How about get a degree where there are jobs instead of crying about it.

Gmol

cloudatlas wrote: »

No, he must fit the status quo, become an accountant get a mortgage on a big house with a garden, two cars.

This is the way.

If he want work in the Arts then he has to consider the location of those jobs.
If he wants to stay in rural Clare, he then needs to see what is available there.
Expecting Rural Clare to cater for such a niche career is a bit blinkered.


In 2009 nobody was getting jobs anywhere.

Ficheall

Deleted User wrote: »

I think most people are better off with self-study, and avoiding Universities entirely... or they will be once the employers accept that more. Which they're already accepting but it's a slow movement away from institutionalized approval.

100 ****ing percent.

partyguinness

There is too much educational snobbery in Ireland. Going to University should be an option and it does not suite everyone but many many students are shoehorned into course that they are not suited. You are almost deemed an embarrassing failure if you do not attend.

Some of the...sorry. In fact the smartest people I know did not attend third level. Some of the dumbest people I know did attend third level.

cloudatlas

Gmol wrote: »

If he want work in the Arts then he has to consider the location of those jobs.
If he wants to stay in rural Clare, he then needs to see what is available there.
Expecting Rural Clare to cater for such a niche career is a bit blinkered.


In 2009 nobody was getting jobs anywhere.

I thought he was merely stating a fact as part of his narrative. I couldn’t get a job in my home town I moved. Would have been very odd if he hadn’t explained that.

partyguinness

You do realise that is not cool to move to another country and say how much you love it? Just not Kosher.

Secretly the vast majority of emigrants are happy with their lot abroad but of course they can't upset Mammy at home by saying that.

If you leave Ireland you have to wallow and go on about how much you miss it even if 99% of the time this is not true.

If you are at home visiting sure you have to let on to everyone that you are abroad under great sufferance and duress even though you are already planning the trip back.

lainey_d_123

Shane Fit Thermos wrote: »

I agree. If he was 24 in 2009, per his article, he was born around 1985, and was still in primary school when the boom started. So he's not of a generation that would have known anything resembling genuine hardship and struggle. He grew up in a country full of opportunity and money, got a college education for free, and probably didn't worry too much about his future before his mid-20s — because, before that, anybody who wanted a job could get one.

When the economy took a temporary downturn, he wasn't prepared for it, and neither were any of the other so-called "Celtic cubs." It was easier to run off to another country such as Australia that re-created the ambiance of Celtic Tiger Ireland than to stay at home and figure something out.

Agreed, but why are you acting like it's that generation's fault? I'd say it's almost worse growing up in a boom time and then graduating into a recession - at least those who started college post 2008 knew what to expect. I'm the same age as that fella and grew up being told that 'any degree was fine', because it was. The people born 4-5 years earlier were getting good graduate jobs with Arts degrees, so why would we have worried? Why would someone with an aptitude for arts subjects force themselves through a computer science degree or whatever when the economy is good and they've been told by their parents and teachers to do whatever degree they enjoy and are good at?

nkl12xtw5goz70

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Agreed, but why are you acting like it's that generation's fault? I'd say it's almost worse growing up in a boom time and then graduating into a recession - at least those who started college post 2008 knew what to expect. I'm the same age as that fella and grew up being told that 'any degree was fine', because it was. The people born 4-5 years earlier were getting good graduate jobs with Arts degrees, so why would we have worried?

I don't believe it's your generation's fault. Those who were children when the boom began are hardly to blame for the world they grew up in. That said, your generation's expectations were inevitably shaped by the economic environment of the day — as you say, you went to college expecting that any degree at all would guarantee a good career and a comfortable life. Parents and teachers should have been old enough to know better — but then again, many were caught up in the "let the good times roll" euphoria of the day.

I agree that it's worse for someone who grows up in a boom and then graduates into a recession, because that person hasn't learned coping skills during childhood to keep going when times get tough. Your generation had to learn those coping skills in their 20s, under difficult circumstances, and I can appreciate that it wasn't easy.

Why would someone with an aptitude for arts subjects force themselves through a computer science degree or whatever when the economy is good and they've been told by their parents and teachers to do whatever degree they enjoy and are good at?

I don't believe that people with an aptitude for the liberal arts should ever force themselves through degrees in computer science, engineering, something they will never have an aptitude for and be truly good at. Instead, they should focus on excelling at the subjects they are good at, and then figure out what they can do with those skills. Degrees in literature, philosophy, languages, and so on are far from "useless" if the holders have developed good skills in writing, reading lengthy and complex texts, thinking and communicating clearly, and so on.

