Silicon Valley Thinks It Invented Roommates. They Call It 'Co-living' (theguardian.com) 337
An anonymous reader shares a report: Have you heard of this cool new trend called co-living? It's a bit like co-working, except instead of sharing an office with a bunch of randoms you share a home with a bunch of randoms. Oh, you might be thinking, is it like ye olde concept of "roommates"? Why, yes. Yes it is. As a viral tweet pointed out earlier this week, "co-living", which has inspired a spate of trend-pieces in recent months, is actually "called *roommates* ... you invented ***roommates***." Now, to be fair, co-living isn't just living with a bunch of roommates. No, it's rich millennials living with a bunch of roommates in a fancy building in a recently gentrified part of town. The co-living space is also full of cool amenities like yoga classes and micro-brew coffee bars, meaning you can minimise unnecessary interactions with the outside world. In startup speak, this is what is called "community." The Collective, for example, a co-working space in London, describes co-living as "a way of living focused on a genuine sense of community, using shared spaces and facilities to create a more convenient and fulfilling lifestyle."
Nursing homes for millennials... (Score:5, Funny)
I think we actually used to call these nursing homes! ;).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
That is assuming that you are a people person. For the introvert spending a day in an open office, having to go to a living center where you still need to interact with a bunch of people to take advantage of these shared services. Sounds like hell to me.
This is why I became a morning person. I would wake up at 5:00 am in college just so I can lock myself in the computer lab where there would be no one there at that time, even during a deadline. And I can just sit there do my work alone with just my though
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I call it Co-Ride-Sharing
Is that sitting on someone's lap in public transport when all seats are occupied?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So... from mom's basement to assisted living to nursing home.
Back where I come from we only have such programs for retards. Then again...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So... from mom's basement to assisted living to nursing home.
Back where I come from we only have such programs for retards. Then again...
It's funny you got modded funny because it's pretty close to reality. I honestly hope California becomes its own country then they can go bankrupt with their socialist economy without dragging the rest of the country down.
Re: Nursing homes for millennials... (Score:2, Informative)
I hope it falls into the sea...and I grew up there.
Right up to the Sierra. I like that part.
Re:Nursing homes for millennials... (Score:5, Informative)
I honestly hope California becomes its own country then they can go bankrupt with their socialist economy without dragging the rest of the country down.
California's "socialist economy" apparently works a hell of a lot better than that of most red states, considering that they get only $0.78 from the federal government for every $1 paid. Mississippi, on the other hand, gets $2 from the feds for every dollar of federal taxation they pay. I don't think this will work out like you are hoping.
Citation: https://taxfoundation.org/pres... [taxfoundation.org]
Re: (Score:3)
California's "socialist economy" apparently works a hell of a lot better than that of most red states, considering that they get only $0.78 from the federal government for every $1 paid. Mississippi, on the other hand, gets $2 from the feds for every dollar of federal taxation they pay. I don't think this will work out like you are hoping.
It only works out better for lower ability people because in an ideal "California World", all your income would go directly to the socialist government to do what's best for you on your behalf. Now maybe you would prefer that and perhaps you can't do better. I can do better than that and have a better life without this type of system because I'm intelligent, I'm hard-working and I have a lot of drive and ambition. I know how to strategize in a free market economy. That's the price you pay for freedom an
Re: (Score:3)
Not California, but Silicon Valley. It turned from an incubator of creative ideas and new technology, to a commune where you are suppose to all think alike. Nearly every city has a spot for technology and plenty of jobs, much of them pay almost as well as SV, but the cost of living is much lower and you can live like a human being and not a caged animal.
Sure your work probably wont be on display on national TV, however you probably didn't get credit for it anyways. But you get to work on new and interestin
Re:Nursing homes for millennials... (Score:4, Insightful)
An old, tired and false argument.
You sound like someone who knows they don't have the ability to be successful in California.
Re:Nursing homes for millennials... (Score:5, Funny)
Will somebody please mod this idiot into oblivion?
Your wish has been granted. We will mod you into oblivion.
Re: (Score:3)
I think we actually used to call these kindergartens.
Re: (Score:2)
Responding to top comment to say, the writer is obviously a satirist and this "article" should never have been submitted. Read the writer's other work.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually this seems like moving back to a feudal system.
