'AI' to hit hardest in U.S. heartland and among less-skilled: study

[jmotivator]

PS: I also went to a trade school in the LATE 90's to learn IT, and it too cost me about seven thousand dollars.
It's how I tried to recover from losing $350 thousand dollars in the 1994 Northridge Quake.

And that school wound up on a list of schools under investigation for being a diploma mill, but they recently got a get out of jail free card because the entire case against all those schools has now been wiped out.

I wound up learning what I learned on the job instead.

You always learn most of what you need on the job. The certificate is more of a proof you can learn than a proof you know the job. I graduated knowing enough to be dangerous.

I like to tell the young'ins coming up in the business that they pay me the big bucks not for what I can do, but for what I know not to do.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The first run away AI truck to kill a bus load of kids will bring a major halt to AI trucks sharing busy roads..

Did the first runaway CONVENTIONAL truck bring a major halt to conventional trucks sharing busy roads and force us all back into horse drawn drayage? No. The courts determined responsibility, the parties involved settled, tragedy was mourned and everyone learned something.

It is incredible to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel given your positions on other issues. Suddenly here in this thread you sound like a handwringing mall mom when in other threads you strut about like a guy in a flannel vest with bare biceps and a "Kill Em All - Let God Sort Em Out" tattoo.

Life is a contact sport and technology introduces new risks, and new progress. Some of that comes in the form of mistakes, and there has never been a 100 percent guarantee of safety in ANYTHING that we do.

More than likely, AI trucking will already feature fail-safes that any vehicle that isn't sending the requisite data when it is supposed to into a COMPLETE STOP mode.
We're not talking about some derp in his Tesla flying into a bridge abutment at 130 while texting in autopilot mode, we're talking about what will most likely be ELECTRIC trucks on short haul routes doing 35 to 45 mph and sticking to TRUCK ROUTES.
The first examples will most likely be the trucks that come and pick up your trash bins every week. They do about 15 mph.

 

[PirateMk1]

Seriously? Did you even look at the rubric article?

Job training to perform some sort of work that (1) is less susceptible to being replaced by machinery and that provides one with a decent income.

• Four fundamentals of workplace automation
• Jobs lost, jobs gained: What the future of work will mean for jobs, skills, and wages
• The Risk of Automation for Jobs in OECD Countries
• THE FUTURE OF EMPLOYMENT: HOW SUSCEPTIBLE ARE JOBS TO COMPUTERISATION?
• The computerisation of European jobs

In other words, training to do something at the bottom of the list on the right side of the image below. A good place to start is with anti-indolence training.



Red:
If they're not, well, that'd be among the types of training they need, now wouldn't it....

A point I would like to make is your graph is slightly off. Its sorta reversed on the potential of being automated. Business and finance is well on its way to being automated to very high degree as is every occupation on that list eventually. The motivation to automate is money. Think of accounting software and how its made accountants more productive with much smaller staff. You can see that translating now in a lot of higher paying areas like engineering with CAD CAM programs and the like turning from simple drawing programs into sophisticated engineering suites that can do routine modeling of all sorts and automating many tasks. This increases every year. Engineers are becoming more and more automated requiring less of them. That trend is accelerating with use of automation to take over the functions of a team of many to a few that make design decisions and do iterative models to arrive at their final product. My point is that production increases are going to occur were it is most easiest to deploy AI and makes sense economically. Its easier to deploy an automated system in a closed controlled environment that it is to introduce them into the wild.

 

[SDET]

How many people do you know who aren't creative, won't ever design software regardless of how hard they try to learn? You surely know some.

Multiply that by seven billion, remove "duplicates". How many billions will have no place in the "new order"?

It's a strange thought, but those might be the new disabled.

 

[What if...?]

Are you as truly as stupid as you make out to be? I am thinking not quite.

You live in Los Angeles, people down there people are usually hustling and have a side gig or two. Same up here in Montana were somebody is doing or hustling usually lines up with the seasons instead of whole year around.

You mean to tell me Joe six pack cant own either his own business using his specialty robots, or be in a partnership with different companies doing different things like plumbing or what have you. People need things and they need services. You mean to tell me that Joe six pack cant get a piece or two of that pie? That joe six pack cant have shares of the big companies? That Joe six pack cant hustle up work for his machines, like he does today except for himself?
Is what you are saying that Joe six pack incapable adapting and overcoming and eventually thriving in a automated age. Is that what you are saying?

