I've been there before as a non-season ticket holder though, so it's one of those things where it will piss people off even more if you sat there before only to be turned away another game. Either way, that's on them. This means we have no real "student section" just a "$100 season ticket holder section". The traditional point of the student section is to have a crazed section with all students packed into it creating school spirit and a tougher environment for the opponent. That has now gone financial and students who don't have that extra $100 to fork over are thrown multiple levels up in the stands away from all the action. Why separate students? The point is to UNITE them. Having all students in one big section is better than scattering them I think we can all agree. By the way, this still doesn't change the fact that they totally botched the advertising for the promotion. It should have said "Free Rally Towels for all season ticket holders!" not "Free Rally Towels for the first 500 fans!". Big difference.
DePaul Attendance
- Thread starter NYCRedmen
- Start date
I've been there before as a non-season ticket holder though, so it's one of those things where it will piss people off even more if you sat there before only to be turned away another game. Either way, that's on them. This means we have no real "student section" just a "$100 season ticket holder section". The traditional point of the student section is to have a crazed section with all students packed into it creating school spirit and a tougher environment for the opponent. That has now gone financial and students who don't have that extra $100 to fork over are thrown multiple levels up in the stands away from all the action. Why separate students? The point is to UNITE them. Having all students in one big section is better than scattering them I think we can all agree. By the way, this still doesn't change the fact that they totally botched the advertising for the promotion. It should have said "Free Rally Towels for all season ticket holders!" not "Free Rally Towels for the first 500 fans!". Big difference.
beast of the east
Active member
Is your post an obfuscation? You do mean student season ticket holders - the kids that come to every game and as a unit, scream their heads off. Season tickets are a measly $100 - please don't complain about $20,000 tuition per semester and then say that $100 for close to 20 games with prime seating is too much. On a per game basis, it's still only about $5 per game INCLUDING the garden, with seats as good as the $100-plus premium seats offered to RW club members who also need to donate several thousand per year to get close to the court.
Marist averages 1700 fans per game in 2011, St Johns 8500. Two different animals. With 1700 fans, every seat is a good seat. My guess is that there are about 200 students behind each basket at CA. If your student section at Marist was 4 times as large, well, the entire arena would be students, no?
Can you really be as unhappy a person as your posts make you appear?
I'm going to go ahead and assume you make at least 70k and are in little to no debt. In other words, good financial standing. I don't think older generations understand just how broke college students are these days. The most you can get is a part time job making 7-10 per hour which you get biweekly living paycheck to paycheck, then you go to get your textbooks...boom...instant 500-800 bucks each semester right there. What about weekends going to bars and such? Cab fees to and from ($10), cover (at some bars) ($5), 8 beers with your buddies ($40), gas in your car ($50 to fill up), groceries (easily $100 every 2 weeks), bills, utilities, etc. etc. After all of that you think students have $100 bucks for basketball games to pay out? Maybe some, but many do not. Finding a job in itself is not even a given like it was when you guys went to school. You can't even get a job at Costco or Best Buy these days. The quick money "BS" jobs part time just to make a quick buck are not available like they used to be. If you work for the school you make minimum wage.
There is no way 200 people sit behind each basket. Eyeballing it, I'd say about 60-75 at most behind each basket and that's if you really pack in. They are very small sections...I sat there. Also, you assume that for $100 you go to every game. The life of a student is extremely busy especially working part time, going to club meetings, school work, socializing, etc. so most people definitely don't go to all games. By the way, ontop of all of the costs I listed above, I forgot $25 round trip on the train if it's at MSG. It may seem like little things but you know how quickly things add up. As an undergrad I would work full time over summers to save up for the coming semester. I would start the semester with about $2,500. You would be shocked how quickly that goes. Some students can still easily pay the $100 and good for them...I can't, so I pick a few big games to attend. So we've established both hoops sections are for season ticket holders. Fine. What about everyone else? I could see if non-season ticket holding students were seated at court level along the sides maybe 5 rows back, but they put you a few levels up. Essentially there is no "student section" because it's for a very specific group of season ticket holders and they can't be very numerous (the student ones at least). If you look at a CA seating chart it will say "Student Section" behind each hoop. That is false. Is it routine to put most students in random high up places for games? I've never heard of such a thing before.
