Kohlrak

Big brother strikes again... We found the charge. So the UK has a history of this, then.

You have't been paying attention at all. If you want, i can show you the recording he did, which included his arrest. He was arrested for the content of his livestream being "breach of peace", which a police officer is recorded stating as they arrest him. In other words, they arrested him for racism. Let's do him a favor. I'll PM you. XD

Which are sub-issues of the overall issue. It's important to note, as these cases are often used as arguments. The big one seems to be that it's used for when the mother's life is in danger, but actual government statistics on reasons show "convenience" to be the primary reason. Just titles, just like somehow Hitler is top right according to some people. That's always been the argument for things like prostitution. Prostitutes don't hurt me, nor do they take my girlfriend from me, nor do they take me from her. Yet some women will argue that it hurts their value as sexual prospects if men have access to sex via money. It was not unlike Trump's immigration suspension: some people tried to nail Trump on grounds that it restricted their access to muslims. I agree. i remember people proposing a separate-but-equal solution to gay marriage, but that doesn't solve the problem. The real solution is to separate church ordained marriage from legal marriage, which is precisely what the Mormons did. Gay people want equal rights, and i say they should have them, but so should Christians have a right to not be governed or held hostage by the state (which is precisely what the issue was about). Government created the problem regarding hospital visits, power of attorney, thinks like that, and we expected them not to pick the solution that would have them involved in church affairs? I think we all knew how it was going to turn out, so they did it through the supreme court so that we could not only give that power to government, but so it could be eternally legislated. I'm very curious how it would be handled at a mosque, though. I think this would be a real test to the left, but i would never suggest a homosexual couple to try this out.. This is potentially way too dangerous, as muslims are known to fight back. On the flip side, it's likely that the case wouldn't get very far and would end up siding with demographic change to secure more power. Then again, a Christian homosexual couple could easily protect churches this way (set the legal precedent for mosques before churches end up in the crosshairs), should they believe it a worthy cause. That said, i still believe it is too dangerous to worth risking: we christians will find our own way, after we're done having the debate ourselves. I saw 2 videos on youtube, citing Peterson. When i tried googling one of the quotes (an alleged tweet), I was only linked back to Voxday's content. So either (not really "either," since the first clause is true) Voxday did a really bad job at making sure we could see that Peterson actually said these things (screenshots, please), or Voxday fabricated the quotes. The comments section on the youtube videos are aflame with basically a debate about context and/or fabricated quotes. Best part is, Voxday isn't even giving us the benefit of the doubt, and coming after those of us who support Jordan Peterson, as well. Even if he's right about Jordan Peterson, that doesn't change the value Jordan Peterson has given us (arguments are valid or invalid completely independent of the speaker: AKA Argument from authority fallacy), nor is it right to come after us if we're not convinced of his arguments. Voxday is clearly showing some bad judgement. Depends how you define it. If you define it as: then, it's not for me, and i respect that people have the right to do it, even if it has consequences. If it leads to pregnancy, there comes obligation, but this definition does not pre-include or disclude pre-conceptive birth control. It's unhealthy for the people involved, but so is smoking (and, supposing pre-contraceptives are used appropriately [more than one, i would highly suggest], smoking is actually worse because a smoking habit invades other peoples' airspace and almost always includes the children through second hand smoke, far more often than creating a child). Since no one took the bait, there's an argument to be made about polygamy as well, and the effects of sexual contact between those married to the (presumably only) "core" if there is a bisexual element. But that demands a whole other topic, and a bit of research that has yet to be done. But, promiscuity alone, well, let's just say it's towards the bottom of my priority list. STDs and unintended bonding are side-effects, but it's the people committing that suffer from these, thus they earn their own punishment. Also note how i'm not defining it: breech of trust (lying [and/or hiding information] to a partner about other partners), rape, adultery, knowingly spreading STDs, etc. These are similar issues with much grander consequences. Well, i hope all that was said so far is enough to conclude that we really shouldn't apply the label to people and expect it to be reliably meaningful. I'm seeing "far right" way more than "far left," and no one on the left really seems to care about the label, while those of us on the right do. Seems we might benefit from the study of lingomancy that the frankfurt school did.

