result of being dicked around by your employer, and you shouldn't have been forced to work that many hours for whatever pay you were receiving, which may well have not been enough to support yourself if you had a great deal of debt and were in the process of paying it off.

Overtime pay is kind of wonky depending on where you live. I'm pretty sure some places flat out don't have it, or it's up to the employer or something. As for being forced to work hours like that, it definitely happens, especially in "fire for any reason" states (Like PA), where you can be fired for...... any reason, and there's little you can do about it.

I remember getting fired from my job at Wendy's because I refused to sit in the dining room for an hour until my shift started (I was late coming in, and the hour wait is the "punishment"). I told them it was illegal to force me to stay, to which the manager said "What, are you gonna go to the labor board?", in some mocking tone that I didn't understand at the time.

So I said "Uh, well yeah I guess. It's illegal". And I was fired on the spot. I went to the Labor Board and they told me there was nothing I could do unless the complaint was about sexual harassment or overt racism.

So yeah, depending on where you live, workers have little to no protection against abuses like this.

[Thug Lessons]

Overtime pay is kind of wonky depending on where you live. I'm pretty sure some places flat out don't have it, or it's up to the employer or something. As for being forced to work hours like that, it definitely happens, especially in "fire for any reason" states (Like PA), where you can be fired for...... any reason, and there's little you can do about it.
Overtime is federal law in the United States and I assume other Western countries have regulations that are at least as strong.

And while you're correct that there is insufficient protection for labor in the US, a violation so gross as forcing employees to work 40-50 hours unpaid overtime would probably get taken seriously, especially if a current employee reported it. In your situation, it was more or less "he said, she said".

Again, don't be defeatist. You can and should fight these things. My other roommate works under the table delivering fliers for pizza place and he routinely gets paid less than minimum wage, (they're always saying stuff like "we didn't get enough calls, you must have been slacking off"), but he's so convinced it he can't change things that he won't even try. I tell him not to be intimidated by those assholes, but he's worried about his job. That's a bad place to be, but you have to take a stand in my opinion.

[#FF0000]

words.

I doubt I could've done much in that situation but I could have (and probably should have) gotten the managers in tons of trouble for other things, so yeah.

[Jimmie Higgins]

But sooner or later don't you desire to be the Captain of your Fate--the Master of your Life? I would be a "sooner" than "later" kind of person myself. Maybe there is some sort of psychological difference between Capitalist and Communists.Wanting to be master of my own life is why I want to destroy capitalism and replace that dictitorial form of production for a democratic and collective form of production and labor.

I don't think there is anything wrong with people wanting or trying to run their own lives - it's a totally natural expression of how much people hate working in capitalism. I think the fact that most people have some kind of dream of owning their own mom and pop shop or dreaming of becoming a sports star or movie star (which all boils down to people wanting to live off of something they enjoy and where they'd have at least a little more autonomy over their own time and labor) shows that most people don't like the dominant social arrangement of labor under capitalism (wage-labor). The thing is, people only see individual ways out of this labor arrangement: in other words, become rich yourself so you can do whatever you want.

But owning a business is just like wanting to be a sports or movie star. Of course hard work and competing against other people could help you become a star, but also access to trainers, influential Hollywood or music people also plays a decisive role in getting a foot in the door no matter how hard you work or good you are. But if you work hard, then maybe you can make it... then again there just aren't enough spaces available for every good hardworking athlete or actor or singer to make it so even if everyone worked as hard as Muhammad Ali, there would still just be a handful of professional boxers.

In short, you can work hard and make it but statistically, you will work hard and still fail. Radicals, socialists, rather than hoping for a personal salvation that could or could not work for an individual, want to change the rules of the game so that things are changed to meet all our needs rather than this system where we all have to change to meet the needs of the market and profit.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

When i read the title of this thread i just come to think about the opposite (sort of).
Why do so many 35-40 oldies think that they are still young? And i dont mean if you have a hobbie that could bee considered childish, thats often just good, no im talking about those who dress like if they where 17, start using young peoples slang in that pathetic way where they dont really know what it means. Even if they have theire own home, a stable job and children they dont see themselfes as adults, so they will go to some rock-festival in a par of trashy levis jeans and a neckless made of seashells, try to pick up some nice 22 year old girl by using catch frasess frome the 80s. Yeah those people irritates mee.

[Die Neue Zeit]

People should get a job and work their way up not look for some exhalted position just because they got a little education.

Earning a living is HARD work. Earning a great living is VERY HARD work.

It just is.

The problem is that you think government cannot provide any sort of full employment. Post-Keynesians have suggested a very direct but flexible government solution to this labour market problem, and it isn't workfare.

[Devrim]

five milestones: completing school, leaving home, becoming financially independent, marrying and having a child.

I did them at 15, 15, 15, 24, and 29 respectively.

I think today though the age that people tend to do these things at is different. Marriage is becoming less common, people are having children later, education had been extended, and leaving home is more financially difficult.

On the other hand there is something of a point here. We were talking about a woman in her mid-twenties who is a postgraduate student the other day and somebody said she was behaving like a teenager. I pointed out that she had exactly the same material circumstances as one.

Devrim

[Bilan]

Do you know how expensive it is to move out?
I don't know about where you're from, but in Sydney, where I work and where I study are far apart, and anywhere inbetween costs a fortune - you're looking at $200 a week if you're lucky.
And if it's anything less, prepare to bunk up with numerous strangers.

