if we all stayed dotted about

[gregorach]

Thats fine - its rather like the assertion that spreading people out means they can't enjoy the company of others, or a good party or are not "social".

I don't think anybody ever made any such assertion.

[the.fee.fairy]

My question is how are people supposed to save when every penny goes on trying to live?
Before I left the UK for more Asian shores, I was working in a full time professional job that paid about £16k. It was a miserable job.

Even earning that amount, I couldn't afford to rent a house in my area. Rent, tax, food, bills, transport, clothing - it all adds up to a big fat zero at the end of the month!

As wages are getting lower in relation to living costs, how are people supposed to save? As soon as you start paying rent you're losing money straight away.

It would be my ideal to live in the country somewhere with my own smallholding (and a campsite - I want to run a campsite!), with my own business in a city nearby that I can get to easily, but with the public transport services being so few and far between in rural areas, It's just not viable.

Some people can't just up sticks and move to a cheaper country. I can only afford to live here because my apartment and bills are paid for me by my employers (one of the good things the Chinese government insists on). I save as much as I can, but it's never a lot.

I managed to save £3k in 3 years in the UK and that paid for me to come here and experience something new. Had i been renting I would never have been able to afford it! I was paying my parents 'housekeeping' of a set amount each month that went up whenever I had a pay rise. My Dad encouraged me to do it so that I could afford to save to come here.

It's all very well people of a 'certain age' trying to tell the younger generation how to do things, but when you remember that your salary was good enough for you to save for a house, and living costs were lower you realise that the younger generation are stuffed! We've been let down by the people before us - the ones who insisted that a degree was the answer to everything - and it landed us in debt before we could even think about a career...those people? They got their education free, they got grants. The people that insisted that a graduate wage was a good wage to live on...lied. It might have been when they graduated, but now there's no chance of getting a decent job even with a degree.

The only reason I don't regret going to Uni was that it gave me two chances: the first one was coming here, and the second was a different qualification that I worked on when I was there.

If I could now, I'd tell younger people to not bother about a University education - go and work, do an apprenticeship. you'll be better off than the educated people and have more chances.

So...how do you suggest that the 'lost generation' regain what they have had frittered away for them?
As much as many people would like to buy a 'cheap' house, people like BR buy them and then sell them on for more than we can afford, or even worse, the landlords buy them to let them out at exhorbitant prices that are still out of our reach.

And after that rant...I'm off for a cup of tea

[oldjerry]

It would only be a 'rant' to me if I disagreed with any of it,and I don't.People of a certain age shouldn't be telling the young anything,and more fool the young if they listen.
The deep shit we're apparently' all in together'is entirely the fault of the older generation,and those younger(including I suspect today's children) will be those who pay,and of course the disadvantaged disproportionally so.

[boboff]

It's not easy, but then it never has been.
Too many people look at Univercity as a norm, it shouldn't be.

[the.fee.fairy]

It would only be a 'rant' to me if I disagreed with any of it,and I don't.People of a certain age shouldn't be telling the young anything,and more fool the young if they listen.
The deep shit we're apparently' all in together'is entirely the fault of the older generation,and those younger(including I suspect today's children) will be those who pay,and of course the disadvantaged disproportionally so.

The problem is that if the younger generations disagree with the older generations about subjects like University, they're seen as failures. If I'd left school and done an apprenticeship for something useful (like a plumber) then my parents would have supported me, but they'd have been disappointed, and all those 'career advisors' would have told me that I was not fulfilling my potential and other discouraging statements.

I remember a lad at my school who came from a farming family and he was so proud to get his tractor licence at 16 that for the school fete, he drove his tractor onto the field with a big grin. His family were absolutely delighted. The school, however told him that he would be better off in higher education and that 'being a farmer' wasn't aspirational enough for him. Luckily, he didn't listen and is now a successful farmer who is working within the family farm and will eventually take it on after his parents can't.

So even though you say 'more fool the young if they listen' (paraphrased), they have no choice. We expected the older people to guide us properly - they had the experience, we didn't.

