14 ms·

A CNN Viewer Has Questions for Mike Rowe

290 points by josephpmay 13y ago

kungfooguru 13y ago
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-the-bills.html?hp http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-t...
- mooreds 13y ago
  I would love to hear Mike Rowe's reply to this. His answers had plenty of anecdotes, as did this article. My question is, where's the data?
  - protomyth 13y ago
    He mentions the data several times, go look at the US Labor stats. Infrastructure jobs are open and we don't have the skilled workers to fill them. ND is importing welders from Canada while road work on the eastern side of the state gets delayed. ND has stats on that too. Some jobs cannot be outsourced. [edit: skilled workers are need more in infrastructure / construction then factories]
    - ryandrake 13y ago
      "Number of available jobs" is a meaningless statistic. HN-ready example: I'd like to do a web start-up, if only I could find skilled engineers. I'm willing to pay 100 experienced, skilled Java programmers $10/hr to build the site. What? No takers? Not one?? Well, there you go! 100 jobs unfilled. Skills gap! You can't offer poverty-level wages for skilled jobs, then complain that "we don't have the skilled workers" when college educated workers instead choose to go sell shoes at the mall.
      - kareemm 13y ago
        Rowe addresses this in his article. He describes many of the available jobs as being well above minimum wage. Granted it's anecdotal data, but in the absence of better data, number of available jobs seems to be the best way to determine whether there's a skills gap.
      - macinjosh 13y ago
        That argument is a bit disingenuous if you ask me. A company that legitimately needs worker would be forced to raise their offered wages until they can find employees or would be forced to go out of business. I think the problem is that society has told young people that if they have a 4-year degree they should be making mid to high wages right out of school just because they have a degree. In the real world employers need people with skills not people with a piece of paper. If you were to learn a skill right out of high-school you could live off of $10 to $12 per hour for a few years while you live with parents or roommates and overtime as your skills improve you should be able to earn much more and become independent. But no people would rather goof off at university for four years and have their high wages handed to them.
        stinkytaco 13y ago
        I think you might be a wee bit disingenuous as well. There are a few issues with so called "skilled labor" right out of high school: 1. Skilled jobs are hard jobs. They are often limited to men strictly due to the physical ability required (I used to work as a diesel mechanic and it was simply not a job that could be done by most women). This is obviously not universally true: machining, some welding, virtually all engineering can be done by women, but there's still a limiter for lots of jobs. 2. The work is hard. This isn't just an issue of "people preferring to goof off". It's hard labor. Given the choice of going to school and continuing that backbreaking work, I made the (wise) choice to go to school. 3. Because it's hard, it's not work for middle aged people. I live in North Dakota, a state that's attracting a lot of skilled labor right now, and it's predominantly young men because men into their 40s and 50s simply can't do it anymore. We need to consider the long term impacts of a workforce that doesn't extend into their 70s. 4. It's not always work that transfers well. Someone who is a computer programmer might be able to work for a long time and in many places, but a skilled laborer is more limited in their options. A machinist in Seattle when Boeing left? Tough break, move or find something else. Obviously this is true with many careers, and many skilled jobs have greater options (mechanics, some welders, engineers) but a skilled laborer is much more subject to the whims of nature than a white collar worker who's skills might be more transferable. I think it's as unfair to say young people want to goof off at college as it is to say that companies want to screw over workers. Young people make decisions for lots of reasons and though I agree that the systems in place to help them make those decisions (parents, school counselors, etc.) could advise them better, it's certainly not because they are goof offs who want a free ride.
      - Crito 13y ago
        This is a terrible analogy; If I were a Java programmer who was unemployed, struggling to find any job at all, I would take your shitty $10/hr programming job in a heartbeat. Of course I am not under/un-employed, so I have the luxury of telling you to take your shitty job offering and shove it. Your little scenario seems absurd to all of us because we all know that there are plenty of far better programming jobs available. We are not looking at a job shortage.
        pavel_lishin 13y ago
        Unless you were collecting unemployment, in which case the shitty $10/hour job would result in a net loss.
        Locke1689 13y ago
        Or the Java market is in the process of undergoing systemic changes and you're not yet a Java programmer, just someone with some technical skill who could spend time and money to becoming proficient.
        Crito 13y ago
        More than worth closing the resume employment gap.
        randomdata 13y ago
        There are better programming jobs out there precisely because there are fewer capable programmers than there are jobs. If we had more programmers than jobs, you would be looking at the $10/hr job right now, because if you didn't take it, someone else would jump all over it.
      - gaadd33 13y ago
        Wow, six figures for a welder in the Dakotas is poverty level? I can't imagine what you consider a livable wage.
      - EpicEng 13y ago
        Except they're not shitty jobs. You start low, yes, but you work your way up. Most of them are union. Soon you're making $25+ / hour with benefits and overtime. Yes, God forbid, what a horrible life.
    - mooreds 13y ago
      Are these the us labor stats that you are referring to? http://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag23.htm http://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag23.htm. Because, if so, it seems they paint a more nuanced picture than either side (shocker!). There are plenty of openings (113k), but the median pay is in the 40k/year range, not 55k starting mentioned. The unemployment rate is also higher than the national average. Not a bad career, but hardly the land of milk and honey.
    - Iftheshoefits 13y ago
      Anytime I hear "we have a shortage of workers" my first thought is, "for what jobs, and at what wage/working conditions?" Usually when a person says "I have a shortage of workers" they mean "I can't find enough chumps/desperate people to work for the ridiculously low wage I want to pay."
      - taeric 13y ago
        There is also the difference between jobs and careers. For many it is not enough to have a job that pays decently. They need one that is stable. Preferably with benefits that can make future planning easy. (And, by easy, I mean possible.)
- evanrich 13y ago
  It seems to me that these articles are talking about different sorts of jobs. They are both quoting the same numbers, but choose to use different application for those numbers. I would think there is some truth in both sides. For Rowe's part, he is talking about jobs that can not be outsourced and are not optional to those who need the work finished. Pipe fitting, maintenance through welding, and vague post-Katrina engineering jobs are jobs and skills that have to be done on site, and therefore can not be moved overseas. They also pay well. These are jobs that make up part of that 3.5M jobs number, but I would guess a small portion of it. The NYT article talks about machining and factory work. In this field, work can be done here or abroad, so the cost of workers is a commodity. Unless tax breaks help these factories bring higher wages or the owners are altruistic, in my mind we can count these jobs as already gone. Someone could take that job for a bit, making $10-15 an hour but as soon as the commodity cost of wages exceeds the cost of added transportation abroad or the cost of transportation falls or any number of little pieces that fall into the outsourcing equation change, those jobs are gone just like the rest. The issue with these jobs are that they are still considered skilled when technology is quickly making them unskilled.
revelation 13y ago
Neocon nonsense. But this just takes the cake: http://profoundlydisconnected.com/skill-work-ethic-arent-taboo/ http://profoundlydisconnected.com/skill-work-ethic-arent-tab...
- booruguru 13y ago
  Rowe is a bit difficult to figure out. Many of the things he says are are quite sensible, but they seem to be couched in neocon notions of American exceptionalism and blame-the-poor economics. I don't know much about him except from what I say during his appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher.
  - macinjosh 13y ago
    In what part of the linked exchange did he 'blame the poor'? There are many causes of poverty and I don't think lack of hard work is a big one. However when it comes to young people deciding how they will make their way in the world I think a lot choose to go into debt for a four year degree that won't help them in the real world. That is not a wise decision and so we should encourage those people to make better decisions even if they don't get their dream job right out of the gate at least they would be employable.
    - taeric 13y ago
      For a few of us, it reads as him basically blaming them for not taking the jobs he references time and again. Maybe that is unfair, but it does echo in the rhetoric to me.
      - tomrod 13y ago
        I think he'd be more likely to agree that people just don't know, as in there is an information problem.
        taeric 13y ago
        This doesn't fit with his rhetoric. "Doesn’t it make sense to fill those positions before we start demanding that companies create more opportunities that people don’t aspire to?" "And no matter where I went, the biggest challenge was always the same – finding people who were willing to learn a new skill and work hard." "Because virtually every single trainee decided it was just too damn hot. I’m not even kidding. They just didn’t want to work in the heat. And so … they didn’t." To be fair, he goes well out of his way to not directly criticize everyone. Only, it reads in the same way that I am going out of my way not to imply he is being an ass. :)
justin66 13y ago
Couldn't read the whole thing. I might actually agree with her but the questioner is strawman-level superficial and trite.
- selectodude 13y ago
  I think this is just the general level of discourse provided by the average CNN viewer.
- baddox 13y ago
  I can only imagine how frustrated Mike Rowe was answering those questions. It's a shame he's too tactful to scream "Maybe if you stop blaming literally everything on the political party you weren't raised as, you could spend a minute focusing on real ideas for solving problems!"
  - slurry 13y ago