I'll pass. I work 30-35 hours a week, but I still can't afford it.
Bite me.

[Raúl Duke]

Increasing college tuition, jobs being less available and lower paying. I think that's mostly all there is to it, even tough I see a lot of more conservative folks blaming "entitlement culture" or something.

I'm 20 and I've been trying to move out since I was 18. Still at home with parents, but not for lack of trying.

This, although I more or less don't live with my parents although I'm dependent on them much to my chagrin.

Perhaps there are some out there who don't want to be independent during their 20s, but I do since I reached 20 yet I find it difficult. Jobs are not abundant, I don't have a car (which is a major setback in Florida), tuition +room, etc is not cheap, etc (my scholarship only covers like between 75% to half and yet they keep lowering the amount). Also about scholarships, I suggest people to get into a sport in high school because that is a sure fire way to get a lot of scholarship money. It's also difficult to hold full-time jobs and be in college at the same time, also part time jobs just would not be able to pay the bills in many cases.

What's interesting about this article is that it states the premise as a question and perhaps entertains the idea of "entitlement culture" and what not. I've seen similar articles (particularly one from Reuters) for Europe, but instead of asking a question or talking about some "entitlement culture" they already did their research/theorizing and state that young college students, college student-workers, college graduates and workers are the most financially strained demographic (in Europe) getting paid less (even if they have more education) that those 30+ (the older the better, unless they're on pension/etc); they than connected this with the initial Greek riots saying something along the lines that this demographic is more prone to be critical of the status quo since it has "failed them" (i.e. their living standards are worse/more difficult than their parents who lived in Europe's/Euro's best time); middle-class expectations of success unreached). Perhaps something similar may or may not occur (or is already occurring) in the US yet in a slightly different manner.

[Bud Struggle]

...tuition +room, etc is not cheap, etc (my scholarship only covers like between 75% to half and yet they keep lowering the amount). Also about scholarships, I suggest people to get into a sport in high school because that is a sure fire way to get a lot of scholarship money. It's also difficult to hold full-time jobs and be in college at the same time, also part time jobs just would not be able to pay the bills in many cases.

Slightly off topic, but at Struggle Enterprises we like the children of our employees to go to Ivy League and some of the other best colleges. The lovely and talented Mrs. Struggle (who was an SVP of HR for a Fortune 25 company) has put together a program for helping our employees kids get into and pay for these schools. We have inhouse scholarships and also use a number of outside resources--here's one that she likes to use a lot. We have had some good success with it. Questbridge:

http://www.questbridge.org/index.html

I could ask her for more about this and other programs she uses if you folks like.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

"My Generation worked for it!"

"Young Americans don't know what work is!"

"Earning a living isn't easy and the young don't acceppt blah blah blah!!!"

Please, shut the fuck up



So both Milwaukeeans decided to trade the uncertain job market for guaranteed jobs in the U.S. Army.

Pfc. Silkey, 21, leaves next week for basic training - and a monthly paycheck of $1,568.70, plus housing, clothing, health insurance and three squares a day. Pvt. Juarez, 25, heads to Fort Jackson, S.C., next month and will soon cash a monthly paycheck of $1,399.50.

"The economy was just too bad. I couldn't wait any longer," said Juarez, who already has her bag packed even though she doesn't ship out until April 22.

As the United States on Friday marks the sixth anniversary of the Iraq war, these are boom times for military recruiters. The number of people walking into recruiting offices has grown as the economy withers. And while patriotism continues to be a motivation for some recruits, many also see the military as a job with generous benefits and little prospect of layoffs.

"Folks are losing their jobs, and the Army is still hiring," said Lt. Col. Dan Miller, commander of U.S. Army Recruiting Battalion Milwaukee.
Silkey has been unloading ultrasound machines in Cudahy since July 2007. The 2006 Hamilton High School graduate had always considered joining the Army, but it wasn't until the economy slackened and he noticed there was less work that he contacted a recruiter. Plus, he wanted a job with a future as well as health benefits.

"It always scared me - what would I do without health insurance because I'm on my mom's (insurance) until I'm 25," said Silkey, who will become a fire support specialist in an artillery unit and hopes to save enough to buy a new car and a motorcycle.

Aside from the jobless, those turning to the military include teenagers, college seniors and recent college graduates who can't find jobs. Plus, there are the teenagers who can't go to college because their parents have lost their jobs or because college funds invested in the stock market have dried up. Joining the military can mean a free college or trade school education.

In Wisconsin and Michigan's Upper Peninsula, 829 people have enlisted in the regular Army and 317 in the Army Reserve since the fiscal year began Oct. 1. During the same period a year ago, 716 enlisted in the Army and 295 in the Army Reserve.

Nationally, all of the military branches, both active and reserve, met or exceeded recruiting goals in January and February. National Guard recruitment is also doing very well.


http://media.journalinteractive.com/images/RECRUIT20G.jpg



"I tell everyone when they ask me why I joined the Air Force that not only do I want to serve my country, but when you're in the military in any branch you always have a job and a paycheck on the first and 15th of every month," he said. After enlisting in the Air Force Reserve when he graduated from high school, Thibeault joined UF's Air Force ROTC. At the end of his four years, he'll become a commissioned officer.

For Thibeault, the decision to enlist and join ROTC was an easy one. "There's no doubt in my mind that this is the right thing for me to do," said Thibeault, whose father was also in the Air Force. "If college doesn't work out, I always tell myself that I'll be in boot camp the next day."

