[Puffer Fish]

The phenomena of the internet and online job advertisement has had a profound effect on professional workers, often forcing them to move from place to place.

This is because since the advent of online job ads, applicants from anywhere in the country can easily apply to a job listing. You're not just competing with all the applicants in the surrounding area, you're competing with all the applicants for that type of job in the country.
Since good jobs can be hard to come by, when an available job opening appears sometimes you have to just take it. Even if it's in a completely different region of the country.

Professional jobs typically want an applicant with more specific experience, so it's not as if the professional worker can easily just get any professional job in the area.

To survive and thrive in this modern age, professional workers have to be mobile, willing to make a move if the new job calls for it.

This carries with it a lot of problems though.

Housing. People don't want to make a big investment in a house if they don't know how long they're going to live there. Maybe there will be restructuring at their work, or they'll get a better job offer somewhere else, then then they'll have to move, leave their houses behind.

Many professionals are choosing to rent now.
Even though that's more expensive than staying in the same house used to be, and the features may not be as nice.

I think there's a reason people aren't investing in the houses and gardens like they did in the old days. If you planted a tree, you might not even be there in a few years time, so what's the point of even bothering?
Houses these days are not made like they used to be. They are more temporary, made out of flimsy materials, not made to last as long. People are not leaving their houses to their children.
The lifestyle of the professional is too nomadic now. Sometimes moving every few years.

There's less job stability as well. Employers want more flexible workers, lifetime employment at the same company is more rare.

The other way this makes things more difficult is on married couples. With two income households, one of them often has to make a sacrifice if there's a move. It's usually the lower income earner. For one of the spouses to advance in their careers, another may need to put theirs on hold or take a much lower level job in the new area that they move.
It's no wonder there's more single parent households than ever, with parents coming under pressure to each go their own separate nomadic ways. Sexual relationships are becoming a lot less monogamous and based on career convenience.
I don't think it's any coincidence that relationships are typically lasting 2 to 4 years. That's about the same span of time as many of these jobs last.

And it most certainly must be hard on the women and children, having to start from scratch and make new friends and acquaintances in the new places that they move to. Friendships are not as deep or lasting as they used to be.

Young professionals being more mobile and nomadic has a lot of downsides.
But if they don't embrace that lifestyle, they lose out to career opportunities that others from other parts of the country will take.

I don't think this is the best thing for society. It seems a little dysfunctional.
The "New Economy" definitely has some negatives.

[SSDR]

The phenomena of the internet and online job advertisement has had a profound effect on professional workers, often forcing them to move from place to place.

The economy forcing everyone to move all the time is inefficient. This is to keep the populace distracted from Zionist imperialists.

This is because since the advent of online job ads, applicants from anywhere in the country can easily apply to a job listing. You're not just competing with all the applicants in the surrounding area, you're competing with all the applicants for that type of job in the country.

This is alienation of the masses.

Since good jobs can be hard to come by, when an available job opening appears sometimes you have to just take it. Even if it's in a completely different region of the country.

This is partially because the Zionists are ruining the economy, so that the populace can produce more benefits for the Zionists who do not work, but rather just buy and sell housing and merchandise, which is not how a civilization can be built.

Professional jobs typically want an applicant with more specific experience, so it's not as if the professional worker can easily just get any professional job in the area.

This is making the "professional workers" compete against each other, which alienates them.

To survive and thrive in this modern age, professional workers have to be mobile, willing to make a move if the new job calls for it.

If everyone has to move all the time, this will keep them distracted from realizing how the Zionists are ruling them.

This carries with it a lot of problems though.

I agree.

Housing. People don't want to make a big investment in a house if they don't know how long they're going to live there. Maybe there will be restructuring at their work, or they'll get a better job offer somewhere else, then then they'll have to move, leave their houses behind.

That is not efficient. People moving a lot wastes resources, time, and labour.

Many professionals are choosing to rent now.
Even though that's more expensive than staying in the same house used to be, and the features may not be as nice.

Because they are brainwashed by Zionists.