    Not sure why it should bother us that a basic cable celebrity is getting frustrated with questions. It's not like people are asking Andrew Wiles to answer long division problems here. Low-to-middlebrow amateur political economy, by contrast, seems pretty solidly within the pay grade of a spokes-actor like Rowe.
  - peeters 13y ago
    If you read closely, you can see that it wasn't an exchange at all. JB wrote a paragraph with multiple phrases and questions, and Mike broke them into individual points and responded to each one in turn. As a result, the format deceptively makes JB look much more stubborn and ignorant than it would if they used a "quote" format rather than a conversation format.
tlrobinson 13y ago
MR: [long eloquent response] JB: "But REPUBLICANS" Repeat 5x
- leokun 13y ago
  JB wasn't responding, MR had broken up her questions to reply to parts of them.
quaunaut 13y ago
> Think about it. Universities get to decide how much money to charge their students. Likewise, parents and students decide if they can afford to pay it. It’s a pretty simple proposition. But when the government suddenly makes hundreds of billions of dollars in student loans readily available — under the popular (and voter-friendly) theory that “everyone should go to college” — we see an unintended consequence. Well that's also ignoring the point that colleges used to get the majority of their funding from States, and almost every major University now has the majority(and sometimes a >90% majority) of its funding coming from other sources. College used to be subsidized by society, and now it just isn't subsidized, and in his argument that entire position is ignored. Like most subjects this is a much more complex problem than either side lets on, but just because Mike Rowe is eloquent in his response doesn't mean that it isn't ignoring rather large portions of the facts.
- pachydermic 13y ago
  Also, because the US has an increasingly unequal income distribution, that makes a college degree relatively more valuable. In addition to the social-status factor it certainly still seems to pay off despite the increased tuition (http://priceonomics.com/is-college-worth-it/ http://priceonomics.com/is-college-worth-it/). My point is simply that maybe college costs so much more now because it's just worth it. It used to be that you could still do alright without a college degree, but a ton of manufacturing jobs have moved overseas and there's a ton of downward pressure on peoples' wages who don't have engineering and computer jobs. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that this is the reason why college is so expensive these days, but I think that it's a point which isn't brought up enough. I think there's a tendency to say: "oh well not everyone can have these high-paying jobs", "college isn't right for everyone", etc. which Rowe also says. Maybe that's true, but we certainly seem to have a shortage of qualified people in this country. Seems to me to be a failure of the educational system and while it makes sense not to saddle yourself with tons of debt for a degree if that degree won't help you pay off the debt, I don't think encouraging people not to get a higher education is a good idea either. Now I'm just rambling - I just wanted to point out that that attitude is a sign that something is wrong.
  - 13y ago
quepasa 13y ago
It's very telling how Rowe comments on how workers wanting more for less is the human condition, but then never considers the same about employers. One example he gives is of one employer who doesn't want employees with a union mind set. He also cites a "success" where a guy got good pay for working 60 hours per week. What could this mean? He doesn't want workers who want good benefits and overtime pay? I bet the $50k/year job he brings up expects 60 hours per week under physically demanding conditions without time and a half and pretty and weak benefits. If you make $15/hour and work 60 hours per week you start getting really close to $50k/year.
- crazy1van 13y ago
  > It's very telling how Rowe comments on how workers wanting more for less is the human condition, but then never considers the same about employers. Of course its true about employers. They are just humans, too. When they both agree on an acceptable level of compensation for a given task, you end up with a job. Just markets and no amount of high-minded legislation will ever change that.
pivnicek 13y ago
That font is garbage, hard to read, it's like they'd been downvoted on HN. Please end the light text trend, let us read.
- tomrod 13y ago
  Yes! So many websites are practically unreadable due to low contrast.
- dredmorbius 13y ago
  Contrast Rebellion: I've also found Readability (Instapaper and Pocket are similar) a huge breath of fresh air: http://www.readability.com/articles/jzhgvevd http://www.readability.com/articles/jzhgvevd There's also Stylish / Stylebot browser plugins which let you modify site CSS. I've ... become a tad addicted to that. /me checks. Yeah, over 700 sites that I've styled now. Contrast and font sizes are a big nit, nuking annoying elements is another. More drastic layout revamps are still another use, though I reserve that for a small number of sites.
infruset 13y ago
Can someone American explain what the core of the issue is for people like me?
- bcoates 13y ago
  American culture leads kids to believe that trades jobs have low social standing, so they borrow obscene amounts of money to go to college because they think it will get them a good job where they do paperwork for lots of money. Instead they wind up in debt working in an unskilled retail sales or service job, or just unemployed. If they had gone to a legitimate trade school[1] or even just an entry-level manual labor job that trains you they'd be much better off. [1] most of the trade schools in America are outright scams, signing up people for government tuition loans then giving them garbage education. Some of them are not, and anyone who graduates from them will have valuable skills that can support a family. Have fun finding out which ones, 17 year olds!
  - infruset 13y ago
    Thanks. I was a bit confused. In my country college is almost free.. I feel for you guys.
    - mortyseinfeld 13y ago
      In your country college is not almost free.....think about it.
wavesounds 13y ago
Why doesn't he have these jobs listed on his website? I have 2 friends who are unemployed one with a newborn who would be more then interested in those welding jobs he mentions. Does anyone have more information? Do you have to own your own gear? How much is school? Is there a lot of travel?
- tomrod 13y ago
  Try emailing him. I bet a few HNers could throw something together by next weekend.
- nhebb 13y ago
  He does: http://www.mikeroweworks.com/job-site/ http://www.mikeroweworks.com/job-site/
  - wavesounds 13y ago
    Thanks, clicking around I eventually found this website too http://search.jobsinwelding.com/jobseeker/search/results/ http://search.jobsinwelding.com/jobseeker/search/results/ But on both of these there are very few entry level jobs and the one I did find that actually listed the salary was only $22k a year!
pnathan 13y ago
I hadn't heard about Mike Rowe until he started his program to popularize the trades. It's an interesting perspective, and I don't really have a beef about it. But let me make a few factual points, borne out of my experience and the experience I have in growing up around tradespeople and being related to tradespeople. * The trades are physically hard labor edit: It might not be clear what this entails, as perhaps not everyone reading has performed it. It entails working 40-50 hours per week, in nearly all possible weather (for outside jobs), where you must maintain (in addition to the work itself) a personal fitness regimen not to be injured through strain. In the pursuit of this work, you will probably find yourself moving objects up to perhaps several hundred pounds, with possibly zero help. You will almost certainly be on your feet (or knees) all day except for breaks. * The trades expose you to non-negligable levels of risk of injury on a daily basis. edit: A few examples, taken from real life experiences. Falling off the roof of a house and breaking vertebrae - lifelong medication after that. Wearing out knee mechanisms due to going up and stairs with 50+ pounds in your hands daily for many years - lifelong care required. Heavy object falling onto shop floor within inches feet - would have chopped feet off or required cutting off the boots if the steel toes had held. Other examples readily available from medical professionals and friends in the trades. These risks are systemic in the trades by and large. * The trades do not pay well until/unless you specialize into certain areas. Let me clarify a bit on what I mean by paying well. I mean, bluntly, that trades frequently pay in (current US dollars) between 12 and 25 dollars per hour; frequently without benefits and (due to seasonal demand and project-based nature of the work) frequent lack of steady employment. Mike Rowe cited a welder's experience as a counterexample of my thesis. The fact that supply & demand makes certain skilled trades very valuable does not obviate the reality of the poor pay endemic to the field, paticularly for the semi-skilled and unskilled areas. All that being said, it's been documented in both popular culture and research that self-centeredness is on the rise; it's getting to be well understood that many modern Americans simply don't want to work hard in unpleasant conditions (Mike Rowe cited an example of people who quit training programs en masse in the SE US because of the heat). This has been borne out anecdotally by the number of immigrants doing these same hard work in unpleasant conditions while native-born "modern Americans" moan about being unable to find work. That doesn't meant that it's a particularly pleasant experience to find out that "pursue your passion" means very little in the broader job market, after you've pursued your financially negative ROI degree (with the utmost support of your parents, friends, and other authority figures). And that's something that I think should be brought out of this debate: don't ruin your life in the pursuit of a dream - be responsible with your dreaming; fulfil your duties and calculate your risks. edit: I don't have a real conclusion here. But I think it's reasonable to evaluate the risk/reward payoff for the trades and seek higher education as an alternative. I suppose a more knowledgable observer could draw some interesting connections between what unionization provides and what higher education degree jobs provide and infer some interesting conclusions. I can't guess as to what those conclusions are. I'd like to read some discussion on that topic sometime.
Aloha 13y ago
