There's a lot of nuance into not only finding a job, but being hired for it along with maintaining the position without being laid off or fired. I mean, why is the act of finding a job inconvenient since you got to account: required qualifications or previous experience in (field), you can have the prerequisites but won't guarantee whether you'll be called in for an interview (as they just "ghost" you after submitting resume).

It doesn't matter if the job interview is done in person or via a zoom call, whatever the case is: the discretion is up to the company or employer on them thinking "you're what we're looking for" even if you aced all their questions, however majority just "ghost" you on that too never knowing if they hired you or not unless you ask them regarding the status on if they hired you or be like "sorry, we've found someone else".

Why is the process of both looking for a job and securing one after being hired so inconvenient? Submitting resume & cover letter online does not cut it since you take into account whether that employer or company will respond is betting the lottery (one day, you managed to land a job interview but later get told they don't want you anymore) or (submit 100+ applications on any position to only be met with silence).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (5 children)

A sign of a good capitalism is that you always have a few percent of jobless people. This establishes the power of employers over workers. doG forbid it should ever be the other way round, even by a 0.1%!

That's why you have to bend over backwards to get a job, not your prospective employer.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 hours ago

    Having a few percent of unemployed people doesn't really give employers power. It takes time to find a new job though, so there always will be a few percent, unless no-one ever changes job... and that is a bad sign.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

    Modern capitalist systems typically have a higher employment rate than in feudal times, which were furthermore hardly characterized by an emphasis on worker rights.

    Capitalism doesn't necessitate or imply strong worker rights and a strong welfare state, but a capitalist system can provide the framework to implement these. Indeed, the permanently unemployed in prosperous societies generally are substantially better off than the working poor in the US. At the same time, these societies generally have a higher employment rate than the US. For example, in the Netherlands, where the lowest income a single-person household (employed or not) may legally have is around $2000 per month, the employment rate is 82.4% (Q3 2025) versus 71.9% (Q2 2024) in the US.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 hours ago* (2 children)

    You're not wrong but what I wrote applies to the two EU countries I call my home as much as it applies to OP's situation which I guess is the USA.

    In other words: I perfectly recognize and also advocate that things are better in some "capitalist" countries than in others, but that doesn't mean they're perfect.

    And you think you're so clever and classless and free
    But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 hours ago (1 child)

    I think a problem many Lemmy users (especially Americans) have is that they recognize certain problems, but don't spend enough time figuring out the state of things in the world and what has already been attempted to address those problems. If one stops thinking at "capitalism bad," then it becomes difficult to think of concrete and feasible steps forward, even if those concrete steps are just "copy what others have done better, and then see what we can improve from there."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 hours ago

    Amen to that last sentence.

    "The Arrogance of Youth" I often think; I find it soothing because it means that they will learn eventually. But it's also ageist. And it's not always that anyhow, people of any age can be incredibly resistant to seeing reality and reflecting on it.

  • source
  • parent