I think there's a reason people aren't investing in the houses and gardens like they did in the old days. If you planted a tree, you might not even be there in a few years time, so what's the point of even bothering?

They are too busy for providing the benefits for sales people, merchants, Zionists, and bankers.

Houses these days are not made like they used to be. They are more temporary, made out of flimsy materials, not made to last as long. People are not leaving their houses to their children.

So people can keep buying new homes, putting money into fixing low quality homes, so that housing companies can make more money to benefit the Zionists.

The lifestyle of the professional is too nomadic now. Sometimes moving every few years.

I agree.

There's less job stability as well. Employers want more flexible workers, lifetime employment at the same company is more rare.

This is not efficient, and is very wasteful.

And it most certainly must be hard on the women and children, having to start from scratch and make new friends and acquaintances in the new places that they move to. Friendships are not as deep or lasting as they used to be.

Emotional social constructs that alienate the masses. A family ruling environment is a characteristic of social oppression.

The "New Economy" definitely has some negatives.

Capitalism has a lot of negatives.

[Rich]

The economy forcing everyone to move all the time is inefficient. This is to keep the populace distracted from Zionist imperialists.

Jewish supremacism and anti Gentile racism certainly dominates our foreign policy establishment. Jewish supremacism certainly corrupts our view of history. The way race quotas work against Gentile Whites leading to massive under representation at our top universities is an absolute disgrace. But to suggest the economy runs around the needs of Jews is total and utter fantasy. I do wonder sometimes if some of the wilder more demented anti Jewish hate propoganda is actually put out by Jewish supremacists to undermine those like myself who are merely trying to question Jewish privilege and resist the Cultural Marxist assault upon our identities.

This is partially because the Zionists are ruining the economy, so that the populace can produce more benefits for the Zionists who do not work, but rather just buy and sell housing and merchandise, which is not how a civilization can be built.

Again I find this utterly absurd. This sounds like the idiotic anti Jewish demonisation that the Nazis were so fond of. No the Jews are not the innocents of history, but nor are they some cosmic demons causing all the ills in the world.

[Rancid]

In a sense, this is more of the same. The history of humanity has always been to chase opportunity and richest in other places.

[AFAIK]

You also have super-commuters who cannot find a job close to home and cannot afford to sell their house because they're underwater on their mortgage.

[Ter]

The economy forcing everyone to move all the time is inefficient. This is to keep the populace distracted from Zionist imperialists.

This is partially because the Zionists are ruining the economy, so that the populace can produce more benefits for the Zionists who do not work, but rather just buy and sell housing and merchandise, which is not how a civilization can be built.

If everyone has to move all the time, this will keep them distracted from realizing how the Zionists are ruling them.

Because they are brainwashed by Zionists.

They are too busy for providing the benefits for sales people, merchants, Zionists, and bankers.

So people can keep buying new homes, putting money into fixing low quality homes, so that housing companies can make more money to benefit the Zionists.

.

Somebody is a little obsessed by The Chosen People (TM) :

[MistyTiger]

The premise of this thread is ridiculous.

Online ads have made it easier for people to apply for jobs. They do not have to fill out paper applications. Applicants can better track which jobs they applied to.

Online ads have made it easier for employers to track applicants. Indeed and other sites help with the application and screening process.

People are nomadic out of personal choice. I am an opportunist. If I see a better job opportunity online, I will apply. If I get a good offer, I will accept.

The underlying reason for being a nomad is lack of opportunity for growth. Not every employer promotes insiders. I see this where I work. They hire outsiders. If I wanted a position but it was offered to some outsider, I would consider leaving.

Another reason for being a nomad is no job security. Work politics can affect how long a person stays with a company.

A final reason for being a nomad is the fact that you can more easily negotiate for more pay at a different company. Where I work, I am not likely to get a 10% raise. If I interview at a different company, I might get an offer for a 10% or more increase, depending on the company size , my experience and the pay grade.

[Puffer Fish]

The premise of this thread is ridiculous.

Online ads have made it easier for people to apply for jobs.

But greater levels of competition can also put workers in a more disadvantageous situation. Are you at all familiar with Marxist economic analysis/theory?