Not every Joe Sixpack or even most of them, no.

Just look around you. How many people do you know who couldn't compete in that environment? How many just built to follow? Most of them weren't born with those "chops" and few of them can develop them.

And I don't know how one buys robots with no income. "General" types like you posit would be the most expensive of all.

 

[PirateMk1]

Not every Joe Sixpack or even most of them, no.

Just look around you. How many people do you know who couldn't compete in that environment? How many just built to follow? Most of them weren't born with those "chops" and few of them can develop them.

And I don't know how one buys robots with no income. "General" types like you posit would be the most expensive of all.

This country at one time before the industrial revolution most people were self employed. They farmed, hunted and produced goods and services for sale. Most people at one time did have the chops to compete and did so.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

You always learn most of what you need on the job. The certificate is more of a proof you can learn than a proof you know the job. I graduated knowing enough to be dangerous.

I like to tell the young'ins coming up in the business that they pay me the big bucks not for what I can do, but for what I know not to do.

Are you trying to call me a liar?

I said that Glendale Career College was one of a gazillion diploma mills under investigation.
They promised training in an IT career and all they did was teach a few people how to do a basic web page.
The brochure talked a lot about data centers, server management, infrastructure, software design.
They did a two week "intro" that devoted about twenty minutes and a few paragraphs about those items, the third week was a test to see if we remember the intro, the fourth week was a beginning HTML class and by that time your 30 day grace period was up and you were locked into your loans. That is how a diploma mill does what they do.

The rest of the eight month curriculum consisted of nonsense devoted to orphan equipment, multimedia presentations from companies that "forecast" stuff and "contests" to see who had the best web pages.
The last month the job placement dept helped a few people get on at part time help desk gigs in fields they knew nothing about.

Yes, of course you learn A LOT of what you need on the job. But for instance, when I went to film school, I emerged with the ability to figure out ANY flatbed film system, (Kem, Steenbeck, Moviola) any nonlinear system and any videotape system, and I had a lot of experience operating them all.

I walked into Laser Pacific and figured out LaserEdit in FOUR HOURS when it was taking most of the older guys four WEEKS.
I walked into American-Russian TV and was up and running on a NewTek Toaster system in two days with a week to spare.
I learned how to use a Grass Valley system LITERALLY in ten minutes as the broadcast was HAPPENING...I simply sat down and KNEW what to do thanks to my training. I learned ON THE AIR, did not make ONE mistake.

On the contrary, I had to learn the 568B pinout from a drunken electrician who marveled that I had emerged from an IT school not knowing how to wire an RJ-45 jack. They TALKED about ethernet a lot, they TALKED about it and talked about it.
We never even saw so much as a SLIDE and the "handouts" they gave us (instead of books) didn't cover it, they just TALKED about it.

That's NOT a trade school, not by ANY standards.

Similar story: MY DAUGHTER.
She enrolled in Marinello Beauty Academy.
Three weeks in, she told us that the teachers weren't even TEACHING anything, just sitting around in class and babbling.
And they weren't CUTTING HAIR.
Three MONTHS in she was supposed to be getting ready to take her state exams for her cosmetology license and she was freaking out. We had TO SUE THEM. I recorded our conversations with Financial Aid and, knowing that I might not be able to use the recordings directly in court, I still was able to arm our attorney with all she needed.

They SETTLED and our daughter did not owe a dime and we re-enrolled her in Toni&Guy Hairdressing Academy Los Angeles. She graduated top of her class, had her license a week later and a job a week after that and is now a senior stylist at one of the top men's salons in Los Angeles. And she has managed to pay off her loan.

Sorry J, you don't get to control the messaging by putting lipstick on a pig you don't own. Just think of yourself as lucky, you didn't get burned. But PEOPLE DO, and unfortunately in the Age of Trump, the folks who operate shady fly by night operations are now back in the clear again.

In other words, if we were to try and sue Marinello today, we would be S.O.L.