I wish I'd got a tractor licence and found a local farmer to marry

The issue with degrees becoming the norm is that there are very very few jobs that will even look at the application unless they see the word Degree on it. It doesn't matter what the job is. So the younger generation are being forced to go to University to get a chance in the job market, and are then saddled with debt and a slim chance of getting that decently paying job because everyone has a degree. But, if they didn't have a degree, that slim chance would turn to absolutely no chance when up against all the other applicants who do have degrees. It's a vicious cycle.

The biggest problem for the graduates is the question of 'experience' - All jobs are now asking for a year or more's experience before you apply - how are people who have spent 3 years at University working in part time jobs (usually bar work) to get by supposed to have experience? They can't get a full time job, or even a job for a couple of days a week because every semester their timetable changes - What job would accept that from September to January you've got Thursdays off, and then from January to June you've got Wednesdays off and therefore will need to change your working day? None. I tried when I was at Uni to get a job for my one day off a week, and weekends and it was impossible. That's why most students either do badly paid agency work (and then the agency will never confirm the jobs that you've done), or bar work - at least they can guarantee evenings and weekends. If the employers stopped obsessing over experience and moved to more on the job training, then they'd have more chance.

[boboff]

No see I think you are wrong.

You can get experience, you have 12 weeks off a year as a student.

Employers want experience, not because they want experience, they want people who don't say can't, don't moan how hard it is, but actually get on with it and get work.

I know it's not easy, and I agree with the parent thing, I became an accountant, when I should have been a plummer or electrician, but at the time a profession was seen as superior, it is not anymore.

I have worked since I was 12, when most people wern't, I worked becuase I wanted money for fags and cider, and my parents wouldn't give it to me. Nothing has changed in 30 years!

[Thomzo]

Fee, I quite agree about the degree thing. I was interviewing for quite a junior accountancy role recently. I wasn't expecting degree level applicants but, in fact, they all were. One had a masters in accountancy. When I asked him why, he said that anybody who worked hard nowadays could get a degree. He'd carried on to get a masters just to differentiate himself. It's madness.

I left school at 18 with rubbish A levels and got myself a job with a firm of accountants. They persuaded me to study and I'm glad that I did but I do feel that I missed out on the social side of youth not having had the Uni experience. In order to qualify I had to study all the time I wasn't working so my social life consisted of going to another couple's for dinner or them coming to us on Saturdays.

Nowadays, everything just seems to have been delayed. I was lucky enough to buy my first house at 20 with my partner. But then there were two of us sharing it. Nowadays, people are buying their first homes in their 30's but then they are living in them a lot longer so I guess it balances out. I suppose the answer is simply to be patient and save up - you'll get there eventually.

Zoe

[The Riff-Raff Element]

The issue with degrees becoming the norm is that there are very very few jobs that will even look at the application unless they see the word Degree on it. It doesn't matter what the job is. So the younger generation are being forced to go to University to get a chance in the job market, and are then saddled with debt and a slim chance of getting that decently paying job because everyone has a degree. But, if they didn't have a degree, that slim chance would turn to absolutely no chance when up against all the other applicants who do have degrees. It's a vicious cycle.

Of course, the big advantage for the various economies where this common practice is that it keeps many hundreds of thousands of young people out of the job market and off the unemployment stats for several years while they themselves pay for the privilege, which is quite clever, if slightly evil.

We've done a superb job in the West in decreasing the lump of employment that is there to be done while being incapable of finding ways to pay for the large number of unemployed or underemployed that it generates. I'm told (generally by right-wing free market junkies) that the idea of there being a finite lump of work in an economy is not a reality, but when pressed none of them seem capable of explaining how this could be increased except by cutting wages and making a few people (for whom tax payment should be optional) ever richer. This doesn't seem entirely right to me.

[boboff]

I think the theory is you teach people to think and lead, they then are in a position to exploit people in under-developed countries. Like China and India, where I think they also have a rather decent education system.

For the developed countries to prosper in a "post industrial" global economy, we have to revert to colonial values, and us owing, or producing the "means of production" we make the machines and the computers that make the T-shirts etc What in fact is happening is that the chinese are buying the companies in the UK and elsewhere making the machines, as well as Africas mineral resources.

So in effect we can only hope that the UK is seen as some sort of large disney world, and people come to visit us from the BRIC's.

And for all those with degrees, the phrase that pays.....Would you like frys with that?