Yes, the individual can more easily find another job in another part of the country, but it's also true everyone else in other parts of the country can more easily find a job where that worker already lives and has established himself. (Assuming there are not plentiful excess jobs in that area, a problem now exists)

Economic pressures force him to become more mobile. And if we are familiar with economic equilibrium, the overall pay will probably not improve. It's just now workers will have to frequently move across the country. (Although there might be some upward pressure on the pay due to the increased costs associated with relocating)

People are nomadic out of personal choice.

And that same type of argument could be used against the minimum wage. ("personal choice" if they choose to accept a job for a certain amount of pay)

[Puffer Fish]

A final reason for being a nomad is the fact that you can more easily negotiate for more pay at a different company. Where I work, I am not likely to get a 10% raise. If I interview at a different company, I might get an offer for a 10% or more increase,

Well that doesn't help if the balance is in favor of companies, does it?
And the Left typically says the balance is in favor of the companies.

That company might prefer to hire someone else who currently lives far away for 10% less rather than you.

[MistyTiger]

Well that doesn't help if the balance is in favor of companies, does it?
And the Left typically says the balance is in favor of the companies.

That company might prefer to hire someone else who currently lives far away for 10% less rather than you.

But see the company decides the starting rate of pay. Management has a budget established every January. The budget includes raises, bonuses and other expenses. If the company is small, they likely will not offer a salary like you might find at a large corporation.

The company may very well hire someone for 10% less than me. They have that right. So when I job hunt, it takes me months. I am no stranger to the application and interview process. I do not rush.

Incidentally, wages have increased during the pandemic. Heard of a cost of living adjustment? Yes, that exists. People got pay increases last year and this year too. Wages increase from time to time, but not fast enough to catch up with the rate of inflation.

[MistyTiger]

But greater levels of competition can also put workers in a more disadvantageous situation. Are you at all familiar with Marxist economic analysis/theory?

Yes, the individual can more easily find another job in another part of the country, but it's also true everyone else in other parts of the country can more easily find a job where that worker already lives and has established himself. (Assuming there are not plentiful excess jobs in that area, a problem now exists)

Economic pressures force him to become more mobile. And if we are familiar with economic equilibrium, the overall pay will probably not improve. It's just now workers will have to frequently move across the country. (Although there might be some upward pressure on the pay due to the increased costs associated with relocating)


And that same type of argument could be used against the minimum wage. ("personal choice" if they choose to accept a job for a certain amount of pay)

Yes, many Americans moved to different states for reasons like jobs and for better housing conditions. The east coast is known for quieter neighborhoods for raising kids.

Luckily for me, I am in an area with a shortage of qualified accounting professionals. I don't have to move. Why? Young people think accounting is hard and boring. Plus, I know how to impress hiring managers.

I believe in survival of the fittest. I worked hard to develop my skills. I have been at my current job almost 5 years and that impresses recruiters and hiring managers. I also am not part of the great resignation. I am staying put for now. I am good at my job. I can easily learn new skills as well. Accounting was not my first career choice but it has proven to be my best career choice. I am proud of myself.

Accounting is in demand across the US. I get job emails every month for jobs in my area. I decline for now.

[MistyTiger]

I also want to add that people have always been nomadic.. Our ancestors moved to sources of water and food. If you study history or anthropology, they talk about settlements and travel routes. People like to explore and go on journeys to make a better life for themselves or they are in search of treasure. The most populated areas are usually near ports, harbors or other major bodies of water. People are inherently nomadic, just some choose to stay in their birthplace. I am a nomad myself. If I found the right conditions somewhere, I would move.

Also, people have this need to leave home and venture out to see the world. Like 90% of my high school class moved out of NH. No one forced them to. They wanted to find their future. Some live in states with good hiking trails and others are near major financial districts. They all have ideas of how they want to live. Online ads were not so popular in the early 2000s.

I have even heard that some people are into travel blogging or vlogging. They like the flexibility. They do not have to sit at a desk every day. They can work from anywhere in the world and set their hours.