Sure we get fancy adult dorms now. Then they will be company owned housing, then to a point where an entire community will be owned by the company. Where it will take care of all your needs, just as long as you work for them. They will just deduct all the expenses out of your paycheck, so you have nothing less to save, because using the company housing, you have access to bunch of services, that you may not use or want, but are paying for it anyways.
FFS (Score:2, Insightful)
$subject already says all I've to say on the matter.
Pre-owned (Score:2, Funny)
I, for one, am enthusiastic about this new form of living. I'm also quite enthusiastic about my "pre-owned" car, which I wouldn't have even considered if it was "used".
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Pre-owned (Score:5, Funny)
Why would you want the inconvenience of having to schedule car time with 3 other owners? My start-up is different. I'm creating a pay-per-use model where you rent one car out of a fleet. They'll be delivered directly to your location and will come with a driver to take your car to its destination. Ready to head back? Rent another on demand! All I need is a name.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Pre-owned (Score:5, Funny)
synonyms (Score:5, Insightful)
'The Collective, for example, a co-working space in London, describes co-living as "a way of living focused on a genuine sense of community, using shared spaces and facilities to create a more convenient and fulfilling lifestyle."'
We also may refer to that as a 'commune', 'compound', or 'cult'
Re:synonyms (Score:5, Insightful)
'The Collective, for example, a co-working space in London, describes co-living as "a way of living focused on a genuine sense of community, using shared spaces and facilities to create a more convenient and fulfilling lifestyle."'
We also may refer to that as a 'commune', 'compound', or 'cult'
I always thought that large residential buildings where lot of people shared bathrooms and kitchens were called "slums". That, or "college".
Re: (Score:2)
I always thought that large residential buildings where lot of people shared bathrooms and kitchens were called "slums". That, or "college".
"Barracks" is another appropriate term.
Re: (Score:2)
'The Collective, for example, a co-working space in London, describes co-living as "a way of living focused on a genuine sense of community, using shared spaces and facilities to create a more convenient and fulfilling lifestyle."'
We also may refer to that as a 'commune', 'compound', or 'cult'
The self affirmation benefits will be great as well.
Re:synonyms (Score:5, Insightful)
A "genuine sense of community". If it were genuine, it wouldn't require a mission statement. The genuine community is probably around the corner holding a "spare change" sign.
Re: (Score:2)
So, like hippie communes, but with hipsters.
Re: (Score:2)
'The Collective, for example, a co-working space in London, describes co-living as "a way of living focused on a genuine sense of community, using shared spaces and facilities to create a more convenient and fulfilling lifestyle."'
We also may refer to that as a 'commune', 'compound', or 'cult'
Or the Borg [wikipedia.org].
So... (Score:3, Funny)
...it's "Friends"?
Re: (Score:2)
Friends is so 90s, who wants to live with something that doesn't even get reruns?
It is called ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Poverty.
Make 100K a year and live like you are 18 with your first apartment, all your life in SV.
Re: (Score:2)
Poverty.
Make 100K a year and live like you are 18 with your first apartment, all your life in SV.
San Francisco has always been a place where money has been turned inside out. And its mostly relative. I could have worked and lived there, and made more money, but it would all have been sucked up by that cost of living. Same goes for DC. Could have made more, spent more, and dealt with the horrible DC traffic.
But aside from some folks thinking that this is somehow a liberal wet dream - what it really is - an example of tribalism. Most people are very social, and urban environments usually work against t
Re: (Score:3)
Make 100K a year and live like you are 18 with your first apartment, all your life in SV.
Yes, you can make an informed, rational choice to do that.
Or, you can make an informed, rational choice to live in one of any number of other places in the country where the salary to cost-of-living ratio is much higher.
What you can't do is live exactly where you would prefer to live, under the exact living conditions you would prefer to have, for the exact amount of money you would prefer to pay.
That's a lesson that seems hard for millennials -- and quite a few adults as well.
The Collective (Score:2)
"We are The Collective. Your Millennials will be assimilated. Resistance is effort and will hurt your feelings. You will become one with The Collective."
Here's the irony ... (Score:2)
they could live better in NY, despite NY's expensive reputation. Rent an entire apartment in Queens for the price, work in corporate/healthcare/academic I.T rather than chasing the dream of making it big in an "app" "startup". (As if other cities don't have those as well.)