He's spot on. We Americans focus so very very often on how we disagree rather than how we agree. If you look at both parties, they broadly agree on so many things. Instead we focus on unimportant social issues, shaving a couple percent off government spending, and so on. The educational system we have now is largely a scam, it promises that if you spend tens of thousands (or more) dollars on a 4 year degree, you'd have a good job waiting on the other side, and its largely BS. We need vocational training, we need training for non white collar career options, and no one is really working on it. I make a salary of that of a skilled professional - with no formal education beyond high school - it's been a long fight to get here though, perhaps it could have been easier otherwise. The other problem with the current college education program is a lack of correlation between cost and outcome, it's something that needs to be looked into. He also hits on a point - the government doesnt create jobs, so it doesnt matter what congress does, or what the president does, its the job of the government to create a stable environment (regulatory and otherwise) so the economy can go and create jobs. I believe our government is largely failing at this. On to the skills gap - I disagree with him on one point, companies are largely unwilling to train - there are jobs for which I'm broadly qualified for, but can't get because I'm missing one specialized skill or another for. If companies were willing to train, they would be able to fill most of those unfilled jobs.
- mgkimsal 13y ago
  re: training - are your skills white collar or blue collar? He seems to be talking about physical labor jobs where employers are willing to train. I don't see that much on the IT side of employment, for example.
- drig 13y ago
  I kind of choked on his message of tolerance. We says we should stop talking about how we disagree, then he goes on a tirade against all the lazy, spoiled, stupid people. "We shouldn't disagree on party, but, if you don't agree with me and the GOP, you're a stupid, lazy slob!" He writes very well, but he's still spouting right-wing, pseudo-libertarian nonsense.
  - bittercynic 13y ago
yetanotherphd 13y ago
On education, Mike Rowe is correct, it's not in the government's hands what the price of education is. Now the government could choose to subsidize higher education fees more, but that would cost a lot of money so its a difficult choice to make. The problem with all discussion on jobs is that they are treated as a special kind of market where free market principles don't apply. Rowe doesn't even go as far as suggesting letting the market determine who works where. Cracking down on illegal immigration would help deal with the lack of jobs at the low end of the market, unfortunately hypocritical politicians find enforcing the law to be an untenable platform. In general though, jobs should come from having skills that are useful, not protectionism. We do need to be training people to fill the new class of technical positions and this includes programmers, even though it will lower the salaries of existing programmers.
mortyseinfeld 13y ago
For a leftist like Piers Morgan, it was a complete embarrassment to have a low-information voter asking ignorant questions when Mike Rowe just completely schooled her. I think your typical university is in panic mode right now. In 10-15 years, online will be the norm and these exorbitant tuitions will be a thing of the past.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  She was so low-information that it almost seemed like a setup. I mean, really, she asked the most superficial, talking-point-like questions that provided him with perfect runway to espouse his views. If he was going to write a script to allow him to peddle his world view, then her part would read exactly as it did. Almost too perfect.
bluedino 13y ago
Here's maybe a simple solution: Why can't it be made illegal to list 'college degree' as a requirement for a job? Everyone knows of jobs that any moron can do, but a college degree is required. Especially for white collar jobs in large corporations, you can't make it past the first layer of HR without a degree.
- eshvk 13y ago
  How is this going to solve anything? All this is going to do is bring in a flood of applicants to the job that has no listing of a college degree as a requirement. Then HR is going to reject a bunch of applications. At the end you are just moving the barrier to an internal portal.
  - randomdata 13y ago
    What you do, however, is remove the reason job seekers go to college in the first place. There are not that many jobs that actually require a degree, other than as a superficial filtering mechanism, so you can take them out of that system. The result is that demand for college decreases, therefore the price will decrease through the properties of supply and demand, which leaves an education that returns to being affordable for those who actually care about an education. You are right that businesses will have to find a new filtering mechanism, but it can be one that doesn't come at the cost of making education unobtainable to those who want an education.
    - eshvk 13y ago
      > What you do, however, is remove the reason job seekers go to college in the first place. There are not that many jobs that actually require a degree, other than as a superficial filtering mechanism, so you can take them out of that system. This is a second order effect which I am not so sure which actually happen reality. I posit that it is also likely that people move the requirements to an internal portal, everyone gets wind of such a thing, mainly when HR reps start writing that "breakthrough book" about secrets of getting your first job and everyone still keeps going to college.
    - 13y ago
rajacombinator 13y ago
This is incredible. Mike Rowe has a blog and he apparently understands economics (based on first answer.) once again HN has made my day.
alayne 13y ago
I don't buy the arguments that trade jobs are a good option. It's especially hard to swallow from a college graduate who belongs to an anti-union political party. Unless you are unwilling or unable to go to college, the numbers indicate that, on average, you will have much lower unemployment and a substantially higher lifetime income.
- randomdata 13y ago
  Markets still remain supply and demand driven. Industries that have roots in college educations have appeared more stable because the number of people with degrees has historically been relatively low. When we have more educated people than jobs that benefit from such an education, incomes will drop and it will become difficult to find work. The trades are starting to gain appeal right now because people have put more emphasis on getting a college degree in the past decade or so. That leaves fewer people able to take on trade work, which pushes for higher incomes and better jobs to the people who can. At the same time, college educated people are finding it increasingly difficult to find meaningful employment. Of course, if people follow Rowe's track in the future, it will swing back the other way again soon enough. That is why smart investors go to where nobody is showing interest.
  - alayne 13y ago
    Show me any evidence that college educated people, in particular, are having trouble finding employment. These numbers look extremely favorable http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm.
    - randomdata 13y ago
      Seeing as how we're talking about a relative increase in difficulty, I'm not sure what we're supposed to take away from a single data point? You can see here[1] that this decade has brought on a distinct change in unemployment rates for college graduates. The last four years averaged an entire percentage point higher than the highest rate ever seen before. Since we both seem to agree that unemployment rates are a reasonable metric for determining the difficulty of finding work, it seems pretty clear that it is more difficult now as a college graduate than it once was. [1] http://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screen-shot-2013-04-29-at-2-17-28-pm.png?w=1024&h=639 http://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screen-shot-2013-0...
gfodor 13y ago
Skate where the puck is going to be. How much confidence can you have nowadays that your job isn't one clever-roboticist away from being automated, if your main value contribution is skilled labor? The same economics that drive high pay for skilled welders who work in the heat also will drive dollars towards automating these jobs. If I have to pay a welder 100k a year now, if I can automate their job away for anything less than that then it's worth it. The truth is college is a form of leverage. If you get a solid degree you have basically added a skills multiplier to many things you will encounter in your career. The same cannot really be said if you become a master tradesman, since the deeper you go the less transferrable your skills become.
- spc476 13y ago
  MYCIN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycin), a program written in the 70s, was better able to diagnose infections than doctors. If failed because "in the 1970s, a session with MYCIN could easily consume 30 minutes or more—an unrealistic time commitment for a busy clinician." Now, with most medical information already computerized (or headed that way), how much better could a modern MYCIN be? What would this do to the career of a typical doctor?
  - kefka 13y ago
    This automation argument applies to everything in the US, and the world. Previously in the history of the world, we had to do things with our own hands, or use manual tools that used our hands. (Shovels, spades, rakes,...) Then we migrated to machines that we could sit in or stand in, that could greatly magnify our strength (vehicles, trains, gas powered stuffs). Now, we entered a realm back in the '60s with powerful automation via computers. And it's only gotten more powerful, smaller, and cheaper. But yet, computers have always been bad for many types of manual jobs because of fuzziness. And now, our computers are dirt cheap and damn fast. And they can handle fuzziness and broad input. And they are replacing jobs rather quickly. But so what? Whom does this make money for? Well, people who can afford the means of production. And that answer takes us back to a treatise that was written back in the late 1800's: The Communist Manifesto. But wait a moment... Communism fails because people seek "fair" compensation. For example, a doctor _should_ get paid more than a burger flipper, right? It seems logical that the more work you put into attaining the position should be relevant to the pay of that position. But what happens when those screws are turned, and you now compete with auto-doc or auto-flipper? You end up with lowering wages. Most of the times, those wages get lowered directly to 0. But we then hear the old saying: When the buggy whip manufacturers died out, it opened up automotive manufacturing. Well, yes. When a segment closes, another opens, but usually the segment is smaller. For example, when a factory is mostly laid off due to automation, the few that are kept are the ones that can program and debug software and hardware. And they then are also 'encouraged' to work harder. Then this harder is the new average. And these new employees are doing the work of 2-3 people, because it is what is expected of them to keep their job. And then automation takes over even these people, because automation can do the job of 10 people (or more!) with low error rates. But this is a look at an individual. Now, what happens nationally? Well, we see higher numbers of unemployed and subsidized users (food stamps, WIC, housing, other means tested benefits). But why? Because automation does work, and well. But it leads to the ones whom can afford it more money, and workers without. But is Communism the answer? Maybe... Or perhaps a post-capitalism answer is needed; one that blends all of the needs of citizens and some of the wants, whilst not ignoring that those whom work harder/smarter should also be compensated for their hard work. And of course, we've heard about the the Canadian program of Mincome, as well as Switzerland's possible venture into this territory. Is this a solution? I believe so, even as a simple humanitarian solution of compassion for fellow man.
