Central Perk

vineri, 30 mai 2014

My Brother's Keeper

Featured

Earlier this year, President Obama launched the My Brother's Keeper initiative to help America's boys and young men of color, and ensure all young people can reach their full potential.

Through this initiative, the Administration is joining with cities and towns, businesses, and foundations who are taking important steps to connect young people to mentoring, support networks, and the skills they need to find a good job or go to college and work their way into the middle class.

Learn more about My Brother's Keeper, and find out how you can make a difference in your own community.

Breaking the SEO Rules: When Not to Follow Best Practices - Whiteboard Friday

Posted: 29 May 2014 05:16 PM PDT

Posted by Cyrus-Shepard

Best practices are set in place to guide us toward success in most situations. Not all situations. In today's Whiteboard Friday, Cyrus shows us several instances in which it's actually best to break the rules and throw those best practices out the window.

For reference, here's a still of this week's whiteboard!

Video Transcription

Howdy Moz fans. Welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. I'm Cyrus Shepard. Today we're going to be talking about one of my favorite subjects -- breaking the SEO rules, and when not to follow best practices.

Now, best practices are something we talk a lot about here at Moz, and people are very adamant about following them oftentimes. So before we get started, I want to talk about what exactly we mean when we say "best practices."

For example, a best practice would be that your meta description length is only so long, or that your title tag length is 512 pixels or something like that. So when we talk about best practices, we're talking about a set of rules that are consistently showing superior results. It doesn't mean they're the only way you can do things, but in general, over time, they deliver the best results over other techniques.

Best practices are also used as a benchmark so that when you compare two different techniques, such as title tag length is this long or title tag length is that long, one set of those results you can use as a benchmark to measure your results.

Finally, best practices are meant to evolve and improve. Best practices get better over time. If you're running a business or you're doing SEO, your best practices are going to change the better you get at what you're doing and the more you learn. This is one thing that people often forget -- that best practices do change.

But sometimes you want to ignore best practices, and that's what we want to talk about today. One of the first reasons that you sometimes want to forget about best practices is when you want to deliver the highest ROI for your activities. When you're working on a client's site, when you're doing in-house SEO, time and resources are limited. So you want to make sure that you're doing the activity that leads to the highest return on investment for what you're doing.

This is a really common example when people start. When they're new to SEO, they start on a campaign, and they start optimizing their on-page elements and crawlability and engine accessibility. At the beginning of your campaign, that's a really high-ROI activity.

As you fix those site errors, as your search engine optimization improves, working on on-page issues, the return on investment starts to decline. What people do is they stay on this line far too long, and they're fixing every little thing on their site, and they're not seeing a huge return on investment.

At the same time, they're ignoring all the other issues, such as building links, building a community, getting out there on social media, when that would be a much higher-ROI activity. So even though it would be a best practice to stay on those sites and fix all those issues, sometimes there are activities which are going to be much more valuable for you to pursue.

Along those same lines you always have to weigh the cost and the benefit of the SEO that you're working on, because working on best practices and implementing SEO on your site sometimes comes at a cost, especially if you're making changes. So you have to justify what you're going to get in return to the effort that you're going to put into it.

An example that comes up a lot, it's a best practice to have keywords in your URL structure. So we see people write in, people talk to us, and they have a structure like this example.com/category/keyword. They want to go through a massive site reorganization, so that's example.com/keyword/keyword.

Now, keep in mind that doing that there's a bunch of 301 redirects. You may lose some link equity, and you may even lose rankings. In the end, you have to wonder if making that change is worth the change, worth the cost of doing so. In many examples, it's not going to be.

We have a saying: If it's not broke, don't fix it, because making huge, massive changes is going to cost you. If you're ranking pretty well in this situation, we might recommend just leave it alone even though it violates best practices.

A lot of times you want to violate best practices when you're optimizing for other goals. Again, talking about that title tag case, 512 pixels, that's generally the amount of title tag that Google will display in its search results. So that's what we define as best practices for title tags.

But that doesn't mean you should go rewrite every title tag on your site, which a lot of people will go out and do. You might be optimizing for social sharing. If you have an awesome title tag and it's hot on Twitter, it's hot on Facebook, it's hot on Google+, LinkedIn, and it's getting shared all over the place, it might be okay to go over that 512-pixel length.