For the 2009 fiscal year, every branch of the military reported recruitment numbers that either met or exceeded their goal. The armed forces have even seen in increase of interest from older generations; in 2006 the Army changed its enlistment age limit from 35 to 42.

"Because of the economy and a lot of people losing jobs, people want job security and health care," said 1st Lt. Sean Norres, an officer strength manager for the Army. Recruiting quotas were met within the first few weeks of the year, quickly satiating the armed forces' need for more than 300,000 new recruits each year.


There are lots of stories like this. A few years ago, the army was having a serious issue in getting enough recruits to fight in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It appears that since the recession kicked in that is no longer an issue since the DoD has had the best enlistment years since the draft was abolished. If this is a lazy generation, how is that possible?

To say that 20 year olds today are less ambitous than their parents is an overgeneralization and doesn't take into account the social aspects of why this is happening, ie lack of jobs and rising costs.

It is my hope that more of my peers will come to realize that we've been handed a rather shitty deck by those who stood watch before us. Not to hate, but fuck the number of steady jobs paying a livable wage has shrunk incredibly in the past few decades. Working retail and services at stores with few benefits for employees has replaced the labor intensive, union backed work available to generations from the Ohio River Valley to the sawmills of the Pacific Northwest. Yes, those jobs do still exist but they're an endangered animal and to suggest that 20 somethings do not wish to work there when the number of young people signing up to potentially die in the middle east is booming makes absolutely no sense, and we know it's not the case.

But whats that? Oh yeah, this is America, you have to go out and make it for yourself blah blah blah fuck off. It wasn't the 20 somethings who gutted out Americas industry, it wasn't the 20 somethings who destroyed the unions, it wasn't the 20 somethings who gave trillions to the wealthiest amongst us while unemployment is ever increasing, it wasn't the 20 somethings who cut funding for schools, roads, bridges, and infrastructure in so many other ways.

It wasn't the 20 somethings who completely fucked the social security fund, but it is the 20 somethings who will have to pay for that generation of Reaganites in their waning years as their investments are GONE BABY GONE.

It wasn't the 20 somethings who completely fucked the healthcare system to the point where, as noted above, it seems military enlistment is the only way to (trust me on this one) sub-par but ever present health coverage, but it is the 20 somethings who, even as their spending power decreases, must bear the brunt of the generation which created Medicare then proceeded to gut that out as well.

It wasn't the 20 somethings who knowingly swindeled others with sub prime mortgages, though, to be fair, many got swindled. Of course, teaching finances is simply not done and expected to be picked up on the go in a culture that thrives on a cheap buck (I'm gonna go out and say many many parents dropped the ball on this one, I aint gonna do the same thats for sure).


Fuck any self righteous baby boomer accusing us of being a lazy generation or so much bullshit.
www.jsonline.com/news/iraq/​41544357.html
http://www.alligator.org/news/local/article_85ec0586-c831-11de-a06e-001cc4c03286.html?mode=print

[Bud Struggle]

Good post Abe--and about 1/2 right.



There are lots of stories like this. A few years ago, the army was having a serious issue in getting enough recruits to fight in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It appears that since the recession kicked in that is no longer an issue since the DoD has had the best enlistment years since the draft was abolished. If this is a lazy generation, how is that possible? And that's just the way it goes---you go where the jobs are and in today's economy the Army, etc. is the place where they are. So there is nothing wrong with getting what is offered. The problem is that jobs in the Army, etc. isn't contributing to the growth of the economy--they take away from it.


To say that 20 year olds today are less ambitous than their parents is an overgeneralization and doesn't take into account the social aspects of why this is happening, ie lack of jobs and rising costs. I think there are some rising costs--certainly education has gotten VERY expensive but I think the main problem is that America's lifestyle has gotten so much more expensive since the 70s. Lots of expensive toys seem to clutter up costs. Also in the 70s you could buy a car for $100 fix it up and drive it for 5 years. Now that seems all but impossible.


It is my hope that more of my peers will come to realize that we've been handed a rather shitty deck by those who stood watch before us. Not to hate, but fuck the number of steady jobs paying a livable wage has shrunk incredibly in the past few decades. Working retail and services at stores with few benefits for employees has replaced the labor intensive, union backed work available to generations from the Ohio River Valley to the sawmills of the Pacific Northwest. Yes, those jobs do still exist but they're an endangered animal and to suggest that 20 somethings do not wish to work there when the number of young people signing up to potentially die in the middle east is booming makes absolutely no sense, and we know it's not the case. All that would make sense if there wasn't suck a vast influx of labor from other parts of the world that take the jobs that Americans won't do. America imports millions of workers from Latin America to work here in low end jobs. In my own business I don't have any white American HS grads. The few that do apply last a week and are gone. It's mainly older Blacks and Hispanics.


But whats that? Oh yeah, this is America, you have to go out and make it for yourself blah blah blah fuck off. It wasn't the 20 somethings who gutted out Americas industry, it wasn't the 20 somethings who destroyed the unions, it wasn't the 20 somethings who gave trillions to the wealthiest amongst us while unemployment is ever increasing, it wasn't the 20 somethings who cut funding for schools, roads, bridges, and infrastructure in so many other ways. That's a mixed point. The latest melt down is definitely a bad that--and it hurts those on the low end of the job market the hardest. People that have good jobs wouldn't know about the downturn if they didn't mention it on TV. But up till 2 years ago the job market was just fine. A lot of the cuts in spending come from the Bush tax cuts--America seriously underfunded itself with them thinking they would spark the economy. Well they did and it was a bubble.