The core problem with Arts degrees in Ireland is that they're poorly taught and badly assessed. That's not an issue with the subjects themselves, but with the universities' approach to them.

Alun

Shane Fit Thermos wrote: »

I don't believe that people with an aptitude for the liberal arts should ever force themselves through degrees in computer science, engineering, something they will never have an aptitude for and be truly good at. Instead, they should focus on excelling at the subjects they are good at, and then figure out what they can do with those skills. Degrees in literature, philosophy, languages, and so on are far from "useless" if the holders have developed good skills in writing, reading lengthy and complex texts, thinking and communicating clearly, and so on.

A story from the far distant past that supports this ...

Back when I first started work in 1978 (yes I am that old!) at Plessey in Nottingham as a programmer, there was a massive shortage of computer science graduates to fill the available positions. At the same time there was a massive oversupply of teachers for some reason or another.

So the company started a scheme to give unemployed teachers the chance to do a few months on the job training to see if they were suitable for a career change into programming / system analysis etc.

They were a mixed bunch, science and maths teachers mainly, but one guy was a classics (Latin, ancient Greek etc.) graduate from Oxford, and needless to say we didn't expect much from him, but we were very, very wrong.

While he initially lacked knowledge of the subject matter he had one of the most analytical minds of all of the graduates, asked probing questions of the senior staff there, was extremely articulate and ended up being the only one to get a job offer at the end of it. I heard later, after I'd left, that he'd risen in the ranks very quickly to become a senior analyst.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

Even though I work at university level, for business related courses, I think most people are better off with self-study, and avoiding Universities entirely... or they will be once the employers accept that more. Which they're already accepting but it's a slow movement away from institutionalized approval.

Getting through a four year course shows stickability, an attractive proposition for potential employers. There's also a certain level of knowledge and skills people might have picked up. It's not for everyone, nor should it be and the apprentice system that is widespread in some countries, Germany and Switzerland in particular is probably a better fit with the workplace. It solves the conundrum of whether potential employees will have workplace skills. The challenge here is to overcome that 3rd level snobbery and that is the only route to further learning. Self-study has its place but without an objective way to evaluate it it can't be relied on. It's definitely a good approach to personal development.

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

Getting through a four year course shows stickability, an attractive proposition for potential employers. There's also a certain level of knowledge and skills people might have picked up. It's not for everyone, nor should it be and the apprentice system that is widespread in some countries, Germany and Switzerland in particular is probably a better fit with the workplace. It solves the conundrum of whether potential employees will have workplace skills. The challenge here is to overcome that 3rd level snobbery and that is the only route to further learning. Self-study has its place but without an objective way to evaluate it it can't be relied on. It's definitely a good approach to personal development.

I was always very honest about my difficulties in University. It would have been difficult to hide my history without lying.. and I never saw the point in that. The vast majority of employers I've encountered were less interested in University degrees and more interested in whether I'd be a fit for their work environment, but also whether I'd explored/learned more beyond the university work. Still, my career history of employers is a bit weird since it jumps around a lot. When you're appraising potential employees who have followed the traditional boring steps to be qualified, you're kinda stuck in how you evaluate them, since so few of them explore knowledge beyond their initial major.

The problem with evaluation is regulation, since regulation leads to complacent thinking, and loss of modern thinking. Evaluation is, and should be a consideration at employment level because that's where it matters... until then, a student should consider themselves to be still in the learning period.

The issue with most University students is that they think they can stop learning/developing themselves after graduation rather than understanding that this is when the most need for improvement begins.

PommieBast

Deleted User wrote: »

Even though I work at university level, for business related courses, I think most people are better off with self-study, and avoiding Universities entirely... or they will be once the employers accept that more. Which they're already accepting but it's a slow movement away from institutionalized approval.

To me it seems like a lot of university courses are virtually self-study.