Problem with Silicon Valley is congestion, lack of decent public transport, and the fact that former cities have become bedroom communities for former suburbs, leading to travel patterns not intended by planners 20-30 years ago.
Millenial hipsters reinvented yuppies (Score:3)
News at 11. The similarities between millennial hipsters and yuppies are significant, including the absolute hatred towards them by those that are outside the culture. I feel like I'm living the 80s all over again sometimes.
Re: (Score:2)
$50,000 (Score:2)
Re:$50,000 (Score:4, Informative)
Hell no. Dead broke people needn't apply.
Apartment Complexes (Score:2)
Condescend a bit more, please (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As long as they keep pretending they invented the world while at the same time not getting anything accomplished, we'll keep mocking them.
Re: (Score:3)
Just like the generation before them. And the generation before that. You know what the thing about millennials is? They're young. Most of us old farts prefer to remember an idealized time when we were in child's bodies with our current judgment, and did everything right.
Re: (Score:2)
The summary is spot-on, TFA is just as condescending, if not more.
But yeah, we need stories crapping on the next generation, it helps us feel superior, just like our parents, grandparents and all our ancestors since the beginning of civilization.
But is it really a surprise? (Score:2)
They didn't invent Doublespeak either (Score:4, Insightful)
I am not a millennial .... (Score:2)
Newspeak (Score:3)
Everthing is called differently now.
Hitchhiking is called Ubering, your granny's bed-and-breakfast is now called Airbnb, mooching off your friends is now called Couchsurfing and living with Roomates are no longer a Hippie-Commune but Co-living.
Co-living Makers in Tiny Houses (Score:5, Funny)
I remember the first time I heard the term "Makers". It was as if garage tinkerers and fabricators hadn't existed before the vaguely sci-fi Makers had arrived
And the same goes for "Tiny Houses". They are trailers people.... Ridiculously heavy and expensive trailers
Rebranding run amok.
Fix the issues, don't rebrand roomates! (Score:2)
Living near NYC, I'm not one to throw stones about expensive housing markets. But, California's real estate markets (especially around SF/SV) are a level above everything outside of Midtown Manhattan. When old, crappy houses on tiny lots start in the low million-dollar range, and 1-bedroom apartments are renting for over $4000 a month, the system needs to be fixed. Rebranding having to share a small space with "co-living companions" is not the answer. I know not everyone wants a big house and a big lawn, et
Why all the negativity? (Score:2)
This isnâ(TM)t new to SV. Everyone before them did this. Itâ(TM)s called marketing and we all fell for it. They were called villages, towns, military posts, military bases, mining towns, factory towns, retirement homes, campuses, UGA, dormitories, roomies, friends with benefits, cube hotels, etc.
Just 10 years ago the real estate industry was freshening up âoeThe Villageâ. You know, âoeDonâ(TM)t you want to go back to the village?â But the dirt replaced by concrete, met
What will they think of next? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
They'll call shoes: "foot helmets".
Toothbrush: "Dental maintenance amenity" or "Bristled breath freshener".
Door: "Controllable privacy barrier".
Floor: "Soil-and-human boundary management system" or "Inverted ceiling".
I call it "Rent Hacking" (Score:3)
It's this super cool way where you hack your monthly rent bill by having other people live in the same house!
Ugh... (Score:3)
Look dude, it's quite obvious you hate silicon valley and millenials, plus the idea of gentrification, but this is nothing really new nor recent, much less exclusive to millenials or silicon valley. Including the renaming of the idea or separation from stuff like frat houses, roommates or student dormitories.
Think you are some sort of genius for making the association? Think again.
Co-living and other shared styles of housing have been around since early 20th century in one form or another, in several different countries if you didn't know about it including Japan, Denmark, and others.
It's far from being a Silicon Valley thing, and it's targeted towards single people who just graduated and are looking for jobs or just started working, particularly in urban areas where rent is cost prohibitive.
And neither the idea of having ammenities in commonground areas, the gentrification part, positive spins or the general philosophy of it is anything new. It's just how the market works. This is ad targetting. It passes a specific image not only of what you should expect of the space you'll be living in, but also of people landlords are looking for in tenants.
While some people might find this kinda fake or stupid, it's actually not. Saves a whole lot of money and time, plus it's a very effective marketing strategy. And more importantly, this isn't so dissimilar to things like stars and categorization of hotels, vacation spots, and whatnot.
