385
The United States will need 7 million migrants to cover old age support programs for baby boomers
(english.elpais.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2024
385 points (95.7% liked)
News
23259 readers
4606 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because unemployment isn't really that low. When we talk about "people here now who could use those jobs", we're usually talking about people in dead end jobs that could use a career job.
So great, pull them into our elder care system, give them a career level up...now their old jobs are still unfilled. And while we're super shitty as a country towards entry level service workers, we also as a country really want those jobs to be filled. So we'd need to fill that gap in the employment pool somehow.
Maybe we shouldn’t have the idea of a dead end job in the first place. Almost all work should be valid and provide livable wages. There shouldn’t be a class of jobs “just for kids”. As if their time is less valuable anyways. This is a super late stage capitalist viewpoint.
A job can be well paid and still be considered "dead end". Just means there's no room for advancement or growth. Has nothing to do with capitalism or wages, really.
Only if constant growth and expansion of capital IE capitalism is your goal. If it's a job you simply enjoy or people you enjoy working with Etc there may not be room for advancement. But why would you want to? Granted many people do not have that. They're wage slaves for capitalists. Point is the whole concept of a dead-end job is inherently a capitalist thing. If a job takes care of your needs and is Pleasant enough. Who cares if there's room for advancement.
You're hearing what you want to hear. "Growth" is not financial growth. It's not wages, I thought that was made clear in the end sentence. Growth is like personal growth or professional growth. Learning things. Becoming more. No stagnating.
But hey, if you're happy in a "dead end" job more power to you. I wasn't necessarily arguing against it. I was just trying to clarify that "dead end" does not refer (solely) to wages.
Only if constant growth and expansion of capital IE capitalism is your goal. If it's a job you simply enjoy or people you enjoy working with Etc there may not be room for advancement. But why would you want to? Granted many people do not have that. They're wage slaves for capitalists. Point is the whole concept of a dead-end job is inherently a capitalist thing. If a job takes care of your needs and is Pleasant enough. Who cares if there's room for advancement.