Class of 72
Active member
Joe, my only advice to you will be regarding your beer budget when you go out:
1. Do not drink and drive....ever!
2. Get drunk "before" you go out (a $10 six pack will do it).
3. Save you money....by the time you are our age, $70K will not buy you a FIAT!
BTW Joe, $70K is a rather "middle class" salary. Shoot for $150K + to live comfortably.
Trust me, married and over $200K per year does not make me well off today when one has to pay taxes on two homes.
STJ11Redmen
Active member
From reading your posts the only other game you attended at Carnesscca this year was an exhibition. They let non-season ticket holders in for games that are during breaks and exhibitions. Games in which the student section will fill up (Detroit, South Carolina, Big East games) they cap it. It was full and loud on Wednesday so stop complaining and buy season tickets next time.
beast of the east
Active member
Good presumption of my salary, but that's really not your business.
I will make the following comparison. Back in the olden days, when Alumni Hall had a dirt floor, we had peach baskets nailed to two old barn doors at either end of the court. Our players were mostly older Jewish and Italian players who didn't run fast or jump high,so they didn't slip as much on the dirt floor.
In those olden days of the early 80s, a student season ticket was $30. As a student, I made about $3 per hour, and worked about 20 hours per week during the school year despite being in pharmacy school, and about 60 hours per week from the time school let out in May until school started in September. I paid part of my tuition with that money, and borrowed the rest. I paid all of my books, although admittedly many were hand copied longhand by the hundreds of Vincentian monks that they stored in the basement of the Vincentian residence, cranking out books. Some of my textbooks in the olden days cost as much as $100, probably due to the fact they were handwritten on papyrus. My one gift was from a fratnerity brother who worked in the library who upon his graduation, handed me a library copy of Goodman and Gilman Pharmacology (one of the $100 books) with no return date.
Taking out my abacus, I calculated that $30 for a season ticket back in those BC days (BC = bloated caucasian players), was roughly 12 times the minimum wage. Today a student season ticket costs the same.
Yea, I was as poor as you, and yea, my father was also dead by the time I had two years to go in college, but until this moment I've never written that publicly.
I didn't bitch about the cost of a student ticket, or my loans, or my books, transportation, gas, lunch or beer. I always felt privileged - P-R-I-V-I-L-E-G-E-D - to be a student at St. Johns, and if humanly possible even more privileged to be seated on those rotten bleachers. If my back hurt a little, my friends behind me were more than happy to let me use their knees as seat backs.
It was the best time of my life, and aside from an adminsitration that contributed to student apathy, I wouldn't change a thing.
The advertisement was rally towels for first 500 students. I am not aware if you attend ST Johns or not but that is what it said.
I know it's not my business, thus my bottom line estimation instead of asking you. I must admit that was funny...had me laughing at the papyrus and monks writing the textbooks haha. I don't think it's "bitching" when you ask for the minimum (a back to a chair) in a non-student section. I'm actually surprised SJ isn't worried about someone suing them for not having back support. Not saying it's the right thing to do obviously, but you know those people exist. I don't think it would be that big a deal honestly to add 1 extra piece of plastic on each chair. I come to games 1 hour before tipoff so it's technically more like 3 hours I'm probably sitting and that can also be why.
I didn't see you factor in absurd levels of inflation into your figures earlier. If you do just a bit of research you will find that things as trivial as coffee and milk are up 200+% in prices from 1980. I just saw an article on CNN recently where it showed the price differentials based on inflation from 1980 and now 2013. Some things are 1000% more expensive now. I'm no business or economics guru, but surely you know hyperinflation is terrible right now. You get the same products and services you did in 1980 for way more money.
Also, one of the SJ administrators in the athletics department got back to me and told me that the basket sections are for season ticket holders, but if at 8 minutes into the game the section isn't full, they let non-season ticket holding students enter. Didn't know that. I also brought up the false advertising with the promotion and he is sending me a "prize pack" including the towel, so I can't complain. He was really nice and answered right away.
terrificboss
Member
I graduated in 1985 during the Glory Days. SJU was #1 in the nation for about 4 or 5 weeks during the year. President Reagan spoke at Alumni Hall. The arena was always packed. TV cameras on campus. What an unbelievable buzz at all times. Maybe I was lucky but I always stood on line and picked up my student season tickets. Students could go but you had to sacrifice.
I am still a season ticket holder since that time but honestly I dropped the tickets 3 times for a year out of sheer frustration each time. Ironically it was before each of Mahoney, Jarvis and Roberts last years.
