Programmer's Guild - how to take them today?

[JavaMouse]

I have read a few blog postings (random people) that posit that home ownership and being pinned to one location is one of the biggest single drags on somebody's employability, career and earning potential. That may be true, but the alternative is to be a miserable rootless nomad.

Like me? 

I don't see where you fit quality of life into removing yourself from being tied down.

Well, there are people who are more suited to this type of life. For whatever reason, I've never felt a need or desire to buy a house. The cost/benefit ratio of home ownership seems disproportionately large to me.  If I had several million in cash lying around, I'd probably splurge, but I don't see that ever happening.

And then there are the people who don't have the luxury of having roots. They can't afford a house and never will be able to. I guess they make the best of it.  Although, it seems like this type is often too poor to be able to easily move around.

BTW I am very sorry to hear your wife is unemployed; I hadn't realized that.  I hope she finds something soon, assuming she wants to.

[The Gorn]

When I first read his comment, I was really ticked off at the way he put it, thinking "what are you crazy, you can't ask families to migrate from state to state at the drop of a hat!" But then I wondered whether he wasn't just phrasing his thoughts in a very cynical way, basically "the 50s were an aberration, this is the way things are, so this is what people have to do."

So we should take it sort of like Jonathon Swift's A Modest Proposal?

Moving is expensive, uses fossil and other fuels unnecessarily, and is socially disruptive. We already have an incredibly alienated society filled with loners. I guess Greenspun sees workers as migrants moving between short term opportunities that last weeks or months.

Basically, Greenspun is griping about how easy it is to cheat the unemployment system, and he's probably right, but it's probably been shown that it's not worth the cost to crack down on the cheaters.

The minority of true abusers of the system are always used as a counter argument to all social protections. IOW, throw 10,000 deserving under the bus because 200 get more than one would suppose that they need or are entitled to.

I just say, for God's sake, someone is tracking "Jessica's" qualification status so this comes down to a failure of implementation, and probably not outright fraud. It's permitted for some bizarre reason, so she is taking it.

So far as being a tool goes, yes, he often comes off as an ass, but I do sometimes enjoy his posts. His overall tone is very bitter, though.  You get the feeling that he's nursing some incredible grudge.  Which is kind of amazing to me, given he spends lots of time supposedly doing exactly what he enjoys, and at least I thought he was a fairly successful entrepreneur.

It sounds like he is running out of worthwhile things to post.

I don't get presumably successful people who mold themselves into bitter social critics. Why's he bitter, I wonder. Probably because he didn't properly cash in on the internet technology boom, even though he was really there first in many ways - his books and blog posts were seminal stuff.

[TechTalk]

Sounds like talking points to me.

Well, I am a free thinker and willing to retract anything I wrote; however, you will need to do the research and provide me with some compelling evidence to refute what I wrote before I do so.  If you foresee a rosy future where most Americans will be singing "Happy days are here again" in just a couple of years from now then by all means post your opinion on how we as a nation are going to get through this current economic storm.

Looking back at the various causes of the Great Depression and comparing them to what is going on today I think what stands out the most for me are the similarities between the attitudes of the federal government and the attitudes of the financial institutions.  The presidents and congress up to the time of Roosevelt had basically taken a hands-off approach to big business, and probably felt that little needed to be done to rein in excesses.  As with today, big business had government where they wanted them -- right in their hip pockets protecting their interests, and not the interests of the common man.  President Roosevelt put in place many things that were extremely controversial in their day, even though we take them for granted nowadays.  All this spending our government is doing nowadays though seems to me to be too temporary and ineffective. 

We as a nation are going to have to pay off our debt eventually and I don't see how that is going to happen unless drastic changes are implemented soon.

Having said all of this, I want to be clear that I am NOT saying that everyone should immediately go out and buy guns and load up on non-perishable goods as well because the world as we know it will be over very soon.

[JavaMouse]

So we should take it sort of like Jonathon Swift's A Modest Proposal?