Well, you've defined the apathetic majority in a nutshell. They don't believe the MSM per se, but they believe the people who believe the MSM, because "news is boring, and doesn't affect me." I think i might've found Han Solo. Not familiar with 1984? Link at least?

When we say "big brother" above, we're referring to a non-government agency. Just feel the need to clarify this. Preparation doesn't mean violence. Given the actions of antifa and such, this is perfectly reasonable. That said, it's amazing the power that lingomancy has. I don't believe he's accusing Tommy of violence, so much as that it's how the people will see it as the media works it's magic.

The question of when words become equivalent to violence seems to be the forefront of the political justification of violence, lately. I think, maybe, the discussion is worth having. We can't say words have no violence attributed to them, yet turn around and say that taxation is the violent mugging of people by the government until the guns themselves show up.

Could you elaborate on this "white genocide"? The violence, or big brother watching us?

This is precisely how i feel about this. I understand my thinking is reactionary, but this isn't getting better as the time is going on. I'm calming down, but my conclusions remain the same. This is not normal for me.

I was thinking of all the warnings and parallels in modern media for the Frankfurt School (a group of people bent on creating revolution and evolution which they view as Marxism) and, presumably, something else, and I came to realize it's all around us. In The Elder Scrolls, we have Anu for order, and Padomay/Sithis for chaos. I thought, then, what if there was a school of Sithis? And my mind went to "The Dark Side," or "Sith" from Star Wars. Is there a reason why both Sith and Sithis are similar (like, perhaps, some ancient God)? If so, what is the origin? What are the names of chaos? What are the names of Order? Was "Jedi" named after some ancient God of Order? Google's not doing me well, right now, so I want to ask this board, for surely most people viewing it are far, far more familiar with this kind of work, and not just as a result of Dr. Jordan Peterson's work.

I hate to double post, and i have to choose my words carefully, but I want to point out i have 2 or 3 in the queue.

That's what our opposition wants. They are dedicated to chaos. What is this movie?

Dreams. I've seen dreams reveal so much about a person. Tell me your most recent nightmare, and i'll see if i can deconstruct what it means. The more details you give, the more accurate. Tell what you were thinking and concerned about while having the dream. Tell me nothing of what you felt when you woke up from the dream. I've seen people regret how they've treated family members who've passed, i see people who get warning signs in dreams of how they mistreat their significant others, i've seen all kinds of things. Regular dreams seem to be tips and messages, but nightmares generally seem to be warning of impending major screwups. I believe when your brain isn't being dedicated to understanding the world around you, and when it has plenty of time to process things and create things, it just generally has a much, much higher IQ than your waking self. Sometimes we have trouble understanding what that second personality is telling us. It also doesn't seem to contain all (though it may have some) of the biases that our waking selves do.

I hope you're right. Even if it devolved into violence, i would regain my faith in the British people who were my ancestors. However, my recent watching of a good documentary on the Frankfurt School of thought has me realizing what is really going on. A quick summary: basically, marxists believed that World War I and World War II would ultimately cause the people of Europe to revolt against their governments and allow them to establish the fuzzy, feel-good system of communism. Well, thanks to capitalism, it didn't happen, because people were happy and content with their plight, because capitalism at least made things bearable. After escaping Germany while trying to take the country from Hitler during his rise to power, they came to the United States, hoping to make the changes here that they failed to pull off in Germany (their arch-nemesis being the nazi party, which is why we conservatives are somehow socialists in their eyes [it's a dog whistle, of sorts, a holdover from their origins]). Knowing that the US' biggest hot-button issues were both Slavery and Segregation, they realized that victim culture was actually enough to motivate people. So, they focused on impressionable children, so that they would internalize the victimhood. This is why in stefan's most recent video about a thought, he was unable to understand why everyone around him was so cynical and questioned everything: because the Frankfurt School is focused on theories about bringing uprising and change, at any cost. He doesn't know this history, which is why he's oblivious to it. The real kicker is, the more i see them in action, the more i like them. They're solving the apathy problem that we're tripping over. We see them getting all bothered by every little thing, and we can't motivate people to care about their neighbor's child getting viciously raped.