If you have a title tag that's converting really well, and it's driving all these sales to your home page, and it's showing up in other places, you may not want to rewrite it.

If you're ranking really well, there's no reason to make that change, especially if you're talking about hundreds or thousands of title tags on your site. We get into the cost benefit ratio again.

So yes, best practices tell you to have it at 512 pixels, and it's often the case that you want to keep it within those ranges because they are consistently showing superior results. But not in every case, because sometimes you're going to have different goals.

The final point is this idea of evolving and improving. Part of SEO is constantly learning what works and what doesn't work. Google and the other search engines are constantly updating their algorithms, so we want to experiment. We want to learn new things. We want to try new things. We want constant improvement on these best practices. We don't want to set them in stone. We want to define them and try to improve them over time.

SEO is all about discovery. What works today may not work a year from now or two years from now, so we have to have open minds and keep learning and keep making our best practices the best they can be.

That's all for today. Thank you.

Video transcription by Speechpad.com

Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

Seth's Blog : The tyranny of lowest price

The tyranny of lowest price

Lowering the price is a one-directional, single-axis choice. Either it's cheaper or it's not.

At first, the process of lowering your price involves smart efficiencies. It forces hard choices that lead to better outcomes.

Over time, though, in a competitive market, the quest for the bottom leads to brutality. The brutality of harming your suppliers, the brutality of compromising your morals and your mission. Someone else is always willing to go a penny lower than you are, and to compete, your choices get ever more limited.

The problem with the race to the bottom is that you might win. Even worse, you might come in second.

To cut the price a dollar on that ebook or ten dollars on that plane ticket (discounts that few, in the absence of comparison, would notice very much) you have to slash the way things are edited, or people are trained or safety is ensured. You have to scrimp on the culture, on how people are treated. You have to be willing to be less caring or more draconian than the other guy.

Every great brand (even those with low prices) is known for something other than how cheap they are.

Henry Ford earned his early success by using the ideas of mass production and interchangeable parts in a magnificent race to the most efficient car manufacturing system ever. But then, he and his team learned that people didn't actually want the cheapest car. They wanted a car they could be proud of, they wanted a car that was a bit safer, a bit more stylish, a car built by people who earned a wage that made them contributors to the community.

In the long run, to be the cheapest is a refuge for people who don't have the flair to design something worth paying for, who don't have the guts to point to their product or their service and say, "this isn't the cheapest, but it's worth it."

• Email to a friend •

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Clash of Generations - Boomers vs. Millennials: Attitude Change Will Disrupt Wall Street and Corporate America
Illinois Has Worst Pension Crisis, Needs Boldest Reforms, Not More Tax Hikes
BLS Employment Projections Through 2022: How Many Jobs Require a College Degree?

Clash of Generations - Boomers vs. Millennials: Attitude Change Will Disrupt Wall Street and Corporate America

Posted: 29 May 2014 11:41 PM PDT

As boomers and gen-Xers hand over the economic reins to millennials, a once in a multi-generational attitude shift comes with it.

Unlike boomers and gen-Xers focused whose primary focus was on money and "getting ahead" lifestyles, millennials have more of a depression-era survival mentality coupled with a completely different set of values.

The ensuing attitude change has profound implications, and that is the focus of the Brookings study: How Millennials Could Upend Wall Street and Corporate America.

Let's start with a couple of demographic definitions then a look at the study.

Boomers: Born 1946-1964
Generation X: Born 1965-1981
Millennials: Born 1982-2003

Brookings Study Excerpts

Millennial Dominance

Millennial Values

By 2020, Millennials will comprise more than one of three adult Americans. It is estimated that by 2025 they will make up as much as 75 percent of the workforce. Given their numbers, they will dominate the nation's workplaces and permeate its corporate culture. Thus, understanding the generation's values offers a window into the future of corporate America.

In the future, most Americans, taking their cue from Millennials, will demonstrate a greater desire to advance the welfare of the group and be less concerned with individual success. They will be less worried about being guided in their daily decisions by software and more intrigued by the opportunities it offers. Even without any major environmental disaster, they will display a greater reverence for the environment and less interest in the acquisition of things as opposed to experiences.

