Noah smith, liar or dumbass?

[catastrophe]

Don't millennials/genZers pretty much have to have more education? Not sure if it's just hyperbole but I keep hearing more and more stories of positions requiring a 4 yr degree when the job description quite frankly doesn't even require a full high school education.
One primary source anecdote: Mrs BAC (works for Satan in O&G) mentioned that they have job openings for admins. She also noted that all of the current admins... Most of which have been working there between 15-20 years, are not qualified for the new hire admin positions they are looking to fill

Probably some hyperbole, but younger millennials gen z and their parents have probably been hoodwinked a bit in this regard. There are a lot of god jobs out there that don’t require university or advanced degrees, but most of the managerial/hr/etc. type jobs do. Couple that with the high price of college nowadays and in recent times and the number of people getting worthless degrees or degrees for low-paying sectors and there you have it.

There are tons of good jobs in tech, manufacturing and the trades that don’t require advanced degrees.

Imo the trades are only going to become more valuable and less and less people will be able to do even the most menial of tasks in the future.

education equals wealth. always has. always will.

That is one of the least helpful graphical representations of data I've seen in a long time. Like as charts go that person deserves whatever the equivalent is of a business ass kicking.

[Justwin]

Don't millennials/genZers pretty much have to have more education? Not sure if it's just hyperbole but I keep hearing more and more stories of positions requiring a 4 yr degree when the job description quite frankly doesn't even require a full high school education.
One primary source anecdote: Mrs BAC (works for Satan in O&G) mentioned that they have job openings for admins. She also noted that all of the current admins... Most of which have been working there between 15-20 years, are not qualified for the new hire admin positions they are looking to fill

Probably some hyperbole, but younger millennials gen z and their parents have probably been hoodwinked a bit in this regard. There are a lot of god jobs out there that don’t require university or advanced degrees, but most of the managerial/hr/etc. type jobs do. Couple that with the high price of college nowadays and in recent times and the number of people getting worthless degrees or degrees for low-paying sectors and there you have it.

There are tons of good jobs in tech, manufacturing and the trades that don’t require advanced degrees.

Imo the trades are only going to become more valuable and less and less people will be able to do even the most menial of tasks in the future.

education equals wealth. always has. always will.

Prove that education and income are not simply correlated.

[Spracne]

YOU CAN'T STEVEDAVE YOU FUGGIN COWARD

[DQ12]

There are plenty of cheap houses in a lot of the flyover town that really thrived decades ago.  Fewer houses in the big metro areas.

Small town America kind of dying is an impact on the current housing situation that I don't see discussed very often.  A lot of our boomer parents that got these low cost homes lived in places like Norton, Kansas.  You too could buy a low cost home in Norton, Kansas!

my understanding from folks that grew up in Norton size towns in western KS is that only old & small houses are cheap and that the newer & larger homes are quite expensive as thre is a limited number of them and most come with a sizeable piece of property

the other thing to consider is nobody wants to live in Norton, KS

No doubt.  And I'm not saying they need to.  I'm saying citing the difference between Boomers' first home prices vs. millenials'/z's first home prices is apples and oranges when you consider the respective differences in location preference/requirements.

There's a higher proportion of the population now that demands/requires to live in the same place(s).

[Kat Kid]

There are plenty of cheap houses in a lot of the flyover town that really thrived decades ago.  Fewer houses in the big metro areas.

Small town America kind of dying is an impact on the current housing situation that I don't see discussed very often.  A lot of our boomer parents that got these low cost homes lived in places like Norton, Kansas.  You too could buy a low cost home in Norton, Kansas!

my understanding from folks that grew up in Norton size towns in western KS is that only old & small houses are cheap and that the newer & larger homes are quite expensive as thre is a limited number of them and most come with a sizeable piece of property

the other thing to consider is nobody wants to live in Norton, KS

No doubt.  And I'm not saying they need to.  I'm saying citing the difference between Boomers' first home prices vs. millenials'/z's first home prices is apples and oranges when you consider the respective differences in location preference/requirements.

There's a higher proportion of the population now that demands/requires to live in the same place(s).

This does not seem true based on remote work alone.

[wetwillie]

The avg size of a house in the US is 50% bigger now than in the 80's when boomers were buying their first house.

[DQ12]

There are plenty of cheap houses in a lot of the flyover town that really thrived decades ago.  Fewer houses in the big metro areas.

Small town America kind of dying is an impact on the current housing situation that I don't see discussed very often.  A lot of our boomer parents that got these low cost homes lived in places like Norton, Kansas.  You too could buy a low cost home in Norton, Kansas!

my understanding from folks that grew up in Norton size towns in western KS is that only old & small houses are cheap and that the newer & larger homes are quite expensive as thre is a limited number of them and most come with a sizeable piece of property

the other thing to consider is nobody wants to live in Norton, KS

No doubt.  And I'm not saying they need to.  I'm saying citing the difference between Boomers' first home prices vs. millenials'/z's first home prices is apples and oranges when you consider the respective differences in location preference/requirements.

There's a higher proportion of the population now that demands/requires to live in the same place(s).

This does not seem true based on remote work alone.

You think rural areas are growing faster than Urban/metro areas?

[Cire]

American house culture is absurd

[DQ12]

The avg size of a house in the US is 50% bigger now than in the 80's when boomers were buying their first house.

This is a big part of it too, imo.  Developers aren't really interested in building "starter homes." 

