BF2S Forums Recession proof companies

Service (maintenance and engineering) industries are underrated. How are you going to get to school or the hospital without functional roads? How's a market going to handle the insurance of dozens of parking lot wrecks and ankle twists because the asphalt's broken up and potholed and the traffic markings have all worn off?

1) I've dabbled in medical records, and it sucks the life out of you. I don't feel compelled to return to it at all, but it is something people can do from home.

Harmor wrote:

I would think if you're an expert in anything really you shouldn't have a problem keeping your job.  Its always the less experienced who are let go first in any company until you have the 'core' group that are required to keep the company going.

Try not to be worried to much, though, hopefully things will settle down soon enough and people will start lending to each other.

Sometimes true, but personality and attitude is also a huge factor in whether or not you're kept or let go. In contracting, you can be the slickest worker bee out of a white van, but the boss is not going to want the Monday morning calls about how you instigated (or wouldn't back down from) a confrontation with the manager of a shopping center's tenant, and would as soon train someone else to take your place.

Consumer confidence is important for a healthy economy, and people underestimate how high a toll constant media barrages of the gloomiest projections take on it.

Edit:

mtb0minime wrote:

Also, I would like to add that engineering is a pretty stable job as far as I know, so long as the company you're with stays in business; but there's always another company to go to if you get laid-off.

Unless you've done something to piss off your old company. Companies in the same industry can have core groups of their own, and a bad reputation can spread like wildfire.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2008-10-12 22:35:37)

Defense industries are usually recession proof, because they don't get the majority of their business from the private sector.

imortal wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

Defense industries are usually recession proof, because they don't get the majority of their business from the private sector.

Maybe, but if a democrat gets in office, defense is one of the first things cut, in an effort to divert funds to social programs.

This is true, no need for a military if your goal is to bow down to those that want to hurt you.

Poseidon wrote:

lowing wrote:

imortal wrote:

Maybe, but if a democrat gets in office, defense is one of the first things cut, in an effort to divert funds to social programs.

This is true, no need for a military if your goal is to bow down to those that want to hurt you.

Oh, how I love last ditch republican fear mongering..

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/defen … y-military

Yeah, sounds like a real defeatist to me.

fear mongering? Nope it is a fact. Democrats have little use for a strong military.

lowing wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

lowing wrote:

This is true, no need for a military if your goal is to bow down to those that want to hurt you.

Oh, how I love last ditch republican fear mongering..

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/defen … y-military

Yeah, sounds like a real defeatist to me.

fear mongering? Nope it is a fact. Democrats have little use for a strong military.

Yeah, right. Like I said, fearmongering.

Because Bill Clinton never had ANY use for the military or anything..

LividBovine wrote:

My goodness man, you read through the rest of the topics on their site?  He is promising the world. 

I love this man, he will solve world hunger and cancer if we vote for him.

Not all of it, but most of it. I, unlike most people, actually want to KNOW about the candidate I'm supporting, and I wouldn't vote because someone's blue or red, unlike lowing.

Last edited by Poseidon (2008-10-12 23:17:46)

Poseidon wrote:

Because Bill Clinton never had ANY use for the military or anything..

Especially not for much ground support during a certain helicopter fiasco.

nukchebi0 wrote:

Especially not for much ground support during a certain helicopter fiasco.

Wasn't that because of the thin ice they were already treading on my staging the Delta Force raid in the first place? That is, it would have been untenable in international diplomacy to commit sizable ground forces to the battle.

Whatever it was was good enough to send troops out in flying turds.

Poseidon wrote:

lowing wrote:

imortal wrote:

Maybe, but if a democrat gets in office, defense is one of the first things cut, in an effort to divert funds to social programs.

This is true, no need for a military if your goal is to bow down to those that want to hurt you.

Oh, how I love last ditch republican fear mongering..

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/defen … y-military

Yeah, sounds like a real defeatist to me.

Invest in a 21st Century Military

    * Rebuild the Military for 21st Century Tasks:

Paint your helmets blue?

Bah, the best you can do is try to decide which candidate blows the most hot air and make your decision.

/derail

Let's start again from the top (OP).

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2008-10-12 23:32:11)

Healthcare shouldn't be a safe career in the coming years in the US.

McCain wants to cut about $150 billion a year from Medicare and Medicaid which is going to mean job losses. Obama is likely to significantly alter the healthcare system to reduce costs, again jobs will likely be lost.

Despite everything, the biggest fiscal problem remains, far and away, health care. Based on the rate that medical spending has been rising, the Congressional Budget Office forecasts that Medicare and Medicaid will take up 10 percent of G.D.P. within two decades, up from about 4 percent now. In today’s terms, that would be the equivalent of adding at least $900 billion to the deficit every single year, in perpetuity. It makes the cost of the bailouts look like a rounding error.

When it comes to health care, we have a situation that is blatantly unsustainable. With the right choices, we can prevent that. But so far, we instead seem to be hoping that the situation will magically resolve itself, which is a recipe for big problems and perhaps even a crisis.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/busin … ref=slogin

If anything healthcare is an area that should be most likely to loose jobs.

Why would the food industry not be fairly recession proof?

I think he meant the food industry as in grocery providers, not the food service industry.

God Save the Queen wrote:

Im in a recession proof industry.

Tempted to ask if you hand out soup to lines of people, but I know better.

Poseidon wrote:

lowing wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

Oh, how I love last ditch republican fear mongering..

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/defen … y-military

Yeah, sounds like a real defeatist to me.

fear mongering? Nope it is a fact. Democrats have little use for a strong military.

Yeah, right. Like I said, fearmongering.

Because Bill Clinton never had ANY use for the military or anything..

LividBovine wrote:

My goodness man, you read through the rest of the topics on their site?  He is promising the world. 

I love this man, he will solve world hunger and cancer if we vote for him.

Not all of it, but most of it. I, unlike most people, actually want to KNOW about the candidate I'm supporting, and I wouldn't vote because someone's blue or red, unlike lowing.

1. Actually, Bill Clinton DIDN'T have much use for the military, not after WTC '93, Somalia, USS Cole, Embassies in Nigeria and Tunesia etc....


2. I do not have opinions "along party lines", my opinions are based on freedom and responsibilty. SO I am not "blue or red"

Poseidon wrote:

lowing wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

lowing wrote:

fear mongering? Nope it is a fact. Democrats have little use for a strong military.

Yeah, right. Like I said, fearmongering.

Because Bill Clinton never had ANY use for the military or anything..


Not all of it, but most of it. I, unlike most people, actually want to KNOW about the candidate I'm supporting, and I wouldn't vote because someone's blue or red, unlike lowing.

1. Actually, Bill Clinton DIDN'T have much use for the military, not after WTC '93, Somalia, USS Cole, Embassies in Nigeria and Tunesia etc....


2. I do not have opinions "along party lines", my opinions are based on freedom and responsibilty. SO I am not "blue or red"

General Wesley Clark would disagree with you.

Funny, you say that, but nearly everything you say contradicts that.

Does it? Well let m give you examples:

I am pro-choice
I am against the govt. bailout
I am pro-gay marriage
I am not a Christian or religious at all

The reason you think everything I say contradicts this is because it just so happens that everything liberals support goes against individuality and personal achievment and responsibility in favor of collective achievment and responsibility.