It will be a world that is radically different than the one those who wield power today have grown accustomed to leading. The Baby Boom generation, born between 1946 and 1964, has made confrontation the touchstone of its existence. In their youth, Boomers protested the Vietnam War, or fought against those who did. As they aged, both conservative and liberal Boomers polarized America's politics, making compromise morally unacceptable. Throughout their lives, Boomers have honed conflict and competition to a fine art.

As Boomers begin to leave the corridors of power in Congress and the executive suites of corporate America, they are being replaced by members of Generation X, who are largely devoted to the pursuit of the bottom line—preferring speed over reflection and autonomy over collective decision-making.

Silicon Valley CEOs, many of whom are drawn from the ranks of Generation X, look with disdain on the good old boys network of their Wall Street counterparts and are eager to leverage the technologies they have developed to gain advantage in the marketplace over the older, more established titans of the media and telecommunication sectors.

This is not to suggest that Millennial CEOs are, or will be, any less interested than Boomers or Gen-X'ers in assuring the success of the enterprises they now, or eventually will, lead. Rather, it is to emphasize the importance of recognizing the differences in how Millennials define success and the way they make decisions in order to envision the future of corporate America.

Millennials as Consumer-Workers

Cone Communications has been tracking the attitudes of American consumers toward businesses' involvement in social issues. As Millennials became a larger and larger share of the marketplace, the idea of "cause marketing" has evolved from a nascent promotional strategy to the key differentiator, not only in deciding what to buy, but who to trust and reward with brand loyalty.

Cone's 2013 survey of over 1,200 U.S. adults found Millennials to be the generation most focused on corporate social responsibility when making purchasing decisions.

Almost all Millennials responded with increased trust (91%) and loyalty (89%), as well as a stronger likelihood to buy from those companies that supported solutions to specific social issues (89%). A majority of Millennials reported buying a product that had a social benefit and 84% of a generation that accounts for more than $1 trillion in U.S. consumer spending considered a company's involvement in social causes in deciding what to buy or where to shop. In 2013, 89% of all American consumers said they would consider switching brands to one associated with a good cause if price and quality were equal. That percentage was 23 points higher than when Cone first did its survey in 1993, at a time when no Millennials were part of the adult population.

Not only are Millennials creating the need for companies to pay attention to their corporate social responsibilities, but they are also leading a shift in buying behavior away from the glorification of consumerism to a more measured view of what's important in life. Young & Rubicam's brand attribute survey in 2009 of 2,300 adults found that a majority of Millennials belonged to a segment labeled "Spend Shifters." Not only did three-fourths of the "Spend Shifters" say they "made it a point to buy brands from companies whose values are similar to my own," almost all of them (87.5%) disagreed with the statement that "money is the best measure of success."

The authors of Spend Shift, John Gerzema and Michael D'Antonio, pointed to a major shift between 2005 and 2009, just as the first wave of Millennials became adults, in what consumers were looking for in the companies with which they wanted to do business. Attributes such as exclusive (-60%), arrogant (-41%), and sensuous (-30%) fell from favor while values more associated with those of the Millennial generation rose dramatically.

Kindness and empathy rose 391 percent in these five years, the biggest shift in attitudes ever seen in the seventeen year history of the survey. Other values associated with the generation, such as friendly (+148%) and socially responsible (+63%), also rose dramatically. These shifts in consumer attitudes driven by Millennial values will give every American corporation that wants to attract customers, not to mention workers and investors, no choice but to deliver on a commitment to make the world a better place one cause at a time. Companies will also have to behave a lot more nicely than they are accustomed to in order to deliver those results, more like the characters in "Her" than those in "The Graduate."

Evidence that these attitudes represent a generational shift, not one based simply on age, can be found in a benchmark survey of 1,250 insurance company employees conducted for LifeCourse Associates in 2012. Almost two-thirds of Millennial employees said they wanted their employer to contribute to social or ethical causes they felt were important. Only half of the Boomers and older Gen Xers surveyed felt the same way.