 

[iguanaman]

Most systems are modular. Module fails it sends a message to repairbot that simply runs over and replaces the module.

Make the modules modular and another robot can repair the bad module by replacing the failed card(s) inside. Cards maunfactured by robots.

Industrial robots are not just "cards". They have complex hydraulic and electric motors, hoses and solenoids that need actions that are not practical for self-service.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

This country at one time before the industrial revolution most people were self employed. They farmed, hunted and produced goods and services for sale. Most people at one time did have the chops to compete and did so.

Oh wonderful, another "gamer" that believes we can just transition back to the "Little House on the Prairie" days.
Do you spend ANY of your time in the real world, EVER?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I'm sorry, what trade are you talking about that only makes $25k a year?

The people applying are maybe making 25K a year right now. Stop screwing around. Stop playing, this is not Romper Room.

And do you ever expect a college education to be cheaper? than $30k? Add to the much lower cost of a trade school the fact that you are earning 2 years earlier than you would even get your college degree.
Colleges have been turning out boat loads of useless degrees for years and years. Do you think making them cheaper would fix that?

Either you're playing the troll bait game or I'm going over your head, but there is no scenario where you apparently figure out the simplest points, that being that too many folks cannot afford the training on their own dime even if they have the ability, and too many schools are crooked with ZERO recourse.
We need to do better or else we are guaranteed a future with 35 percent unemployment as a "New Normal", it is as simple as that.

I've about lost patience with your nonsense. You're clearly just amusing yourself.

 

[jmotivator]

Are you trying to call me a liar?

Nope.

Your experience and my experience differ. I did my research and found a trade school in a valuable kill in the IT market, went to night school, got all the requisite certifications, used them to leverage my first IT job and have been gainfully employed in the field ever since. It sounds like you didn't do you homework before choosing "Glendale Career College".

People have signed up for "film school" and left with no real skill as well. Likewise, a relative of mine got an bachelors degree in acting from Virginia Tech... care to guess how much he has used that degree? Is that his fault or VA Tech?

After years of doing nothing with that degree I helped him through IT trade school and he's finally gainfully employed.

You go throw down a ridiculous wall of text like your experience gives you some credibility that I lack. I've lived a life too, you may be surprised.

 

[RetiredUSN]

did the first runaway conventional truck bring a major halt to conventional trucks sharing busy roads and force us all back into horse drawn drayage? No. The courts determined responsibility, the parties involved settled, tragedy was mourned and everyone learned something.

It is incredible to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel given your positions on other issues. Suddenly here in this thread you sound like a handwringing mall mom when in other threads you strut about like a guy in a flannel vest with bare biceps and a "kill em all - let god sort em out" tattoo.

Life is a contact sport and technology introduces new risks, and new progress. Some of that comes in the form of mistakes, and there has never been a 100 percent guarantee of safety in anything that we do.

More than likely, ai trucking will already feature fail-safes that any vehicle that isn't sending the requisite data when it is supposed to into a complete stop mode.
We're not talking about some derp in his tesla flying into a bridge abutment at 130 while texting in autopilot mode, we're talking about what will most likely be electric trucks on short haul routes doing 35 to 45 mph and sticking to truck routes.
The first examples will most likely be the trucks that come and pick up your trash bins every week. They do about 15 mph.

ah huh!

 

[Mithros]

"Roughly media income"? I think you are off by about 62%.

Also, do you have a link to the study you are using for income? I've seen studies that put the income at about $50k for a college graduate, but they are not actually surveying graduates, or even a random sampling of college grads, just employers and select degree categories.

Plus, there appears to be a correlation between loan participants and the federal government running out of money. But that is all beside my point.

I was not arguing that the federal government is losing money, I am arguing that the program is separating cost from value in higher education, which it is. If two students gets a degree in, say, social work, one from a school that charges $40,000 versus one from a school that charges $90,000, they will both end up paying the same for their education assuming the same pay for the same job, so there is no incentive for colleges to price competitively, nor for students to shop competitively since the the actual realized debt payments per discipline for a degree is normalized.

Median personal income is in the 30’s, median household is in the 60’s.

And you’re right that colleges cost too much now and private loans are killing students. I’m not sure forcing more students into private loans is a good solution.