Back in 2017 I had thought about doing a masters in embedded electronics, but reading the prospectus felt that I would not actually learn much new. The €5,000 or so I have since spent on the likes of Maplin, Farnell, Digi-Key, and Mouser is a lot less than what the course would have cost, and I suspect the outcome is much the same..

lainey_d_123

Shane Fit Thermos wrote: »

I don't believe it's your generation's fault. Those who were children when the boom began are hardly to blame for the world they grew up in. That said, your generation's expectations were inevitably shaped by the economic environment of the day — as you say, you went to college expecting that any degree at all would guarantee a good career and a comfortable life. Parents and teachers should have been old enough to know better — but then again, many were caught up in the "let the good times roll" euphoria of the day.

True. It just gets tiring when people constantly sh1t on 'millennials' and 'tiger cubs' and don't stop to consider who brought them up! The career advice I was given was p1ss poor. How is a teenager with no life experience supposed to know what the best career path is if all the adults around them don't know?

I agree that it's worse for someone who grows up in a boom and then graduates into a recession, because that person hasn't learned coping skills during childhood to keep going when times get tough. Your generation had to learn those coping skills in their 20s, under difficult circumstances, and I can appreciate that it wasn't easy.

I grew up in a poor family (even during boom times) and had a very unhappy childhood so it certainly wasn't a question of being coddled or spoiled, but there was certainly no concept of ending up poor or unemployed despite getting good qualifications. A degree practically guaranteed a good life for our parents' generation and so they advised us to do the same. I was always told that doing well at school/college was a ticket out of my crappy life...it was a definite kick in the teeth to work so hard for so many years and then graduate in 2008 to find it was all for nothing.

I don't believe that people with an aptitude for the liberal arts should ever force themselves through degrees in computer science, engineering, something they will never have an aptitude for and be truly good at. Instead, they should focus on excelling at the subjects they are good at, and then figure out what they can do with those skills. Degrees in literature, philosophy, languages, and so on are far from "useless" if the holders have developed good skills in writing, reading lengthy and complex texts, thinking and communicating clearly, and so on.

The core problem with Arts degrees in Ireland is that they're poorly taught and badly assessed. That's not an issue with the subjects themselves, but with the universities' approach to them.

Agreed. Pointless telling people to do STEM subjects when a lot of people just don't have the aptitude for them. I certainly wouldn't want a doctor who had scraped through medical school and hated it and was in it for the money. I think the main problem with Arts degrees in Ireland is they're undervalued. There's no respect for knowledge and being able to think and rationalise. In France, a philosophy degree is seen as something impressive - here, it's seen as a waste of time. I think employers are the ones who need to be more open-minded and appreciate the different views and skills Arts graduates can bring to the workplace.

thebourke

i know a person who has a PHD in irish folklore...can't get a a job...in her mid 30s....limited area i guess...

partyguinness

thebourke wrote: »

i know a person who has a PHD in irish folklore...can't get a a job...in her mid 30s....limited area i guess...

No surprise really. I can just picture her. I bet she has the social skills and personality of a damp dish cloth.

A hobby PhD...Jesus wept. Just confirms my suspicions that Irish universities hand out PhDs too quickly. Outside of technical subject matters such as science the vast majority of Phds are a complete and utter waste of time and just a vanity project.

While I am sure Irish folklore is super interesting it is essentially a dead subject matter and you are not likely to contribute anything new or ground breaking.

donaghs

cloudatlas wrote: »

No, he must fit the status quo, become an accountant get a mortgage on a big house with a garden, two cars.

This is the way.

No, of course he has a choice. But he shouldn't be moaning about not having skills anyone wants in a rural village. Or expecting to live off taxpayer "arts funding".

I know lots of people who did Arts degrees. the difference is they were under no illusions that they were entitled to anything when they finished, or even that employers were interested in their qualifications after.

They had to work had at getting into their career of choice, or else retrain/do postgrads in something else, and get on with their life.

lainey_d_123

partyguinness wrote: »

No surprise really. I can just picture her. I bet she has the social skills and personality of a damp dish cloth.

A hobby PhD...Jesus wept. Just confirms my suspicions that Irish universities hand out PhDs too quickly. Outside of technical subject matters such as science the vast majority of Phds are a complete and utter waste of time and just a vanity project.

While I am sure Irish folklore is super interesting it is essentially a dead subject matter and you are not likely to contribute anything new or ground breaking.