This desire on the part of Millennials for their daily work to reflect and be a part of their societal concerns will make it impossible for corporate chieftains to motivate Millennial employees simply by extolling profits, or return on investment for their shareholders, or even employee salaries. For example, a recent Intelligence Group study found that almost two-thirds (64%) of Millennials said they would rather make $40,000 a year at a job they love than $100,000 a year at a job they think is boring.

Millennials Think About Money Differently

In its latest study of the Millennial Generation, Millennials in Adulthood, the Pew Research Center found that America's youngest adults were the least trusting of any generation.

Only 19 percent of Millennials agreed with the statement that "most people can be trusted," a percentage that was about half of all other older generations.

A recent survey by MFS Investment Management found that nearly half of Millennials "never feel comfortable investing in the stock market." The survey also showed Millennials keep more of their assets in cash, less in stocks, and, in spite of their relative youth, have a shorter time horizon—less than five years—for their investments than Boomers or Gen Xers.

A report by UBS Wealth Management in the Americas described Millennials as "the most conservative generation since the Great Depression" with regard to its savings habits. According to UBS's research, the average investor aged 21 to 36 has 52 percent of their savings in cash, compared to 23 percent for other age groups.

Clearly, one reason for this avoidance of the stock market stems from the same experience of extreme volatility and risk that the Millennials' GI Generation great grandparents experienced when they were coming of age during the Great Depression. A 2013 study by Accenture confirmed these attitudes, with 43 percent of Millennials identifying themselves as conservative investors, compared with 27 percent for Generation X and 31 percent for Boomers. But the survey also uncovered a deeper reason than just the Great Recession for this cautious investing behavior by Millennials.

The Accenture survey found high levels of mistrust of financial institutions among Millennials and a greater reliance on the Internet, social media, and personal networks for financial advice. As Kelsey Raycroft, a Boston-based Millennial put it, "The personal connection is important to me, especially with money stuff.... When I see these commercials with big companies, I'd rather go to somebody I trust."

In fact, this deep level of distrust toward the banking industry led the authors of the Millennial Disruption Index to identify the financial sector as the industry most likely to experience severe disruption in its business model. Their three-year research study of more than 10,000 Millennials also found that of the ten least-liked brands among members of this generation four belonged to the nation's most powerful banks—J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., Wells Fargo & Co., and Citigroup. Seventy-one percent told the researchers that they would "rather go to the dentist than listen to what banks are saying."

Report Merits a Closer Look

There is much more in the 19-page PDF that merits a closer look.

For example, the study contains a discussion of what working 9-to-5 means at a place like Goldman Sachs. The short synopsis is that for the first couple of years, 9-to-5 means 9AM to 5AM, seven days a week.

In the list of companies where millennials would like to work, there are some non-surprises like Google and Apple, but also some real surprises like the FBI and CIA. St. Jude's Children's Hospital, also a surprise, was the number one choice.

Major Attitude Shift

I have been writing about the implications of changing attitudes since at least 2008.

Flashback June 25, 2008: This is what I said about attitude changes in Peak Credit

Secular Attitude Change Underway

There is a secular attitude change happening right now. Boomers close to retirement are now (finally) scared to death as the equity in their houses has been vaporized. School age children are seeing homes foreclosed, and families destroyed over debt. The American consumer, who nearly everyone thinks will be back as soon as the economy picks up are mistaken.

Secular shifts like these come once in a lifetime. Sadly it's too late for many cash strapped boomers counting on equity in their houses for retirement.

Lessons Of The Great Depression Forgotten

The lessons of their great grandfathers who lived in the great depression era were forgotten. Over time, everyone learned to ignore the dangers of debt, risk, and leverage. Belief in the Fed and the government to bail out any problem are ingrained. Bank failures are distant memories.

Anyone and everyone who wanted credit got it, and on the easiest of terms: subprime, pay option arms, reckless leverage, and covenant lite debt and toggle bonds that allowed debt to be paid back with more debt. That's what it takes to hit a peak.

Peak Credit

Peak credit has been reached. That final wave of consumer recklessness created the exact conditions required for its own destruction. The housing bubble orgy was the last hurrah. It is not coming back and there will be no bigger bubble to replace it. Consumers and banks have both been burnt, and attitudes have changed.

