Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by CSI_Kat, Aug 21, 2008.
haha i'd rather just not bother with them at all
Pac Man joins us in 'The 30 and Over Club'. :lol: Now this makes me feel old. I have Pac Man, Ms. Pac Man, and Jr. Pac Man all for an ATARI 2600 that still works. :alienblush:
This comedian on Twitter made a crack about the Mario brothers not making the celebration because they were deported by accident from Arizona! :lol:
i REALLY HATE THE 19-21 YEAR OLDS THAT I WORK WITH who complain they are TIRED AFTER A 6 HOUR work day WTF!!!!!!! i CAN DO 3X THE WORK THEY DO AND STILL KEEP GOING
ALL I am going to say at this point is being in my 30's I have learned from my mistakes from my 20's and WILL NEVER REPEAT THEM!!!! but I like the fact that this is a place for those of us who have been through stuff can talk to others about it and realize our mistakes
HOPEFULLY THOSE THAT DECIDE TO PEEK IN (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE *HINT, HINT*) YOU LEARN FROM WHAT WE HAVE EXPERIENCED!!!
Well... *takes a deep breath* ... here I am.... over 30 (still in "light" denial I turned 40 a few weeks ago... for I feel somewhere between 18 and 33 )
But what use is there to deny the facts of life.... embrace the wisdom (ahum) and enjoy ....
Indeed when I saw Pacman exists already 30 years... I remember playing it at the C64...
I just heard on the radio that a man was rejected for a job because he was 50 . "the rest of the team is 30 somethingy and we would like to keep things in that "tone".
Pardon me.....but is 50 = old age???????????
And the book just came on the market "The + - age". The book about people after 50.
Which means when I turn 40 only the + age is ahead of me:wtf:
Which for the first time made me think.....when I will apply for a new job will age work against me or what ???
No no no... a more or less famous person back here once said when she was turning 40... 40 is the new 30.... I agree....
and with al the news about people getting older, without enough young people to pay for this "graying" society .. we have to work beyond our legitimate retire age.....so I don't think you've to worry to much...
that is discrimination pure and simple - they might try to dress it up in terms of fitting in but it's still wrong.
certainly in the uk there are (recentish) laws against that kind of thing; as has been said with the rapidly aging population, employers really do need to be more flexible on the age matter, because (a) there are more older people than younger now and (b) medical advances mean that even pensioners can be young and capable. 50 years ago that probably wasn't the case, but times change and people need to get with the programme!
it's an interesting point though - if society is aging to the point where older people (who, as pensioners at any rate) take pensions from society but don't usually contribute (as they're retired) are outnumbering people who are young enough to be starting out in the employment world and who will be paying taxes for the next 30-40 years; is it time to rethink the system, and more controversially, is it time to wonder whether medical advances are necessarily a good thing?
And in the department of oops
I was at one of the many local drugstores this evening and it was seniors day at the store. After the total of my purchase of one item rang up I queried the total because it wasn't the correct price. The upshot of this is the clerk gave me the Senior discount without asking. She did ask me if I was a senior and I said no but my mom is :lol: but I said no I'm only 51. She did look apologetic and I said don't worry. I told her I'd been in her same shoes many years ago. It's certainly better to air on the side of oops rather than ask and be embarrassed. And for those that want to know I saved myself a whole $0.33
Advances in medicine should be stopped? When you said controversial, you weren't kidding! I think perhaps you might want to look at the "rethink the system" concept first before you start looking down that avenue! :lol:
Here, they've gotten rid of the mandatory retirement age (which I think was 60 or 65) so people can stick around in their jobs forever, pretty much. There's a woman in the department where I work (but I don't work with her, exactly) who is 70! However, she's a lot more active and healthy than half the other people in her area that are 20 and even 30 years younger than her, so...? I say if you're still useful and want to pull your weight, go for it.
And the way my debt is, I'll probably need to be working until I'm 100!
haha i wasn't saying they should be stopped, i was just saying they have possibly contributed to the issues! and not the advances per se, but the fact that the structure of society hasn't kept up with the advances, and so things like tax/retirement/pensions etc are way behind, and still designed for a younger population - basically yes, they need to adjust the system to fit the new demographic... but hey, i like to be controversial :lol: so...
although i guess in a way... i dunno, it seems medical advances want to make it so people can live longer and longer - eventually they will discover a way to let people live for much longer than they do now - but who the hell would want to?! i know i wouldn't.
yeah i agree - they keep rejigging retirement age here but i'm not sure what the latest configuration is. i think mostly people should be able to continue with work until they stop feeling able to, i don't think retirement should be imposed on those that don't want it.
Just today, the so called "social partners" (the unions and some other institutions) here in the netherlands reached a compromis/decision... the retirement age used to be 65.... now it will be extended to 66 (starting in 2020) and five years later 67....
The same where I live.
As per my "50 or + age" experience the saga continues.
We do have discrimition laws which were the whole point of the story hitting the news but since then it started a flood of stories either defending the "disliking" of older employies(?) or defending of the "grey gold" as they say.
But the fact "age" could work against me still annoys me a lot as the post-modern youth is not expected to stay in the same workplace for long so would it make sense for companies to have both young and old. BUT should all the good and exciting jobs go to the young (and thel boss or board members be male.)
Well back to my frustration - ok - I will be working until 67 but in what sort of job when I am + plus age or more????? If old age is a problem for workplaces then I wouldn´t be able to "pick" a job but have to get lucky to get "picked"- the finacial crisis is not helping to that fact.
LOL I was the last person to post, so let me be the first to post again.
I hope you gals and guy will return to tread to help me....
My job hunt saga continues:
Originally I was having this discussion back stage(in personal messages) but I need some more input:
I will give you your own firm(AS an exampel)
Don´t quite know how come I am quote myself...but let me continue:
You are to employ 2 people:
You recive 150 applications and 50 of them are qualified.
You get 12 people in for an interview.
Which criteria would you use?
I will even give my cause for asking: Some years I went to a job - interview and didn´t get it. The other candidate was more fun. Three months later she dropped the job and they had to get someone out of retirement to fill in. I got a job next door which cooperated a lot with the first firm. During that time I got some praise from both my work - place and a lot of praise from the other firm. I sooooo wanted to say:
Hey please remember I wasn´t funny enough for you:wtf:
But as I am an adult I did behave:lol:.
As I am looking for new job I want to be more prepared this time:
So besides qualifications and a kind personality what would in your opion make a difference?
This last part is just frustration:
Which jobseeker would their right mind say:
- I hate teamwork, I hate to have more the one thing going on at the same time, I hate stressing things and I hate talking to people and I hate fleksibillity.
Separate names with a comma.