That said, I kept coming back. I loved the school and the Basketball team. After Looie retired, there was a buzz for a while with Mahoney(great man but over his head) then for a while with Frannie(good coach but a nut), Jarvis(arrogant and almost wiped us out with his antics, I do not like him at all) and Norm(who was a nice man but a mid level coach who did bring us back as a honest program again).
The key point is that the program and University never did anything to keep the alumni from the 80's involved. They ignored us. We were primed to be a core group of lifetime season season ticket holders. They just simply did not care and that is a shame.
Enough of the past, Lavin has brought me back for good. He is building a terrific program and has started to bring the buzz back. The momentum is building. We have a huge alumni base that will tapped into when the winning continues. I expect to see many of my old friends back joined by many from the new generation.
It is a good time indeed to be a SJU fan!
Go Johnnies!
My cousin went to Notre Dame, she paid around $250 for her student tickets for football. And in football there's no more than 8 home games.
I'm not saying $100 is insignificant to a student, but St Johns didn't pull this policy out of their a$$ ... they looked at what other schools do, and apparently it works elsewhere.
I'm not saying $100 is insignificant to a student, but St Johns didn't pull this policy out of their a$$ ... they looked at what other schools do, and apparently it works elsewhere.
Please read through this entirely and you tell me who was truly spoiled: the boomers, or us. The pool of resources and opportunity that was America has been dried up by the boomers and left bone dry for the millenials. Ironic how boomers make fun of us saying "me me me!", yet that's exactly what their mindset was and got fat eating at the 5 star restaurant while handing us the bill.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/07/15/are-millennials-the-screwed-generation.html
We will be the first generation to have it WORSE than our parents even though we are way more educated.
That's not an accurate representation of the generational-gap at all.
For one, the notion that the public debt burdens future generations is logically misleading if you don't understand economics.
"We" owe that money to ourselves. Foreign investors own only a small portion of the US debt; the vast majority is in those treasury bonds your grandma owns (and you'll inherit someday), the treasury notes in your Mom's pension, and the treasuries that will be held by the fund your own 401k invests in in a few years. In essence, we owe that money to ourselves.
Further, it's foolish to say expenditures on generation X, only burden generation Y. Spending $$ on unemployment insurance now, ensures that the children of a Dad who's out of work still eat, and can still go to school and be relatively prepared for their future. I'm pretty sure if you fast forward 20 years they'll call that money well spent, and not "greed" on the part of their parents' generation.
Next, one reason unemployment is high amongst our generation (I'm 30) is because none of us listened to our guidance counselors in middle school. How many people do you know who majored in childhood education, or communications? And how many majored in engineering or nursing? Demographics didn't sneak up on us... we knew 20 years ago which fields would have shortages.
And lastly, the lack of opportunities you talk about is short-sighted. The same demographic wave that is making it hard for some millennials to find a job now, is going to make it very easy for them to get promoted in 10 years. The median baby boomer is 58 now. The recession in '07 caused a lot of them to temporarily postpone retirement, but in the coming decade there is going to be an enormous amount of workers leaving the workforce. And, on the whole, it'll be the most experienced workers who are retiring, not the entry-level person. In essence, all the middle and upper management in America is about to retire.
A few things. Without looking at the most up to date figure my foreigners are probably the single biggest holder of treasuries. I'd have to check on monday but it's probably at least 33%
Speaking of pensions they are disappearing. One biggest reasons is the cost to retirees who are living longer. So chances are moms pension is virtually extinct. Defined benefit plans in public companies are disappearing and being replaced with defined contribution plans
the debt is going to be a big problem. That and the current deficit are 2 of the biggest problems facing my generation and younger. We are truly screwed. I've never been so sure of anything in my life
I would wake up at 6:30am for a 7:30am class at STJ, be on campus until 1pm. Thats 4 classes. I would run to get on a bus to long island for work. I would work from 3pm to 10pm, I would take the bus back to queens and get home around 11. When i got home i would try to get some studying in and i would do it all over again the next day. I'm sorry but WHEN THERE IS A WILL THERE IS A WAY!!! I didn't get student season tickets, but i still manage to go to every game, taking advantage of the 5 buck CA games and the $15 MSG games. Now that I graduated from STJ this past semester I'm able to base my schedule around STJ games. 
Go St.John's Lets BEAT GTOWN
Go St.John's Lets BEAT GTOWNMaher, I won't try to change your opinion, it seems very informed, but I'll at least give you a different perspective on the numbers.
