Hacker News Reader

Comment by tseabrooks | Hacker News Reader

I'm 27 so I think I'm just a couple years outside of this generation that can't find jobs. That said, I'm pretty sick and damned tired of seeing lists of things keeping these 20-somethings from succeeding. It's time for people to man up (Though I'm not excluding women) and take responsibility for themselves and stop complaining about externalities keeping them from success and just go out and succeed. The problem isn't the lack of jobs it's this loser, "The world is against me", attitude. One of the young people quoted in the article said, "not for the types of positions I'm qualified for". Another quipped about a living wage. Does this person even know what a living wage is or what that means?

Frankly, this article looks like it's full of over privileged cry-babies sad that life isn't working out as perfect as they hoped. I say it's time for them to pivot on life and stop the damned whining.

View on HN

It's hard to point blame in one specific direction. Yes, you are right they should take responsibility.

But these are people who grew up doing the "responsible" thing and listening to the advice of teachers and parents. They made good grades whether or not they learned, did extracurricular activities whether or not they enjoyed them, and otherwise put aside any sort of personal decision-making for 21 years, in the idea that a college degree would get them "success."

Given that, it isn't enough to just say "get a job, bum." They need some new, concrete picture of how life works. With ideas like, do things you enjoy and practice hard to get better at them, not to impress other people. Or, work hard even at things you don't like, if it gets you the money, time, or skills you need to do something else later.

And then the question is, how would you arrange a family or a school that produces people who have these ideas naturally? Probably there'd be a lot more opportunities for kids to do meaningful work/play, apprentice learning a trade, and less focusing on getting into a prestigious school.

I have a group of friends who have master's degrees in art education (from a private school), and are stuck being substitute art teachers and waiting tables, because there are few openings for art teachers.

In their minds, they did the "responsible" thing. They got good grades, went $100k+ plus in debt, and are waiting tables at age 28. The problem is, they didn't do the responsible thing -- they used alot of someone else's money to learn a skill of very narrow utility. Now they need to pay the piper.

People lack a critical eye. It's amazing to me that people advise high school kids the way that they do.

Frankly, I don't know how people do it. My wife and I make a good buck, own a modest home and drive one 5 year old car. We don't owe anyone anything, and we save alot, so we're "broke". I don't know how people fit a $400 student loan payment in, while living a non-frugal lifestyle.

High school students are getting advice that made since in the 1970s (when the people who are advising them went to school). Go to college, "find yourself", expand your horizons, etc. Then, that made you special. Today it just makes you one of many without any discernible skills.

Doing what you like is a luxury. Most people need to just do what pays.

Are companies going to hire employees, then, who won't love their jobs with a burning passion?

Didn't think so.

Companies have been doing that for years. You think factory workers or fast food employees all love their jobs (without being a little brainwashed)?

This is the trend I've seen from my friends (even before Gen Y)

Parents came from middle class, work their ass off to provide for their kids. The idea is to give their kids the opportunity to do what they love instead of having to run the rat race.

For the parents that succeed, their kids end up picking something they love, but pay absolutely crap. But they're happy right? Well, not really. So now the friends' kids are growing up in a family where money IS an issue, and they learn to work hard for things. They don't necessarily get to do what they love, but they'll work for pay. One day they'll grow up and provide for their kids so their kids can do what they love.

This ends up being a moving sine wave where each generation repeats what their grandparents did. I'm not really sure if there is a better way.

OK, so my statement was biased by my experience in the software industry.

>You think factory workers or fast food employees all love their jobs (without being a little brainwashed)?

They are all trained and required to act as though they enjoy their jobs when on-the-clock, yes. In current days, they are often not hired without showing some enthusiasm for the prospects, yes.

Strangely, it gets even worse when you move into well-paying fields like software, engineering, finance, etc. "Passion" is the hiring watchword.

Kid enjoys something that pays well? You'd think it would be the best of both words, until you realize the companies are filtering for passion for the company mission, a quality not usually found in actual human workers anywhere.

> But these are people who grew up doing the "responsible" thing and listening to the advice of teachers and parents.

I hope they won't make that mistake again, or to quote Twain: Never let your schooling interfere with your education.

I hate to tell you this, but doing all the right things up through college doesn't entitle you to a guaranteed job upon graduation. You still have to pull yourself up from your bootstraps, pound the pavement (figuratively), and get your first job or internship, start at the bottom of the corporate ladder, live in a 1 bedroom apartment on ramen noodles or beans and rice, and work your way up based on the merits of your work.

To be honest, every generation has had to do this, including the baby boomers. Getting a high paid manufacturing job with a pension and benefits right out of high school is a myth as far as I'm concerned, because it only happened for a few years in a few towns that happened to have factories in them.

I don't at all disagree.

But it isn't these people's fault for thinking so, they spent twenty years of their lives working "hard" (for the wrong definition of hard) and being told this lie.