Cowicide 13y ago
>most of the Republicans I know want the same basic things as most of the Democrats I know ... They all want a healthy planet That's a crock of shit right there. Most Republicans put the almighty dollar ahead of the environment and many still think global warming or climate change effects are a hoax. Mike Rowe must live in quite the small bubble.
- bmelton 13y ago
  I'm not a Republican, but I work with mostly Republicans in some of the charities I'm associated with, and at least anecdotally, that statement seems completely unsubstantiated, and carries about as much weight as "all Republicans are racists" or "all Democrats hate the rich".
  - Cowicide 13y ago
    Except I didn't say "all republicans" anything.
    - bmelton 13y ago
      Nor did I say that you did.
      - Cowicide 13y ago
        Please stop being obtuse. You obviously implied it with your post. >carries about as much weight as "all Republicans are racists"
        bmelton 13y ago
        What I implied was that a lie about "most" Republicans is just as asinine as a lie about all Republicans. Undeserved stereotypes don't have any place here, and as pragmatists, we should all be above them.
        13y ago
trekky1700 13y ago
"Only two countries have done this well: Germany and Switzerland. They’ve both maintained strong manufacturing sectors and they share a key thing: Kids go into apprentice programs at age 14 or 15. You spend a few years, depending on the skill, and you can make BMWs. And because you started young and learned from the older people, your products can’t be matched in quality. This is where it all starts." http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/vaclav-smil-wired/ http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/vaclav-smil-wired/
al2o3cr 13y ago
"In the next few years, this company anticipates 15,000 new openings for welders and pipe-fitters in the southeast. And the head of recruitment has absolutely no idea where the workers will come from. That should scare us all." Oh FFS. If the company can't find 15k workers perhaps they should consider raising wages. Mr. Rowe's show has clearly demonstrated that no matter how unpleasant 99% of the world might find a particular job there's somebody willing to hold their nose (or put on a gas mask, etc) and do it for the right price. Of course that's not really what most companies mean when they say, "we can't find workers": it's usually more "we can't find people who've already been trained who'll work for below-market rates while enduring blazing heat AND total shitbags for bosses - won't somebody make these uppity workers stay here?"
- lotsofpulp 13y ago
  Yes, I was disappointed in Mike Rowe that be basically wrote off the whole problem as people not willing to do hard work. Everyone is willing to do hard, physical labor where you risk handicapping yourself for life...it just has to pay comparatively well to office jobs. Then again, people around the world are competing for the same jobs nowadays, and obviously those with lower standards of living are going to do them for much cheaper, and all those manual labor technical jobs that don't require a mastery of English are going to go to China until the living standards equalize. Bottom line is make sure someone in a poor country can't do your job (probably an intellectual, specialized, English speaking job), otherwise be willing to compete with China.
  - EpicEng 13y ago
    And many people with degrees are delivering pizzas for a living while trying to pay off their student loans. That is a problem.
- eli_gottlieb 13y ago
  Excuse me, but don't you know that workers demanding compensation is un-American? They should be willing to work for little or nothing, not because they don't have material needs but because the purpose of life is to work. Work makes free, work is free! Workers should not be angry that they make sub-living wages, suffer union-busting management, cannot support families and have a tendency to drop dead or be laid-off before they can retire. They should be honored that it is thus! Praise Work, Work is great, blessed is the Name of Work! </dripping sarcasm> Or, you know, they're refusing to take jobs that don't pay them enough to not die slowly, because they've grown wiser since refusing to take jobs that actually killed them on a regular basis.
Cowicide 13y ago
Mike Rowe continuously spouts on a "skills gap" but doesn't seem to know anything about "job lock". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_lock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_lock He keep avoiding the topic of health care in the USA several times in the Q&A. Frankly, I think Rowe is out of his league here and doesn't understand that we need a true single payer system for health care: http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-faq http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-faq
- bcoates 13y ago
  Is there some reason to think health-care related "Job Lock" is a thing in the US after COBRA and HIPPA?
  - Cowicide 13y ago
    COBRA is vastly expensive for most Americans and does very little to combat "job lock" and HIPAA doesn't help the situation. COBRA: • COBRA is prohibitively expensive for most people who are attempting to transition to another job especially with the risks that are often incurred by switching to another job (see below) • It has a time limit. If it doesn't work out with new jobs, you can find yourself without any health insurance. For example, if you're forced to get a job in the meantime that doesn't provide insurance, COBRA won't qualify you. Also, even if the job did have insurance and they lay you off, COBRA is expensive and will drain savings (if one is fortunate enough to have savings in the first place). • If things go wrong after your transition to another job and you're expensive COBRA runs out you may get stuck with State-sponsored high risk pools with yet even more high costs, waiting lists, poor benefits. Of course, that is IF you're "luckily" enough to live in a state that has such a things. • If you dare apply for another job and your current employer finds out you're looking for another job and find an excuse to fire you, you can't qualify for COBRA. You're SCREWED. • Not all states are consistent in applying COBRA. Depending on which state you're in, if you're denied COBRA, you may be stuck. • If you want to leave a job to start your own business, you may not quality for COBRA and/or afford it in the first place. HIPAA does not ensure that a worker who changes jobs will have access to health insurance coverage on the new job or that the coverage offered will be affordable. Thus, neither COBRA nor HIPAA ensures affordability of health insurance -- the main cause of job lock.
lee 13y ago
One factor of the metric that there're "unfilled skilled positions" is that the pay for those positions is still incredibly low. Many of those positions offer compensation near minimum wage, or are laborious enough that it's not worth working for. So although there are unfilled skilled labor positions, many of those don't fit the supply/demand curve.
Yuioup 13y ago
Is this Mike Rowe of Mike Rowe Soft fame? Who got sued by Microsoft?
- Crito 13y ago
  No.
- possibilistic 13y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Rowe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Rowe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft
ablanton 13y ago
just to be clear, tuition is inversely proportional to the amount of funding the government gives to higher education: http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/pa/key/understandingtuition.html http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/pa/key/understandingtuition.html
Fomite 13y ago
I've always found it puzzling that many businesses believe that if they can't fill a job, it can't be because they're offering too low a wage - they invariably say the pay is fair. If went around trying to buy bread at what I thought was a fair price, and found no takers, my immediate reaction would not be "Well, bakers just don't want to work hard."
- spydum 13y ago
  It's a hard pill to swallow when you realize the cost of your business critical resources have gone up. I suspect most business sit in denial until their competitors who are willing to pay it and can figure out a working business model begin to eat into their wallets.
transfire 13y ago
Mike Rowe, advocate for the human machine. "60hrs? Lazy bums! A good hard working man only need 4hrs of sleep a night, and can put in 16hr days, six days a week. Just like the Good Book says." --Future Middle Class Worker
fotoblur 13y ago
Notice how the questioner seems to have someone else's actions to blame for the problems. This is often a narrow way of thinking and can be a deception in ones own view of the world. What I like most about Mike's responses are that he doesn't blame anyone, per se, but understands that these problems are best described by analyzing the current environment in which they become evident. Who could blame colleges for raising tuition when the current funding environment begged them too? Who could blame people for not wanting to work shit jobs in the heat but instead go to college and work at jobs that require instead a skilled intellect, pay more, and are more comfortable? And why shouldn't Mike talk about people who work hard, dirty jobs when a show about them made him famous?
kazagistar 13y ago
The current situation is somewhat problematic, absolutely. But I am pretty sure privatization of universities is exactly the wrong way to go. As far as a society goes, that would be putting the last nail in the coffin for social mobility... if anyone still believes in that. Prices won't drop. At some universities, they will just rise to make up for the lower number of students who are able to afford to pay tuition, and those who are able to afford it (the upper classes) will be able to attend. At other universities, the prices will indeed drop, and they will be unable to retain any truly talented professors, and become a second wave of community colleges and trade schools. And with that, the ability for children of the lower classes will be even more entirely cut out of the ability to rise anywhere beyond our shrinking middle class. The reason blue-collar work is avoided is that it is a dead end. And as factories close down, the remaining work is more and more just packing boxes and stocking shelves at minimum wage.
wwarner 13y ago
In my state of Washington, tuition increased due to a voter approved cap on taxes, exactly the opposite Rowe's claim.