You are correct in the sense that if you break it down, foreign investment is the largest categorical debt holder. But when you combine the other categories which are essentially all held here in the US... fed's holdings, private pensions, banks, insurance companies, state and local governments (including their pensions) it's more. My exaggeration was just to make the point that a lot of the debt is held by institutions regular Americans get a return from.
And to your larger point - the debt is a concern, but it shouldn't top your list. 8 percent unemployment is a larger concern.
The rise in the deficit is almost entirely the result of the financial crisis. Automatic payments like unemployment, food-stamps, temporary tax cuts etc caused a temporary spike in the deficit. The path we were on in 2006, if it had not been interrupted, would have led to a surplus right now.
(Ignore the commentary, but these charts show you all you need to know about the deficit - there wouldn't be one right now were it not for the financial sector collapse in '07, and it's on the decline again http://bit.ly/SdryN8 )
And the debt, for one thing, is vastly misunderstood. The total debt is an essentially meaningless number. What should be considered is our annual interest payments on the debt, which are comparatively very low. I know you're a street guy, just look at the borrowing rates in recent years as our deficit has blossomed - near record low interest rates. The US is borrowing at less than the rate of inflation. We're borrowing $1 and on a 20 year note we're paying back 90 cents.
Following WWII the US never paid back it's debt, it became insignificant - because the size of our economy grew over the next half century. There are 30million more Americans today than there were in 1990. $50k in debt is a lot if you make $50k a year; it's chump change when you make $1 million annually. That's what happened to the US economy, and continues to happen. Unlike Europe which has relatively stagnant populations, our country continues to grow exponentially. Meaning our borrowing power will only continue to grow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_GDP_per_capita.PNG
Further, the scary debt in the future that analysts talk about is entirely a result of rising healthcare costs. That's it. And we already spend far more than comparable countries, our spending on HC simply can't continue to rise at the rate it has; there's going to be a plateau. Health care costs in the US have risen 700% percent in the last 30 years - that's incredible growth, but it can't continue. There will be a market reaction. No one thinks when I'm 60 I'll be paying $3,500 for what is a $500 Dr visit now.
And along similar lines, it's entirely possible health care costs start to decline as a % of gdp. Like I said we spend twice what other advanced countries spend on health care, and with no tangible difference in quality. I'm not talking Canada... take Germany, in every measurable way there health care is equivalent or better than ours... but they pay half as much for it. If we were to start to reform the health care system (even more so than the ACA) the debt would plummet. Our debt is because of ridiculous health care costs; that's it. http://bit.ly/TZQg2E
In summary, the deficit and debt aren't a catastrophic threat. There would be no deficit were it not for the recession, and in a few years we'll return to that trend and it'll be gone. Temporary spike.
And the future debt is simply an issue of health care costs, which will partly fix itself through market forces (consumers refusing to pay higher costs), and the remainder of which can be corrected with reasonable political reforms.
Anyway, that's my case for easing your fears B-)
And for what it's worth these aren't optimistic ideas I pulled from my ass - Goldman's chief economist Hatzius said as much in a series of interviews after the new year, and the editors at the financial times said the same thing last week.
You are correct in the sense that if you break it down, foreign investment is the largest categorical debt holder. But when you combine the other categories which are essentially all held here in the US... fed's holdings, private pensions, banks, insurance companies, state and local governments (including their pensions) it's more. My exaggeration was just to make the point that a lot of the debt is held by institutions regular Americans get a return from.
And to your larger point - the debt is a concern, but it shouldn't top your list. 8 percent unemployment is a larger concern.
The rise in the deficit is almost entirely the result of the financial crisis. Automatic payments like unemployment, food-stamps, temporary tax cuts etc caused a temporary spike in the deficit. The path we were on in 2006, if it had not been interrupted, would have led to a surplus right now.
(Ignore the commentary, but these charts show you all you need to know about the deficit - there wouldn't be one right now were it not for the financial sector collapse in '07, and it's on the decline again http://bit.ly/SdryN8 )
And the debt, for one thing, is vastly misunderstood. The total debt is an essentially meaningless number. What should be considered is our annual interest payments on the debt, which are comparatively very low. I know you're a street guy, just look at the borrowing rates in recent years as our deficit has blossomed - near record low interest rates. The US is borrowing at less than the rate of inflation. We're borrowing $1 and on a 20 year note we're paying back 90 cents.