Strangely, instead of cry-babies, I saw people making a cogent argument that the costs of moving are high and the job market is very uncertain, and that under those conditions the risks of moving to a place without an adequate support network outweigh the benefits.

They might be wrong, but you haven't made a single point that contradicts this, nor have you made any constructive suggestions.

That kind of mindset is a lot easier to espouse when you (and a lot of the visitors to this site) are in one of the few industries that wasn't particularly affected by the recession, and for that matter is arguably in the midst of a bubble.

We're all lucky -- if your chosen profession (and, say, one that you invested 8+ years of expensive American college to get into) was an industry that had the air sucked out of it in 2008, you might not be so condescending.

I do get what you're saying, and I think there definitely is a type of person you're describing, but you're oversimplifying a measurably more complicated problem.

Telling people to "stop whining" isn't that constructive.

I was unemployed about 5 years ago before the recession had really dug it's teeth in and even then it was tough.

Spending days applying for every posting I was vaguely qualified for online and also physically hitting the pavement and handing out my CV to every business on the street.

Also having to make decisions about whether it was better to get my suit dry-cleaned so as to be more presentable if I ever got an interview or whether I should eat next week.

After a few month of this I get all kinds of people telling me I should "try harder" and "If you really wanted a job you would have one". Well what exactly do you expect me to do? I applied for hundreds of jobs and for the most part heard absolutely nothing back, I would try and call up and inquire about my application but whoever answered the phone generally had strict instructions to get rid of people like me ASAP.

I would stop from applying after the 10th time. If you failed to get a job in 3-4 applications, something is wrong about your CV, presentation, or you. There is something wrong, it's your responsibility to fix it and try again.

Personally, I won't say to a candidate you SUCK or you did that thing the wrong way. I'll just apologize that another candidate took the position.

Advice from someone who was there: Go and build a network. Get the job from the network.

I must have rewritten my CV countless times during my job hunt at that point as well as having many people proof read it with me, I'm sure it was never perfect but I can be fairly confident that it was better put together than the majority of CVs floating around from unemployed people at the time.

Regarding presentation, I was always washed, wore the best suit I could afford and paid attention to body language what I was saying to people. Not sure what else I could have done, it's not like you can suddenly become a handsome , charismatic person on a whim.

There was also the issue that many jobs wouldn't accept a CV and would simply direct you to an online or paper application where everything had to be filled into discreet boxes and provided little opportunity to make yourself stand out.

Of course the networking advice is good, most of the jobs I have had have been through networking with people I knew and getting in that way. This is easier in some places than others of course, since I was living in an industrial town in england there was not exactly a thriving tech scene. More a small collection of freelancers and satellite offices from larger companies.

The majority of people there worked for the government in one way or anther too, where the only way to get those jobs is to fill out the application form.

It is not always obvious as to how to get an "in" if you don't already know people.

Your posts on this thread read like you are living in an Ayn Rand Dystopia. Nearly everyone around you works for the government? You are too dependent on government benefits to start a business? Your hope is that at some point the cost of living will be cheap enough that most people can live comfortably on welfare? There is such a dis-incentive to creating companies and jobs that even a motivated, well-spoken developer can't find a company that is hiring within any reasonable distance?

If it's really as you say, perhaps a "safety net" is the last thing this "stuck" generation needs.

I can only speak of my own experience based on where I live which is a post industrial town in England.

Basically as manufacturing declined the government stepped in and opened up many of their bureaucratic departments here. I think something like 60%+ of the jobs around here are for government of some form (either local or national).

We also have one of the highest unemployment rates in Europe. Combined with the fact that there is not really much of a tech scene here (most people have few qualifications at all) it is quite difficult to land development work.

My point is more that relocating or starting a business would require more resources than a typical recent college is likely to have access to.

I agree completely that you should build a network and use that to get a job. Extra points if you start building the network before you need a job -- networking's a lot more natural if you're not already trying to get something out of people.

I disagree that failing to get a job in 3-4 applications represents a problem with your resume/presentation/etc in all circumstances. While there are certainly times that's true (if you're an engineer in the current market, for example), there are many industries where there are simply too many qualified people applying for too few positions for getting a job via a cold application to be anything other than a complete crapshoot. (which, again, only emphasizes the importance of having a network to support your search).

I would expect that the parent comment was not addressed to you so much as to the guy who says he can't move because he'd need to spend several hundred dollars on new drinking glasses.

>stop complaining about externalities keeping them from success and just go out and succeed.

The majority of people do not want to be entrepreneurs so their only option is to work for someone else where you are faced with more external forces. When you're in that situation, most people want to do the minimum and earn the maximum which we know rarely works. Let's face it, being an entrepreneur is not for everyone. It's a lot of work and responsibility; something the majority of 20-somethings can't handle.

