But these are people who grew up doing the "responsible" thing and listening to the advice of teachers and parents. They made good grades whether or not they learned, did extracurricular activities whether or not they enjoyed them, and otherwise put aside any sort of personal decision-making for 21 years, in the idea that a college degree would get them "success."

Given that, it isn't enough to just say "get a job, bum." They need some new, concrete picture of how life works. With ideas like, do things you enjoy and practice hard to get better at them, not to impress other people. Or, work hard even at things you don't like, if it gets you the money, time, or skills you need to do something else later.

And then the question is, how would you arrange a family or a school that produces people who have these ideas naturally? Probably there'd be a lot more opportunities for kids to do meaningful work/play, apprentice learning a trade, and less focusing on getting into a prestigious school.

In their minds, they did the "responsible" thing. They got good grades, went $100k+ plus in debt, and are waiting tables at age 28. The problem is, they didn't do the responsible thing -- they used alot of someone else's money to learn a skill of very narrow utility. Now they need to pay the piper.

People lack a critical eye. It's amazing to me that people advise high school kids the way that they do.

Frankly, I don't know how people do it. My wife and I make a good buck, own a modest home and drive one 5 year old car. We don't owe anyone anything, and we save alot, so we're "broke". I don't know how people fit a $400 student loan payment in, while living a non-frugal lifestyle.

To be honest, every generation has had to do this, including the baby boomers. Getting a high paid manufacturing job with a pension and benefits right out of high school is a myth as far as I'm concerned, because it only happened for a few years in a few towns that happened to have factories in them.

But it isn't these people's fault for thinking so, they spent twenty years of their lives working "hard" (for the wrong definition of hard) and being told this lie.

This is the trend I've seen from my friends (even before Gen Y)

Parents came from middle class, work their ass off to provide for their kids. The idea is to give their kids the opportunity to do what they love instead of having to run the rat race.

For the parents that succeed, their kids end up picking something they love, but pay absolutely crap. But they're happy right? Well, not really. So now the friends' kids are growing up in a family where money IS an issue, and they learn to work hard for things. They don't necessarily get to do what they love, but they'll work for pay. One day they'll grow up and provide for their kids so their kids can do what they love.

This ends up being a moving sine wave where each generation repeats what their grandparents did. I'm not really sure if there is a better way.

>You think factory workers or fast food employees all love their jobs (without being a little brainwashed)?

They are all trained and required to act as though they enjoy their jobs when on-the-clock, yes. In current days, they are often not hired without showing some enthusiasm for the prospects, yes.

Strangely, it gets even worse when you move into well-paying fields like software, engineering, finance, etc. "Passion" is the hiring watchword.

Kid enjoys something that pays well? You'd think it would be the best of both words, until you realize the companies are filtering for passion for the company mission, a quality not usually found in actual human workers anywhere.

I hope they won't make that mistake again, or to quote Twain: Never let your schooling interfere with your education.

They might be wrong, but you haven't made a single point that contradicts this, nor have you made any constructive suggestions.

We're all lucky -- if your chosen profession (and, say, one that you invested 8+ years of expensive American college to get into) was an industry that had the air sucked out of it in 2008, you might not be so condescending.

I do get what you're saying, and I think there definitely is a type of person you're describing, but you're oversimplifying a measurably more complicated problem.

I was unemployed about 5 years ago before the recession had really dug it's teeth in and even then it was tough.

Spending days applying for every posting I was vaguely qualified for online and also physically hitting the pavement and handing out my CV to every business on the street.

Also having to make decisions about whether it was better to get my suit dry-cleaned so as to be more presentable if I ever got an interview or whether I should eat next week.

After a few month of this I get all kinds of people telling me I should "try harder" and "If you really wanted a job you would have one". Well what exactly do you expect me to do? I applied for hundreds of jobs and for the most part heard absolutely nothing back, I would try and call up and inquire about my application but whoever answered the phone generally had strict instructions to get rid of people like me ASAP.

Personally, I won't say to a candidate you SUCK or you did that thing the wrong way. I'll just apologize that another candidate took the position.

Advice from someone who was there: Go and build a network. Get the job from the network.

Regarding presentation, I was always washed, wore the best suit I could afford and paid attention to body language what I was saying to people. Not sure what else I could have done, it's not like you can suddenly become a handsome , charismatic person on a whim.

There was also the issue that many jobs wouldn't accept a CV and would simply direct you to an online or paper application where everything had to be filled into discreet boxes and provided little opportunity to make yourself stand out.

Of course the networking advice is good, most of the jobs I have had have been through networking with people I knew and getting in that way. This is easier in some places than others of course, since I was living in an industrial town in england there was not exactly a thriving tech scene. More a small collection of freelancers and satellite offices from larger companies.

The majority of people there worked for the government in one way or anther too, where the only way to get those jobs is to fill out the application form.

It is not always obvious as to how to get an "in" if you don't already know people.

If it's really as you say, perhaps a "safety net" is the last thing this "stuck" generation needs.

Basically as manufacturing declined the government stepped in and opened up many of their bureaucratic departments here. I think something like 60%+ of the jobs around here are for government of some form (either local or national).

We also have one of the highest unemployment rates in Europe. Combined with the fact that there is not really much of a tech scene here (most people have few qualifications at all) it is quite difficult to land development work.

My point is more that relocating or starting a business would require more resources than a typical recent college is likely to have access to.

I disagree that failing to get a job in 3-4 applications represents a problem with your resume/presentation/etc in all circumstances. While there are certainly times that's true (if you're an engineer in the current market, for example), there are many industries where there are simply too many qualified people applying for too few positions for getting a job via a cold application to be anything other than a complete crapshoot. (which, again, only emphasizes the importance of having a network to support your search).

