New theory: PREVIOUS generations had a sense of entitlement

[Lindagerr]

Some food for thought, this was in my church bulletin and I found it interesting. It gave me a pause to ponder the implications.

[SIZE=2]GLOBALIZATION AS AN OLD PHENOMENON[/SIZE]

[SIZE=2]People today generally understand globalization as an economic phenomenon.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=2]However, the Gospel saying that “man shall not live by bread alone” (Matt. 4:4)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]
should be interpreted and understood more broadly. The truth is, as the saying

goes, that bread for myself is a material value, bread for my neighbor is a spiritual

value and a moral obligation. We cannot live by economic development alone, but

we must seek “every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.” (Matt. 4:4) This

means that we must pursue values and principals that transcend economic concerns.

Once we accept these, the economy becomes a servant of humanity, not its

master.

It is my firm conviction – and I believe it can easily be understood by all, independently

of religious or political persuasion - that economic development in itself and

the globalization that serves it lose their value when they cause deprivation among

the many and excessive concentration of wealth among the few. Moreover, the

evolution of globalization in this direction cannot be limitless; at some point, we

shall face a dead end in the world’s economy. Beyond a certain limit, an individual

or small group obsessed with financial gain receives a response that had been well

-known since ancient times: “You cannot take from someone who does not have.”

Solon (638-558 B.C.E.), the legislator and one of the seven ancient wise men,

once declared that Athenian society was not functioning properly because of the

excessive indebtedness of the majority of its citizens to the few. He therefore instituted

what was called


[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]seisachtheia, [/SIZE][SIZE=2]namely the writing off of all debts. The debate,[/SIZE]

[SIZE=2]then, about world debt is not new. Although Solon’s initiative seemed at first to be[/SIZE]

[SIZE=2]to the disadvantage of the rich, in the end it benefited the entire Athenian community[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]
because it allowed all of its members to act as free, creative, and self motivated

citizens rather than as each other’s slaves.

The example of Solon, and many others like this through the centuries, reveals – at

least in a general manner, since economy is a very complex phenomenon – how

economic progress is morally justifiable and successful when all the members of

the global community are able to participate. The current situation in our unequal

world poses familiar questions of economic morality but on a scale that would be

hard for Solon to imagine. Still, although we are speaking of new challenges, it is

evident that we are dealing essentially with an aggravated form of ancient problems.

The ancient Athenians excelled “not by bestowing any advantage on the rich,

but by the poor sharing equally with the rich.” By the same token, when Athens fell

into an anarchic democracy, and its rule was reduced to control by demagogues,

its former glory was eclipsed. The same has occurred, in the ancient past a well as

in more recent times, with every society, which Aristotle (384-322 B.C.E.) would

call “oligarchies,” where the basic presupposition of life was the possession of

wealth by the “few” (or, in Greek, the

[/SIZE]


[SIZE=2]oligoi[/SIZE][SIZE=2]).[/SIZE]

[SIZE=2]from ENCOUNTERING THE MYSTERY, by His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch[/SIZE]

[SIZE=2]Bartholomew, pp 159-161.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]




Edit: sorry I had some cut and paste problems






[/SIZE]

[skyfall123]

Nice post Linda

There are companies that are able to prosper while taking care of their employees, even during times of recession.

At Lincoln Electric, a Leading Maker of Welding Machines, Jobs Are Guaranteed - ABC News

Page 2: At Lincoln Electric, a Leading Maker of Welding Machines, Jobs Are Guaranteed - ABC News

If you have the mentality (as a manager or citizen) that cutting jobs and laying off employees is the first response, then you will probably cut jobs first. If on the other hand, you pause and consider other options or ways of restructuring, you may be able to weather an economic downturn and keep people employed.

The problem is we have weak managers and weak CEO's that look for the easiest solutions to their immediate problems.

[ryoder]

I was laid off to the detriment of my entire small company of about 50 software engineers, managers, product people, marketing folks and admins and to the delight of hundreds of employees in India back in 2006. My famine was their feast. My loss and drunken sorry that weekend was their pay raise as economic opportunity left Florida and flourished in India.
Sad but reality.
I bounced back and didn't take a single check of unemployment, finding employment locally at another company.