290 points by josephpmay 13y ago

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-the-bills.html?hp http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-t...

mooreds 13y ago
I would love to hear Mike Rowe's reply to this. His answers had plenty of anecdotes, as did this article. My question is, where's the data?
- protomyth 13y ago
  He mentions the data several times, go look at the US Labor stats. Infrastructure jobs are open and we don't have the skilled workers to fill them. ND is importing welders from Canada while road work on the eastern side of the state gets delayed. ND has stats on that too. Some jobs cannot be outsourced. [edit: skilled workers are need more in infrastructure / construction then factories]
  - ryandrake 13y ago
    "Number of available jobs" is a meaningless statistic. HN-ready example: I'd like to do a web start-up, if only I could find skilled engineers. I'm willing to pay 100 experienced, skilled Java programmers $10/hr to build the site. What? No takers? Not one?? Well, there you go! 100 jobs unfilled. Skills gap! You can't offer poverty-level wages for skilled jobs, then complain that "we don't have the skilled workers" when college educated workers instead choose to go sell shoes at the mall.
    - kareemm 13y ago
      Rowe addresses this in his article. He describes many of the available jobs as being well above minimum wage. Granted it's anecdotal data, but in the absence of better data, number of available jobs seems to be the best way to determine whether there's a skills gap.
    - macinjosh 13y ago
      That argument is a bit disingenuous if you ask me. A company that legitimately needs worker would be forced to raise their offered wages until they can find employees or would be forced to go out of business. I think the problem is that society has told young people that if they have a 4-year degree they should be making mid to high wages right out of school just because they have a degree. In the real world employers need people with skills not people with a piece of paper. If you were to learn a skill right out of high-school you could live off of $10 to $12 per hour for a few years while you live with parents or roommates and overtime as your skills improve you should be able to earn much more and become independent. But no people would rather goof off at university for four years and have their high wages handed to them.
      - stinkytaco 13y ago
        I think you might be a wee bit disingenuous as well. There are a few issues with so called "skilled labor" right out of high school: 1. Skilled jobs are hard jobs. They are often limited to men strictly due to the physical ability required (I used to work as a diesel mechanic and it was simply not a job that could be done by most women). This is obviously not universally true: machining, some welding, virtually all engineering can be done by women, but there's still a limiter for lots of jobs. 2. The work is hard. This isn't just an issue of "people preferring to goof off". It's hard labor. Given the choice of going to school and continuing that backbreaking work, I made the (wise) choice to go to school. 3. Because it's hard, it's not work for middle aged people. I live in North Dakota, a state that's attracting a lot of skilled labor right now, and it's predominantly young men because men into their 40s and 50s simply can't do it anymore. We need to consider the long term impacts of a workforce that doesn't extend into their 70s. 4. It's not always work that transfers well. Someone who is a computer programmer might be able to work for a long time and in many places, but a skilled laborer is more limited in their options. A machinist in Seattle when Boeing left? Tough break, move or find something else. Obviously this is true with many careers, and many skilled jobs have greater options (mechanics, some welders, engineers) but a skilled laborer is much more subject to the whims of nature than a white collar worker who's skills might be more transferable. I think it's as unfair to say young people want to goof off at college as it is to say that companies want to screw over workers. Young people make decisions for lots of reasons and though I agree that the systems in place to help them make those decisions (parents, school counselors, etc.) could advise them better, it's certainly not because they are goof offs who want a free ride.
    - Crito 13y ago
      This is a terrible analogy; If I were a Java programmer who was unemployed, struggling to find any job at all, I would take your shitty $10/hr programming job in a heartbeat. Of course I am not under/un-employed, so I have the luxury of telling you to take your shitty job offering and shove it. Your little scenario seems absurd to all of us because we all know that there are plenty of far better programming jobs available. We are not looking at a job shortage.
      - pavel_lishin 13y ago
        Unless you were collecting unemployment, in which case the shitty $10/hour job would result in a net loss.
        Locke1689 13y ago
        Or the Java market is in the process of undergoing systemic changes and you're not yet a Java programmer, just someone with some technical skill who could spend time and money to becoming proficient.
        Crito 13y ago
        More than worth closing the resume employment gap.
      - randomdata 13y ago
        There are better programming jobs out there precisely because there are fewer capable programmers than there are jobs. If we had more programmers than jobs, you would be looking at the $10/hr job right now, because if you didn't take it, someone else would jump all over it.
    - gaadd33 13y ago
      Wow, six figures for a welder in the Dakotas is poverty level? I can't imagine what you consider a livable wage.
    - EpicEng 13y ago
      Except they're not shitty jobs. You start low, yes, but you work your way up. Most of them are union. Soon you're making $25+ / hour with benefits and overtime. Yes, God forbid, what a horrible life.
  - mooreds 13y ago
    Are these the us labor stats that you are referring to? http://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag23.htm http://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag23.htm. Because, if so, it seems they paint a more nuanced picture than either side (shocker!). There are plenty of openings (113k), but the median pay is in the 40k/year range, not 55k starting mentioned. The unemployment rate is also higher than the national average. Not a bad career, but hardly the land of milk and honey.
  - Iftheshoefits 13y ago
    Anytime I hear "we have a shortage of workers" my first thought is, "for what jobs, and at what wage/working conditions?" Usually when a person says "I have a shortage of workers" they mean "I can't find enough chumps/desperate people to work for the ridiculously low wage I want to pay."
    - taeric 13y ago
      There is also the difference between jobs and careers. For many it is not enough to have a job that pays decently. They need one that is stable. Preferably with benefits that can make future planning easy. (And, by easy, I mean possible.)
evanrich 13y ago
It seems to me that these articles are talking about different sorts of jobs. They are both quoting the same numbers, but choose to use different application for those numbers. I would think there is some truth in both sides. For Rowe's part, he is talking about jobs that can not be outsourced and are not optional to those who need the work finished. Pipe fitting, maintenance through welding, and vague post-Katrina engineering jobs are jobs and skills that have to be done on site, and therefore can not be moved overseas. They also pay well. These are jobs that make up part of that 3.5M jobs number, but I would guess a small portion of it. The NYT article talks about machining and factory work. In this field, work can be done here or abroad, so the cost of workers is a commodity. Unless tax breaks help these factories bring higher wages or the owners are altruistic, in my mind we can count these jobs as already gone. Someone could take that job for a bit, making $10-15 an hour but as soon as the commodity cost of wages exceeds the cost of added transportation abroad or the cost of transportation falls or any number of little pieces that fall into the outsourcing equation change, those jobs are gone just like the rest. The issue with these jobs are that they are still considered skilled when technology is quickly making them unskilled.

revelation 13y ago

Neocon nonsense. But this just takes the cake: http://profoundlydisconnected.com/skill-work-ethic-arent-taboo/ http://profoundlydisconnected.com/skill-work-ethic-arent-tab...

booruguru 13y ago
Rowe is a bit difficult to figure out. Many of the things he says are are quite sensible, but they seem to be couched in neocon notions of American exceptionalism and blame-the-poor economics. I don't know much about him except from what I say during his appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher.
- macinjosh 13y ago
  In what part of the linked exchange did he 'blame the poor'? There are many causes of poverty and I don't think lack of hard work is a big one. However when it comes to young people deciding how they will make their way in the world I think a lot choose to go into debt for a four year degree that won't help them in the real world. That is not a wise decision and so we should encourage those people to make better decisions even if they don't get their dream job right out of the gate at least they would be employable.
  - taeric 13y ago
    For a few of us, it reads as him basically blaming them for not taking the jobs he references time and again. Maybe that is unfair, but it does echo in the rhetoric to me.
    - tomrod 13y ago
      I think he'd be more likely to agree that people just don't know, as in there is an information problem.
      - taeric 13y ago
        This doesn't fit with his rhetoric. "Doesn’t it make sense to fill those positions before we start demanding that companies create more opportunities that people don’t aspire to?" "And no matter where I went, the biggest challenge was always the same – finding people who were willing to learn a new skill and work hard." "Because virtually every single trainee decided it was just too damn hot. I’m not even kidding. They just didn’t want to work in the heat. And so … they didn’t." To be fair, he goes well out of his way to not directly criticize everyone. Only, it reads in the same way that I am going out of my way not to imply he is being an ass. :)

justin66 13y ago

Couldn't read the whole thing. I might actually agree with her but the questioner is strawman-level superficial and trite.

