Men More Likely to Lose Their Jobs Than Women
Reader Comments
young people today
young people today want a college degree, graduate, earn a 6 figure salary, do not want to start @ the bottom. they want a lg house, 2 cars, vacations,,immediately. what it tk us 25 yrs to acquire. they apply for 40 & 50 yr mortgages..while me & my parents always had a 20 yr mortgage ! we sacrificed because we knew we had to save for a "rainy day" an expression from the 1930 depression.now we're in a downpour...how can people live w/credit card debt? how can they sleep @ night? possessions do not bring happiness..people feel a void in their lives & need to keep up w/the Joneses...
young people today
young people today want a college degree, graduate, earn a 6 figure salary, do not want to start @ the bottom. they want a lg house, 2 cars, vacations,,immediately. what it tk us 25 yrs to acquire. they apply for 40 & 50 yr mortgages..while me & my parents always had a 20 yr mortgage ! we sacrificed because we knew we had to save for a "rainy day" an expression from the 1930 depression.now we're in a downpour...how can people live w/credit card debt? how can they sleep @ night? possessions do not bring happiness..people feel a void in their lives & need to keep up w/the Joneses...
jobs
there are many part time jobs..just work part time 24/7 , we need to feed our families, we may not like them but better days are coming..I stock super mkt shelves in muddle of night on wk/ends..# 3 of my 4 part time jobs, until smthing better comes alone ! have faith America !
Unemployment
What is with High unemployment. There are jobs every where. Its just like this because we americans got lazy. We have gotten lazy. Excpecially the younger generation.
It gets worse
I heard part of an NPR interview with Valerie Jarrett yesterday morning. She did indicate that small business was one of the important parts of the economic recovery, but then began to explain how the focus needed to be on getting more women and girls into the small business workplace, even if they are not currently qualified for jobs. The implication was that the administration would be pushing for programs to stimulate increased numbers of women to enter the job market as a remedy to high unemployment and economic instability.
What an incredibly insane thought, on so many levels:
We can solve the high unemployment problem by getting more people to compete for the same number of jobs. Right, that ought to work!
We can train relatively low skilled workers to take jobs that are either currently held by men or were planned for men. Small businesses will save money because they can compensate for less experience. That will help offset the cost of training inexperienced workers.
Win-win, right? Well, except for the families who substitute a lower (entry level female) income for a higher (experienced male) income. No big deal, though, because the social importance of bringing more women into the workplace (a worthy cause, it is true) far outweighs the incidental pain and suffering imposed on families that have to tighten their belts and learn to live on even less. All in all, a satisfactory bargain, especially if you consider it from the aspect of a politician making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. After all, no good crisis should go to waste, right?
When men lose their jobs
women and children are badly affected. It's not just the money. An emasculated hubby, daddy or boyfriend is a social bomb that goes off with only the slightest spark.
Unemployment had the Catholics and Protestants fighting in Ireland for decades. Likewise, unemployment fuels all those Islamic marches and rants you see on TV in Islamic places. And need I say anything about what goes on in our own ghettos?