It wasn't the 20 somethings who completely fucked the social security fund, but it is the 20 somethings who will have to pay for that generation of Reaganites in their waning years as their investments are GONE BABY GONE. That is why you really can't count on government or other people or society or anyone else to make things work for you. You have to go out and get it yourself. Make your own retirement. And that is difficult. The best way is two income households--you live on one income and bank the other. But in order to do that you need a long term financial goal and a steady home enviornment--a marriage (or something similar) without divorce.


It wasn't the 20 somethings who completely fucked the healthcare system to the point where, as noted above, it seems military enlistment is the only way to (trust me on this one) sub-par but ever present health coverage, but it is the 20 somethings who, even as their spending power decreases, must bear the brunt of the generation which created Medicare then proceeded to gut that out as well. Well Medicare is one fucked up thing to be sure. VAST AMOUNTS of money are being spent on old people and no money is being put in to replace it. I'm not saying it is a bad thing to spemd money on the old--but it has to be funded, and in this case it isn't being funded by them--it will be funded by the young--you.


It wasn't the 20 somethings who knowingly swindeled others with sub prime mortgages, though, to be fair, many got swindled. Of course, teaching finances is simply not done and expected to be picked up on the go in a culture that thrives on a cheap buck (I'm gonna go out and say many many parents dropped the ball on this one, I aint gonna do the same thats for sure). That's for sure. I'd sat the best way to make money in America is to have your parents teach you the value of a dollar at a young age. Once you understand that--life gets considerably easier. One REALLY has to stay away from the consumer economy--it is poison.




Fuck any self righteous baby boomer accusing us of being a lazy generation or so much bullshit. Im a goddamn us navy sailor and noone is here because of patriotic duty or so much bullshit. I feel more and more, staring at the astronomical deficit and the prospects for the USA, that the generations before us have fucked us.

Now if the 20 somethings can get our act together, we'll do just fine. Actually, you are a lot more than half right. :)

[RGacky3]

And that's just the way it goes---you go where the jobs are and in today's economy the Army, etc. is the place where they are. So there is nothing wrong with getting what is offered.

If your only option is the Army, thats a problem.


All that would make sense if there wasn't suck a vast influx of labor from other parts of the world that take the jobs that Americans won't do. America imports millions of workers from Latin America to work here in low end jobs. In my own business I don't have any white American HS grads. The few that do apply last a week and are gone. It's mainly older Blacks and Hispanics.


Lots of comapnies won't hire people that are over qualified, thinking they'll just leave, many companies won't hire legal workers because they have to follow labor laws, so the idea that the illigals do what legals just won't do is wrong.


People that have good jobs wouldn't know about the downturn if they didn't mention it on TV. But up till 2 years ago the job market was just fine. A lot of the cuts in spending come from the Bush tax cuts--America seriously underfunded itself with them thinking they would spark the economy. Well they did and it was a bubble.


Most likely they would, job security will go down, they might have to take pay cuts or work less, other people will loose their jobs, their work will diminish. Most people feel it, you don't have to loose your job to feel it.


That is why you really can't count on government or other people or society or anyone else to make things work for you. You have to go out and get it yourself. Make your own retirement. And that is difficult. The best way is two income households--you live on one income and bank the other. But in order to do that you need a long term financial goal and a steady home enviornment--a marriage (or something similar) without divorce.


Its difficult if not impossible, the economy (unlike what the market mystics say) is not an individual matter, its all tied together, what a dollar in your hand is worth is up to a few in the capialist class, if you invest your savings, what your return is is again up to a few in the capitalist class.

BTW, a lot of households HAVE to work 2 jobs to make ends meat, so its not as easy as you say.


Well Medicare is one fucked up thing to be sure. VAST AMOUNTS of money are being spent on old people and no money is being put in to replace it. I'm not saying it is a bad thing to spemd money on the old--but it has to be funded, and in this case it isn't being funded by them--it will be funded by the young--you.


The other option is private insurance, in which much much more money is needed with much less results.


"My Generation worked for it!"

"Young Americans don't know what work is!"

"Earning a living isn't easy and the young don't acceppt blah blah blah!!!"

Please, shut the fuck up


I've gotta say here here, The baby boomer generation grew up in FDRs America, we grew up in Reagens America, so again, STFU. FDRs American had more democratic controls, it had more opportunity, Reagens American is a Corporate ologarchy, where everyone is pretty much at the marcy of the ruling buisiness class.

The Bud struggle/republican idea of pick yourself up by your bootstraps and it will be ok, might have worked in the 1950s, where everyone had access to a boot, but now a few people have all the boots.

So yeah, I'm also sick of dickhead baby boomers judging the 20 somethings, saying its a character or culture problem, nothing could be farther from the truth. There ARE no more bootstraps left.

[Bud Struggle]

The Bud struggle/republican idea of pick yourself up by your bootstraps and it will be ok, might have worked in the 1950s, where everyone had access to a boot, but now a few people have all the boots.

I'm more of the 80s generation, thank you. :)

[RGacky3]

were you born in the 80s?

[Jazzratt]

I've learned surprising things about leftist attitudes to the unemployed in this thread. None of them were pleasant.