selectodude 13y ago
I think this is just the general level of discourse provided by the average CNN viewer.
baddox 13y ago
I can only imagine how frustrated Mike Rowe was answering those questions. It's a shame he's too tactful to scream "Maybe if you stop blaming literally everything on the political party you weren't raised as, you could spend a minute focusing on real ideas for solving problems!"
- slurry 13y ago
  Not sure why it should bother us that a basic cable celebrity is getting frustrated with questions. It's not like people are asking Andrew Wiles to answer long division problems here. Low-to-middlebrow amateur political economy, by contrast, seems pretty solidly within the pay grade of a spokes-actor like Rowe.
- peeters 13y ago
  If you read closely, you can see that it wasn't an exchange at all. JB wrote a paragraph with multiple phrases and questions, and Mike broke them into individual points and responded to each one in turn. As a result, the format deceptively makes JB look much more stubborn and ignorant than it would if they used a "quote" format rather than a conversation format.

tlrobinson 13y ago

MR: [long eloquent response] JB: "But REPUBLICANS" Repeat 5x

leokun 13y ago
JB wasn't responding, MR had broken up her questions to reply to parts of them.

quaunaut 13y ago

> Think about it. Universities get to decide how much money to charge their students. Likewise, parents and students decide if they can afford to pay it. It’s a pretty simple proposition. But when the government suddenly makes hundreds of billions of dollars in student loans readily available — under the popular (and voter-friendly) theory that “everyone should go to college” — we see an unintended consequence. Well that's also ignoring the point that colleges used to get the majority of their funding from States, and almost every major University now has the majority(and sometimes a >90% majority) of its funding coming from other sources. College used to be subsidized by society, and now it just isn't subsidized, and in his argument that entire position is ignored. Like most subjects this is a much more complex problem than either side lets on, but just because Mike Rowe is eloquent in his response doesn't mean that it isn't ignoring rather large portions of the facts.

pachydermic 13y ago
Also, because the US has an increasingly unequal income distribution, that makes a college degree relatively more valuable. In addition to the social-status factor it certainly still seems to pay off despite the increased tuition (http://priceonomics.com/is-college-worth-it/ http://priceonomics.com/is-college-worth-it/). My point is simply that maybe college costs so much more now because it's just worth it. It used to be that you could still do alright without a college degree, but a ton of manufacturing jobs have moved overseas and there's a ton of downward pressure on peoples' wages who don't have engineering and computer jobs. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that this is the reason why college is so expensive these days, but I think that it's a point which isn't brought up enough. I think there's a tendency to say: "oh well not everyone can have these high-paying jobs", "college isn't right for everyone", etc. which Rowe also says. Maybe that's true, but we certainly seem to have a shortage of qualified people in this country. Seems to me to be a failure of the educational system and while it makes sense not to saddle yourself with tons of debt for a degree if that degree won't help you pay off the debt, I don't think encouraging people not to get a higher education is a good idea either. Now I'm just rambling - I just wanted to point out that that attitude is a sign that something is wrong.
- 13y ago

quepasa 13y ago

It's very telling how Rowe comments on how workers wanting more for less is the human condition, but then never considers the same about employers. One example he gives is of one employer who doesn't want employees with a union mind set. He also cites a "success" where a guy got good pay for working 60 hours per week. What could this mean? He doesn't want workers who want good benefits and overtime pay? I bet the $50k/year job he brings up expects 60 hours per week under physically demanding conditions without time and a half and pretty and weak benefits. If you make $15/hour and work 60 hours per week you start getting really close to $50k/year.

crazy1van 13y ago
> It's very telling how Rowe comments on how workers wanting more for less is the human condition, but then never considers the same about employers. Of course its true about employers. They are just humans, too. When they both agree on an acceptable level of compensation for a given task, you end up with a job. Just markets and no amount of high-minded legislation will ever change that.

pivnicek 13y ago

That font is garbage, hard to read, it's like they'd been downvoted on HN. Please end the light text trend, let us read.

tomrod 13y ago
Yes! So many websites are practically unreadable due to low contrast.
dredmorbius 13y ago
Contrast Rebellion: I've also found Readability (Instapaper and Pocket are similar) a huge breath of fresh air: http://www.readability.com/articles/jzhgvevd http://www.readability.com/articles/jzhgvevd There's also Stylish / Stylebot browser plugins which let you modify site CSS. I've ... become a tad addicted to that. /me checks. Yeah, over 700 sites that I've styled now. Contrast and font sizes are a big nit, nuking annoying elements is another. More drastic layout revamps are still another use, though I reserve that for a small number of sites.

infruset 13y ago

Can someone American explain what the core of the issue is for people like me?

bcoates 13y ago
American culture leads kids to believe that trades jobs have low social standing, so they borrow obscene amounts of money to go to college because they think it will get them a good job where they do paperwork for lots of money. Instead they wind up in debt working in an unskilled retail sales or service job, or just unemployed. If they had gone to a legitimate trade school[1] or even just an entry-level manual labor job that trains you they'd be much better off. [1] most of the trade schools in America are outright scams, signing up people for government tuition loans then giving them garbage education. Some of them are not, and anyone who graduates from them will have valuable skills that can support a family. Have fun finding out which ones, 17 year olds!
- infruset 13y ago
  Thanks. I was a bit confused. In my country college is almost free.. I feel for you guys.
  - mortyseinfeld 13y ago
    In your country college is not almost free.....think about it.

wavesounds 13y ago

Why doesn't he have these jobs listed on his website? I have 2 friends who are unemployed one with a newborn who would be more then interested in those welding jobs he mentions. Does anyone have more information? Do you have to own your own gear? How much is school? Is there a lot of travel?

tomrod 13y ago
Try emailing him. I bet a few HNers could throw something together by next weekend.
nhebb 13y ago
He does: http://www.mikeroweworks.com/job-site/ http://www.mikeroweworks.com/job-site/
- wavesounds 13y ago
  Thanks, clicking around I eventually found this website too http://search.jobsinwelding.com/jobseeker/search/results/ http://search.jobsinwelding.com/jobseeker/search/results/ But on both of these there are very few entry level jobs and the one I did find that actually listed the salary was only $22k a year!

pnathan 13y ago

I hadn't heard about Mike Rowe until he started his program to popularize the trades. It's an interesting perspective, and I don't really have a beef about it. But let me make a few factual points, borne out of my experience and the experience I have in growing up around tradespeople and being related to tradespeople. * The trades are physically hard labor edit: It might not be clear what this entails, as perhaps not everyone reading has performed it. It entails working 40-50 hours per week, in nearly all possible weather (for outside jobs), where you must maintain (in addition to the work itself) a personal fitness regimen not to be injured through strain. In the pursuit of this work, you will probably find yourself moving objects up to perhaps several hundred pounds, with possibly zero help. You will almost certainly be on your feet (or knees) all day except for breaks. * The trades expose you to non-negligable levels of risk of injury on a daily basis. edit: A few examples, taken from real life experiences. Falling off the roof of a house and breaking vertebrae - lifelong medication after that. Wearing out knee mechanisms due to going up and stairs with 50+ pounds in your hands daily for many years - lifelong care required. Heavy object falling onto shop floor within inches feet - would have chopped feet off or required cutting off the boots if the steel toes had held. Other examples readily available from medical professionals and friends in the trades. These risks are systemic in the trades by and large. * The trades do not pay well until/unless you specialize into certain areas. Let me clarify a bit on what I mean by paying well. I mean, bluntly, that trades frequently pay in (current US dollars) between 12 and 25 dollars per hour; frequently without benefits and (due to seasonal demand and project-based nature of the work) frequent lack of steady employment. Mike Rowe cited a welder's experience as a counterexample of my thesis. The fact that supply & demand makes certain skilled trades very valuable does not obviate the reality of the poor pay endemic to the field, paticularly for the semi-skilled and unskilled areas. All that being said, it's been documented in both popular culture and research that self-centeredness is on the rise; it's getting to be well understood that many modern Americans simply don't want to work hard in unpleasant conditions (Mike Rowe cited an example of people who quit training programs en masse in the SE US because of the heat). This has been borne out anecdotally by the number of immigrants doing these same hard work in unpleasant conditions while native-born "modern Americans" moan about being unable to find work. That doesn't meant that it's a particularly pleasant experience to find out that "pursue your passion" means very little in the broader job market, after you've pursued your financially negative ROI degree (with the utmost support of your parents, friends, and other authority figures). And that's something that I think should be brought out of this debate: don't ruin your life in the pursuit of a dream - be responsible with your dreaming; fulfil your duties and calculate your risks. edit: I don't have a real conclusion here. But I think it's reasonable to evaluate the risk/reward payoff for the trades and seek higher education as an alternative. I suppose a more knowledgable observer could draw some interesting connections between what unionization provides and what higher education degree jobs provide and infer some interesting conclusions. I can't guess as to what those conclusions are. I'd like to read some discussion on that topic sometime.