My gut reaction is to make illegal, the firing of any employee in America and the subsequent hiring of the poor souls in India and other developing nations. I would like to hoard all of the wealth here in this country but it is not right to do this. These people are competing on the same playing field as I am and if they choose to take a lower salary and provide a comparable service, then they win.

Of course I don't think their services are near as high quality as American software developers but I am biased. I also believe Chevy products are far suprerior to the likes of BMW, Honda, Nissan and Mitsubishi and of course Toyota.

But as a lover of freedom and opportunity for all, I cannot deny those poor developers in India their information revolution.

[skyfall123]

We live in interesting times. The US government is the single largest employer in the US. There are also hundreds of thousands if not millions of jobs tied to government contracts (which probably includes the company you work for). The other area of job growth over the last decade is Health Care.

We have pressure on the government to reduce spending and we have a push to reform Health Care as it makes up 16-17% of GDP. So the two areas that have provided job growth over the past ten years are unlikely to continue to provide job growth.

Which means that the 10% unemployment is likely to remain/rise regardless of who is in office.....and we will continue to outsource jobs. Which jobs are next?

Interesting read here:

Assuming that the markets will fix these problems by themselves is not a good idea; it may be approximately true for the global economy as a whole, but is not necessarily for its parts. In truth, all countries, including successful emerging economies, have addressed issues of inclusiveness, distribution,
and equity as part of the core of their growth and development strategies. Now advanced countries will need to follow suit. Confronting the tension between efficiency and distribution and attempting to strike an appropriate balance is critical.

The Evolving Structure of the American Economy and the Employment Challenge - Council on Foreign Relations

[LaterBloomer]

Ryoder, the point I was making was in the distancing between an actor, and the thing acted upon. If I owned stock directly in XYZ corporation, and I heard that they were doing something that I thought was wrong, I'd be on their case. Maybe go to a stockholder's meeting, or consider not voting in members of Board of Directtors (or whomever it is that stockholders elect). Now, I'm contributing to a pension (yes, I'm VERY lucky), buying IRAs, and putting in to deferred comp. It's lazyness on my part, but I couldn't tell you the name of one stock held by one of the mutual funds or the pension plan. If I learn that someone in a company whose stock I owned ran it into the ground but is getting a golden parachute, a golden handshake, and gold bullion up his a$$, I would have raised holy heck. I'm just saying that I don't think the mutual funds have any inclination to act on that sort of thing. Are these big stock offering companies, stockbrokers, mutual funds, etc. all in cahoots with each other? Or is it that they don't feel that they had a sense of responsibility? Also, while I'm not a knee-jerker about stopping jobs going from America to other countries, I have concerns. Yeah, folks scream out our polution controlls, government regulation etc. I can't help but think, however, that China will soon be one toxic wasteland. When we do this to our planet, where do we go next? It's great if you think there's a Rapture, but the rest of us will be stuck with grey air, brown water, and Pampers up to our hips. The pollution isn't going to be staying in the BRIC (?) countries. It' will be working its way to us from Brazil, Russion, India, and China.

[MomOfMany]

Just as an FYI

There are mutual fund companies that specialize in helping clients only invest in companies that follow certain ethical parameters. They give rather harsh critique for their investors.

Ave Maria is one example.

[MomOfMany]

I think a bigger problem is that the majority only have work based options for funding investments and healthcare. Those should have no place in employer/employee relations. Both while handle that outside of their work and certainly not have whatever their employer offers be their only options.

[blu2blu]

I have been traveling these last few days and didn't make it to a computer much. How this discussion has evolved!

Frankie: sorry to hear about your situation and yes I have heard of WWII. And would you really pay higher taxes so that everyone could have a job? That sounds like communism. Pay a ton of taxes but then the government gives you everything you could ever need. Didn't work for the USSR.

Ryoder, I have to say that I agree with a lot of your points. Especially your post about not needing to justify laying off employees. I do not see how loyalty could possibly figure into a situation like that. Maybe loyalty to a company was worth something long ago but that is clearly no longer the case. Also the liberals...you are correct there.

So you tell me when the kids my son went to school with get new fancy cars every 2 years live home with Mommy and Daddy until they are 30 years old and are satisfied to collect unemployment for 6-30 months "because we can". Who is the entitled generation?

