Damn, you ARE the boring type. What are you thinking, yo?!
|
|
|
Police seek motorcyclist who fled from Lawrence Avenue crash
- Thread starter chrias
- Start date
Damn, you ARE the boring type. What are you thinking, yo?!
So if I read this right...the summary is whether or not you'd stick around if your friend was injured and some of you are suggesting buggering off sharpish? I'd have a serious look at who you call your friends if that's the case.
As for the entitlement generation and selfishness for once I agree with Shaman, kind of. Yes, job prospects are terrible for young people these days but unfortunately until they realise that many still think the world owes them a living.
As for the entitlement generation and selfishness for once I agree with Shaman, kind of. Yes, job prospects are terrible for young people these days but unfortunately until they realise that many still think the world owes them a living.
OpenGambit
Banned
Its something that YorkU puts in the water.
OpenGambit
Banned
I agree with this, the days of just finding a job and having a career handed to you are over.
Gixxer6
Well-known member
Where was I during these days....
I know absolutely no one who was handed a job or a career. I am however, in my mid 30's and that may have something to do with it. I also think that there are tonnes of jobs out there but people aren't willing to take them because they feel it is "beneath" them. Suck it up and get to work. I worked well over 20 jobs prior to landing a job in my field, there is no excuse.
As far as the comment about the over-priveleged youth, if that was in response to my comment about self-entitled youth, they are vastly different in nature. One is handed everything in life, likely due to family wealth and the other is holding his/her hand out expecting someone to give them everything, personal wealth has very little to do with it.
LOL I popped in here to see if they caught the dude who fled and instead I see a debate about today's youth :lmao:. I haven't read all the posts but I have to agree with Gixxer6. Self-entitled, for sure. A lot of people in our generation are not exempt from this either IMO.
OpenGambit
Banned
tons of adults a few decades ago gradded high school, got a job at an auto factory or something like that. kept it. off they go.
And with that job could afford a stay at home wife, a couple of kids and a house.
You can't do that now and thats undeniable.
its obvious you aren't a part of that generation either, but pretending that time didn't exist is just denial.
Last edited:
Anybody know if they found the guy?
I have to wonder how much of that is reality and how much is unrealistic expectations of 'keeping up with the Joneses'? Part of what has driven cost of living so high is that the standard for families is now two incomes, two cars, 3 or 4 TV sets, cable, high speed internet.........
Graduates having trouble getting jobs is nothing new. It's a cyclical thing. When I went into college, people in my field could essentially write their own ticket. Some time around the end of second year the avalanche of grads who had entered the field for the money, rather than like me because of aptitude, hit the job market. Then the bottom dropped out of the economy, as it frequently does, as I was coming up on graduation. The only job that I could get, was refurbishing photocopiers for a sub-contractor, for $12K/yr.. My story is far from unusual. The guy who I fought it out with over who would get the only available bursary, whose marks were within a percent or two of mine (Except in English, where I roundly trounced him), ended up a pizza delivery guy.
In short, it isn't necessarily all that much more difficult to get by, now, than it was back then.
OpenGambit
Banned
maybe, but I am thinking of costs like housing. not how many TVs one has. Thats clearly much more unaffordable as a multiplier of income. the globe article on this isn't bad.
The reality is that you just gotta do what you gotta do to get what you want and it doesn't really matter how much easier another generation had it.
But Gixxer6 likes to talk to me like I am a grad with no job, when I am just talking about simple numbers.
The reality is that you just gotta do what you gotta do to get what you want and it doesn't really matter how much easier another generation had it.
But Gixxer6 likes to talk to me like I am a grad with no job, when I am just talking about simple numbers.
Last edited:
Shaman
Well-known member
In 1992, my two-bedroom apartment in a nice, private building here in Kingston was $575. I was a student, and this was the raw edge of affordability for me... hydro extra, heat included. Now that same apartment is going for $850. Average wages have gone *down* in Kingston, not up, and unemployment is around 12%. What do you figure that means?
Gixxer6
Well-known member
Sorry sir, i meant no disrespect, we were engaged in a battle of opinion. I do not agree with your opinion and neither of us provided any supporting "numbers" therefore you were giving your opinion not fact, as was I. If you felt i was treating you like a grad i apologize for upsetting your delicate balance, had you offered information to the contrary I would not have assumed that your adament suppport for the recently graduated and unemployed was anything more then recent personal experience.
Gixxer6
Well-known member
.
A raise in rent of $275 over 20 years hardly seems high.
A quick Google search and i came up with a rise in average income as per the City of Kingston. 2006 Census http://www.cityofkingston.ca/pdf/business/KingstonStatisticalProfile.pdf
OpenGambit
Banned
... to make your point you use non-inflation adjusted numbers.. comparing to 2000... instead of the 60s-70s which is what everyone else appears to be talking about, and you use numbers from the height of the economy.
seriously?
Go read the globe article, see that the average home prices in Vancouver is in the 700,000s and tell me that its more affordable than 30 years ago. See the multiplier of income to house affordability and the results are clear.
(PS the house that I lived in was purchased in 1990 at ~220,000.00 and that house sold for 1.1 million in 2006).
Also, I don't see how just because you got a job changes the way things were 30-40 years ago. If you want to use professional qualifications as a measure of truth, go nuts, I'll play.
seriously?
Go read the globe article, see that the average home prices in Vancouver is in the 700,000s and tell me that its more affordable than 30 years ago. See the multiplier of income to house affordability and the results are clear.
(PS the house that I lived in was purchased in 1990 at ~220,000.00 and that house sold for 1.1 million in 2006).
Also, I don't see how just because you got a job changes the way things were 30-40 years ago. If you want to use professional qualifications as a measure of truth, go nuts, I'll play.
Last edited:
DOHC1
Well-known member
I'm hoping thats a typo.
I can't seem to find it now, but it seems to me that the Globe and Mail article compared incomes to costs, without adjusting for inflation. Can you post a link? If they're using National figures, but pointing to the dysfunctional markets of Toronto and Vancouver as proof, then it's logical fallacy.
OpenGambit
Banned
They list market by market, not aggregated, so no there is no skewing of numbers. I took a quick look for the link but don't have time to look throughly, probably from a different thread.
And the point of comparing income to cost of housing is to obtain a multiplier of income to cost, that doesn't need to be inflation adjusted, because the multiplier would be the same. However the article does compare what the house would cost if it just appreciated with the rate of inflation.
found it: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...eally-do-have-it-harder-today/article2425558/
Last edited:
OpenGambit
Banned
So the house was purchased for 220 million? and only sold for 1.1 million? and you took a 218.9 million hit?
"PS the house that I lived in was purchased in 1990 at ~220,000,000 and that house sold for 1.1 million in 2006).
|
|
|
|
|