Help - Former USAID contractor -- zero interviews in a year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

That’s like saying that only carpenters work in construction. Sure, the people swinging hammers are critical. But you also need architects, engineers, and inspectors. Public health is essentially the engineers and inspectors of the health care world. It isn’t a nurse who is taking waste water samples to check for pathogens, or a doctor who is developing models for how a disease will move through a population and how to deploy resources to stop it. Surgeons don’t do home visits to make sure sick old people have food in their fridge and pills in their medicine boxes so they don’t end up back in the hospital.

I don’t know if you just want to hate on everything Trump hates on, or if you really don’t know what public health is. So I’m explaining in the hope you are in earnest. Because, bleeding heart that I am, I like to assume the best of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

That’s like saying that only carpenters work in construction. Sure, the people swinging hammers are critical. But you also need architects, engineers, and inspectors. Public health is essentially the engineers and inspectors of the health care world. It isn’t a nurse who is taking waste water samples to check for pathogens, or a doctor who is developing models for how a disease will move through a population and how to deploy resources to stop it. Surgeons don’t do home visits to make sure sick old people have food in their fridge and pills in their medicine boxes so they don’t end up back in the hospital.

I don’t know if you just want to hate on everything Trump hates on, or if you really don’t know what public health is. So I’m explaining in the hope you are in earnest. Because, bleeding heart that I am, I like to assume the best of people.

Again, if usaid people could do these other things they would.

Architects, engineers, and inspectors are working. They aren't wondering why they haven't had an interview in a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

That’s like saying that only carpenters work in construction. Sure, the people swinging hammers are critical. But you also need architects, engineers, and inspectors. Public health is essentially the engineers and inspectors of the health care world. It isn’t a nurse who is taking waste water samples to check for pathogens, or a doctor who is developing models for how a disease will move through a population and how to deploy resources to stop it. Surgeons don’t do home visits to make sure sick old people have food in their fridge and pills in their medicine boxes so they don’t end up back in the hospital.

I don’t know if you just want to hate on everything Trump hates on, or if you really don’t know what public health is. So I’m explaining in the hope you are in earnest. Because, bleeding heart that I am, I like to assume the best of people.

Again, if usaid people could do these other things they would.

Architects, engineers, and inspectors are working. They aren't wondering why they haven't had an interview in a year.

Plenty of people in computer science and IT are wondering exactly that. Is it because they don’t have skills? No, it’s because the macro environment of their industry is awful. The job market is not strong and is not adding jobs except in a few select areas (construction is actually one that hasn’t shed jobs in the past year, actually), but this very simple concept is lost on you. No one is surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

Maybe your poor interpersonal skills is why you can't find a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

I'm a nurse. I work on a pediatric intensive care floor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

Maybe your poor interpersonal skills is why you can't find a job.

I have a job. I never worked at USAID. The only person with poor interpersonal skills is the one coming onto a thread that is looking for advice for a laid off spouse and making multiple comments about how all of the people that worked at the spouse’s organization had no skills and that’s the reason they are unemployed. It’s just troll behavior from garbage people drinking right-wing kool aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I tried to tease this out early in the thread because everyone is so vague about the work.they.actually.did at USAID or adjacent. Then somebody chimed in with some good details and I was really respectful of that work. That one example had truly valuable skills. I'm not convinced about everyone, especially the ones that aren't 'fessing up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

Maybe your poor interpersonal skills is why you can't find a job.

I have a job. I never worked at USAID. The only person with poor interpersonal skills is the one coming onto a thread that is looking for advice for a laid off spouse and making multiple comments about how all of the people that worked at the spouse’s organization had no skills and that’s the reason they are unemployed. It’s just troll behavior from garbage people drinking right-wing kool aid.

Why do you think it's one person?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

The pp never said they didn't know what those things are. The quotes are used when quoting another poster.

Maybe English isn't your first language and you didn't know so I'm helping out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

The pp never said they didn't know what those things are. The quotes are used when quoting another poster.

Maybe English isn't your first language and you didn't know so I'm helping out.

The pp very clearly indicated that. Here is what they said:

“If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills…”

All of these things have clear meaning if you know what they are. If, instead, you don’t know what these things are, you would probably think they are just vague terms that don’t involve actual useful skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but it sounds like his skills either aren't there, aren't unique, or aren't transferrable.

The problem with a lot of these USAID folks is there's a lot of talk about deliverables and managing programs but it's a lot of words.

No, the problem is that the job market is terrible and the government has poured gasoline on it by dumping 300k extra workers into it all at once. Very few industries or sectors have added any meaningful number of jobs in the past year other than healthcare.

If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field.

It sounds like the government propped up the 300k extra workers and they don't really have marketable skills.

Because the jobs in healthcare are in the provision of healthcare services (doctors, NPs, nurses, hospital and office administrative staff), not in public health (got cut!) or infectious diseases.

It sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is unsurprising.

That makes no sense. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners work in public health and infectious diseases.

Just face it. Usaid people were not in healthcare. They were paper pushers.

Of course it makes sense. Your reading skills are just terrible.

I never said USAID people were in healthcare. I specifically said they weren’t in healthcare. The people in healthcare getting jobs are doctors, nurses, hospital administrators. USAID people were not that, and no one ever said they were.

Yes, there are doctors and nurses in public health and infectious diseases. But the type of work USAID did on those issues—which were projects and logistics—would not fall under healthcare as classified by the jobs data. Which is why your earlier point of “If healthcare added all these job why aren't the people who prevent infectious diseases in Africa or stopped ebola working in that field” is actually the point that makes no sense. The work USAID people did is not the type of work where jobs in the US have been added in the past year, which has been my point all along.

You are just reinforcing the op's point. If the usaid type of work "projects and logistics" or contracts and deliverables or whatever other vague terms that have been used were actual useful skills then these people would be working. Instead it's a pyramid scheme of managing and supervising and auditing the people doing the actual work.

I am not at all surprised that you have never heard of project management or logistics, or that you think dealing with contracts and managing is part of a pyramid scheme instead of “actual work.” These are absolutely foreign concepts down in your troll hole.

Please enlighten us on your deep skills and expertise in doing “actual work.” I’m sure it’s some low-level, menial bulls[i]hit.

Maybe your poor interpersonal skills is why you can't find a job.

I have a job. I never worked at USAID. The only person with poor interpersonal skills is the one coming onto a thread that is looking for advice for a laid off spouse and making multiple comments about how all of the people that worked at the spouse’s organization had no skills and that’s the reason they are unemployed. It’s just troll behavior from garbage people drinking right-wing kool aid.

Why do you think it's one person?

I don’t. I think there are multiple Trump trolls on this thread. The person I was referring to above was the person I was responding to. But it indeed applies broadly.