[Devrim]

I've learned surprising things about leftist attitudes to the unemployed in this thread. None of them were pleasant.

I haven't read through it all. What were they?

I can't imagine anybody who was a socialist having a bad attitude towards the unemployed, particularly during this crisis.

In Turkey, both amongst our comrades and my personal friends, there are two situations at the moment.

Those who work in the state sector, some of which is sill 'secure', and those who are in crisis.

There are no 'Unemployed' in this country as even if you don't have a job, you are scrambling for what little work you can get.

My work is casual. This month I have worked one week. Before the crisis started I was working 50 hours a week every week.

Leo who posts on here is working two jobs, one of them 12 plus hours a day for about £10 a day. The other is a little better, but there aren't many hours at the moment.

Another comrade lost his job a few days ago.

I have always worked since I was a kid. At the moment I am under a lot of psychological stress due to constantly worrying about money. To be really honest, I would say that worries about money and work were one of the, possibly one of the main issues that led to me splitting up with my wife just over a year ago.

I spoke to a very old personal friend a couple of days ago. He was saying that they barely had enough work for them to live on. I'd foolishly gone out to ask him if he knew of any work going. I asked him about his wife, and he told me that she had quit her job because she hadn't been paid for three months.

As I said before, I have always worked. I started my first full time job, on a construction site, at 15 years of age. At the moment my lack of work is extremely troubling for me.

I don't have much time for those who want to criticise the 'un/under-employed'.

Devrim

[black magick hustla]

half of my university graduate friends are working shitjobs without healthcare btw

the future is bleak

[Bud Struggle]

were you born in the 80s?

62 [Edit--as in 1962.] I got into business whe the Great Ronald Reagan became president.

[#FF0000]

I remember when I worked at Wendy's a year ago I was the youngest one there at 19 years old, which made me kinda sad. I was working with a lot of people around my parents age at a fast food restaurant.

[Ele'ill]

Rent is a crime.

I prefer bridges.

[Reznov]

Rent is a crime.

I prefer bridges.

How do you get interent access there and then come on RevLeft? :confused:

[Ele'ill]

How do you get interent access there and then come on RevLeft? :confused:

I'm in a more stable situation now at this point in my life than I had been in the past- mainly because of friends and comrades.

I pay rent now- I didn't always. Hence- I prefer bridges.

Besides, when I was a gypsy caravaner and even simply when traveling they have this really awesome technology called wireless. Many places offer it as a free service- they also developed these things called laptops- which is basically a portable computer.

They also have libraries.


Oh yeah, friends also had internet and computers.


PDAs.

Cellphones.


:rolleyes:

[RGacky3]

62 [Edit--as in 1962.] I got into business whe the Great Ronald Reagan became president.

Before his Reagenomics got in effect :), good timing. Pray for your Children Bud, the way things are going they're gonna have a hard time. Luckily it seams like they have a good base but most people don't.

[Revolution starts with U]

My grandfather worked his ass off his whole life, he saw a lil progression until the 80s when that firmly stopped, and he was stuck in a trailer park in debt until he died. My father worked 12hrs a day 6 days a week (most of the time) and we never advanced our position until we got a lucky break from my mother's professor to rent one of his upscale houses on the cheap.
It seems pointless to me to work my ass off rather than pursue my desires. Its not going to help me materially anyway, not in this fascist system.:mad:

[RGacky3]

It seems pointless to me to work my ass off rather than pursue my desires.

Thats great, if you have the financial freedom to pursue your desires, most people don't.

[empiredestoryer]

because theyre still really kids

[Revolution starts with U]

I dont. Honestly I think it is time people said "I would rather starve than buy in/ sell out to your capitalist paradigm."

[Ele'ill]

My grandfather worked his ass off his whole life, he saw a lil progression until the 80s when that firmly stopped, and he was stuck in a trailer park in debt until he died. My father worked 12hrs a day 6 days a week (most of the time) and we never advanced our position until we got a lucky break from my mother's professor to rent one of his upscale houses on the cheap.
It seems pointless to me to work my ass off rather than pursue my desires. Its not going to help me materially anyway, not in this fascist system.:mad:


I almost made a thread about this but didn't want to come across as 'stating the obvious for my ego's sake' since it's sort of implied that I already agree with this stance:

High volume warehouse- I was part time- hourly- non management:

There was a situation at work where a manager- a younger guy (early to mid 20's) didn't want to be there. He was late- not finishing work- and being passively confrontational. He was a quiet person and kept to himself but was nice enough. His employees were ranting and raving about how he didn't 'do shit' anymore and how his attitude 'fucking sucks'.

One of the other managers was pulled aside and spoken to by myself about how to approach the situation- he said 'If he doesn't want to be here we'll send him home every time he comes in and fucks off-it's not worth him being here only to piss the other workers off'

My reply was 'None of us want to be here- none of us inherently care about this company- we come to work to get paid- but more importantly- under this system we're in- we need to come to work for each other- as workers.

We can have hard-worked and relatively stress free good days by working together towards goals- so we can pay the bills and eat or we can have extremely stressful double-work days where everything goes to shit and nobody flows with each other.

The solution was to talk to the struggling manager and bring these issues up. After that- he made a point to show that he didn't mind hard-work- he did extra stuff and took on other people's tasks. In that situation- at that work place- it worked. People want to feel appreciated.