But you make a great point. College costs are completely detached from any real market forces. That has to change

 

[jmotivator]

The people applying are maybe making 25K a year right now. Stop screwing around. Stop playing, this is not Romper Room.

Ah, well then your argument is stupid. College applicants are making minimum wage when they apply for college.. the point is not what they can afford right now, it is what they can make when they graduate. Not everyone does their homework, and they follow degrees with no marketability regardless of the school that is giving it out.

Either you're playing the troll bait game or I'm going over your head, but there is no scenario where you apparently figure out the simplest points, that being that too many folks cannot afford the training on their own dime even if they have the ability, and too many schools are crooked with ZERO recourse.
We need to do better or else we are guaranteed a future with 35 percent unemployment as a "New Normal", it is as simple as that.

I've about lost patience with your nonsense. You're clearly just amusing yourself.

When your a goat every seems like a troll.

People can't afford stupid degrees, for sure... but schools still like taking their money for stupid degrees all the same. Now the stupid degrees cost less because you only have to pay 100% of 1 years salary over 10 years no matter what **** job it landed you.

You get a degree in French beat poetry and it only costs you the equivalent of 1 year's barista salary at Starbucks. What a bargain!

 

[jmotivator]

Median personal income is in the 30’s, median household is in the 60’s.

And you’re right that colleges cost too much now and private loans are killing students. I’m not sure forcing more students into private loans is a good solution.

But you make a great point. College costs are completely detached from any real market forces. That has to change

It's not the private loans, it is the fact that they only have to pay 100% of their average income of their first 10 years of employment. A payout that scales to your income just removes incentive to pursue a reasonably priced education.

 

[Xelor]

That’s a good post. One caveat, I’ve suspected that this graph was made by a business person.... and they confirmation biased themselves way down on the list.

My advice would be to first go into STEM, especially the E. If that’s not a good fit, pick up a trade.

Thank you.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Nope.

Your experience and my experience differ. I did my research and found a trade school in a valuable kill in the IT market, went to night school, got all the requisite certifications, used them to leverage my first IT job and have been gainfully employed in the field ever since. It sounds like you didn't do you homework before choosing "Glendale Career College".

People have signed up for "film school" and left with no real skill as well. Likewise, a relative of mine got an bachelors degree in acting from Virginia Tech... care to guess how much he has used that degree? Is that his fault or VA Tech?

After years of doing nothing with that degree I helped him through IT trade school and he's finally gainfully employed.

You go throw down a ridiculous wall of text like your experience gives you some credibility that I lack.

Okay, I give up, my responses are "ridiculous walls of text" which means you stared at it for two seconds, gleaned the opening and hit reply.
Glendale Career College and Marinello Beauty School did amazing presentations, the likes of which, if you didn't ALREADY HAVE the degree, would sell you.
You did your research? So did I, so did THOUSANDS.
But to you, it isn't even remotely possible that schools exist that put on a good front and that people, even smart people, get tricked.

You didn't even read what I had to say, we're done. I am not interested in you talking past me.
You're the kind of person who, unless it happens to you, it can't possibly be real, and everyone's just "making an excuse".
The only problem with that is, I described how a real school trained me, and the results I got.
You probably didn't see that because it was part of my "ridiculous wall of text".

I've lived a life too, you may be surprised.

You appear to be functionally incapable of understanding other people's experiences.
BYE...see ya.

 

[Xelor]

You have a point. I should have clarified. That the training they may need is not job training, but training in entrepreneurship, and business.

Okay.

Training is training, for the most part. Nobody expressly called the training I and my siblings received in K-12, college and grad school "job training," yet that's precisely what it amounted to.

• Mind, some of the skills, such accounting theory and practice, were taught discretely; others, such as analytical and research skills, were cumulatively taught, developed and honed progressively.
• It's also worth noting that with my BS degree, I had all the skills one needs to have a remuneratively fine career. I just didn't want to be a public accountant for the rest of my life, which I why I pursued graduate studies. That said, a good deal of what's taught in master's programs is no different than what's taught in baccalaureate programs. It's just that folks who already have bachelor's degrees get masters degrees because a bachelor's degree has a core curriculum requirement that a master's degree does not. At the doctoral level, well, that's a whole different "ballgame," for PhD programs culminate with one materially contributing something new to the body of knowledge about a topic rather than merely being held accountable for mastery of the preponderance of extant knowledge in the field one studies. (That contribution needn't be "Earth shattering," but it must answer a germane question(s) that either hasn't before been asked or that hasn't before been adequately answered.)