Now, undergrad is one thing, but I do struggle to understand why anyone would do such a PhD unless they had family money and were just doing it for something to do. I was offered a place to do a PhD at Cambridge, fully funded, but turned it down because I didn't want to be 30+ coming out of it with no real work experience. And that was in a way more marketable niche than Irish folklore.

partyguinness

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Now, undergrad is one thing, but I do struggle to understand why anyone would do such a PhD unless they had family money and were just doing it for something to do. I was offered a place to do a PhD at Cambridge, fully funded, but turned it down because I didn't want to be 30+ coming out of it with no real work experience. And that was in a way more marketable niche than Irish folklore.

I think some graduates are afraid of the big bad world and staying at University is a nice place to hide.

weldoninhio

Always Tired wrote: »

I studied fine art. I never intended to work in some tedious corporate slave wage job. I knew I would probably be pretty poor as a result of following my passion. (Never thought it would be this bad, but costs of living has risen so much that it IS quite challenging to make ends meet at times.)

I don't expect there to be a job in my field in the small town I live in. I live here because it's cheap. I've been on the dole now 3 years, and for around 5 of the last 8 since graduating in 2011.

I would happily do something like work in a cafe or shop, but where I live there is still a severe lack of even those types of jobs. Only places ever hiring is a few hotels and takeaways and my experience in those was generally awful, work ridiculous hours when it suits them, get none when it doesn't, low pay, 75% of your colleagues speaking in some language other than English most of the time. Treated like absolute crap. Once you have either quit or got fired from the 3 or 4 of them in town there's nothing else left.

I'm now almost finished my 2nd stint of Jobpath. They havent referred me to a single job. They don't have any. I can't move for family reasons, and moving to Dublin or London or where the jobs are doesnt appeal to me. I love cities but the rents are insane so I just visit when I want to enjoy some culture, see art, go to gigs, etc.

I've stopped being bitter about the economy. It was my own fault for pursuing something unpractical. But I don't regret it. I made some adjusments. I quit smoking and drinking years ago, and I buy paints etc. with the money saved. I've had my art displayed in 4 different countries, I've had 2 pieces of my writing published in literary mags the last couple years (doesnt sound like much but it's hard to get selected even for small publications). I don't make any money off my creative endeavours, any I do get goes back which is rare into the work, but I have gotten the stuff out there and a few people enjoyed them. That's good enough for me.

I did a stint in a medical device factory for a year as a contractor. They forced us onto 12 hr shifts, and then let us go when it suited them. You had to stick the same pieces of plastic together over and over. I hated it, and despite the good pay my health was ruined by the crazy shifts, going to bed at 9 am, try and sleep during the daytime and go back in for 8 pm

For some, to get made permanent in this job would have been a dream come true. Me, I saw the people who had been at this craic for donkeys years and they seemed completely institutionalized, their life revolved around this place, the gossip, the company, and they all had this grey, shapeless, lifeless look to them.

I'd honestly rather not end up like that, even if that means not having a flash car or big house.
And for myself, I kind of have to do creative stuff because I'm not good at anything else, I can't hack boring work that doesnt engage me, I can't kiss up to managers who are almost always dullards or bullies, I don't want to wear a dumb uniform, have my activities timed, and be expected to bend over backwards for some company that doesnt care a jot about me at the end of the day. Most of all, if I don't engage with my creative pursuits I just feel bad, depressed, dissatisfied. I think a lot of creative people are like that.

And that's why some people study these non practical things OP.

The dole should be a safety net, a hand up. Not used to fund your fantasy lifestyle. The above is exactly why the dole should be lowered as time goes on. I don't want to do a menial job to support myself, so I'll just let that muppet John Q Taxpayer support me. It's a kick up the arse you need.

lainey_d_123

weldoninhio wrote: »

The dole should be a safety net, a hand up. Not used to fund your fantasy lifestyle. The above is exactly why the dole should be lowered as time goes on. I don't want to do a menial job to support myself, so I'll just let that muppet John Q Taxpayer support me. It's a kick up the arse you need.

I have to agree. I don't know how some people can feel OK with letting other people's taxes support their lifestyle choice. I graduated in 2008 with first class degree, Master's (distinction) and several foreign languages and I didn't think I was above working in call centres, cafes and other menial jobs at the height of the crisis when I couldn't get anything else and was unable to move abroad. I even spent a while cleaning hotel rooms. Drives me mental when people think they're too good for certain jobs because of a piece of paper. Wouldn't have entered my head to sit on the dole and let other people fund my creative works. I did those at the weekend, like a normal person.

vriesmays

Do these fools realise that technical and IT roles can be just as creative as writing a bad play.

nkl12xtw5goz70

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

A degree practically guaranteed a good life for our parents' generation and so they advised us to do the same. I was always told that doing well at school/college was a ticket out of my crappy life...it was a definite kick in the teeth to work so hard for so many years and then graduate in 2008 to find it was all for nothing.