The revolutionary aspect of labor isn't in fighting against it and not working- it's by working hard and being valuable to other people- labor itself was never the fight.

[Bud Struggle]

^^^^THAT was a GREAT POST!

[Ele'ill]

I dont. Honestly I think it is time people said "I would rather starve than buy in/ sell out to your capitalist paradigm."


In general- not enough people would do this to make any sort of impact.

Most people wouldn't do this because it's not just them that they're working for- it's their children and others.

[Ele'ill]

I think this is an interesting topic to discuss because it affects every single worker in every position on the face of the planet.

You know what kind of work force companies fear? A work force that can handle running everything from warehouse level- to admin- to operational by themselves.

It sort of starts to highlight the illegitimacy of 'upper management' and 'CEO's'- take that a step further- it highlights the illegitimate nature of current government.

Yes, the companies will make more money if their work force is going to operate 'as they should'. I call a bit of bullshit on that note though- right now- the work force in america is fragmented- people are miserable- infighting at the work place is running rampant- and we really think that labor organizing can corral anything more than petty complaints from people? The companies right now are still making over their projected earnings from the previous year.

Know how we'll start to win our means of production back? We'll out-work the mother fuckers upstairs. I know it isn't that simple but it's a fucking wonderful place to start and I fully believe it's necessary.


Admittedly, I have no fucking clue how this can be implemented in organizing.

I think a lot of people are misplaced or rather displaced within the workforce. They simply suck at their jobs but only because they're brilliant at something else. "Randal handles dremel tools all day long at his retail store- he sucks at it- he's miserable- but he makes amazing fucking birdhouses on his days off."

Edit- I removed that stuff about a solution- it's better to leave that scenario open ended- I didn't fully agree with it either.


The best advice I can give is once you get a job- use your labor as a weapon.






Btw- a disclaimer- I had a lot of coffee today so I'm kind of going with this- I don't think anything is as easy as simply stating an idea- I think labor organizing is extremely valuable and we need more of it-

[Dimentio]

People are different though as well. Some people would, if they tried to "WORK REALLY HARD" either become extinguished wrecks who are eating anti-depressant pills to survive, or finally blow it and massacre their co-workers or random people on the streets in some postal disaster.

Maybe they are bad people, or maybe its perhaps more true that society nowadays have very tough demands on people to conform to a set of norms in western society, though not as physically tough as in the early 20th century. Those who fail or feel they cannot compete rather retreat into the world of the video games where you always have extra lives.

[Ele'ill]

People are different though as well. Some people would, if they tried to "WORK REALLY HARD" either become extinguished wrecks who are eating anti-depressant pills to survive, or finally blow it and massacre their co-workers or random people on the streets in some postal disaster.

The warehouse I described in my post above was run by the work force- it was one of those places that operates as a worker owned worker run place but isn't- obviously. They just had their shit together.

It really depends on the amount of employees the work place has. It seems like the greater the number the less in control the 'general workforce' is and the more authoritarian the management is.





Maybe they are bad people, or maybe its perhaps more true that society nowadays have very tough demands on people to conform to a set of norms in western society, though not as physically tough as in the early 20th century. Those who fail or feel they cannot compete rather retreat into the world of the video games where you always have extra lives.

It's tougher to find genuine contentment. There's so many false avenues.

[Revolution starts with U]

That is half the problem tho. It isnt physically as tough anymore, so it makes your complaints seem petty. People discount the effect of mental work and mental stress, thinking it is somehow lesser than physical work and stress because the effects are felt over a longer time (mental stress).
Even to the point that people will say "I work harder than an office guy." Really, if you have ever said that, I doubt you have worked in an office. They both work just as hard, it is just the difference between being physically beat and mentally beat, time differentials.
That is another thing, blue collar and white collar like to seperate themselves, and that harms the labor movement as a whole. We are all workers, all except the money changers and dividend collectors. And we should come together as a whole. There is just not enough blue collar in the western world to build a movement out of just it anymore.

[Dimentio]

Actually, they made a study on Swedish workplaces. It shows that Swedish workers in the public sector in general have higher likelihood to develop stress disorders than soldiers who have been into wars. The cause was attributed as bullying in the study.

[The Red Next Door]

Fuck you self righteous baby boomer *****es, you are the one to fuck things up, where the younger generation can not get a job. I hope you all die. so there can be a fresh new start

[Revolution starts with U]

All you mother fuckers are gona pay. YOU ARE HTE ONES WHO ARE THE BALL LICKERS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGGDRRRxGp4

[Jimmie Higgins]

Materialism wins:

Amid Recession, Birth Rate Plunges to Record Low (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/27/business/main6811139.shtml)

As U.S. Birth Rate Drops for 2nd Year, Experts Say People Are Putting Off Having Children Due to Economic Downturn. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/27/business/main6811139.shtml)

[RGacky3]

I dont. Honestly I think it is time people said "I would rather starve than buy in/ sell out to your capitalist paradigm."

Not gonna happen, nor should it. The point of socialism is that people don't starve.


The solution was to talk to the struggling manager and bring these issues up. After that- he made a point to show that he didn't mind hard-work- he did extra stuff and took on other people's tasks. In that situation- at that work place- it worked. People want to feel appreciated.

The revolutionary aspect of labor isn't in fighting against it and not working- it's by working hard and being valuable to other people- labor itself was never the fight.