Whatever type of training folks need is what they need. As a "mere" citizen, you, I and most others need only, via our votes (perhaps activism too), accord approbation to candidates who advocate for (or against, if that be one's preference) policies and programs that facilitate delivering the requisite training to the people who need it. The people who manage and administer those policies and programs, collaborating with the folks who need the skills, are who must determine what specific forms of training to deliver/offer.

 

[Xelor]

A point I would like to make is your graph is slightly off. Its sorta reversed on the potential of being automated. Business and finance is well on its way to being automated to very high degree as is every occupation on that list eventually. The motivation to automate is money. Think of accounting software and how its made accountants more productive with much smaller staff.

You can see that translating now in a lot of higher paying areas like engineering with CAD CAM programs and the like turning from simple drawing programs into sophisticated engineering suites that can do routine modeling of all sorts and automating many tasks. This increases every year. Engineers are becoming more and more automated requiring less of them. That trend is accelerating with use of automation to take over the functions of a team of many to a few that make design decisions and do iterative models to arrive at their final product.

My point is that production increases are going to occur were it is most easiest to deploy AI and makes sense economically. Its easier to deploy an automated system in a closed controlled environment that it is to introduce them into the wild.

Red:
The graph is not off. What can be and increasingly will be automated in business are rote tasks.

The inclusion of business at the bottom refers to business innovation and the key decision to capitalize one's resources by forming a business is very unlikely to be automated. Tasks that rely on innovation and effective/sagacious exception processing -- be it, say, seeing a new way to make money or deciding how to overcome an unexpected happenstance/status -- don't readily lend themselves to automation. That might not be so when every possible scenario can be programmatically accounted for, but we're a very long way from that being realized. In short, the greater the potential for task-level dynamic uncertainty and variability, the lower the value of attempting to automate a given task.


Blue:
Well, of course, manager will exchange labor for capital when the cost of doing so militates for doing so. The whole point of running a business (once the firm has passed its introductory period, which can last for a lustrum or so) is to maximize profits. If/when replacing labor augurs to return greater profits, that's the smart thing to do, given a firm's existential raison d'etre. Firms don't exist to employ workers; they exist to produce profits.


Tan:
Ever firm's implementation and ongoing use of systems/robots is "in the wild."

 

[PirateMk1]

Oh wonderful, another "gamer" that believes we can just transition back to the "Little House on the Prairie" days.
Do you spend ANY of your time in the real world, EVER?

Actually I run a logistics company primarily and I am partners in a aerospace prototyping company, I specialize in the airframe mock ups and layouts and ergonomics. I am also the Bubba for the destructive Bubba tests.

The world needs things moved and thats what I do for my bread and butter. Logistics wienies like me see the trends before anyone else. This year is going to be slower than last year economically. Not a recession, but not a boom year either. The yearly shipping contract rates and volume guarantees are down. Expect a fairly choppy market running a slight upward trend channel for most of the year with muted seasonal swings. Part of my "training" is historical comparisons to tease out future trends. To find the old things that are new again, like the saying. The more things change the more they stay the same. Amazon is the new Sears and Roebuck of old with a twist. The "gig" economy is expanding and many people actually like it, especially the flexibility. People are not loyal to companies anymore because that loyalty is no longer reciprocated. There are lots of signs about that employment as we know it now is about to revert to a form more closely resembling what it used to before the industrial revolution.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Actually I run a logistics company primarily and I am partners in a aerospace prototyping company, I specialize in the airframe mock ups and layouts and ergonomics. I am also the Bubba for the destructive Bubba tests.