A page taken out of Jesus' works: if they won't listen to the high road and change their lives when they see it's better for them, they won't change at all. That said, even though i'm Christian, i really, really want revenge, as of late. I'm watching these disgusting tactics working, and i'm generating apathy for the welfare and wellbeing of the apathetic crowd. Not too different from Simon the Boxer. Gotta maintain that illusion. This is clearly mental illness. The population at large, yes the majority of people, are mentally ill. On the flip side, it's not our job to fix it. If only there was a yet to be discovered land out there, a new world where the intelligent people could go, and separate ourselves from the rest, and learn our lesson this time and not allow immigration. This is why freedom of speech is important. Amazing how the government feels it should spy on our citizens, saying we should have nothing to hide if we're innocent, yet we can't apply the same rules to them. But, try convincing anyone of this. Even if you do, they still won't care. Even if they cared, they still won't act to even the degree of opening their mouths to others. Ever notice the left always holds the right accountable for what the left does, even if the right doesn't do it? Oh, hey, look, Russia hacked the US elections! It's not like we haven't seen voter-machine fraud in the US before this election, with machines preferring the left candidates. Sooner to expect unicorns than the general public to care about what they've avoided caring about so far. I think the big mistake we keep making on the right is assuming the public will be angry enough. Remember, this stuff came from the Frankfurt School, which was facing the same problem with the populace being apathetic. That's why they started this victim culture: it was the only way to get people really outraged, and even the grand majority are still apathetic, even with this victim culture being beat into our heads since childhood. I think this is the real lesson of our time, not that communism kills, but humans are apathetic, refusing to rule themselves, thus it is always a small minority that sacrifices themselves for the benefit of others who have no problem just letting others take their gifts from them, for they do not understand nor appreciate their gifts. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, but the vigilant die securing it.

Depends on how that law's written, if it's vague enough, and there's a legal precedent like the one i stated above,

I'll ask a question that i asked another UK citizen on this topic elsewhere: if a couple rent an apartment on the first floor of an apartment building, and there are children in the other apartments (we'll say they're 10-12 years old). The couple decides to commit to their hanky-panky, but they leave the windows open to help keep it cool in the apartment while this is going on (maybe also because they enjoy voyeurs, or something, we don't know). The children go outside to play, and they see what it is their neighbors do with the window uncovered. They, being immature, decide to use their cellphones to record videos and upload it to facebook, where the couple then finds the videos and protests. What is the couple charged with, if anything? What are the children charged with, if anything? What are the parents of the children charged with, if anything? I could tell you what they would be charged with in america, but that's irrelevant. What's important is how UK law treats citizens, as well as information they would like to protect. Is it the responsibility of people to avert their eyes of something in plain view, or is it the responsibility of the party wishing to hold secrets to take reasonable steps to protect their secrets?

What's the point of philosophy that doesn't have application? On another note, even if this benefits no one, those who use it will suffer consequences. Not as strong as the crime, yet there are consequences.