Replace manager with king, and workers with subjects and you'll see the problem.

As Socialists we don't want better bosses, we want to get rid of the bosses.

Of coarse its better to work for a good boss than a bad one, but why have bosses to begin with.


^^^^THAT was a GREAT POST!

It sounds just like you


infighting at the work place is running rampant- and we really think that labor organizing can corral anything more than petty complaints from people? The companies right now are still making over their projected earnings from the previous year.


Actually organized labor has been on the upswing over the last 10 years or so, it takes time.


Know how we'll start to win our means of production back? We'll out-work the mother fuckers upstairs. I know it isn't that simple but it's a fucking wonderful place to start and I fully believe it's necessary.

That does'nt make any sense, no matter how hard you work, the capitalist is still in control, it does'nt matter if the CEO is needed or not, because they are the ones that choose who has what position.


That is half the problem tho. It isnt physically as tough anymore, so it makes your complaints seem petty. People discount the effect of mental work and mental stress, thinking it is somehow lesser than physical work and stress because the effects are felt over a longer time (mental stress).
Even to the point that people will say "I work harder than an office guy." Really, if you have ever said that, I doubt you have worked in an office. They both work just as hard, it is just the difference between being physically beat and mentally beat, time differentials.
That is another thing, blue collar and white collar like to seperate themselves, and that harms the labor movement as a whole. We are all workers, all except the money changers and dividend collectors. And we should come together as a whole. There is just not enough blue collar in the western world to build a movement out of just it anymore.

I've done both, and from personal experience, thats absolutely right, infact white collar work is many times more alienating and dehumanizing thah physical work, physical work being more exausting.


Fuck you self righteous baby boomer *****es, you are the one to fuck things up, where the younger generation can not get a job. I hope you all die. so there can be a fresh new start

Typical maoist.

[Ele'ill]

Replace manager with king, and workers with subjects and you'll see the problem.

As Socialists we don't want better bosses, we want to get rid of the bosses.

Of coarse its better to work for a good boss than a bad one, but why have bosses to begin with.

The bosses at that work place didn't act as typical bosses. I'm not naive- I understand they were still there.







Actually organized labor has been on the upswing over the last 10 years or so, it takes time.

It has done absolutely nothing for me in those last 10 years.




That does'nt make any sense, no matter how hard you work, the capitalist is still in control, it does'nt matter if the CEO is needed or not, because they are the ones that choose who has what position.

You're taking my post too literally. The first steps as I mentioned are to actually be able to control the means of production.

I could say (to an extent in the United States) that even if the workers had the means of production they'd still be fucked.


My posts in this thread were directly relevant to that quote/previous post by that user.

That's all.

[Obzervi]

Hmm maybe because this shitty capitalistic system in which we live isnt providing enough jobs for young people so they have to live with family members for a few years. What the fuck is wrong with that? Why has it become expected that all humans are expected to move out at a young age to be oppressed by capitalist bourgeoisie as quickly as possible?

[#FF0000]

The best response I saw on the article yet:


Perhaps if the baby boomers didn't rig the financial system in their favor, inflate housing prices, crash the dollar, grant themselves unfunded medicare and social security benefits for their vastly extended lifespan, increase college and healthcare costs 20-40%/yr, start two hugely expensive and mostly pointless wars, burn half the world's oil, scalp the science/tech sectors that their parents built for WWII and the space race, replacing them with finance/real estate ponzi schemes to extend an empty consumer lifestyle, and then outsource virtually everything except for senior executive and imigrant service jobs, their kids could start their own lives?


Damn, son.

[Invader Zim]

In responce to the argument that graduates refuse to take jobs they consider beneath them, this is horse shit. I have a friend, with a masters degree, who has applied for literally hundreds of jobs, including factory work and flipping burgers, and been incapable of getting a single one. There is a reason for this, mimimum wage employers will not hire a guy like him because they know full well that as soon as something better comes up he will be gone. And of course work, which better suits his education and skill sets, simply doesn't exist at the moment because we are in a recession.

In short, our generation has been dealt a massive shit sandwich.

[La Comédie Noire]

I work 33 hours a week making $8.00 an hour, I could get 39 hours if I felt like commuting to a large city about 20 minutes away from where I live. It's not a good situation at all.

[Revolution starts with U]

I posit that we need to stage protest near tea-baggers, and draw them into attacking us, physically. Of course, we want them to attack us first to retain the moral high ground. But they are very close to secession, and if we can get them to start the war, and aggress upon us, we can continue the war maintaining the moral high ground, and our ideology comes out on top :thumbup1:
Or something along those lines, we are very close to a tipping point here in the states. And as it looks now, the tea baggers are going to be the ones to start it. We need to make a concerted effort to prove them as dangerous reactionaries that cannot be trusted.

[Adi Shankara]

what I hate the most is how much the US government assumes you should have or what you shouldn't have--an example of this being the "Expected Family Contribution" when it comes to financial aid for college.

I don't have a family that cares enough like that, or would have the resources to do so anyways; yet they are still factored into the equation of how much financial aid I get for school. what the hell kind've bullshit is that? That's assuming that we're all comfortably middle class and our families have that kind've money in the first place.

Another is when they ask you for your "home address" when applying for a benefits card; I was on and off homeless most of my life so I didn't always have the elusive "home address", so how was I supposed to get anything? that's what I fucking hate about America; they assume so goddamn much about what you what you should have, never taking into account that many people don't have this shit.