The world needs things moved and thats what I do for my bread and butter. Logistics wienies like me see the trends before anyone else. This year is going to be slower than last year economically. Not a recession, but not a boom year either. The yearly shipping contract rates and volume guarantees are down. Expect a fairly choppy market running a slight upward trend channel for most of the year with muted seasonal swings. Part of my "training" is historical comparisons to tease out future trends. To find the old things that are new again, like the saying. The more things change the more they stay the same. Amazon is the new Sears and Roebuck of old with a twist. The "gig" economy is expanding and many people actually like it, especially the flexibility. People are not loyal to companies anymore because that loyalty is no longer reciprocated. There are lots of signs about that employment as we know it now is about to revert to a form more closely resembling what it used to before the industrial revolution.

My oldest brother was head of logistics for Northrup-Grumman for thirty years. I know what your job is.
It all sounds valid until I hit the part about most folks "liking" the new "gig economy"...specifically the "liking" part more than anything else.

Companies aren't loyal to anyone anymore?
Yes, you're absolutely right, it is true. Not only do I realize you're right about that, I've experienced it, and watched my peers experience it. I do not know a single family who "likes" it at all.
I know a few young single people who like it but that is because they are young, single, footloose and fancy free.
Try it once you hit 47 and have two kids getting ready for college and you're carrying a few other responsibilities that might be health related or similar.
It's even less fun at sixty-two.

There are lots of signs about that employment as we know it now is about to revert to a form more closely resembling what it used to before the industrial revolution.

Before the industrial revolution, we were an agrarian nation. It was the 1750's.
You say that you're pretty good at discovering the old things that are new again.
I BELIEVE YOU.

However, I believe that your perspective is that of a person who lives and works in Montana.
I do not know your age or how much time you have spent in the parts of the world that aren't Montana.
If you spent two years in Fresno or Turlock, California...that doesn't really count.

We're not the thirteen colonies and it's never going to be 1750, or even 1811, or even 1835 ever again.
Just a suggestion that you might want to adjust your perceptions, maybe just a wee bit.
The "many people" who say that they like the new gig economy just might not have ever experienced anything else in their entire lives. Again, adjusting perspective might be a good idea.

I realize that me saying all of this might be meaningless to you, which means you will dismiss it as the rantings of an old man.
Trust me, you wouldn't be the first person to do that.
I have two adult kids, 23 and 25.
I went through the period where everything I said to them was dismissed as the rantings of an old man.

 

[Mithros]

It's not the private loans, it is the fact that they only have to pay 100% of their average income of their first 10 years of employment. A payout that scales to your income just removes incentive to pursue a reasonably priced education.

When did that go into effect?

 

[PirateMk1]

My oldest brother was head of logistics for Northrup-Grumman for thirty years. I know what your job is.
It all sounds valid until I hit the part about most folks "liking" the new "gig economy"...specifically the "liking" part more than anything else.

Companies aren't loyal to anyone anymore?
Yes, you're absolutely right, it is true. Not only do I realize you're right about that, I've experienced it, and watched my peers experience it. I do not know a single family who "likes" it at all.
I know a few young single people who like it but that is because they are young, single, footloose and fancy free.
Try it once you hit 47 and have two kids getting ready for college and you're carrying a few other responsibilities that might be health related or similar.
It's even less fun at sixty-two.



Before the industrial revolution, we were an agrarian nation. It was the 1750's.
You say that you're pretty good at discovering the old things that are new again.
I BELIEVE YOU.

However, I believe that your perspective is that of a person who lives and works in Montana.
I do not know your age or how much time you have spent in the parts of the world that aren't Montana.
If you spent two years in Fresno or Turlock, California...that doesn't really count.

We're not the thirteen colonies and it's never going to be 1750, or even 1811, or even 1835 ever again.
Just a suggestion that you might want to adjust your perceptions, maybe just a wee bit.
The "many people" who say that they like the new gig economy just might not have ever experienced anything else in their entire lives. Again, adjusting perspective might be a good idea.

I realize that me saying all of this might be meaningless to you, which means you will dismiss it as the rantings of an old man.
Trust me, you wouldn't be the first person to do that.
I have two adult kids, 23 and 25.
I went through the period where everything I said to them was dismissed as the rantings of an old man.

