By choking off job opportunities to the one that one wishes to see
become desperate, through unyielding discrimination in employment.
In the last decade or so, a major cause of this desperation has been
the unwillingness of many employers to hire anyone, for any position, who
has not yet had 2 - 5 years of working experience in that specific
position, raising the common sensical question of how the applicant is
supposed to get that experience. The credentials demanded have become
more and more extreme, as employers have (at times) refused to interview
anyone with less than a 3.8 average on a 4 scale (3.5 being Dean's list),
or informed people with graduate degrees that second or third degrees
will be needed before the applicant will be hired (the degrees to be
obtained, without support, in most cases), or, completely reversing
themselves later on, announcing that they don't want the degrees indicated
in the past, now, and are refusing the applicant employment on the basis
of "overqualification".
Leaving the deeply indebted student wondering how she (or he) can
possibly find work and pay the bills that arise in simply surviving the
winter. The excuse offered for the practices that create this
predicament is that they simply reflect the workings of the free market,
as the employers choose the best candidates that they can find, a
process which the government can interfere in only at the price of
reducing the productivity of the economy. Except, that's a lie. By their
own acknowledgement, employers have stubbornly refused to budge on these
unreasonable expectations they have of finding a "perfect fit", when
hiring, even at the expense of not finding "qualified applicants" (ie.
those meeting the narrow and ludicrously unrealistic requirements on
those wish lists) for years and losing money, because work is going
undone. Even if this claim were true, though, do the rest of us have right
to make ourselves richer by depriving someone else of so basic a right,
as deciding who shall and shall not have access to her body?