Aloha 13y ago

He's spot on. We Americans focus so very very often on how we disagree rather than how we agree. If you look at both parties, they broadly agree on so many things. Instead we focus on unimportant social issues, shaving a couple percent off government spending, and so on. The educational system we have now is largely a scam, it promises that if you spend tens of thousands (or more) dollars on a 4 year degree, you'd have a good job waiting on the other side, and its largely BS. We need vocational training, we need training for non white collar career options, and no one is really working on it. I make a salary of that of a skilled professional - with no formal education beyond high school - it's been a long fight to get here though, perhaps it could have been easier otherwise. The other problem with the current college education program is a lack of correlation between cost and outcome, it's something that needs to be looked into. He also hits on a point - the government doesnt create jobs, so it doesnt matter what congress does, or what the president does, its the job of the government to create a stable environment (regulatory and otherwise) so the economy can go and create jobs. I believe our government is largely failing at this. On to the skills gap - I disagree with him on one point, companies are largely unwilling to train - there are jobs for which I'm broadly qualified for, but can't get because I'm missing one specialized skill or another for. If companies were willing to train, they would be able to fill most of those unfilled jobs.

mgkimsal 13y ago
re: training - are your skills white collar or blue collar? He seems to be talking about physical labor jobs where employers are willing to train. I don't see that much on the IT side of employment, for example.
drig 13y ago
I kind of choked on his message of tolerance. We says we should stop talking about how we disagree, then he goes on a tirade against all the lazy, spoiled, stupid people. "We shouldn't disagree on party, but, if you don't agree with me and the GOP, you're a stupid, lazy slob!" He writes very well, but he's still spouting right-wing, pseudo-libertarian nonsense.
- bittercynic 13y ago

yetanotherphd 13y ago

On education, Mike Rowe is correct, it's not in the government's hands what the price of education is. Now the government could choose to subsidize higher education fees more, but that would cost a lot of money so its a difficult choice to make. The problem with all discussion on jobs is that they are treated as a special kind of market where free market principles don't apply. Rowe doesn't even go as far as suggesting letting the market determine who works where. Cracking down on illegal immigration would help deal with the lack of jobs at the low end of the market, unfortunately hypocritical politicians find enforcing the law to be an untenable platform. In general though, jobs should come from having skills that are useful, not protectionism. We do need to be training people to fill the new class of technical positions and this includes programmers, even though it will lower the salaries of existing programmers.

mortyseinfeld 13y ago

For a leftist like Piers Morgan, it was a complete embarrassment to have a low-information voter asking ignorant questions when Mike Rowe just completely schooled her. I think your typical university is in panic mode right now. In 10-15 years, online will be the norm and these exorbitant tuitions will be a thing of the past.

unclebucknasty 13y ago
She was so low-information that it almost seemed like a setup. I mean, really, she asked the most superficial, talking-point-like questions that provided him with perfect runway to espouse his views. If he was going to write a script to allow him to peddle his world view, then her part would read exactly as it did. Almost too perfect.

bluedino 13y ago

Here's maybe a simple solution: Why can't it be made illegal to list 'college degree' as a requirement for a job? Everyone knows of jobs that any moron can do, but a college degree is required. Especially for white collar jobs in large corporations, you can't make it past the first layer of HR without a degree.

eshvk 13y ago
How is this going to solve anything? All this is going to do is bring in a flood of applicants to the job that has no listing of a college degree as a requirement. Then HR is going to reject a bunch of applications. At the end you are just moving the barrier to an internal portal.
- randomdata 13y ago
  What you do, however, is remove the reason job seekers go to college in the first place. There are not that many jobs that actually require a degree, other than as a superficial filtering mechanism, so you can take them out of that system. The result is that demand for college decreases, therefore the price will decrease through the properties of supply and demand, which leaves an education that returns to being affordable for those who actually care about an education. You are right that businesses will have to find a new filtering mechanism, but it can be one that doesn't come at the cost of making education unobtainable to those who want an education.
  - eshvk 13y ago
    > What you do, however, is remove the reason job seekers go to college in the first place. There are not that many jobs that actually require a degree, other than as a superficial filtering mechanism, so you can take them out of that system. This is a second order effect which I am not so sure which actually happen reality. I posit that it is also likely that people move the requirements to an internal portal, everyone gets wind of such a thing, mainly when HR reps start writing that "breakthrough book" about secrets of getting your first job and everyone still keeps going to college.
  - 13y ago

rajacombinator 13y ago

This is incredible. Mike Rowe has a blog and he apparently understands economics (based on first answer.) once again HN has made my day.

alayne 13y ago

I don't buy the arguments that trade jobs are a good option. It's especially hard to swallow from a college graduate who belongs to an anti-union political party. Unless you are unwilling or unable to go to college, the numbers indicate that, on average, you will have much lower unemployment and a substantially higher lifetime income.

randomdata 13y ago
Markets still remain supply and demand driven. Industries that have roots in college educations have appeared more stable because the number of people with degrees has historically been relatively low. When we have more educated people than jobs that benefit from such an education, incomes will drop and it will become difficult to find work. The trades are starting to gain appeal right now because people have put more emphasis on getting a college degree in the past decade or so. That leaves fewer people able to take on trade work, which pushes for higher incomes and better jobs to the people who can. At the same time, college educated people are finding it increasingly difficult to find meaningful employment. Of course, if people follow Rowe's track in the future, it will swing back the other way again soon enough. That is why smart investors go to where nobody is showing interest.
- alayne 13y ago
  Show me any evidence that college educated people, in particular, are having trouble finding employment. These numbers look extremely favorable http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm.
  - randomdata 13y ago
    Seeing as how we're talking about a relative increase in difficulty, I'm not sure what we're supposed to take away from a single data point? You can see here[1] that this decade has brought on a distinct change in unemployment rates for college graduates. The last four years averaged an entire percentage point higher than the highest rate ever seen before. Since we both seem to agree that unemployment rates are a reasonable metric for determining the difficulty of finding work, it seems pretty clear that it is more difficult now as a college graduate than it once was. [1] http://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screen-shot-2013-04-29-at-2-17-28-pm.png?w=1024&h=639 http://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screen-shot-2013-0...

gfodor 13y ago

Skate where the puck is going to be. How much confidence can you have nowadays that your job isn't one clever-roboticist away from being automated, if your main value contribution is skilled labor? The same economics that drive high pay for skilled welders who work in the heat also will drive dollars towards automating these jobs. If I have to pay a welder 100k a year now, if I can automate their job away for anything less than that then it's worth it. The truth is college is a form of leverage. If you get a solid degree you have basically added a skills multiplier to many things you will encounter in your career. The same cannot really be said if you become a master tradesman, since the deeper you go the less transferrable your skills become.

spc476 13y ago
MYCIN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycin), a program written in the 70s, was better able to diagnose infections than doctors. If failed because "in the 1970s, a session with MYCIN could easily consume 30 minutes or more—an unrealistic time commitment for a busy clinician." Now, with most medical information already computerized (or headed that way), how much better could a modern MYCIN be? What would this do to the career of a typical doctor?
- kefka 13y ago
  This automation argument applies to everything in the US, and the world. Previously in the history of the world, we had to do things with our own hands, or use manual tools that used our hands. (Shovels, spades, rakes,...) Then we migrated to machines that we could sit in or stand in, that could greatly magnify our strength (vehicles, trains, gas powered stuffs). Now, we entered a realm back in the '60s with powerful automation via computers. And it's only gotten more powerful, smaller, and cheaper. But yet, computers have always been bad for many types of manual jobs because of fuzziness. And now, our computers are dirt cheap and damn fast. And they can handle fuzziness and broad input. And they are replacing jobs rather quickly. But so what? Whom does this make money for? Well, people who can afford the means of production. And that answer takes us back to a treatise that was written back in the late 1800's: The Communist Manifesto. But wait a moment... Communism fails because people seek "fair" compensation. For example, a doctor _should_ get paid more than a burger flipper, right? It seems logical that the more work you put into attaining the position should be relevant to the pay of that position. But what happens when those screws are turned, and you now compete with auto-doc or auto-flipper? You end up with lowering wages. Most of the times, those wages get lowered directly to 0. But we then hear the old saying: When the buggy whip manufacturers died out, it opened up automotive manufacturing. Well, yes. When a segment closes, another opens, but usually the segment is smaller. For example, when a factory is mostly laid off due to automation, the few that are kept are the ones that can program and debug software and hardware. And they then are also 'encouraged' to work harder. Then this harder is the new average. And these new employees are doing the work of 2-3 people, because it is what is expected of them to keep their job. And then automation takes over even these people, because automation can do the job of 10 people (or more!) with low error rates. But this is a look at an individual. Now, what happens nationally? Well, we see higher numbers of unemployed and subsidized users (food stamps, WIC, housing, other means tested benefits). But why? Because automation does work, and well. But it leads to the ones whom can afford it more money, and workers without. But is Communism the answer? Maybe... Or perhaps a post-capitalism answer is needed; one that blends all of the needs of citizens and some of the wants, whilst not ignoring that those whom work harder/smarter should also be compensated for their hard work. And of course, we've heard about the the Canadian program of Mincome, as well as Switzerland's possible venture into this territory. Is this a solution? I believe so, even as a simple humanitarian solution of compassion for fellow man.