Following WWII the US never paid back it's debt, it became insignificant - because the size of our economy grew over the next half century. There are 30million more Americans today than there were in 1990. $50k in debt is a lot if you make $50k a year; it's chump change when you make $1 million annually. That's what happened to the US economy, and continues to happen. Unlike Europe which has relatively stagnant populations, our country continues to grow exponentially. Meaning our borrowing power will only continue to grow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_GDP_per_capita.PNG
Further, the scary debt in the future that analysts talk about is entirely a result of rising healthcare costs. That's it. And we already spend far more than comparable countries, our spending on HC simply can't continue to rise at the rate it has; there's going to be a plateau. Health care costs in the US have risen 700% percent in the last 30 years - that's incredible growth, but it can't continue. There will be a market reaction. No one thinks when I'm 60 I'll be paying $3,500 for what is a $500 Dr visit now.
And along similar lines, it's entirely possible health care costs start to decline as a % of gdp. Like I said we spend twice what other advanced countries spend on health care, and with no tangible difference in quality. I'm not talking Canada... take Germany, in every measurable way there health care is equivalent or better than ours... but they pay half as much for it. If we were to start to reform the health care system (even more so than the ACA) the debt would plummet. Our debt is because of ridiculous health care costs; that's it. http://bit.ly/TZQg2E
In summary, the deficit and debt aren't a catastrophic threat. There would be no deficit were it not for the recession, and in a few years we'll return to that trend and it'll be gone. Temporary spike.
And the future debt is simply an issue of health care costs, which will partly fix itself through market forces (consumers refusing to pay higher costs), and the remainder of which can be corrected with reasonable political reforms.
Anyway, that's my case for easing your fears B-)
And for what it's worth these aren't optimistic ideas I pulled from my ass - Goldman's chief economist Hatzius said as much in a series of interviews after the new year, and the editors at the financial times said the same thing last week.
For those that are interested....
(and I apologize for taking the thread slightly off course with my essay - but this is kind've my thing)
http://www.businessinsider.com/gold...e-10-most-important-questions-for-2013-2013-1
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Colum...ent-Spending-Is-Not-Out-of-Control.aspx#page1
http://on.ft.com/VAIcfE
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/93365/no-long-term-deficit-problem#
http://www.theatlantic.com/business...s-3-then-worry-about-healthcare-costs/272521/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/larry-summers-deficits_n_2525753.html
http://robertreich.org/post/36001609487
http://read.bi/onbdlR Business Insider: Richard Koo: Even Talking About Long-Term Deficit Reduction Is Indecent And Irresponsible
(and I apologize for taking the thread slightly off course with my essay - but this is kind've my thing)
http://www.businessinsider.com/gold...e-10-most-important-questions-for-2013-2013-1
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Colum...ent-Spending-Is-Not-Out-of-Control.aspx#page1
http://on.ft.com/VAIcfE
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/93365/no-long-term-deficit-problem#
http://www.theatlantic.com/business...s-3-then-worry-about-healthcare-costs/272521/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/larry-summers-deficits_n_2525753.html
http://robertreich.org/post/36001609487
http://read.bi/onbdlR Business Insider: Richard Koo: Even Talking About Long-Term Deficit Reduction Is Indecent And Irresponsible
One problem my generation has that boomers did not is student loan debt, and that is not arguable. Private schools in the 70's cost about 5k MAX for all 4 years. Those same exact schools can easily cost $160,000 today for all 4 years. It's just insane...it's almost a cruel joke. Student loan debt has surpassed NATIONAL credit card debt! That is a very stark thing and a big wake up call. I know what you're saying..."Well, don't go to a private school go to community college or a SUNY/CUNY." The problem is that many people want to go to prestigious and competitive colleges and many of these happen to be private. Students/recent grads today essentially bought a house but they don't have a house to show for it. That's how expensive it is. I remember my grandpa saying "Why not just buy a brand new Mercedes?" instead of going to college because of how expensive it is. When I talk to boomers they always seem to tell me "It really sucks for the kids today...when I was your age I got offered jobs and getting a job was very easy".