At least my generation worked many years BEFORE we thought we were entitled to anything.

This statement assumes that your generation had zero people living with their parents or off of the government for years at a time if not their entire lives.

As for the lack of jobs, I am not sure what markets are being discussed but there seem to be plenty of jobs in the Phoenix metro area. There are plenty of jobs in many disciplines advertised on USAJobs (Fed jobs) and the State of AZ job website.

As for the private sector there are tons of jobs on careerbuilder, phoenix.jobing.com, and linkup (not linkedin) but those are only the tip of the iceberg. During my transition class they spent a great deal of time teaching us how to job hunt. One of the statistics that was cited was that only 7% of all open positions are advertised either in print or online, with the obvious exception of government jobs that are required to be posted. So for every job you see online there are at least ten more unadvertised, but finding these will require 'pounding the pavement.'

If nothing else works out then every security company in Phoenix seems to be hiring a ton of Guards. These jobs only pay about 10-16 per hour but they require little training (usually company provided) and one can get to work very quickly. Got a BA/BS in anything at all? Enterprise Rent a Car can't seem to find enough applicants for their management training program.

If folks are located in a place where there are not this many jobs available maybe it is time to move.

Perhaps extending jobless benefits time and time again was worse thing the gov't could have done. Could it be possible that a lot of the unemployed are holding out for a 'good' job and refuse to take a lower position? Would some people rather not work at all if they cant wear a suit and tie than be a security guard or flip burgers?

[Lindagerr]

@ blu2blu you act as if anyone including a 50+ man supporting a family could live on $10 -16/hr. Have you done the calculations? My 21yo son works for $10 an hour. That means he brings home about $325-$350 a week X 4.3 weeks a month that equals $1397-1505 I don't know the cost of living in Phoenix, but here in NJ that would maybe get him a studio apartment at $800/month which leave about $705 That has to pay Utilities ($30-80), car insurance $150-250) ,food ($100-200) ,gas for car($200-350) so that adds up to $480-880per month. So unless you never have a car break down need to go to the doctor or have any other expenses you might survive. Now that is one person. If you add a family of 2-3 children and a realistic mortgage payment and car payments and on and on $10-$16 dollars an hour woun't work. Men who have been making $35-$80per hour have lived a better life style, even if they wanted to sell there house or cars they would not gain very much because of the economic downturn. For the kind of jobs these men are looking for it is not what you find in the paper and even if you get an interview they won't hire you because of age. Also a lot of companies are going to the "don't even look at them if they don't have a job" plan so someone who loses his job because his company went bankrupt is going to be in the same place as someone who isn't looking for a job.

My husband was out of work for 171/2 months we had gone through all our savings we had cut back to the bone and we were starting to build up our credit card debt. My husband was trying VERY hard to find a new job. If Unemployment hadn't extended we would have lost our home and had nothing. This after he had 30 years with his company.

So yes some people are scamming the system and sitting back collecting unemployment not looking for a job does that mean the ones trying and needing the benefits should be punished too?

We make too many generalizations. most of the people I know worked hard all of their life and saved and never had a significant time without work before. That doesn't mean there are not some of my age that have lived oof the dole and sat on their arse doing nothing. I feel more are doing that now and the unrealistic ways we try to help them are only making them weaker. I just think we need to stop judging the many by the few and be realistic about what is happening in this country on all sides.

Oh by the way it is a researched fact that presently more 20 somethings are still living with their parents then ever before and for longer into their 20's

[ryoder]

I am stuck in the middle. As a 35 year old, I am not old and not young at the same time.
I have never once collected an unemployment check and have maintained consistent employment since I was 14 years old.
The secret to my success is keeping myself current and keeping my skills in-demand. I actually think that staying with a single company for 30 years is a recipe for disaster under the new social contract.

People who stick around for that long, in my opinion, rob themselves of rich experiences outside the "four walls" of their current employer. This stagnates their growth and makes them dependent on that one employer for their livelihood. This is especially true in niche industries.

Keep your resume diverse, your skills up-to-date and your expectations realistic and you will have a much better chance of being attractive to future employers and maintaining continuous employment.

I feel for the people who have lost their job and cannot find employment but we all must realize that it is really every man for himself out here and it is now a global job marketplace.