Degree holders got the higher paying jobs in your parents' generation because, before the introduction of free fees in 1994, they were in relatively scare supply. But it's a basic fallacy to assume that if everyone has a degree, then everyone will have a high-paying job. It's more likely that as soon as the majority of people have degrees, they simply becomes "the new Leaving Cert," and employers start looking for other ways to differentiate among applicants — such as postgraduate or professional qualifications, work experience, etc.

I think the main problem with Arts degrees in Ireland is they're undervalued. There's no respect for knowledge and being able to think and rationalise. In France, a philosophy degree is seen as something impressive - here, it's seen as a waste of time.

Agreed entirely. But in France, a philosophy degree is rigorous and exacting, requiring a huge amount of reading, writing, and study. There, you can't miss most of your lectures, cram for a few days before the exam, and come out with a pass — but I have frequently heard of that happening in Ireland.

If Irish universities made their Arts degrees as difficult, rigorous, and demanding as their STEM degrees, then Arts graduates would walk out of university with skills that could impress any employer. Instead, we have graduates with literature degrees who can't talk coherently for three minutes about John Milton (if they'e even read him at all) or who can't write a half-decent cover letter for a job application. It is a waste of time to produce graduates like that — but again the problem lies with the approach in Irish universities, not with literature or philosophy as subjects.

vriesmays

Shane Fit Thermos wrote: »

Agreed entirely. But in France, a philosophy degree is rigorous and exacting, requiring a huge amount of reading, writing, and study. There, you can't miss most of your lectures, cram for a few days before the exam, and come out with a pass — but I have frequently heard of that happening in Ireland.

France produced Sartre, Bergson, Foucault, Althusser, Voltaire, Baudrillard and Deleuze. Ireland produced Gerry Ryan who was convinced he was intellectual.

nkl12xtw5goz70

vriesmays wrote: »

France produced Sartre, Bergson, Foucault, Althusser, Voltaire, Baudrillard and Deleuze. Ireland produced Gerry Ryan who was convinced he was intellectual.

Ireland has produced some astonishing literature, including the twentieth century's preeminent poet and novelist, but not much of note in recent decades. Its universities have become glorified extensions of secondary school, filled with students who merely want a piece of grade-inflated paper to get a job. And there's a worrying anti-intellectual strain in Ireland these days, along the lines of "If a qualification doesn't lead directly to employment, it's 'useless.'"

LirW

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I have to agree. I don't know how some people can feel OK with letting other people's taxes support their lifestyle choice. I graduated in 2008 with first class degree, Master's (distinction) and several foreign languages and I didn't think I was above working in call centres, cafes and other menial jobs at the height of the crisis when I couldn't get anything else and was unable to move abroad. I even spent a while cleaning hotel rooms. Drives me mental when people think they're too good for certain jobs because of a piece of paper. Wouldn't have entered my head to sit on the dole and let other people fund my creative works. I did those at the weekend, like a normal person.

Completely aside from any entitlement, living in an area with virtually no jobs is really tough. I live in one and who doesn't fancy working in the local meat packing factory has to commute very very far. Employers know they can treat their staff however they please because there's no shortage of unemployed and people can't just go elsewhere.
In reality these situations are often complex. A family I know quite well has to do an unbearable split: he's working local as a factory supervisor, she works in law and has to take a 5 hour roundtrip every day because there is simply no work around but their whole network is there.
While the economy is doing well it's not doing well everywhere and there are big unemployment hotspots all over the country. People aren't expecting jobs at their doorstep but some areas have been hit hard with many job losses dragging the area into deprivation.
Good on everyone without commitments being able to leave, but not everyone can.

LirW

LirW wrote: »

Good on everyone without commitments being able to leave, but not everyone can.

The only real commitment that could have stopped me leaving would have been wife/kids. Thankfully I was single. (Although then again, if I'd been married I might have had the second income to cover the costs, I couldn't afford on a single income) Everything else was manageable/negotiable (since I have a brother/sister to help deal with the parents needs).

nkl12xtw5goz70

LirW wrote: »

While the economy is doing well it's not doing well everywhere and there are big unemployment hotspots all over the country. People aren't expecting jobs at their doorstep but some areas have been hit hard with many job losses dragging the area into deprivation.