>Another quipped about a living wage

I would feel discouraged too if I was only being paid $15 an hour after going to school for 4 years.

I agree with you, there are definitely things you can do to ameliorate yourself and improve your chances of finding a job. You don't seem to have the "average person" mentality of doing just the minimum to achieve your goals, so I sense some disconnect there. I could just be reading into it too much.

Not to mention the costs associated with beginning a business on your own. Of course this varies a lot depending on the business too.

Even for say doing some freelance programming which has low costs since all you need is a computer and some open source software. As soon as you start your business you will be cut off from government benefits so you will not have any income until you get your first payment.

Since most companies interested in hiring you for a job will not want to pay you up front since as a new business your going to be seen as pretty high risk your going to need a way of covering your living costs for at least 2-3 months most likely.

If your fresh out of college and already riddled with debt the chances that you have those kind of savings in the bank is pretty minimal.

Small business (or as call it "cottage industry") was the way many people survived in cities before the industrial revolution hit it stride.

I don't believe its beyond the capabilities of mere mortals today to do.

What people dislike about entrepreneurship is the search for something to sell to people. On the otherhand, many would prefer working for themselves if it could pay, and they had a clearly defined role to slip into.

The difference between pre-industrial and now is that you now not only have to find a product/service to sell but you have to find something that the large wallmart style corporations can't do quicker, better and cheaper than you can.

Even small software companies now have the risk of Apple etc completely removing their distribution channel on a whim or a larger software company (or open source project) just replicating their entire product.

>a larger software company (or open source project) just replicating their entire product.

Agreed for products that are specific service, but if your product is driven by a users(facebook and twitter for example), it's damn near impossible for other companies to push you out of the way and achieve the same results once you reach a large enough user base. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, especially between generations of software, but usually not concurrently. (google+ vs facebook?)

Therein lies roughly the same problem though. It's not really practical for anybody to start a new social network unless you think you can compete with the likes of facebook / google+ etc.

It's a go big or go home type game and requires a fair amount of risk. It's not really a career choice in the same way as doing a trade would be.

True, post-industrial society has forced everyone to act like traders and back in the day no one wanted to be a trader because you had to contend with guild monopolies, merchant princes, thieves making off with your goods, wolves in the brush, having your ship sink, having your horse go lame from beneath you, and ofcourse... the excessive taxes leveed against anyone not doing exactly what the extablishment wanted.

At least now adays, we don't have to worry about wolves.

During the depression, I had a grand-uncle who went from farm to farm offering to squeeze the farmers' dogs' anal glands for a nickel (or some other tiny amount). It wasn't glamorous but it paid for food.

There's always some kind of work to be done for those willing and able to identify a market.

> Let's face it, being an entrepreneur is not for everyone. > It's a lot of work and responsibility; something the > majority of 20-somethings can't handle.

It's easy to forget that software is probably the least capital intensive industry that's open to a lone entrepreneur. Think about someone wanting to start, say, a basic small bakery operation. My wife did this, and the capital costs necessary to just get started and make that first batch of sales - ingredients, packaging materials, special implements like decorating tips - could easily be enough to deter someone who has little capital to work with. (And we already had a good kitchen with the majority of tools one would need). It's one thing to risk a month of time when you're otherwise idle, it's another to risk next month's rent payment as well.

How about dog walking? Lawn care? Those are just unskilled examples. There are all kinds of small business that you could do without significant investment, so long as you are willing to grow the business out of your earnings.

Dog walking and lawn care put you in competition with illegal aliens charging less than minimum wage, and parentally-subsidized teenagers for whom minimum wage is a gold mine.

Another aspect of this that I noticed among many of my own friends when we were in our 20s and poor is that most people from a middle-class background have no idea how to live inexpensively. Many other problems follow from this chronic overspending when they cannot afford it. The thing is, they thought they were being "frugal" but the reality is that they were not even close. If you look, for example, how most immigrants bootstrap from nothing their spending patterns and priorities look very different and they usually manage to save quite a bit of money over time.

Savings plays a huge role in flexibility. When you are in your 20s without family, it is eminently possible to bootstrap enough savings from a really crappy jobs and even temp jobs to have the flexibility to move if you need to and still live an okay lifestyle even in a new city. Been there, done that. Very modest but comfortable. You would not want to live this way forever but it is only a bootstrap. It also instills good habits toward not buying a lot of "stuff" once you have a good paying job.

I will add that this same pattern applies to people with very good jobs too. I know people making six-figures that swear they are just getting by, paycheck to paycheck, with no savings. Their definition of "absolute necessity" gets stretched to the breaking point but they literally do not know how to live on less money. I do not have much sympathy in cases like this but it is also part of a larger pattern of people militantly refusing to live below their means.