The majority of people do not want to be entrepreneurs so their only option is to work for someone else where you are faced with more external forces. When you're in that situation, most people want to do the minimum and earn the maximum which we know rarely works. Let's face it, being an entrepreneur is not for everyone. It's a lot of work and responsibility; something the majority of 20-somethings can't handle.

>Another quipped about a living wage

I would feel discouraged too if I was only being paid $15 an hour after going to school for 4 years.

I agree with you, there are definitely things you can do to ameliorate yourself and improve your chances of finding a job. You don't seem to have the "average person" mentality of doing just the minimum to achieve your goals, so I sense some disconnect there. I could just be reading into it too much.

Even for say doing some freelance programming which has low costs since all you need is a computer and some open source software. As soon as you start your business you will be cut off from government benefits so you will not have any income until you get your first payment.

Since most companies interested in hiring you for a job will not want to pay you up front since as a new business your going to be seen as pretty high risk your going to need a way of covering your living costs for at least 2-3 months most likely.

If your fresh out of college and already riddled with debt the chances that you have those kind of savings in the bank is pretty minimal.

I don't believe its beyond the capabilities of mere mortals today to do.

What people dislike about entrepreneurship is the search for something to sell to people. On the otherhand, many would prefer working for themselves if it could pay, and they had a clearly defined role to slip into.

Even small software companies now have the risk of Apple etc completely removing their distribution channel on a whim or a larger software company (or open source project) just replicating their entire product.

Agreed for products that are specific service, but if your product is driven by a users(facebook and twitter for example), it's damn near impossible for other companies to push you out of the way and achieve the same results once you reach a large enough user base. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, especially between generations of software, but usually not concurrently. (google+ vs facebook?)

It's a go big or go home type game and requires a fair amount of risk. It's not really a career choice in the same way as doing a trade would be.

At least now adays, we don't have to worry about wolves.

There's always some kind of work to be done for those willing and able to identify a market.

It's easy to forget that software is probably the least capital intensive industry that's open to a lone entrepreneur. Think about someone wanting to start, say, a basic small bakery operation. My wife did this, and the capital costs necessary to just get started and make that first batch of sales - ingredients, packaging materials, special implements like decorating tips - could easily be enough to deter someone who has little capital to work with. (And we already had a good kitchen with the majority of tools one would need). It's one thing to risk a month of time when you're otherwise idle, it's another to risk next month's rent payment as well.

Savings plays a huge role in flexibility. When you are in your 20s without family, it is eminently possible to bootstrap enough savings from a really crappy jobs and even temp jobs to have the flexibility to move if you need to and still live an okay lifestyle even in a new city. Been there, done that. Very modest but comfortable. You would not want to live this way forever but it is only a bootstrap. It also instills good habits toward not buying a lot of "stuff" once you have a good paying job.

I will add that this same pattern applies to people with very good jobs too. I know people making six-figures that swear they are just getting by, paycheck to paycheck, with no savings. Their definition of "absolute necessity" gets stretched to the breaking point but they literally do not know how to live on less money. I do not have much sympathy in cases like this but it is also part of a larger pattern of people militantly refusing to live below their means.

It's rather the definition of the slump we're in: the economy as a whole is spending less and taking fewer risks. So no matter what they do, there are only so many jobs. No matter how many of them start their own businesses, there is only so much spending going on.

And while it's obvious and correct that perspective- and attitude-adjustments can only help and that whining and blaming never does, to think that a run of life like that won't have eroded people's attitude and outlook is something between naive and crass.

Let's assume, for this discussion, that what you say is true, and that many people are stuck by perceived not actual problems. That's not good for them, or for the economy.

What would you do to help them move forward with their life? How would you help them break out of this cycle? What changes would you make?

Or is it really as simple as telling them to "man up"? To "get on their bike"[1]?

[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Tebbit)

> *"I grew up in the '30s with an unemployed father. He didn't riot. He got on his bike and looked for work, and he kept looking 'til he found it."

So, I agree that "woe is me" won't get you anywhere, but also everything is fucked-up and on fire. Thank goodness for software, though I doubt this ride will last much longer either. Someone will find a way to cut our cost out of the equation for good.

So I agree. These people sound foolish. It is entirely possible to move but that means getting rid of shit and people do not want to get rid of their shit. It's a bit sad really.

I also would expect some sort of tipping point: "Oh, you can't afford to live in the city because you can't get a job in pharma too? Wow, our generation is having a tough time."

I'm 30, own about 15% of a home and have a wife and kids. I've never been unemployed. I attribute this to not expecting the world to give me anything, like a living wage, student loans, cheap mortgage, etc.

Plenty of people in my peer group are also successful, but there are still those who 'fail' and go from scheme to scheme trying to get a high paying, easy job.

At the end of the day, life is not a video game and you are not the hero. If you're lucky, you might might be a middle manager on the death star construction team.

Let's have some perspective - when kids decide whether and where to go to college, and agree to take on its debt, they are 17 and know nothing about the world, about job markets, about mortgage rates, about growth industries and dying industries. They are told by their parents and other adult influencers to study what they are passionate about because in America you can be whatever you want to be if you try hard enough and if you go to a good school. So the dumb 17-year-olds of this "whiner" generation went to college during a strong economy and played along with all the adult assurances that they would do great, and they graduated to a world with no work and especially not for most people who studied something they were "passionate" about.

It's such crap to scorn people for regretting decisions they were led into when they were clueless. People need to take responsibility for their own success, but our society needs to be thinking long and hard about how it has failed this generation and how to avoid failing the subsequent ones.