It took nearly 80 years for people to get as reckless as they did in 1929. 80 years! Few are still alive that went through the great depression. No one listened to them. That is the nature of the game. The odds of a significant bout of inflation now are about the same as they were in 1929. Next to none.

Children whose parents are being destroyed by debt now, will keep those memories for a long time.

Social and Stock Market Impacts

Peak credit has been surpassed, but a substantial portion of the rise in credit is in the form of student loans that cannot and will not be paid back.

Importantly, millennial attitudes towards cars and other material goods is not the same as their parents. Moreover, student debt and a dearth of high-paying jobs ensures that housing formation will stay depressed, even if attitudes did not change.

As boomers retire, they will need to draw down on both their stock market portfolios and their savings (assuming they have either). Economic support from relatively low-paid millennials so that boomers can maintain their lifestyles will be massive.

Millennials will assist aging boomers via taxation and by overpaying for Obamacare. Higher taxes coupled with increasing time commitments to help care for aging parents will take a toll. And because boomers live longer than ever, the economic drain and time commitment from millennials will increase every year.

This has downward implications on the economy and the markets, especially in light of millennial-mistrust in stocks and the massive amount of student debt many of them carry.

Wall Street is not prepared for the major attitude and demographic shifts that are now underway. Are you?

In a related post, particularly for millennials searching for jobs, please consider BLS Employment Projections Through 2022: How Many Jobs Require a College Degree?

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Illinois Has Worst Pension Crisis, Needs Boldest Reforms, Not More Tax Hikes

Posted: 29 May 2014 02:44 PM PDT

Governor Pat Quinn passed Illinois' largest tax hike on record immediately after he was elected. That tax hike was supposed to be temporary. It won't be, if governor Quinn and House Speaker Michael Madigan get their way.

Madigan, Quinn, and other Illinois politicians are attempting the same worn-out, taxpayer-unfriendly, method of threatening massive cuts in services if taxes are not permanently hiked. And it will not stop there.

It should not have to be that way, says Ted Dabrowski at the Illinois Policy Institute. Via email, Ted writes ...

Illinois politicians such as Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle are offering city and county residents the following choice when it comes to government pension reform: either pay higher property taxes or watch core government services get cut.

But that's a false choice.

There's no question that Chicago, Cook County and the state of Illinois desperately need pension reform. But instead of threatening service cuts and property tax hikes, Illinois should take a cue from states such as Oklahoma that are passing real reform.

These states are embracing self-managed plans, such as 401(k)-style accounts, to increase retirement security for their workers and to bring back certainty to state and local budgets.

This week, Oklahoma's House of Representatives passed a bill that moves some new state workers into 401(k)-style plans.

The bill now moves to the state Senate, and Gov. Mary Fallin is expected to sign the reform into law.

Once signed, Oklahoma will join Michigan and Alaska in requiring new employees to participate in defined contribution, or DC, plans.

Michigan made the move in 1996; Alaska followed suit in 2005.

Six other states already offer optional DC plans for some of their employees. Employees in Florida, Montana, South Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio and Colorado can choose between staying in the traditional defined benefit, or DB, plan or moving to a 401(k)-style plan.

Another 10 states offer either mandatory or optional participation in hybrid retirement plans that combine both DB and DC plans. Six of those states – Georgia, Utah, Michigan (public schools), Rhode Island, Virginia and Tennessee – passed mandatory hybrid systems for new employees after the Great Recession.

Fortunately for Illinois, a model for such reform already exists within the state.

Illinois' State Universities Retirement System has offered an optional 401(k)-style plan to its employees for more than 15 years.

Plan participants who opt in are required to contribute 8% of their salary toward the self-managed plan. The state contributes an additional 7% into the member's account. In total, employees put away the equivalent of 15% of their salary yearly into a portable account that the employee, and not the government, legally owns and controls.

More than 17,500 state university workers have opted into the self-managed plan since its inception.

Illinoisans should reject higher property taxes as the solution to the crisis. Instead, they should demand that politicians go back to the drawing board and follow the lead of states that have enacted real reform.