That's what I was thinking, but I'm not sure (BTW you're preaching to the choir, I think his entire post was outrageous unless it's taken as satire). It may very well be that he considers the average American to be stupid and lazy, compared with foreigners who struggle mightily to get 1/10 of what we have.  He certainly does rant a lot about the stupid young folk he encounters nowadays (of course I hear that on this board, too).

Moving is expensive, uses fossil and other fuels unnecessarily, and is socially disruptive. We already have an incredibly alienated society filled with loners.

Yeah I agree, although I'm mainly concerned with the way moving destroys social fabric.  It seems to me that many policies pushed by economists, including gung-ho globalization, completely disregard any social side effects, or human rights side effects. Humans are thought of as purely economic actors moving in a social vacuum.

The minority of true abusers of the system are always used as a counter argument to all social protections.

Like Reagan's welfare queen; I'm sure such people exist, but I find it hard to be jealous of anyone on welfare.

I just say, for God's sake, someone is tracking "Jessica's" qualification status so this comes down to a failure of implementation, and probably not outright fraud. It's permitted for some bizarre reason, so she is taking it.

I don't know what it's like in Ohio. In the states where I've been unemployed, you dial in to a phone number once a week (or use the internet), and your check comes in.  You are supposed to spend a decent amount of time looking for work, and if you do not you should not apply for unemployment that week, and need to restart the next week.  I always kept records of where I sent my resume in case I was audited, but I never was (over a period of about 6 months in each case).  It's easy to believe that no one is tracking Jessica at all, her records are just sitting there in a database somewhere, and that she'll only get caught if she wins the audit lottery.

I don't get presumably successful people who mold themselves into bitter social critics. Why's he bitter, I wonder. Probably because he didn't properly cash in on the internet technology boom, even though he was really there first in many ways - his books and blog posts were seminal stuff.

You're probably right. I'm guessing he must have a few million in the bank; maybe he's bitter that he doesn't have a hundred million.

I definitely detect a libertarian tone to his posts, and libertarians often strike me as bitter (no offense to any libertarians here on the boards, it's just something I've noticed, but maybe I'm biased).

[lorb]

The grass is always greener on the other side.  Get to the other side and it looks like the grass just grew where you left, and you start to notice a lot more cows on the side you moved to.

[DarkHumour]

I have actually been on unemployment.  After being laid off in November 1996 (which sowed the cynicism about going FTE in tech). I was on it in Illinois. You had to look for 3 jobs a week and submit your reports.  I made elaborate (by their standards) spreadsheets that had every job contact/borker/email I made.  I made more efforts than what was required.  I started working again in January 1997.  (As far as I know it is still only 3. It really should be higher than that I think.)

After a contract in Seattle, WA was cut five or six months early one of the team members half joked about all of us going on unemployment. It was W2. What the hell, I signed up.  March 2007 was when I filed.  Meanwhile I had to eat so I contacted an temp agency.  Now you still had to do the three jobs per week but it felt like someone was crawling up my ... for a pittance of a benefit. Having a two-tiered "career" over the course of a decade or so didn't built up much of a reserve.  I was eligible to draw less than $5000.00 (I don't remember the exact amount) over the course of a year.   Also having low pay/above low pay career led to some confusion over what I can and cannot refuse as work.  I turned down something that was a 21 mile commute and hard labor before accepting something else by the agency the following week (which I worked until I left Seattle). 

I think as a rule the temp agencies contest EVERY unemployment claim.    I had to explain myself in writing.  If I had just reported that I turned down that opportunity then maybe there would not have been a problem.  Meanwhile tech salaries were sh*t and I was fed up with that town and leaving anyway.

Sometime in May (two months after I filed) I was already in Chicago again and received my first and only check for around $400 bucks. 

I was finally working at some triple subcontracted hell hole in July 2007 who did a bunch of shenanigans to avoid triggering the WARN act.    I checked my po box after a long absence and I discovered that there was an unemployment hearing by phone I didn't even know about until a few days before it was scheduled.  Bastards from the temporary agency were contesting it.  I did not see how this mattered to them. 

