My mailman is 75. There are a lot of young people who could use these good jobs. It's time to get on your rockers and shake your fists at the clouds.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Edit: it unfortunately looks like you've been breaking the guidelines quite a bit, and we've already had to ask you multiple times not to. You've also posted good comments, so I don't want to ban you, but would you please review them and use the site as intended? We want thoughtful, curious conversation here.
Which would make "multiple times" and "not one single time" both wrong. I'd presume neither is a lie, though. More likely, Dan miscounted, and Cougher never saw Dan's request.
Yes, I am great fun at parties -- why do you ask?
In 1965 6 countries where below replacement rate, in 2015 that hit 83, and the projection are for 130 countries below replacement rate by 2050. https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/replacement-fertility-de...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_d...
That means we as a country have to out compete other countries. With the imbalance of population to land mass to wealth favoring the US for the foreseeable future, short term is relative. Could immigration be a solution for the next century?
People say how taxes are too high in California, and the crime, and so on. Go to Texas and it will be better. Maybe I want to go to Peru or Canada.
I think that should be easy. Let countries compete for talent and allow free movement just like states do.
Immigration should be about bringing people in to fill in a true gap between demand and supply of workers. Having people rush to America thinking it’s the land of milk and honey whether are not you bring required skills wouldn’t do us or them any good.
Which implies that we're not there now. Right now, there are a lot of young people who could use a solid job like a mailman, some of whom have a lot of student debt to pay for careers that are not panning out.
If you want to speak about bad choices studies, we need to speak about the society structure to understand that kind of paths.
To understand casino, we just need to learn what is an addiction.
Free public education seems like a fine solution for this. I have no problems with art degrees. I may go back and get one when I am ready to retire. But society doesn’t need to pay or be blamed for a choice for a 200k private degree that won’t pay itself back.
The "young people" should move or change the rules like they do in other countries.
In the case of my mailman, there is. If he retires, another person is hired to take his route. This is the case with many jobs. Clearly I'm not speaking about ALL jobs, just as when I posted the comment about the students who didn't get a job after college that I wasn't talkin about students who got a degree in basket weaving as another posted suggested. I shouldn't have to explain that my comments are not meant to cover ALL situations.
In the great depression there were lots of people who weren't working, but that didn't somehow create more jobs for everyone else. People not having a job creates less demand, which in turn creates fewer jobs.
Sure for any one job at one company only one person will fill the position. But it's one of those things that's true at an individual level but works differently at a country level. Like if you got a million dollars it would be great, but if everybody got a million dollars it would just cause inflation. How easy it is to get a good job is determined by big things like fiscal policy, interest rates, technology, regulations, etc and not who is taking any single individual one.
Having people who want to work not working (even old people) generally isn't a good thing, it doesn't create more jobs available overall (since demand is reduced) and the remaining working people have to pay to support the unemployed people with taxes etc.
If technology improves, perhaps drones can deliver mail to remote locations with sparse population.
Even the example you gave is a little bit weak for making your point. Perhaps that is because the point is not as strong as you thought it was?
Perhaps you meant to post this under someone else's comment, because I didn't claim that the "existence" of old people was "the cause" of unemployment. However, if a 75 year old man retires, it opens up a job for anyone who is younger, be it a 20 year old person or a 55 year old person.
In my career I have seen retirement most often used as a way to downsize not to hire young people
I have a hard time understanding that. If I could afford it, I'd quit work tomorrow and I don't think I would ever get bored. I have a so many hobbies I don't have time for and about a million more I'd like to dive into. I have countless movies and TV shows on lists that I'll probably never get to. Books are an even bigger problem for me. If I lived near a a university I'd audit everything. I'd volunteer for causes I believe in.
It's nice that someone held onto a job til 102, but it also means that at least two generations of young people lost out on a job that they could use to buy a home, start a family, etc.
I'm not for forced retirement but someone holding onto a position to 102 is really ridiculous. Especially for a taxpayer funded government job with terrific retirement benefits/pension.
At some point, shouldn't a person acknowledge they've taken more than their fair share and step aside so another gets a chance? Isn't it part of the social contract that you retire, collect benefits and let others have a job?
If this employee had to work to survive ( pay rent/mortgage, bills, etc ), then more power to him. But otherwise, he really did a disservice to the younger generations by staying on as long as he did.