Which is why I left the Silicon Valley (Score:3)
Re:Progressive wet dream (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Conservative policies you mean.
You cons ALWAYS project your failings on others!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's just what progressive projectionists always say.
Re: (Score:2)
...that's not what "progressives" want.
That's funny, because it's the sum of their policies.
RLY? So the concept of having to live communally because you can't afford an actual place of your own is now somehow a progressive goal?
I live in a college town where something like 4 families own pretty much everything, Students live as many per apartment as the law allows, which was brought into being because some actual progressives didn't think that 12 people shouldn't live in a small two bedroom apartment.
And the people who own the town are pissed because you know - "regulations" . They're even ra
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Progressives want the US to be like the Soviet Union, so yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Progressives want the US to be like the Soviet Union, so yes.
No that's part of the Republican Party Platform.
Re: (Score:2)
I would think they would prefer the US to be like Germany or, say, Canada...
Some folks would just like the country run by people who are working for citizens, not corporations.
Re: (Score:2)
Your argument is literally "liberals temper the negative consequences of their policies to be the maximum allowable without revolt." It's not a win that the economy is structured that people lack the ability to control their own lives, Hell, you couldn't even move off to live in the woods if you wanted to. You don't get to opt-out of society anymore.
WalMart has taken your input into consideration and will get back to you on your fate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've read it. Which section are you referring to?
Re:Progressive wet dream (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to the progressive wet dream. Home ownership is for the 1% only (and optional).
You've misspelled conservative. Progressives want more housing and better housing affordability.
The rest get to live in shared housing, tied to it by monthly rent that is just high enough to ensure they can't accumulate wealth, and just low enough to ensure that anyone can get a 12x12 ft box for themselves.
Basically you're describing Feudalism, which is definitely not progressive. Its quite the opposite. Feudalism is where the lord maintains the ownership of all the lands and the tenants (serfs and freemen) rent off the lord for a portion of their produce. The tenants, well at least the freemen are permitted to work it as they see fit as long as the lords get their tribute. This is very much a conservative wet dream who are still bitter about having to give up any of their rights to the peasantry.
Re: (Score:3)
The differen
Re:Progressive wet dream (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference here is that instead of a ruling family you have "the government". The Soviets used to have an expression: "you own what you guard". When the government owns and controls everything, the bureaucrats own and control everything, including you. In Soviet Union, the government officials had property, income, and quality of life that far exceeded the rest, and was proportional to their position. I fail to see the difference.
And where did I advocate government ownership? Sure its better than Feudalism, but I'd still rather not have it (Communism originated from a time where Feudal lords still controlled much of eastern Europe like they did in dark age England, Feudalism in England was over before the US even existed).
Have you been to Manhattan, San Francisco, Silicon Valley - they so-called havens of the progressives? They are far more segregated, stratified, with their high castles inaccessible to the common citizens, compared to the South, for example.
Have you? These aren't liberal havens. The people who live in SF, Manhattan, Central London et al want to keep their property prices high and the riff raff out. They aren't progressive in any way shape or form no-matter what Fox News tells you. Why do you think multi-millionaires flock to these places to live if they're so bohemian? Clue by four, if that were true they wouldn't.
Re: (Score:2)
So you are going to go with the "no true Scotsman argument".
Sorry you need to come to grips with the fact that progressives are either stupid enough to believe their own nonsense, or cynical enough to inflict it on others. The progressive "agenda" is nothing but a bunch of pandering to groups whose actual needs are in direct conflict.
Re:Progressive wet dream (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a very clear divide between progressives and establishment democrats at the municipal level. I live in Seattle, which isn't one of the cities you list but has similar problems of officially being controlled by the "liberal" party but the municipal policy effectively greatly favoring current land-owners over renters (according to this site [zipatlas.com], 46% of the population, but likely non-citizens are overrepresented as Seattle has a lot of immigrants), homeless, and future residents.
Because Washington state has top-two primaries [wikipedia.org] (instead of Democrat and Republican party primaries), this divide is very visible in Seattle politics, especially in our mayoral race last week [wikipedia.org] where the primary had the eventual winner establishment candidate Jenny Durkan with 28% of the vote and the two leading progressive candidates each with 17% of the vote (and another with 12% of the vote; if only we had ranked choice primaries...). One of the main issues was that Durkan wanted to zone for less new housing and slower. And she won in part because home owners think that increases their property values. But "increased property values" is bad for anyone who wants to live in the area who does not presently own a home.