Cowicide 13y ago

>most of the Republicans I know want the same basic things as most of the Democrats I know ... They all want a healthy planet That's a crock of shit right there. Most Republicans put the almighty dollar ahead of the environment and many still think global warming or climate change effects are a hoax. Mike Rowe must live in quite the small bubble.

bmelton 13y ago
I'm not a Republican, but I work with mostly Republicans in some of the charities I'm associated with, and at least anecdotally, that statement seems completely unsubstantiated, and carries about as much weight as "all Republicans are racists" or "all Democrats hate the rich".
- Cowicide 13y ago
  Except I didn't say "all republicans" anything.
  - bmelton 13y ago
    Nor did I say that you did.
    - Cowicide 13y ago
      Please stop being obtuse. You obviously implied it with your post. >carries about as much weight as "all Republicans are racists"
      - bmelton 13y ago
        What I implied was that a lie about "most" Republicans is just as asinine as a lie about all Republicans. Undeserved stereotypes don't have any place here, and as pragmatists, we should all be above them.
        13y ago

trekky1700 13y ago

"Only two countries have done this well: Germany and Switzerland. They’ve both maintained strong manufacturing sectors and they share a key thing: Kids go into apprentice programs at age 14 or 15. You spend a few years, depending on the skill, and you can make BMWs. And because you started young and learned from the older people, your products can’t be matched in quality. This is where it all starts." http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/vaclav-smil-wired/ http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/vaclav-smil-wired/

al2o3cr 13y ago

"In the next few years, this company anticipates 15,000 new openings for welders and pipe-fitters in the southeast. And the head of recruitment has absolutely no idea where the workers will come from. That should scare us all." Oh FFS. If the company can't find 15k workers perhaps they should consider raising wages. Mr. Rowe's show has clearly demonstrated that no matter how unpleasant 99% of the world might find a particular job there's somebody willing to hold their nose (or put on a gas mask, etc) and do it for the right price. Of course that's not really what most companies mean when they say, "we can't find workers": it's usually more "we can't find people who've already been trained who'll work for below-market rates while enduring blazing heat AND total shitbags for bosses - won't somebody make these uppity workers stay here?"

lotsofpulp 13y ago
Yes, I was disappointed in Mike Rowe that be basically wrote off the whole problem as people not willing to do hard work. Everyone is willing to do hard, physical labor where you risk handicapping yourself for life...it just has to pay comparatively well to office jobs. Then again, people around the world are competing for the same jobs nowadays, and obviously those with lower standards of living are going to do them for much cheaper, and all those manual labor technical jobs that don't require a mastery of English are going to go to China until the living standards equalize. Bottom line is make sure someone in a poor country can't do your job (probably an intellectual, specialized, English speaking job), otherwise be willing to compete with China.
- EpicEng 13y ago
  And many people with degrees are delivering pizzas for a living while trying to pay off their student loans. That is a problem.
eli_gottlieb 13y ago
Excuse me, but don't you know that workers demanding compensation is un-American? They should be willing to work for little or nothing, not because they don't have material needs but because the purpose of life is to work. Work makes free, work is free! Workers should not be angry that they make sub-living wages, suffer union-busting management, cannot support families and have a tendency to drop dead or be laid-off before they can retire. They should be honored that it is thus! Praise Work, Work is great, blessed is the Name of Work! </dripping sarcasm> Or, you know, they're refusing to take jobs that don't pay them enough to not die slowly, because they've grown wiser since refusing to take jobs that actually killed them on a regular basis.

Cowicide 13y ago

Mike Rowe continuously spouts on a "skills gap" but doesn't seem to know anything about "job lock". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_lock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_lock He keep avoiding the topic of health care in the USA several times in the Q&A. Frankly, I think Rowe is out of his league here and doesn't understand that we need a true single payer system for health care: http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-faq http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-faq

bcoates 13y ago
Is there some reason to think health-care related "Job Lock" is a thing in the US after COBRA and HIPPA?
- Cowicide 13y ago
  COBRA is vastly expensive for most Americans and does very little to combat "job lock" and HIPAA doesn't help the situation. COBRA: • COBRA is prohibitively expensive for most people who are attempting to transition to another job especially with the risks that are often incurred by switching to another job (see below) • It has a time limit. If it doesn't work out with new jobs, you can find yourself without any health insurance. For example, if you're forced to get a job in the meantime that doesn't provide insurance, COBRA won't qualify you. Also, even if the job did have insurance and they lay you off, COBRA is expensive and will drain savings (if one is fortunate enough to have savings in the first place). • If things go wrong after your transition to another job and you're expensive COBRA runs out you may get stuck with State-sponsored high risk pools with yet even more high costs, waiting lists, poor benefits. Of course, that is IF you're "luckily" enough to live in a state that has such a things. • If you dare apply for another job and your current employer finds out you're looking for another job and find an excuse to fire you, you can't qualify for COBRA. You're SCREWED. • Not all states are consistent in applying COBRA. Depending on which state you're in, if you're denied COBRA, you may be stuck. • If you want to leave a job to start your own business, you may not quality for COBRA and/or afford it in the first place. HIPAA does not ensure that a worker who changes jobs will have access to health insurance coverage on the new job or that the coverage offered will be affordable. Thus, neither COBRA nor HIPAA ensures affordability of health insurance -- the main cause of job lock.

lee 13y ago

One factor of the metric that there're "unfilled skilled positions" is that the pay for those positions is still incredibly low. Many of those positions offer compensation near minimum wage, or are laborious enough that it's not worth working for. So although there are unfilled skilled labor positions, many of those don't fit the supply/demand curve.

Yuioup 13y ago

Is this Mike Rowe of Mike Rowe Soft fame? Who got sued by Microsoft?

Crito 13y ago
No.
possibilistic 13y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Rowe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Rowe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft

ablanton 13y ago

just to be clear, tuition is inversely proportional to the amount of funding the government gives to higher education: http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/pa/key/understandingtuition.html http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/pa/key/understandingtuition.html

Fomite 13y ago

I've always found it puzzling that many businesses believe that if they can't fill a job, it can't be because they're offering too low a wage - they invariably say the pay is fair. If went around trying to buy bread at what I thought was a fair price, and found no takers, my immediate reaction would not be "Well, bakers just don't want to work hard."

spydum 13y ago
It's a hard pill to swallow when you realize the cost of your business critical resources have gone up. I suspect most business sit in denial until their competitors who are willing to pay it and can figure out a working business model begin to eat into their wallets.

transfire 13y ago

Mike Rowe, advocate for the human machine. "60hrs? Lazy bums! A good hard working man only need 4hrs of sleep a night, and can put in 16hr days, six days a week. Just like the Good Book says." --Future Middle Class Worker

fotoblur 13y ago

Notice how the questioner seems to have someone else's actions to blame for the problems. This is often a narrow way of thinking and can be a deception in ones own view of the world. What I like most about Mike's responses are that he doesn't blame anyone, per se, but understands that these problems are best described by analyzing the current environment in which they become evident. Who could blame colleges for raising tuition when the current funding environment begged them too? Who could blame people for not wanting to work shit jobs in the heat but instead go to college and work at jobs that require instead a skilled intellect, pay more, and are more comfortable? And why shouldn't Mike talk about people who work hard, dirty jobs when a show about them made him famous?

kazagistar 13y ago

The current situation is somewhat problematic, absolutely. But I am pretty sure privatization of universities is exactly the wrong way to go. As far as a society goes, that would be putting the last nail in the coffin for social mobility... if anyone still believes in that. Prices won't drop. At some universities, they will just rise to make up for the lower number of students who are able to afford to pay tuition, and those who are able to afford it (the upper classes) will be able to attend. At other universities, the prices will indeed drop, and they will be unable to retain any truly talented professors, and become a second wave of community colleges and trade schools. And with that, the ability for children of the lower classes will be even more entirely cut out of the ability to rise anywhere beyond our shrinking middle class. The reason blue-collar work is avoided is that it is a dead end. And as factories close down, the remaining work is more and more just packing boxes and stocking shelves at minimum wage.

wwarner 13y ago

In my state of Washington, tuition increased due to a voter approved cap on taxes, exactly the opposite Rowe's claim.