Illinois has the worst pension crisis in the nation. That's why Illinoisans should demand the country's boldest reforms.

Ted Dabrowski
Vice President of Policy

Oklahoma was the latest state to move away from defined benefit plans to contribution-based plans or hybrids.

For a look at how these plans have evolved over time, please see Oklahoma pension reform: 401(k)-style plans for new state workers.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

BLS Employment Projections Through 2022: How Many Jobs Require a College Degree?

Posted: 29 May 2014 09:08 AM PDT

Inquiring minds are taking a look at the BLS Occupation Forecast Through 2022.

Occupations with the Most Job Growth, 2012 and Projected 2022 (Numbers in Thousands)
2012 National Employment Matrix Title	Code	Employment		Change, 2012-22		Median annual wage, 2012
		2012	2022	Number	Percent
Total, All Occupations	00-0000	145,355.8	160,983.7	15,628.0	10.8	$34,750
Personal care aides	39-9021	1,190.6	1,771.4	580.8	48.8	19,910
Registered nurses	29-1141	2,711.5	3,238.4	526.8	19.4	65,470
Retail salespersons	41-2031	4,447.0	4,881.7	434.7	9.8	21,110
Home health aides	31-1011	875.1	1,299.3	424.2	48.5	20,820
Combined food preparation and serving workers, including fast food	35-3021	2,969.3	3,391.2	421.9	14.2	18,260
Nursing assistants	31-1014	1,479.8	1,792.0	312.2	21.1	24,420
Secretaries and administrative assistants, except legal, medical, and executive	43-6014	2,324.4	2,632.3	307.8	13.2	32,410
Customer service representatives	43-4051	2,362.8	2,661.4	298.7	12.6	30,580
Janitors and cleaners, except maids and housekeeping cleaners	37-2011	2,324.0	2,604.0	280.0	12.1	22,320
Construction laborers	47-2061	1,071.1	1,331.0	259.8	24.3	29,990
General and operations managers	11-1021	1,972.7	2,216.8	244.1	12.4	95,440
Laborers and freight, stock, and material movers, hand	53-7062	2,197.3	2,439.2	241.9	11.0	23,890
Carpenters	47-2031	901.2	1,119.4	218.2	24.2	39,940
Bookkeeping, accounting, and auditing clerks	43-3031	1,799.8	2,004.5	204.6	11.4	35,170
Heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers	53-3032	1,701.5	1,894.1	192.6	11.3	38,200
Medical secretaries	43-6013	525.6	714.9	189.2	36.0	31,350
Childcare workers	39-9011	1,312.7	1,496.8	184.1	14.0	19,510
Office clerks, general	43-9061	2,983.5	3,167.6	184.1	6.2	27,470
Maids and housekeeping cleaners	37-2012	1,434.6	1,618.0	183.4	12.8	19,570
Licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses	29-2061	738.4	921.3	182.9	24.8	41,540
First-line supervisors of office and administrative support workers	43-1011	1,418.1	1,589.6	171.5	12.1	49,330
Elementary school teachers, except special education	25-2021	1,361.2	1,529.1	167.9	12.3	53,400
Accountants and auditors	13-2011	1,275.4	1,442.2	166.7	13.1	63,550
Medical assistants	31-9092	560.8	723.7	162.9	29.0	29,370
Cooks, restaurant	35-2014	1,024.1	1,174.2	150.1	14.7	22,030
Software developers, applications	15-1132	613.0	752.9	139.9	22.8	90,060
Landscaping and groundskeeping workers	37-3011	1,124.9	1,264.0	139.2	12.4	23,570
Receptionists and information clerks	43-4171	1,006.7	1,142.6	135.9	13.5	25,990
Management analysts	13-1111	718.7	852.5	133.8	18.6	78,600
Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing, except technical and scientific products	41-4012	1,480.7	1,612.8	132.0	8.9	54,230

The above table is by the BLS. In the following table, I stripped out all the occupations that I believe should not realistically require a college degree. Here are the results.