I know the feeling. People are so damn indifferent, 'cause it's not personal. I was just telling my girlfriend last night how my family used to own castles in either Britain or Ireland, and we confirmed this through some geneology. That was cool, but now the land of my ancestors can jail a man for doing his job, all because he's not of the right opinion. She couldn't put down her youtube via iPhone to give me her opinion on the matter. It's kind of like caring about trends or anything like that is "my thing" just like a food preference. When i made points over skype all i got was "wow," then a few points later "damn," and then "wow." It's getting to the point i feel like just joining "the dark side." I'm religious. I believe in God, i believe that Jesus was a representative to man from the Creator, but here I am watching myself being a target for atheists. I believe that I should do the right thing, for the ideals of that man we call Jesus, since I believe he had the wisdom of the Creator with him. Yet i look around, at all the happiness that Hedonism brings, and the blindness that leads to the bliss of ignorance. I look at the companies around here, and I see how hard it is to get a stable job without dealing with the devil over debt so i can have the credentials. Meanwhile, i look at Tommy Robinson, who's fighting to protect children, like the ones i wish to have some day, and he's being destroyed and defeated by "the powers that be," and I know realistically that the protests won't last, they won't change a damn thing, and people will be "disappeared" for having "the wrong opinion." I watch as i see on other forums, that people don't care about the fact that this could be turned on them, as well, saying it's OK, despite legal and ethical violations, because he's a racist, even if he isn't. So any man who tries to be good is either forced to cease to exist for having the wrong opinion of standing up for the oppressed, is jobless for he refuses to lie about his experience, goes uneducated for he feels it is wrong to buy something he cannot afford, is ignored for caring, and just generally is ineffectual for these reasons. I'm sure i could find more reasons to be upset, and I understand that switching teams isn't very useful either. So, here I am, a Christian, wondering if, just as religion may be the wisdom of our ancestors, instead of a God, if hidden occult knowledge and demon worship is the knowledge of civilizations that failed or are being revived, thus the secret to not being on the team of liars, cheaters, hedonists, etc, while simultaneously being effective, is in some form of mind games or trickery. I sure as hell can't join the other team, but i don't seem to be able to stay on this team, either, 'cause we're getting annihilated. Nihilism isn't the way, clearly, so what can we do? We can't escape. Meanwhile, those around us, our loved ones, make it harder to run away, for we know they'll be left behind. An anger grows in me, almost hoping that the worst happens, just so I can watch everyone else crumble around me. Almost hoping that every evil i've predicted and warned others of would come true. Almost hoping that gays would be burned at the stake, that those in debt would be made slaves for long hours with little to sustain them until they dropped dead of starvation, that those who lie would live in fear of their lies being exposed resulting in their execution, that these secular progressives be forced to worship a god of hate, that the apathetic women and their feminist counterparts would be raped. A small part of me wishes for this level of evil, so that at least justice, since nothing else, would prevail, and there would be at least one good thing allowed to thrive in this world. I don't like these dark thoughts, but the sickly good news is, it's probably going to turn out that way if things continue as they are. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and we don't see it as important enough to pay that small price, so if the innocent and those willing to pay the price must suffer, then let the immoral suffer as well. Don't even let them commit suicide to get out of it: they should've did it before ruining it for everyone else. EDIT: Another point, let it be that should this go down, that we never have a liberator. It's not fair to liberators and would be heros to bail apathetic people out so that their sacrifice goes in vain, like all the freedom fighters of old.

Thank you.

There has to be work for them to find, first, and they'll loose out in credentialism. The problem with economic trend prediction is they tend to be based on R-selection: assumption that there will be a sufficient supply to maintain the trend. I'm curious: how do you go about finding gigs? The only place i've heard of before with gigs is "hackforums," but i'd rather not take gigs from a place like that. So find mom and pop businesses that're willing to pay a nephew to do it, step in on his territory, establish a name, then worry about putting a trademark or something on it? Right. And while most programmers are self-taught, who hires them? To be fair, i haven't looked that much, but after getting turned down for IT in a small nursing home for an outsider because "you don't have enough paperwork," i realized i wasn't nuts about credentialism; but how much trouble does one have in starting their first professional gig? How does one get past the experience catch-22? It's more than just direct regulations for licensing: if someone is self-taught in plumbing, and a pipe breaks, even if the plumber did everything right, if someone somehow ends up electrocuted the company gets nailed for having an unlicensed plumber, even if the plumber never even saw the pipe that broke, let alone worked on it. Though, licensing reqs are always upped under "keeping licenses up to date," but it's not a simple 2 week "get-you-up-to-date course," but usually they require, say, an RN get a doctorate's degree. I actually know an RN that is being told he has to constantly be upping his license, and the best part is that it's not even government requiring this, but Geisigner (the local monopoly on healthcare). The term "progressive credentialism" is what you're looking for.

