These disciplines are interesting, but consider them as "minors" (or individual pursuits), & pursue a marketable trade.

[bloke]

https://moneyinc.com/20-worst-college-m ... ur-career/

[MiBrassFS]

Some really odd AI generated book titles in those pictures!

[sweaty]

I disagree to some extent. The humanities, assuming they are taught with an intent of genuine education instead of indoctrination, gives people a view of the big picture. Greater understanding enables one to adapt and improve upon whatever task you're doing.

What if you major in a marketable, yet narrowly-focused field, and then decide you have no interest in doing it? It sounds harder to change and adapt.

[dp]

[bloke]

I disagree to some extent. The humanities, assuming they are taught with an intent of genuine education instead of indoctrination, gives people a view of the big picture. Greater understanding enables one to adapt and improve upon whatever task you're doing.

What if you major in a marketable, yet narrowly-focused field, and then decide you have no interest in doing it? It sounds harder to change and adapt.

OK...but you and I (though we might vote for some of the same people) view things from markedly different perspectives.
I'm pretty sure that your careers have been public sector careers, whereas mine has not, and - actually - I've never accepted full-time employment from anyone.

I tend to view private sector work as "real" and public sector work as "synthetic".
Further (and simply), the so-called "humanities" (in these post-orwellian times) are not taught with an intent of educating (broadening perspectives) and are - nearly exclusively - presented as indoctrination. ie. I'm basing my recommendations on what is, rather than what perhaps should be.

1/ Acquire marketable/in-demand skills, market them, and get out of others' (including one's on parents') way.
2/ Study whatever one wishes to study - at one's own leisure, and at one's own expense (funding those studies via any disposable income acquired from marketing those acquired in-demand skills).

[sweaty]

I tend to view private sector work as "real" and public sector work as "synthetic".

My careers as a band director and FEMA inspector are certainly public sector, though I have had private sector jobs and even my own business. As to what is "real" and "synthetic", I think you're confusing the "realness" of the actual work with the directness of the hiring and payment. You deal with each customer and their instruments directly and payment is made right from buyer to seller. They (and I) choose you because of the quality of your work and competitive price. The result of your work is very tangible and verifiable.

With bigger private companies, it is not so direct. I do not choose every employee I deal with at any given company. Their employees behind the scenes affect the customers, yet we never know who or how. If I have a complaint, I could make one and the company would address it. The same thing goes for my public sector employers. The biggest difference is that I can usually choose among competing companies, but my employers have monopolies, and their payment is taken involuntarily. You (collectively) can complain to your elected representatives and fire them if they are not responsive.

As for the "realness" of the work, my 4000 students certainly seemed real (the work was constant focus, intensity, and interaction all day). The music they made was real. If it was imaginary or "synthetic", I would have had lots of parent complaints. The damage and destruction to houses in natural disasters sure seems real to me. The tears and exhaustion of survivors sure seem real.

As objects have no brains, you have much more direct control over the results of your work than those who deal with people. Especially since most of your work is solitary as opposed to being one link in a long chain, like mine.


Sorry for the tangent. Getting back to the thread's subject, the most marketable field is computer science. Getting this degree requires long hours coding every day for years. If this CS grad changes his mind and wants to deal with people instead of screens, speak and write words instead of code, will he suddenly become good at it? Or would it take some learning and practice? He may well regret that highly marketable major.

[bloke]

Value is created in the private sector and and is spent in the public sector. Whether it's spent on things that are useful or not, that's how it goes.

Whether or not it's successful, the private sector is taxed to fund the public sector. The public sector is subsidized whether or not it is successful.

Who determined that the most marketable skills are related to computer science?

[sweaty]

Quite true.

Consumer demand ultimately determined that computer science is marketable.

Private sector also includes destructive activities such as casinos, addictive chemicals, junk food, and trashy "entertainment". It is based on voluntary cooperation between buyer and seller and they pay taxes.

Some taxes go to technology research in DARPA, NIH, and universities. I see lots of good and bad coming from government, private sector, and non-profit foundations.

Our collective values determine where money goes. I believe the most productive activity is to build the minds, souls, character, and wisdom of people. This is not a role for any of the above institutions.

[bloke]

I haven't seen it a study or heard a person say that it's the most in demand skill set. Maybe (??) it's the most in demand in other words treating a computer basically like a typewriter and entering data, but is writing code actually the most in-demand skill - OK - "in the USA"?

I'm not trying to trick anybody or paint anyone into a corner with some trick question or prove them wrong. I'm actually asking this question.

What I'm hearing (and this isn't related statistically to how in demand it is, but...) that most people in the construction/home improvement/repair industry will be retiring in the next five-or-so years, and people aren't lining up to take their places in any significant numbers.

I know I'm going off on a tangent, but it seems to me that any "work from home" job skill set would be one to avoid learning, because - if I can be trained do a job from home - someone in a third world country can be trained to do it from their home... and they are likely willing to do that job for significantly less per hour than I would and to do it for significantly more hours per week than I'd be willing to do it.