[the.fee.fairy]

No see I think you are wrong.

You can get experience, you have 12 weeks off a year as a student.

Employers want experience, not because they want experience, they want people who don't say can't, don't moan how hard it is, but actually get on with it and get work.

It's not that easy. Even with the holidays, it's difficult to get a 'full time job' through them. No company is going to employ someone for two weeks at Easter, a week at Christmas and then at the Summer Holidays. So most students (myself included) sign up with agencies to get work.

The problem with that is that when you ask the agency for a reference, they'll only confirm that you worked for them, not what job you did, or where you worked.

The experience that employers are asking for is ridiculous - 2 year's or 3 year's experience in some cases. That's impossible to get as a student - 3 years of 12 weeks holidays (ideally) = 36 weeks - not even 1 year's experience and in most cases rejected by the employers as it's not 'continuous employment'

The wanting experience is nothing to do with how hard someone can'/will work, it's to do with the employers no longer wishing to train people on the job. They want drag and drop workers rather than someone who can be taught and learn.

For example: I wanted to be a librarian when I left Uni. I have a degree in English Language and Literature. Whenever I applied, I was asked for experience. The only experience I had was going to the library regularly. They wanted me to have 2 year's experience before they would think about it. No job = no experience. No experience = no job.

And people wonder why there's a problem!

[MKG]

Hang on, Fee. If you wanted to be a librarian, then you could, and should, have taken an appropriate degree - Eng. Lang & Lit. don't do it. Or you could have done a post-grad in Librarianship, and the entry requirements for that may have included degrees in Lang. or Lit. It's a different kettle of fish, and we're not talking about being a library assistant here.

Speaking as one who worked on top of Coalite ovens in my "holidays", I can't see what the problem is.

Mike

[The Riff-Raff Element]

And for all those with degrees, the phrase that pays.....Would you like frys with that?

Rotten sod

I thoroughly enjoyed my degree, but to an extent I question its value since I never once used it in a professional capacity.

Intuitively I feel that education for its own sake is quite a good thing. Teaching kids to Google everything on their smartphones is a practical solution, but there is a certain mind-expanding pleasure in just simply knowing some stuff. But should we be trying to encourage children to go down a more practical route earlier on rather than wasting their time in academic studies they will probably never use but which they might plausibly enjoy? I dunno.

[MKG]

I find it hard to believe that I'm hearing all of this (well, OK - reading it).

The object remains what it always has been - you want the job you WANT? Get the degree. You want the job which pays loadsamoney? Become a plumber.

Alright, when I was a lad in the 19errrmies, plumbers weren't so well off. Even so, try getting a plumber to discuss a difficult subject. No - give me that degree every single time.

It's either that or I really have gone well past my sell-by date.

Mike

EDIT: Of course, in my high dudgeon I didn't say what I meant to say. If we choose to live in a society which has quite knowingly, over several decades, devalued every qualification in the book, we shouldn't be too surprised to find that those qualifications have no value.

[boboff]

One of the hardest jobs to fill where I worked was the role of food technologist.
The best candidates I employed for this role both had three things in common, female, just done a degree in food technology, and most importantly wrote to the company asking if there were any positions. It was that initiative which to me marked them out.
When I was a lad and wanted work to get a motorbike, I pitched up at my parents place 100 miles from where I lived, and didn't go to Agencies, but spent the first two days going in all the shops, then restaurants and cafes, then burger joints, fish and chip shops etc etc from 10 in the morning till 10 at night, after 2 days I had two jobs from 9 till two in a fish and chip shop, and from 4 till 2 a.m. in Burger King, at the end of the 7 weeks I was running and frying the fish and chip shop evening shift, and going out with the owners daughter, not a bad Summer as it turned out. After that it was easy getting work as I then turned 18 and could work in Pubs.
I didn't do a degree, I qualified as an accountant whilst working, which gave me experience as well as a qualification, and worked weekends and all my holidays in the local Pub to get more money. It was probably looking back some of the most enjoyable parts of my life.
So my attitude as an old git now is defined by my " worked down the pit" "got up two hours before I went to bed" etc, I know that, but from my own experience if you want work you have to go the extra mile, do things diferently, make a special effort, don't except no as an answer.