I think what people define as left and right are very, very different. Take abortion, for example. You can be allowed by society to do it or not, and allownce/punishment mechanisms can be enforced either by ostracism or state. This is where you see the "political plain" (2 axes) come into play. A "true communist" (anarcho-communist: bottom-left) says that everyone should have the right to have one, and it should be free (no charge-no tax-no government funding), as it's a medical procedure. The "stalanist communist" (totaliterian-communist: top-left) says that everyone has a right to an abortion, enforceable by the government for eugenics purposes. A tyrant? (totalitarian-capitalist?: top-right) would say that no one is to have abortions, that every sperm is sacred and to be defended by the state, and would include forced marriages and sex for the benefit of eugenics. While the annarchist (annarcho-capitalist: bottom-right) says that abortion is wrong, and enforcement will include either ostracism or a lynch-mob. All 4 corners stated here assume abortion was proven. Currently, we're on the left, perhaps a little above middle, on abortion. Left and right is about individual rights, while up and down is enforcement/support. But the real trap is that a person need not fall on a single location based on the issue. For example, for abortion, i'm almost all the way to the right (if the baby's toast either way, but the mother would be dead on delivery, save the mother), and somewhere close to the bottom, but not the bottom: murder charges need some degree of enforcement. For economy, i'm right of center, but not all the way on the right, but definitely on the bottom: i believe that people should (willingly, hence the bottom) engage in charity, including where we can't verify it to be of the benefit of the donator. If you were to break the whole thing into quadrants, i'm in the bottom right, but you may find me in another quadrant on a given issue. Should you let your stance in abortion judge whether or not i should speak for you on, say, gay marriage (hint: i'm in the bottom left quadrant, somewhere)? What about my stance on polygamy; do you think you can even guess what mine is based on what you see me saying here? This is the polarization trap, and easily explains Voxday's attacks on Dr.Peterson. I used to be against promiscuity, but I also realize that opposing it usually means government control. So i'm on the bottom, perhaps a little left of center: it's not my business what someone else does with their life if it has no impact upon mine. Now, if a prostitute was advertising herself by rubbing herself all over the outside of my kitchen window (or, if i owned the land and had a gate, right outside my front gate) then i'm not really concerned about her rights, as she's already messing with that which is mine (whether it be my property, my personal space, perhaps my children, or my wife, or whatever). Double standards are clearly separate: that's consistency. Arguably, everyone should be against double standards, but double standards are exploitable by people with agendas and goals. Well, it's easy to see where that came from, and then it becomes easy to see why we are where we are, especially with universities which was one of the major entrypoints. I'm not sure what happened to the CIA and when (i think it might've been around the time of the "red scare"), but what we do know is that when all this was going on in Europe, this Socialist/Communist vs Nationalist Socialism debate was going on, when Hitler (the nationalist socialism: the more right of the two major contenders) won, the other guys (the more left) came here (to the united states), and become university teachers. It wasn't their philosophy or ideology that inherently made this become totalitarian, but it was the fact that the ones that came here were people who were trying to take political control of a nation (germany). They lost germany, so they decided to try it here instead. So, naturally, when we saw the most evil left as communists, their direct opposition became the definition of the far right, even if it is actually still to the left of center (which is why everyone's far right, but no one can define far left). I'm not 100% sure, but i believe this is who they are.

So, presumably, since this is UK law, only UK news agencies would be obligated to follow it, right?

In the US, the left had violent protests trying to defend a man who committed a crime and threatened the life of another. In the UK, a man is wrongfully imprisoned. This is not US-UK comparison. I'm just saying that if criminals are going to have violent protests, maybe good people should at least have scary ones. If shutting down streets is OK for criminals, totally legal, etc, why aren't people doing this for Mr. Robinson?

Well, we try to describe left and right as a number line (or a plane for the more "enlightened" individuals who see that some leftists are for small government and some conservatives want a totalitarian state), so how do you actually quantify a person's politics as a number? Then, what number is "far"? Sure, we can "feel" the difference, just as we can "feel" how reasonable someone is, but deceptions come through this method. The words are, to use Stefan's terms, "nothing burgers." Even using the terms sacrifices our souls to identity politics.