I am 45. I have lived in California most of my life specifically Bakersfield. I have had continuous residence in Bakersfield from 1979 till this last year, even when I had a couple of year and a half tours overseas in the middle east back in the early 2000's. I have been employed and self employed. I prefer to be self employed. I cant be an employee anymore. I would suck at it, and I would hate it. I have been hunting, killing and bringing home the bacon since 2006. Thats long enough that I dont have those sorts of fears about failing anymore that I had when I started. **** I have started several things some of which were somewhat successful for a period, some that out right failed and couple that I am doing quite well with. I have been up and I have been down. I am living what I preach. Thats why I believe in it. I dont dismiss what you say. Its just my experience tells me otherwise. Especially after my time with my aerospace partnership. For a lot of the partners there, we dont have employees, its just one of many things they do. Only the primary engineers is the aerospace partnership their primary income source, for the rest of us like me it a supplementary income as well as a sort of hobby that I can write expenses off of. I do know one thing from my logistics experience that things they are changing, and major change is on the horizon and one has to adapt. Being in business for yourself allows you that flexibility you dont have when you are employed.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I am 45. I have lived in California most of my life specifically Bakersfield. I have had continuous residence in Bakersfield from 1979 till this last year, even when I had a couple of year and a half tours overseas in the middle east back in the early 2000's. I have been employed and self employed. I prefer to be self employed. I cant be an employee anymore. I would suck at it, and I would hate it. I have been hunting, killing and bringing home the bacon since 2006. Thats long enough that I dont have those sorts of fears about failing anymore that I had when I started. **** I have started several things some of which were somewhat successful for a period, some that out right failed and couple that I am doing quite well with. I have been up and I have been down. I am living what I preach. Thats why I believe in it. I dont dismiss what you say. Its just my experience tells me otherwise. Especially after my time with my aerospace partnership. For a lot of the partners there, we dont have employees, its just one of many things they do. Only the primary engineers is the aerospace partnership their primary income source, for the rest of us like me it a supplementary income as well as a sort of hobby that I can write expenses off of. I do know one thing from my logistics experience that things they are changing, and major change is on the horizon and one has to adapt. Being in business for yourself allows you that flexibility you dont have when you are employed.

I'm not much different.
I've been employed AND owned my own outfit, and even both simultaneously.

You believe in it, okay I take your word for it but again, we are not all Montana or Bakersfield.
And it isn't ever going to be the 18th and 19th centuries ever again.
If catastrophic factors put us BACK there again, the economic die-off will make Walking Dead look like a weenie roast.

This is a diverse, secular, modern, urban industrialized Western nation.
The nomad thing may work for young singles (yes, 45 is young, I graduated HS before you were born) but it's not a candidate for families who would like a permanent address.

 

[jmotivator]

Okay, I give up, my responses are "ridiculous walls of text" which means you stared at it for two seconds, gleaned the opening and hit reply.
Glendale Career College and Marinello Beauty School did amazing presentations, the likes of which, if you didn't ALREADY HAVE the degree, would sell you.
You did your research? So did I, so did THOUSANDS.
But to you, it isn't even remotely possible that schools exist that put on a good front and that people, even smart people, get tricked.

No, I read your post, but like I said, it was a silly "this is my life story, so your life story is false" kind of argument.

Also, you aren't helping your narrative by saying you were snowed by the sales pitch. I have yet to find a salesman who will tell you their product isn't for you. It's on you to corroborate their sales pitch with research.

I remember some schools I ruled out because their computer aptitude tests were absurdly easy and the "counselor" did nothing but rave about my scores.

You didn't even read what I had to say, we're done. I am not interested in you talking past me.
You're the kind of person who, unless it happens to you, it can't possibly be real, and everyone's just "making an excuse".
The only problem with that is, I described how a real school trained me, and the results I got.
You probably didn't see that because it was part of my "ridiculous wall of text".

I did read what you said, it simply wasn't relative to my statement. You had a bad IT school experience and a film school that prepared you for a career... that is not an argument for or against what I said.

You had a bad experience with a school that purported to prepare you for IT, I did not. The competing experiences say nothing about the cost of school or how it is funded. School could be FREE and that doesn't mean that people who don't do their homework in picking a school wouldn't wind up in a school that sucked.

You appear to be functionally incapable of understanding other people's experiences.
BYE...see ya.

Says the guy whose entire bull**** argument revolves around discrediting my experiences. :roll: