www.ditl.org

Same here. She's on the lower end of the scale. No wonder she's not got a job in this current economic climate.

I wouldn't throw her under the bus and say she's a poor student... mostly. A 2.7 is strictly average. However her strictly average GPA and her utterly generic degree are her problem. If you want to get hired in this climate you need to be more than genericly average.

ya IMO, 0-2 is below average, 2-3.2/3.3 is about average, and 3.2+ is above average.

Though for some of you in high school, with many (to some degree all) degrees it isn't what you learn in college, it's what you learn in spite of it.

If anyone just shows up for the classes and passes without anything else in the US you're well behind the curve. Everybody wants to see internships these days with any degree. Business degrees require you to develop a network of contacts and solid "soft" skills. Technology related degrees require you to learn about what's in the gap between when someone wrote the courses and where technology is today. And so on.

While it certainly isn't something someone should be able to sue for, many colleges simply do not stress that if you just sit in the classes and get a 2.7 you're pretty much screwed even if the economy isn't tanking. (Though better colleges will)

sunnyside wrote:While it certainly isn't something someone should be able to sue for, many colleges simply do not stress that if you just sit in the classes and get a 2.7 you're pretty much screwed even if the economy isn't tanking. (Though better colleges will)

I disagree with this point. While it may not be stressed as an institutional PSA, most higher-education advisors will certainly point out the necessity of more than just a degree.

I dunno, is the need for experience really something you need to spell out to people? I knew just from purusing job fairs and common sense that practical job experience was just as important as my grades. I pushed as hard or harder to get an intern/co-op position than I did my classes.

I have a little over a 2.7... but I've dealt with the more advanced classes and other... difficulties. And expecting the school to find the job for you is really really stupid. And unrealistic.

Mikey wrote:

sunnyside wrote:While it certainly isn't something someone should be able to sue for, many colleges simply do not stress that if you just sit in the classes and get a 2.7 you're pretty much screwed even if the economy isn't tanking. (Though better colleges will)

I disagree with this point. While it may not be stressed as an institutional PSA, most higher-education advisors will certainly point out the necessity of more than just a degree.

If a person is taking the time to go see an advisor. Usually that's optional. Certainly a good idea, but the people smart enough to go see one are probably the same people who are smart enough to not need one.

Anyway we're nitpicking, I do think they problem here is, as was said, that we've got increasing numbers of people in this country who feel entitled to everything. All she needs is a jury of her "peers" and she could win her lawsuit.

Drives me nuts. In my hometown we have to bring in illegals by the vanload to get the work done. They aren't taking anybodies job, it's just that a lot of people would rather be on some form of government support somewhere than move to get a solidly paying but agrarian job in the midwest, so people either have to operate understaffed or have to quit checking IDs so well.

I know a sci-fi forum might be the wrong place to suggest it [/sarcasm], but I think those agrarian jobs should be done by machines. Haven't we moved past the "bust ass 18 hours a day for limited results" era of farming?

Education should be easier to get for all of us; America needs to focus on training (and re-training) for high-tech jobs, not sending millions of us back to the 1920's doing sh*tty farm work.

Tsukiyumi wrote:I know a sci-fi forum might be the wrong place to suggest it [/sarcasm], but I think those agrarian jobs should be done by machines. Haven't we moved past the "bust ass 18 hours a day for limited results" era of farming?

Education should be easier to get for all of us; America needs to focus on training (and re-training) for high-tech jobs, not sending millions of us back to the 1920's doing sh*tty farm work.

Actually machines do a lot of farming. However until we get skynet online we're going to need people to run the machines and to handle/butcher the larger sorts of tastey animals.

I agree hi-tech jobs are the way to go as a nation. Though I don't think "training" is exactly the issue. I'm not seeing the help wanted pages full of companies desperate for tech workers (hence why the lady in this article can't get a job). Rather we need to focus on things that get new tech firms going like venture capital, encouraging native top flight researchers, and not violating companies that want to try and operate in the US.

However in the meantime (which, given the current political environment towards corporations, will be a looooong time) I don't think I'm wrong in feeling somethings messed up when people are on government support around the cities while emplyers are like as not still having to turn a blind eye to illegals to get anything done elsewhere.

If corporations don't like the sort of laws that discourage massive individual profits, and they won't agree to "not be assh*les", then the government should step in. Of course they wont; we value "free trade" at the expense of the workers and "lower class" people.

I imagine I'd be on a "conservative" list of "undesirables" as well, even though I'm far more "conservative" about certain issues than most of them.

Fine. Forgive me if I laugh when the greedy f*cks get what's coming to them.

Crapitalism is dying, slowly but surely. I hope I'm around to hear its eulogy.

Tsu - you buying those harvesting machines?

Sarcastic, I know - but I think it illustrates the point.

I'm not sure what you consider will happen instead of capitalism. If you mean communism I'm not sure that even exists anyhere currently. They're surprisingly capitalistic in China. Ther difference is more totalitarian party control vs democracy.

And I'm not in the camp where I always want things better for business. Like back when we were soaring as the dot com bubble inflated. Some more corp tax could have been a good idea then.

However right now the high tech jobs you want are going elsewhere (i.e. Intel isn't building their big expensive FAB facilities in the US anymore). And putting protective measures like tarriffs into place is suicide for the high tech industry because that stuff relies on getting components from all over the world to get them at a decent rate. The idea is to put in a significant "value add" to the stuff.

Anyway, bottom line is if the corps aren't willing to set up businesses here, and if eventually we can't just borrow trillions of dollars every year to keep our employment and benifit ponzi schemes going. Well, I guess I've got some horsesh*t you can scoop for a few bucks, because the illegals will already be trained with everything else.

I don't think he's proposing anything as extreme as Communism, but a more socialistic state, similar to what most of Europe have IIRC.

Lt. Staplic wrote:I don't think he's proposing anything as extreme as Communism, but a more socialistic state, similar to what most of Europe have IIRC.

Yeah, I'm a Libertarian Socialist, not a Communist.

To me, it's a lot like the global warming issue: we know there's a problem, we know we could solve it, but no one wants to pay for it. There seem to be dozens of such issues...