I'm trying to find a stable income source, so i could finally move out of my home and get on with my life. Well, and i was reading comments in this video and other videos, and basically people (apparently some lawyers, too) are waiting for loan bailouts and/or the next crash. So, basically, everyone's banking on either a bailout or for the system to fall apart. Did this father see it that way? I don't know. Does the father have lawyer friends? I do remember talk and spam emails about Obama student loan forgiveness under the Obama administration. Was that kind of talk floating around in his circles? I don't know. Still, that bet, of having a chance at a decent paying job as a debt slave, is still a better prospect than being a debt slave without decent pay trying to pay off every loan you're taking out, because you start out with nothing and no realistic way to pay for it, thanks to credentialism (wonderful word i found in the comments section of the video, so apparently people have been talking about it, but not correlating it with the "student debt crisis"). Well, let me ask. Do you have a stable enough income to live on your own? 'Cause i've heard of people doing this as a stepping stone into a stable job. I've never heard of anyone trying to survive on it. So, I ask, is this viable? So what kind of costs, exactly, is one expected to accrue? Since you've been there, what's it take to deal with the credentials of business registration with the government, because you know other businesses want you to have that paper, just like a degree. That's the mentality i was in when i doubled down on learning programming. In theory, it should be enough to prove skills. In reality, proving that you wrote the code you're using, or dealing with your company trying to deal with "liabilities" becomes a problem (i've heard of old boomer accountants and secretaries loosing their jobs because they lacked the paper). Sure, the paper's meaningless, but so is the dollar. If we can't break ourselves free of using that worthless paper dollar, how do we expect to break free of that worthless paper degree? Programming aside, take a look at job search platforms: So, i look at my local area in the government job posting website (which is actually the goto job posting method in my area). Frito Lay is looking for a sales rep. It's actually quite a drive away (not 1 hour, but still a drive), and while it requires no degree or experience, the "competitive salary" tells it all. See, that's how companies avoid putting "8-10 bucks an hour" on job posting, since actually putting numbers and number ranges is possible (i've seen it). To drive the point home: Accounting intern, at an hour away drive over said "mountain" that closes. "Competitive salary." 40 hours a week seasonal. Despite saying no education or experience required, in the actual job description they demand you have working knowledge of accounting. I agree, that last requirement is reasonable. Conestoga wood. I applied at one of the local "job fairs," never got a call back. Less than a year later, they're advertising the job again. Guess like every other business, they "can't keep people," which usually means the pay is bad and they prefer external people for higher positions rather than promoting and rewarding good work. Another long drive away, and, should've guessed it, "competitive salary." In the description, it says generous wage, but they didn't actually list one when provided the opportunity. Experience tells me "this just like what democrats say when they say they care." I remember leaving the nursing home, and when i cited that it isn't enough to pay rent, the one supervisor laughed at me asking where i could possibly find better than 10.20 an hour, because they pay so well. To be fair, they did pay me more than one would reasonably expect for the job i was hired to do, but they also had made up job postings (and they expected me to do them) where elsewhere it would've been a much higher paying job. So, let's try filtering out this junk, just like these same companies treat us like junk using filtration methods. Fun part here, when i go to the search filters, you can filter based on "estimated yearly salary," and 18 jobs fall under less than 10,000, 31 for 10,000, 20,000 has 70, 30,000 has 19, 40,000 has 9, 50,000 has 4, 60,000 has 1, 70,000 has 1, and 100,000 has 2, wtih the largest category of jobs falling under "unspecified" (aka minimum wage or close to it) at 195. So, to start off, over half the jobs on the market aren't even worth looking at, because your average person looking for a job wants to pay bills, not look for extra cash on the side. 20,000 seems reasonable, divided by 52 gives us 384 per week before taxes. This is the largest category with reported salaries, and we'll pretend there are not taxes, just incase they already factored your taxes in. So living alone, with rent around 600, out of your 1536 (pre-tax), you're already working over 1/3 for the land lord alone. If you pay only a little bit more per month, you can make a house payment and potentially