Degree Requiring Occupations with the Most Job Growth, 2012 and Projected 2022 (Numbers in Thousands)
2012 National Employment Matrix Title	Code	Employment		Change, 2012-22		Median annual wage, 2012
		2012	2022	Number	Percent
Total, Degree Requiring Occupations		17,500.3	20,231.0	2,730.7	15.6
Registered nurses	29-1141	2,711.5	3,238.4	526.8	19.4	65,470
Secretaries and administrative assistants, except legal, medical, and executive	43-6014	2,324.4	2,632.3	307.8	13.2	32,410
General and operations managers	11-1021	1,972.7	2,216.8	244.1	12.4	95,440
Bookkeeping, accounting, and auditing clerks	43-3031	1,799.8	2,004.5	204.6	11.4	35,170
Medical secretaries	43-6013	525.6	714.9	189.2	36.0	31,350
Licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses	29-2061	738.4	921.3	182.9	24.8	41,540
First-line supervisors of office and administrative support workers	43-1011	1,418.1	1,589.6	171.5	12.1	49,330
Elementary school teachers, except special education	25-2021	1,361.2	1,529.1	167.9	12.3	53,400
Accountants and auditors	13-2011	1,275.4	1,442.2	166.7	13.1	63,550
Medical assistants	31-9092	560.8	723.7	162.9	29.0	29,370
Software developers, applications	15-1132	613.0	752.9	139.9	22.8	90,060
Management analysts	13-1111	718.7	852.5	133.8	18.6	78,600
Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing, except technical and scientific products	41-4012	1,480.7	1,612.8	132.0	8.9	54,230

Results

Of the projected 15,628,000 jobs that will be filled by 2022, only 2,731,000 of the jobs in the first table should require a college degree.

However, given the emphasis on getting a degree (and brutally overpaying for it), and given the sheer number of people with degrees who are jobless, many employers will only hire those with degrees simply because they have ability to be picky.

There is another gotcha for the unemployed. Other employers do not want overqualified applicants fearing they will leave at the first opportunity.

Thus, applicants need to correctly figure out whether to dumb-down or trump-up their resume to improve their own chances, even though overall chances for higher paying jobs is poor.

Those who don't make good use of their college degree will be stuck competing for low-wage jobs as personal care aids, retail sales clerks, food prep workers, and as various assistants.

Education for Education's Sake

My friend "BC" explains ...

In effect, the US is "educating"/socializing a large share of our young people coming of age to be hopelessly indebted and unemployed or unemployable.

With record debt to wages and GDP, withering costs of "health care", and fully mature and costly urban/suburban/penturban infrastructure build out and associated high fixed costs, a growing majority of millennials simply cannot afford to begin or sustain the urban/suburban, auto-, oil-, and debt-based lives as "consumer units".

And neither will a majority of Boomers be able to sustain their lifestyles into late life. The situation is made worse in that the US economy has not created a net new full-time private sector job per capita in 30-35 years.

Automation of services sector employment now occurring at an accelerating rate will exacerbate conditions for paid employment and purchasing power, especially for women who make up a disproportionately larger share of employment in medical services (80-85%), "education" (80%), gov't (60%), and financial services (60%).

Consequently, women face loss of paid employment as a share of the work force and population on a scale that men have experienced in the goods-producing sector since the 1970s-80s.

The relative payoff to a bachelor's degree peaked in the 1990s and will continue to decline hereafter for the rest of millennials' lifetimes, especially those in the bottom 90% of households who cannot actually afford a post-secondary credential.

Many argue that the jobs lost in the aforementioned sectors will be replaced by even better jobs in the helping, human touch, and other occupations that we cannot predict; but this presupposes, incorrectly in my view, that the loss of tens of millions of jobs will allow an economy that still produces sufficient level and growth of after-tax, real purchasing power, discretionary income, and tax receipts to support what are more often than not public sector or costly private sector services for the top 1-10% .

Education Model Broken

The US education model is fatally broken because the cost of education is far too high. Soaring student debt with no way to pay it back is one consequence.

In turn, high student debt guarantees low family formation rates with kids moving back in with their parents. Here is a shocking chart that shows what I mean.

The above chart was part of my Wine Country Conference II presentation, which will be out shortly.

Note that approximately 12% of women and 17% of men aged 25-34 now live with their parents. The implications on household formation, child raising, and home buying are obvious.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com