[The Red Next Door]

what I hate the most is how much the US government assumes you should have or what you shouldn't have--an example of this being the "Expected Family Contribution" when it comes to financial aid for college.

I don't have a family that cares enough like that, or would have the resources to do so anyways; yet they are still factored into the equation of how much financial aid I get for school. what the hell kind've bullshit is that? That's assuming that we're all comfortably middle class and our families have that kind've money in the first place.

Another is when they ask you for your "home address" when applying for a benefits card; I was on and off homeless most of my life so I didn't always have the elusive "home address", so how was I supposed to get anything? that's what I fucking hate about America; they assume so goddamn much about what you what you should have, never taking into account that many people don't have this shit.

they don't even have you get welfare money in the list of income you have to pick.

[Dimentio]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_Mc63WEOik&feature=related

Think this will explain a lot about how people feel about working today.

[Scary Monster]

they don't even have you get welfare money in the list of income you have to pick.

Ya you only get welfare money if you are homeless. Even then it's only 200 bucks a month. At least in California thats how it is. The only real assistance you get from the state for single guys our age in our 20s in good health condition is motel vouchers and about $100 in food stamps per month, but they dont last for very long. Welfare in the US is only meant to keep you barely alive- It's a "get a job you lazy bum!" kind of attitude toward people.

[Lt. Ferret]

times are tough, but most people in the world have it tougher than anyone in the West has it, so I don't complain much.

As for those benchmarks for adulthood, I've done all of those except have a child, which me and my wife refuse to do, and we're both 23. We've lived in a car, we've sold home made wine to squatters, we sold fireworks to pay rent, and we've sold off everything we owned more than once.

I grew up in a trailer park in texas and she was raised in North Carolina, we both came from nothing, but she owns her own photography business, and I was one of those guys that joined the Army after college because I couldn't find a job. After taxes, I make $43,000, and she makes about $60+ an hour when shooting in her studio, which is collapsable and mobile and we can set it up in someone's living room.

When the economy is shit, either sell out and make the State pay for your existence, like I'm doing, or learn a skill and work for yourself. You will never get rich working for someone else, so don't expect it. Learn a skill, I cannot stress that enough. Oh, and don't have a kid until you are on strong financial footing.

You don't have to necessarily sell out to some consumerist, value inflated materialist view of life to get ahead. I have a ten dollar phone, but I'm getting my college debt paid off, and I paid off my car. I'm doing better than most of my friends, but I still see them buying Iphones when they can't pay rent.

I'm kind of rambling. I'm not saying much most of you don't already know. Live outside the system, the days when a big manufacturing union is going to scoop you up and give you a pension are dying in the West. Until someone smarter than me can get them back, you will have to make due on your own.

[RGacky3]

or learn a skill and work for yourself. You will never get rich working for someone else, so don't expect it. Learn a skill, I cannot stress that enough.

Do you know how many people with a skill are out of a job?

Lets say you live in a poor area, how are you gonna work for yourself? How are you gonna get the money? Get a loan? What skill you gonna learn to work for yourself? You gonna take a loan?


Live outside the system, the days when a big manufacturing union is going to scoop you up and give you a pension are dying in the West. Until someone smarter than me can get them back, you will have to make due on your own.

Unions are not some third party thing that takes care of you, unions ARE workers, getting together.

You know who loves the mantra make due on your own? Capitalists? Why? Because they know it gives them a HUGGEE advantage against the poor.

I say yeah sure live outside the system, but organize, get together with other people, get community groups going, cooperatives and so on. This "just do it alone" stuff won't work, and it never has worked.

People need to get together otherwise they'll always be stepped on.

[Lt. Ferret]

We know what worked fine for us.

[RGacky3]

If your ok with the way things are, then fine. But people who are not, should start to collectivise.

[Lt. Ferret]

you dont have to be fine with the way things are to not sit with your hands under your butt and your head in the sand. and collectivizing in of itself is not the answer to everything.

[black magick hustla]

yea we cant grow we are too busy playing videogames and drinking beer sux to be u

[RGacky3]

and collectivizing in of itself is not the answer to everything.

Nope, but trying to fight goliath by yourself is gonna be a lot damn harder.

[Decommissioner]

Those milestones are pretty bunk, if you ask me.

I moved out when I was 19, never went to school, been working dead end jobs and living with friends. Honestly, if growing up means giving up living a real life (tethered to a dead end job, to a house mortgage, and to a mate), then I would rather not grow up.

I work, I pay my bills, I pay taxes. Thats all that matters. This whole concept of adulthood being displayed here seems to represent some outdated 1950's ideal of how adults should act. Marriage before 30? Finished with school? In an ideal society, we wont have marriage, in an ideal society we would never stop educating ourselves (an education would serve more as a means of actual education, and not training for a life spent imprisoned by a career). I would not be the same person if I married and had kids at 20..I wouldn't even be the same person if I rushed to college after high school. I was pretty dispassionate and aloof after high school, I would have walked into college not knowing who I am and what I am about. Most kids make this mistake, they get a psychology degree or something, and then work at wal mart (although, as has already been pointed out, this also has to do with the lack of jobs available to graduates).

Personally, I want to some day be a teacher. Right now I cannot afford the schooling for that, but I am in no rush, too much fun going on in my life at the moment. I regret always being two paychecks away from poverty, but at least I dont have a massive debt weighing me down on top of that.