have some equity, so it's not surprise that articles are written that the debt slaves are jumping into debt to buy a house (that market's ugly, by the way). Let's forget the similar car payment and all the other bills. Frankly, you're not living alone on this salary, but shacking up with someone. First job, direct support specialist. They'll actually send you to school for your certification. Looks like this practice is slowly coming back. This is not what the search looked like last year. Production Recruitment (yeah, they're not llooking for a recruiter, but a laborer). This company specializes in making those tiny houses that we see on the highway on the back of shipping trucks. I happen to know people who work there: about 14 an hour, which is one of the best around here. On job injuries are common, but, hey, gotta feed the wife (i'd say kids, but you aren't having them). They're the only other company (other than Standard Steel) that i'm aware of with an "incentive program," which pays you above the base pay (12) based on profits (explaining how 12 became 14). Machinist in a plastic bag company, requires 2 years of experience with a lathe (and the catch-22 of experience begins, 'cause you aren't getting that professional experience without working there: they're targeting people who might move to this area from another). Production/Warehouse forklift operator: 2 years experience (to be fair, if they just happen to need forklift drivers while you're on the part time line in the chicken plant, they'll train you there, and you gotta deal with that for 2 years [i won't get into the illegal immigrants, high crime rate at facility, high injury rate, etc]). "Nursing assistant" for an agency. See problems from previous post. Listed three times. "Food service," so they're probably lying about the yearly to get people or the hours are terrible. Listed as "competitive salary" for the hourly section. They're specifically looking for prospective employees with mental conditions (my ADHD is listed) or physical disabilities. I can only imagine why that might be. Wireless sales associate (AKA cash register operator at companies trying to sell cellphones: AT&T, Verizon, etc are listed in the job description): 2 years minimum experience. Like most of these others, still magically listed at 20,000 a year despite "competitive salary," which means they're not reporting the full picture, which implies they're not honest. Shipper-packer: 1 year of experience. "Competitive salary." Need i say more? "Machine operator," minimum 2 years experience required. Apparently they've been falling into the age-old practice of blaming millennials for their lack of hiring due to their unrealistic job requirements, as evidenced by the job description, where the bold is present on the job posting: " Confectionary Production Associate" (aka Laborer at the local candy making factory): I'd love to know what the experience must be in, but it's not even listed. These were not selected at random. These were not even carefully selected results. These were the actual search results, going down the list. I didn't skip-over or avoid any. This isn't just a problem for me, but a problem for everyone. So, the requirements have come down, i didn't see out of these jobs requring the usual bachelor's degree in anything just to work as a laborer factory, like i did a few years ago. I did recently hear that a startup in the next county over is giving preferential to exclusive hiring treatment for those with degrees (i'm assuming bachelor's or better) for positions like driving fork lift and inventory. One of those results actually suggested paying for schooling, which i've always heard boomers talking about, but it's the first time i've actually seen it. So, the market's actually reacting to the problems, just really, really slowly. They have to compromise to even have a work force, but they can only compromise so much, and they're still employing dirty tactics (lying about wages and hours) to hire employees. I'd continue on, but i need to get going. This is a huge problem, and I hope stefan addresses it, at least for the sake of summarizing it for others, because no one wants to listen to "lazy" millennials. This is the source of the "failure to launch"/"failure to land." The source of this problem is government regulation. This is the thing that stefan is not talking about that explains precisely the things stefan is talking about: the suicide rate is up, men running from babies (that they can't afford), unemployment rate, young people living at home, student debt crisis, and the list goes on. This is the focal point for me and almost everyone else i graduated with. There is no easy fix and what we're doing is merely strategies on circumnavigating this problem. I'd love to hear from more people who found ways around it. So far i have 2 people here suggesting starting business/freelance programming work (which most people i graduated with are not smart enough for, which we can point the finger, but remember we're dealing with a major demographic change).