OT, but along these same lines, it upsets me when I see people tearing down older kind of crappy/small houses in places like Prairie Village to build some 7 figure home.  I think it's a sin to tear down inhabitable/inhabited houses.  You want a giant mcmansion?  More power to you.  Build it in Stillwell or some plot where there's not already a house. But that plot in Prairie Village already has a house that someone would pay solid value to live in.  I don't know if there ought to be a law/regulations prohibiting that sort of thing, but I do think it's immoral. 

[michigancat]

might be relevant.

https://twitter.com/_fat_ugly_rat_/status/1783509097968492710

since it's absolute values it's kind of difficult to tell how things shifted post covid

[Skipper44]

  at the big jump in the MTN time zone - seems too much to solely post covid remote workers

[catastrophe]

American house culture is absurd

It really is something.

[wetwillie]

Is America House Culture the desire to own a home?

[michigancat]

Is America House Culture the desire to own a home?

I think of it as single family suburban homes with large yards combined with a significant profit motive. I'm sure elements of those elsewhere but it seems a bit extra in the US

[catastrophe]

I mean I don’t use it as a defined term but I’d consider it a feeling of entitlement to owning a house in a preferred location as well as tying up a significant part of your self worth in the kind of house you own.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

The avg size of a house in the US is 50% bigger now than in the 80's when boomers were buying their first house.

This is a big part of it too, imo.  Developers aren't really interested in building "starter homes." 

OT, but along these same lines, it upsets me when I see people tearing down older kind of crappy/small houses in places like Prairie Village to build some 7 figure home.  I think it's a sin to tear down inhabitable/inhabited houses.  You want a giant mcmansion?  More power to you.  Build it in Stillwell or some plot where there's not already a house. But that plot in Prairie Village already has a house that someone would pay solid value to live in.  I don't know if there ought to be a law/regulations prohibiting that sort of thing, but I do think it's immoral.

Morality and capitalism are mutually exclusive ideas. And I’m pretty sure, at least since like 1960, every time these ideas have collided, capitalism is undefeated

[wetwillie]

next we should explore the American Car Culture

[nicname]

next we should explore the American Car Culture

And interstate highways

[DQ12]

The avg size of a house in the US is 50% bigger now than in the 80's when boomers were buying their first house.

This is a big part of it too, imo.  Developers aren't really interested in building "starter homes." 

OT, but along these same lines, it upsets me when I see people tearing down older kind of crappy/small houses in places like Prairie Village to build some 7 figure home.  I think it's a sin to tear down inhabitable/inhabited houses.  You want a giant mcmansion?  More power to you.  Build it in Stillwell or some plot where there's not already a house. But that plot in Prairie Village already has a house that someone would pay solid value to live in.  I don't know if there ought to be a law/regulations prohibiting that sort of thing, but I do think it's immoral.

Morality and capitalism are mutually exclusive ideas. And I’m pretty sure, at least since like 1960, every time these ideas have collided, capitalism is undefeated

I mean, they're different ideas, but not incompatible, imo. 

[michigancat]

I would say capitalism is based on a form of morality

[DQ12]

I would say capitalism is based on a form of morality

Yeah, the idea that you ought to be compensated at an agreed-upon sum for the value of work and property seems pretty moral compared to the alternative.

[star seed 7]

This reminds me of an interesting point I had never really considered. I was watching a streamer doing one of those political quiz type things and the question was something like "does a business have any ethical responsibility beyond making money" and the guy basically argued that no, they have no ethical responsibility except following the law. The state has the responsibility of not letting businesses be lawfully unethical. In essence I fully agree with that, and asking businesses (or people) to act ethically without legal framework is a pipe dream.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

I would say capitalism is based on a form of morality

Yeah, the idea that you ought to be compensated at an agreed-upon sum for the value of work and property seems pretty moral compared to the alternative.

fair enough, i guess i should have been more precise with my wording, instead of saying capitalism as in like the theoretical version, i instead should have said capitalism as in the (inescapable) reality of how it is exists in reality today. Just because a sum is agreed does by no means imply that the sum is not exploitative.

As they say, and it bolsters what ss7 just said, "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" and i yes i realize you didn't say ethical you said moral, however i would argue that the way you are using the word moral there is a tremendous amount of overlap with ethical

[DQ12]

I would say capitalism is based on a form of morality

Yeah, the idea that you ought to be compensated at an agreed-upon sum for the value of work and property seems pretty moral compared to the alternative.

fair enough, i guess i should have been more precise with my wording, instead of saying capitalism as in like the theoretical version, i instead should have said capitalism as in the (inescapable) reality of how it is exists in reality today. Just because a sum is agreed does by no means imply that the sum is not exploitative.

As they say, and it bolsters what ss7 just said, "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" and i yes i realize you didn't say ethical you said moral, however i would argue that the way you are using the word moral there is a tremendous amount of overlap with ethical

I don't know what any of this means but I also don't really care to have some further deep theoretical, semantics driven argument about it.

I'm going to go buy a burrito and not wrestle with the ethics/morality of the transaction.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

I would say capitalism is based on a form of morality

Yeah, the idea that you ought to be compensated at an agreed-upon sum for the value of work and property seems pretty moral compared to the alternative.

fair enough, i guess i should have been more precise with my wording, instead of saying capitalism as in like the theoretical version, i instead should have said capitalism as in the (inescapable) reality of how it is exists in reality today. Just because a sum is agreed does by no means imply that the sum is not exploitative.

As they say, and it bolsters what ss7 just said, "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" and i yes i realize you didn't say ethical you said moral, however i would argue that the way you are using the word moral there is a tremendous amount of overlap with ethical

I don't know what any of this means but I also don't really care to have some further deep theoretical, semantics driven argument about it.

I'm going to go buy a burrito and not wrestle with the ethics/morality of the transaction.

sounds good, enjoy your burrito!