I was so freaked out that I did not even attend/dial-in to the hearing. I was not required to.   The agency contesting it didn't show up either and the decision of the unemployment agency to allot my benefit (already paid) was upheld.

This process has probably put me off ever claiming unemployment for another decade.    It is set up in a way that if your pay is higher than the benefit then you don't get the benefit.  It is less than minimum wage... but maybe it was scaled based on my screwed up average low salary of working white collar and blue collar jobs?  E.G. If I had been working a Rand McMoneypants job and got laid off then my benefit would have been higher (and actually possible to live off of for a while?)

I thought to myself, " Next time? F*ck this. I will go work at Burger King."

Oh wait... that will screw up the payout of my unemployment the next time???  Is there a vicious cycle going on here ?

Epilogue: The temp* agency had some serious communication issues or complete idiots working for them as I told them in April/May I was leaving the area.  I received an irritated call from them in June about not calling in for work.  "I moved to Chicago in May (you morons)."

_____________

I look at PG's website from time to time but they don't update it enough to make it interesting.  At least to me.  I think someone should take the LCA H1B data and make a job board of out that.  The b.s. that 'we can't find anyone, even to work for a substandard salary would go out the window.

Mobility? For years idiot bhorkers already expect that you'll drop everything to move 1000-3000 miles for their sh*tty 1099 part time opportunity.  Maybe it is because their fellow countrymen have crossed continents for an opportunity so why can't you?

I kind of had half a notion of being a road warrior since I have no ties to anything....but increasing mobility (giving them what they seem to want) would probably accelerate commoditization of technical jobs.

As far as a dystopian future my half joke is that the owners of walmart have a concrete compound.  I think they know the end game.

DarkHumour

edit for clarity *the work place not the government (the unemployment agency in Washington was so cordial it was unbelieveable)

[I D Shukhov]

Quote from: G0ddard B0lt on July 06, 2010, 08:53:27 pm
I don't get presumably successful people who mold themselves into bitter social critics. Why's he bitter, I wonder. Probably because he didn't properly cash in on the internet technology boom, even though he was really there first in many ways - his books and blog posts were seminal stuff.

You're probably right. I'm guessing he must have a few million in the bank; maybe he's bitter that he doesn't have a hundred million.

I think that Greenspun is also a tenured professor, which means job security for life.   Interesting how everything is relative.   I'm sure most of the world would wonder what I've got to complain about.  It's human nature to complain, but good to count your blessings everyday.

[The Gorn]

I think that Greenspun is also a tenured professor, which means job security for life.   Interesting how everything is relative.   I'm sure most of the world would wonder what I've got to complain about.  It's human nature to complain, but good to count your blessings everyday.

<tangent>

We hired a local handyman to do some painting and fix-up work around our house. He does essentially anything except wall to wall carpeting. He came over the other day to paint a room for us. We had a sump pump fail in the basement and there was a pool of water down there. I asked him to "redirect" and to instead replace the sump. So he dragged it out of filthy drain water in the pit, pumped the pit out, cleaned the funk out of the pit that had accumulated over the years, went out to Home Depot, bought a new pump and some fittings, installed the pump, and cut a larger opening for the riser pipe coming out of the cover for the pit. And, of course, this is black water that comes out of a laundry tub in the basement and a floor drain, so it's disgusting. One step above dealing with a toilet.

He wanted $80 labor for this. It probably took him 5-6 hours. I rounded up to $100. A real plumber would have done the exact same job and charged $2-300.

We are rich by his standards. But I feel poverty stricken compared to some programmers that you read hanging out on programmer and techie forums.

[David Randolph]

>We are rich by his standards.

I'm reading in the press that for some things, the US is getting price competitive with China. Certainly, for low cost items, Mexico is a better deal than China is partly due to the faster delivery time.

How did we get competitive? Wages dropped. 15-20% un and under employment drops wages and costs. But at a cost to the rest of society.