One of my professors must have graduated in the 70's and he literally had people approach him asking him if he wanted a job. If you did that to a millenial, we would probably think "too good to be true" or "scam". That's the climate right now. When I was getting frustrated having to wait in line in grad school while all my friends were getting their first entry level jobs (after years of looking), I looked into business one summer and approached my interviews from a psychological perspective knowing the clientele and customer base, etc. I actually got 5 interviews within a few days of applying with most in Manhattan. I went and they all turned out to be scams...every last one. It turned out to be door to door sales from 11 AM to 9 PM with no base salary, no benefits, no nothing. 100% commission. You have to go to Harlem, Jackson Heights (Queens), the South Bronx, etc. door to door dealing with some of the shadiest characters who don't want you there. One woman answered the door, saw me in a suit and honestly thought I was in the mafia asking me what her husband did. Anyway, these are the kinds of opportunities that are out there. The days of graduating and being offered a 45k base salary with benefits and a pension are gone for most people. If there are any left, Ivy candidates are the ones who get the spots because they can afford to be so selective. Not saying it's wrong to pick an Ivy candidate over others (it probably is), but the sheer volume of positions open are not there.
Finally, in regards to whoever said this was predictable and we "didn't listen to our guidance counselors", I see what you're saying. I have friends who went into communications...I used to break their balls all the time about it along with tons of other people. One of them now has a part time job on a very weird schedule and he has to drive up to 200 miles away for certain games. He maybe gets called in a few times a week or sometimes as low as maybe 3x in 2 weeks. It's not enough to live off of alone and he should really be looking for a full time job, but he isn't. I think a lot of comm majors have these dreams of working for ESPN like John Anderson or Chris Berman, then they graduate and the only thing out there is a job paying 25k a year to cover high school women's fencing (LOL). I can't lie...my field of psych also had people give me a hard time saying I'll never get a job, I'll never make money, etc. The one major difference between me and the comm guys were: I had a plan. I knew I would have to go to grad school and I knew the subfield of psych I was getting into would definitely pay around 60k starting and 100k+ after 10 years. While I see your point, you can't just tell kids to pick majors and go for jobs that America "needs" because not everyone is interested in Petroleum Engineering. I think our generation sees how our fathers reacted to their business jobs, coming home pissed off, scared of being fired, staying late until 9 PM, having heart attacks and being run into the ground. That could be another reason students are turning more to the humanities and things they really find interesting.
One of my professors must have graduated in the 70's and he literally had people approach him asking him if he wanted a job. If you did that to a millenial, we would probably think "too good to be true" or "scam". That's the climate right now. When I was getting frustrated having to wait in line in grad school while all my friends were getting their first entry level jobs (after years of looking), I looked into business one summer and approached my interviews from a psychological perspective knowing the clientele and customer base, etc. I actually got 5 interviews within a few days of applying with most in Manhattan. I went and they all turned out to be scams...every last one. It turned out to be door to door sales from 11 AM to 9 PM with no base salary, no benefits, no nothing. 100% commission. You have to go to Harlem, Jackson Heights (Queens), the South Bronx, etc. door to door dealing with some of the shadiest characters who don't want you there. One woman answered the door, saw me in a suit and honestly thought I was in the mafia asking me what her husband did. Anyway, these are the kinds of opportunities that are out there. The days of graduating and being offered a 45k base salary with benefits and a pension are gone for most people. If there are any left, Ivy candidates are the ones who get the spots because they can afford to be so selective. Not saying it's wrong to pick an Ivy candidate over others (it probably is), but the sheer volume of positions open are not there.
Finally, in regards to whoever said this was predictable and we "didn't listen to our guidance counselors", I see what you're saying. I have friends who went into communications...I used to break their balls all the time about it along with tons of other people. One of them now has a part time job on a very weird schedule and he has to drive up to 200 miles away for certain games. He maybe gets called in a few times a week or sometimes as low as maybe 3x in 2 weeks. It's not enough to live off of alone and he should really be looking for a full time job, but he isn't. I think a lot of comm majors have these dreams of working for ESPN like John Anderson or Chris Berman, then they graduate and the only thing out there is a job paying 25k a year to cover high school women's fencing (LOL). I can't lie...my field of psych also had people give me a hard time saying I'll never get a job, I'll never make money, etc. The one major difference between me and the comm guys were: I had a plan. I knew I would have to go to grad school and I knew the subfield of psych I was getting into would definitely pay around 60k starting and 100k+ after 10 years. While I see your point, you can't just tell kids to pick majors and go for jobs that America "needs" because not everyone is interested in Petroleum Engineering. I think our generation sees how our fathers reacted to their business jobs, coming home pissed off, scared of being fired, staying late until 9 PM, having heart attacks and being run into the ground. That could be another reason students are turning more to the humanities and things they really find interesting.