To be fair, the drop in economic activity necessarily means that everyone can not simply tug harder on their boot straps. Could most individuals do more? Possibly. But it would only deliver improved outcomes if they're doing more relative to everyone else.

It's rather the definition of the slump we're in: the economy as a whole is spending less and taking fewer risks. So no matter what they do, there are only so many jobs. No matter how many of them start their own businesses, there is only so much spending going on.

And while it's obvious and correct that perspective- and attitude-adjustments can only help and that whining and blaming never does, to think that a run of life like that won't have eroded people's attitude and outlook is something between naive and crass.

Harsh.

Let's assume, for this discussion, that what you say is true, and that many people are stuck by perceived not actual problems. That's not good for them, or for the economy.

What would you do to help them move forward with their life? How would you help them break out of this cycle? What changes would you make?

Or is it really as simple as telling them to "man up"? To "get on their bike"[1]?

[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Tebbit)

> *"I grew up in the '30s with an unemployed father. He didn't riot. He got on his bike and looked for work, and he kept looking 'til he found it."

It is constructive to have social pressure against failure. These people have no shame about their situation, because it's socially acceptable to blame their problems on others. Referring to this group as "Generation Stuck" is indicative of this coddling culture.

One one hand I agree, on the other I sometimes feel like Indiana Jones outrunning the boulder -- I had a head start so I didn't get crushed, and they did. I don't have much quantitative reasoning for that feeling, I suppose, it's just that I started my career in 2004 when the economy had briefly recovered before going into the shitter for good. People I know who got out of school just a year before me had a noticeably harder time getting jobs because the economy was still rough in 2003, and it impacted their careers pretty seriously. And now it seems like everyone trying to start a career are in a battle royale for table scraps.

So, I agree that "woe is me" won't get you anywhere, but also everything is fucked-up and on fire. Thank goodness for software, though I doubt this ride will last much longer either. Someone will find a way to cut our cost out of the equation for good.

This. I'm 26 and I had a decent paying software job in Florida. But I wanted to move up to New York so I convinced my job to let me work remotely. I made the move 2 months after they allowed me to work remotely. I sold a bunch of my possessions, made sure everything could fit into my car, gave away my furniture to my mom, and did the entire move for around $800 of my own money. (I had a place to stay when I got up here)

So I agree. These people sound foolish. It is entirely possible to move but that means getting rid of shit and people do not want to get rid of their shit. It's a bit sad really.

That's assuming you are young ,(presumably) have no kids and have a job that will let you will let you work remotely (the vast majority , like 95%+ will not).

The article was mainly referencing people in my position (young and no kids)...

I assume you are aware that software is currently a booming industry, unlike most of the rest of the economy (other notable exceptions being finance and medicine).

Yes I am aware. I also noted that I am paid decently, maybe I should have made it clearer that I am paid decently for FL which is most certainly not the same in NY.

It's not just the amount of pay that people are having difficulty with - it's the relative difficulty of finding work. Coders are in demand at the moment, so we don't have that problem.

I've wondered for a while now if this whiner generation actually complains about how the world is against them more, or if it's just easier for them to be heard. In particular, I'm thinking social media is the big culprit here.

I also would expect some sort of tipping point: "Oh, you can't afford to live in the city because you can't get a job in pharma too? Wow, our generation is having a tough time."

I'm 30, own about 15% of a home and have a wife and kids. I've never been unemployed. I attribute this to not expecting the world to give me anything, like a living wage, student loans, cheap mortgage, etc.

Plenty of people in my peer group are also successful, but there are still those who 'fail' and go from scheme to scheme trying to get a high paying, easy job.

At the end of the day, life is not a video game and you are not the hero. If you're lucky, you might might be a middle manager on the death star construction team.

Get over yourself. It's great that you're 30, have assets and a good life, and have never been unemployed. Huge swaths of the generation you so casually refer to as "whiners" will never have the chance to make those claims regardless of what they do or don't expect from the world, and you scoff at them from your comfortable perch.

Let's have some perspective - when kids decide whether and where to go to college, and agree to take on its debt, they are 17 and know nothing about the world, about job markets, about mortgage rates, about growth industries and dying industries. They are told by their parents and other adult influencers to study what they are passionate about because in America you can be whatever you want to be if you try hard enough and if you go to a good school. So the dumb 17-year-olds of this "whiner" generation went to college during a strong economy and played along with all the adult assurances that they would do great, and they graduated to a world with no work and especially not for most people who studied something they were "passionate" about.

It's such crap to scorn people for regretting decisions they were led into when they were clueless. People need to take responsibility for their own success, but our society needs to be thinking long and hard about how it has failed this generation and how to avoid failing the subsequent ones.

The issue is that in the last generation the age of maturity/critical thinking has gone from early teens to late teens. I find it amazing that 17 year olds have been so isolated from the world that they believe that no matter what they study in college, they can graduate and easily get a high paying job no matter what they studied.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com