If you apply to 759 jobs and get 0 is it you or the jobmarket?
- Thread starter KINGOFSHORTS
- Start date
But are enough of them being hired to soak up the massive amount of domestic supply that is coming on stream every year, nevermind all the foreigners?
Firms like Intel go around bragging that they hired 1,000 new grads last year -- but a workforce of 83,000 (source: wikipedia), and an average employee 'shelf life', of, let's say, 20 years, and with some growth, they would need to hire at least 5,000 new grads just to remain 'even'.
And of course, the hiring has been disproportionately H1-B, so where does that leave domestic grads? Unemployed. And ignorant attitudes, such as the ones exhibited by many posters (blaming victims of the bad economy for being unemployed) here are definitely not helpful in getting things back on track.
(lol, and no I don't do drugs, sell drugs, or lick fat girls. I just put on a certain trade and leave it on, which has yet to let me down...)
But not overskilled wage slaves. Which might be part of my (and the girl with the MA in the earlier message's) problem.
Its pretty simple math. The US workforce has not expanded since 2000. Job growth in the low-skilled portion of the US workforce has been very rapid. Hence, one can conclude that growth in the high skilled portion of the US workforce has been low, if not negative.
Silicon Valley went from being 90% white males in the tech workforce a decade ago, to only 50-60% today. What does that say about the chances of a white male getting a tech job in Silicon Valley in the past decade? Very low chances.
A few people have posted here, claiming I'm lying, claiming that there's something wrong with me, claiming that they don't know anyone unemployed (even though the unemployment rate is easily close to 20%), etc. But the numbers don't lie. The tech industry, in particular, has been caught in a deflationary death spiral ever since 2000, with no clear signs of abatement. The rest of the economy seems to be following suit.
That might sound great, but maybe that just means there are more recruiters competing for each job. And maybe those recruiters are looking at an unprcedented number of candidates for each job. Say there are 10 recruiters for each job, and each one looking at 100 candidates. Your odds of getting any given job are 1/1000. This person we're talking about suddenly sounds quite typical.
Quote from sumfuka:
America's best and brightest grads are pretty f'in stupid then, if they get displaced by curry eating drones.
Its not a matter of stupidity. Its a matter of American businesses not feeling they need to hire top-notch talent, when cheap 'barely good enough' will do.
Look, I own a nicely restored Jaguar E-type, and a early 1990s Oldsmobile. Guess which one gets used for long drives out of state, and which one gets used when I'm trying to pick up the local p*ssy?
And without a robust 'consumer economy', there is no demand for 'marketing', so the girl, unfortunately, will probably only be good for making babies in the future. But the sort of damage that has been inflicted on America's science, technology, and manufacturing professionals will have a deep and long-lasting impact on America's ability to compete once all this financial nonsense has been purged out of the system.
BULLSHIT But I don't blame ya, anybody that have started a business from the ground up (any business) knows that you have to hire top-notch talent for dirt cheap price. 'barely good enough' employees is a guaranteed way to go the way of the DODO BIRD. I think it's kind of sad, that Americans can't even compete with foreigners for IT jobs given the FACT that we actually have the upper-hand in terms of language skills.
Think about it, the H1B's have to learn English (who knows how long it took them) then learn the technical skill (again who knows how long it took them) then compete with ya. Somehow they still beat ya, so instead of overcoming your challenger. You stick your middle finger out to your boss and to the indian and waltz to the unemployment line.
I come to a slightly different conclusion; Americans can compete quite well, but they can't compete with people who were given their education for free, and can hop on the plane back to India if their houses become worth less than the mortgage, or for a cheap retirement.
An Indian is happy to work at $50k/year, while an American grad needs to start at $70-$90k just to break even. Employers know this, and act accordingly.
The fact that Americans have not been, on the balance, hired in IT or the tech sector more broadly, since the late 1990s is a reflection of that reality. Very few tech jobs need top end skills, and businesses will not buy Ferraris (ie: American tech grads), when their needs are met by cheap Fords (ie: H1-B's from India).
Its not quite like that. Indian H1-B's are usually only hired because they cost less, and are quite obedient and subservient. If they start to rack up health care costs, the employer has the option of simply ending their H1-B sponsorship and sending them back to India. If an employer dismisses them and doesn't pay appropriate compensation (ie: severance), the ability of a guest worker to seek redress in the courts is limited, if not non-existent. While most American techies insist on an office, and a glass window to the outside world -- Indian H1-B's cherish every day they get to experience the sheer luxury of living and working in the United States.
silicon valley's tech workforce 10 years ago was 50% white male, and that was just engineers. i was in the SV workforce back then. seriously, stop talking about stuff you know absolutely nothing about.
if you count all employees related to tech, including HR and finance and marketing, then the SV workforce 10 years ago was not even 1/3 white male.