If you want to see progressive housing policy, look to Seattle Transit Blog [seattletransitblog.com] calling for upzoning near any major transit route. Multiple people in the comments put forth arguments for eliminating zoning limitation on residential construction entirely. These policies are not even within the Overton window of political discourse at the level of campaigns for Seattle city positions.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you been to Manhattan, San Francisco, Silicon Valley - they so-called havens of the progressives? They are far more segregated, stratified, with their high castles inaccessible to the common citizens, compared to the South, for example.
Have you? These aren't liberal havens...
This is a joke, right? You're joking. OP made some ridiculous statements made about cities and segregation, and you're going to argue with the part that describes these cities as liberal havens?
How could you miss the voting maps the rest of us have pored over for the last year?
Re: (Score:2)
The difference here is that instead of a ruling family you have "the government". The Soviets used to have an expression: "you own what you guard". When the government owns and controls everything, the bureaucrats own and control everything, including you. In Soviet Union, the government officials had property, income, and quality of life that far exceeded the rest, and was proportional to their position. I fail to see the difference.
You seem to be conflating Communism with Progressivism. Or perhaps you think there are only two economic systems, so if one is not Capitalist it must be Communist. It is true that Progressives are concerned about extreme inequality, but they do not advocate that everyone should have exactly the same amount of wealth or that the state should own the means of production.
Have you been to Manhattan, San Francisco, Silicon Valley - they so-called havens of the progressives? They are far more segregated, stratified, with their high castles inaccessible to the common citizens, compared to the South, for example.
The dynamic you describe is wealth inequality, not Progressivism. You have noticed that the wealthy use their money to separate themselves
Re: (Score:2)
"The difference here is that instead of a ruling family you have 'the government'. " Except that in this instance "The Government" does *not* own the building. The building is owned privately by one or more of the people living there.
In right wing nut job speak you use "the government" to mean "anything I don't like".
Re: (Score:2)
Wait nope, not at all. Yes conservatives and neo-conservatives a like pushed home ownership but they did it thru favorable tax policy.
It was progressives (who also were behind universal home ownership for a long time) who created the lending crisis. Conservatives have always hated fannie and fredy. Those were liberal/progressive inventions designed to make below market rate loans to people who were not qualified to borrow. That created a government competitor to the private industry that forced private
Re: (Score:2)
This is the confusing part of politics today. "Long-standing" and "right now" are really quite different. Regardless of whether you think Barney Frank or George Bush is really responsible for the critical policy, the liberals today are staying away from universal house ownership with a 10 foot pole.
The NY Times had a great summary of the policies that led to the housing bubble. It's an easy article to find. I think Bush removing the requirement for down payments was key... but other views are valid.
I also
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say anything about limiting affordability. I clearly stated that they would like everyone neatly stacked into little boxes... affordably.
Re: (Score:2)
Its lucky the world is so binary.
This is why we can't have nice discussions anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome to the progressive wet dream. Home ownership is for the 1% only (and optional). The rest get to live in shared housing, tied to it by monthly rent that is just high enough to ensure they can't accumulate wealth, and just low enough to ensure that anyone can get a 12x12 ft box for themselves. You don't need a bathroom - you can share. You certainly don't need a kitchen - you won't be doing any cooking of your own. And you surely don't need a garage because you'll use public transportation, or god forbid rent once in a while. Everything is disposable... and you're dependent on your betters for every aspect of your life. You won't even have a job of your own - you'll get free money from the government.
Actually, it seems like the 1 percenters are the ones who benefit from this system. Is a 1 percenter a progressive?
Re: (Score:2)
I was generous. It's probably 0.1-percenter, or 0.01 percenter.
Yes they're progressive as long as they get to remain a 0.01 percenter. Just ask Jimmy Kimmel.
The progressives in the government remain so because they realize that when the government owns everything, and they control how to distribute it, they will just distribute it according to their wants and needs.
Re: (Score:2)
I was generous. It's probably 0.1-percenter, or 0.01 percenter.
Yes they're progressive as long as they get to remain a 0.01 percenter. Just ask Jimmy Kimmel.
The progressives in the government remain so because they realize that when the government owns everything, and they control how to distribute it, they will just distribute it according to their wants and needs.
I'm not certain what on earth you are talking about.
Trying to piece something together, there are wealthy people of all political stripes.
The concept of "The Government owns everything" well duh. The part that most people both left and right don't take into account is someone is going to own it.
We are now under Governance by corporatism. Corporations pay for and get proxy votes to run the country.
If people were to actually think about it, what they have chosen is that they demand that WalMart is
Re: (Score:2)
But then we can't have an enemy. Remember liberalism = communism and conservatism = nazi. Now get in the ring!
Cars ... (Score:2)
Re:Progressive wet dream (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to the progressive wet dream. Home ownership is for the 1% only (and optional). The rest get to live in shared housing, tied to it by monthly rent that is just high enough to ensure they can't accumulate wealth, and just low enough to ensure that anyone can get a 12x12 ft box for themselves. You don't need a bathroom - you can share. You certainly don't need a kitchen - you won't be doing any cooking of your own. And you surely don't need a garage because you'll use public transportation, or god forbid rent once in a while. Everything is disposable... and you're dependent on your betters for every aspect of your life. You won't even have a job of your own - you'll get free money from the government.
You do realize that you have just described where our capitalist system has led and is leading us, right? Are Republicans "progressives" now?
Re: (Score:3)
You're such a brainwashed trumpflake rethuglikkkan tool.
BBBBBZZZZZTTTT
Did you hear that? The period bell just rang. Better get going to your next class. Don't want to get a citation from the hall monitor. (I've heard those things stay on your record even after you make it to high school. Don't chance it.)
Fortunately ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
PUSHING anyone anywhere is wrong. You know, back when I was young, everyone and their dog had to become a doctor or a lawyer. Preferably both, so you can handle your own malpractice lawsuits. Anything else and you were stupid.
Today we have lawyers and doctors with huge debts for their expensive education with no chance to ever recover any of that in their lifetime (unless they're extremely lucky or extremely good at their job) because you can't throw a lawyer over your shoulder without hitting a doctor. And
Re:Wow IT sucks as a career now. (Score:5, Interesting)
Lawyers are a good example of your complaint, but not doctors...not by a long shot. Doctors were smart enough to create professional organizations that actually have teeth. Through these orgs, they pay for the laws that will keep them employed when every other knowledge job is done by automation.
Part of the reason why it's so hard to become a doctor is that the supply of medical school slots is closely protected. The Bar Association did the reverse and allowed tons of new law schools to open up, resulting in those lawyers with unrecoverable debts because there just isn't enough work to go around anymore. Becoming a doctor requires the closest thing possible to a photographic memory even to pass the MCAT, and you have to be even more hard-wired in an academic mode to make it through the classroom part of the training. So yeah, if my kids are capable of it I would certainly encourage them to at least try...I don't know of any non-rich doctors in the US!
Re: (Score:3)
yeah, doctors formed the only successful labor union in the united states, and republicans can't stop slobbering on their knobs (possibly just because they're rich?). go figure. the irony is killing people. literally.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't wonder. I know it's because Americans have been brain-washed with decades of pro-corporate and anti-government propaganda into believing bullshit like this:
Waiting lists in public health systems are for non-urgent conditions. Anyone with an urgent condition will be
Re: (Score:2)
Male and female power structures are different and I can't see saddling graduates with debt as a great way to encourage entrepreneurial risk only to be told that they are too old to be there once they become useful. That's a lot of factors against IT as a career choice.
Outsourcing attracted people interested in the money, not the craft and created an adversarial aspect to IT that didn't really exist before. All the parasites that have attached themselves to IT to drive down the cost of talent have done ev
Re: (Score:2)
The people pushing for more women in IT are true misogynists.
Absolutely NOT. They are feminists that are a minority within women trying to force other women into careers they don't want because you know we need to have an equal distribution of every possible demographic in every possible discipline even if that's not what the people actually want. It's a cult.
Re: (Score:3)
In the 60s, nobody had a job but everyone had good dope and somehow still managed to make ends meet.
Today, nobody has good dope, everyone has a job and probably a second one to make ends meet.
Where did we go astray?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)