Greater support for remote work could address so many of these problems.

lainey_d_123

LirW wrote: »

Completely aside from any entitlement, living in an area with virtually no jobs is really tough. I live in one and who doesn't fancy working in the local meat packing factory has to commute very very far. Employers know they can treat their staff however they please because there's no shortage of unemployed and people can't just go elsewhere.
In reality these situations are often complex. A family I know quite well has to do an unbearable split: he's working local as a factory supervisor, she works in law and has to take a 5 hour roundtrip every day because there is simply no work around but their whole network is there.
While the economy is doing well it's not doing well everywhere and there are big unemployment hotspots all over the country. People aren't expecting jobs at their doorstep but some areas have been hit hard with many job losses dragging the area into deprivation.
Good on everyone without commitments being able to leave, but not everyone can.

Sometimes you just need to move to where the work is, especially as a young graduate with no real ties or caring responsibilities. Someone who is stuck in a rural area caring for ageing parents or whatever and is doing whatever jobs are there and trying to make it work is very different to someone who wants to play at being an artist and doesn't fancy getting their hands dirty doing jobs they consider beneath them.

Nobody has the God given right to be an artist or a musician. If you can't make money from it (and most people can't), do something else and do the creative stuff on the side like everyone has else has to. It *is* tremendously entitled for someone perfectly able bodied and educated to live on welfare because they think they shouldn't have to work at anything they deem beneath them. It's laziness and arrogance.

lainey_d_123

Shane Fit Thermos wrote: »

Greater support for remote work could address so many of these problems.

In fairness, there are all sorts of possibilities for remote work already. It's 2020. I know loads of people who have had 100% freelance, online businesses for years now. Anyone with any skills and a bit of cop on should be able to at least scrape a living online.

I knew a girl who taught English to Chinese kids online. She only did 4-5 hours a day, 5 days a week, and that was enough to keep the rent and bills paid and have a modest lifestyle. She got up really early because of the time difference and was finished by about 10am or something, giving her the rest of the day to do whatever she wanted - exercise, painting, yoga, whatever. But why bother if you can just not work at all and get the taxpayer to pick up the tab, I guess.

LirW

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Sometimes you just need to move to where the work is, especially as a young graduate with no real ties or caring responsibilities. Someone who is stuck in a rural area caring for ageing parents or whatever and is doing whatever jobs are there and trying to make it work is very different to someone who wants to play at being an artist and doesn't fancy getting their hands dirty doing jobs they consider beneath them.

Nobody has the God given right to be an artist or a musician. If you can't make money from it (and most people can't), do something else and do the creative stuff on the side like everyone has else has to. It *is* tremendously entitled for someone perfectly able bodied and educated to live on welfare because they think they shouldn't have to work at anything they deem beneath them. It's laziness and arrogance.

I'm not disagreeing there, I'm merely trying to point out that often these situations are more complex than they seem.
I'm aware that it's about a particular poster above and I'm not agreeing with his stance on work but I see where he is coming from regarding deprived areas with very little opportunity for just about anyone. I've been struggling with the very same issue myself, there's simply no work around and the little bit that is sees hundreds and hundreds of applicants. I decided to go back to college but I have to keep in mind that my husband earns decent money and it would be madness for him to give his job up, so down the line I'll have to come up with a way to make money while keeping my family's commitments in mind.
It sucks and it's the reality for many educated people in economically weak areas.

LirW

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

In fairness, there are all sorts of possibilities for remote work already. It's 2020. I know loads of people who have had 100% freelance, online businesses for years now. Anyone with any skills and a bit of cop on should be able to at least scrape a living online.

I knew a girl who taught English to Chinese kids online. She only did 4-5 hours a day, 5 days a week, and that was enough to keep the rent and bills paid and have a modest lifestyle. She got up really early because of the time difference and was finished by about 10am or something, giving her the rest of the day to do whatever she wanted - exercise, painting, yoga, whatever. But why bother if you can just not work at all and get the taxpayer to pick up the tab, I guess.

Not every employer is happy with the idea of mainly remote staff and if you have a mortgage to pay you won't make ends meet with 5 hours of English teaching a day when you're trained in a field that translates poorly into remote work.
There are enough people out there depending on their jobs that have to fight for a single remote day per week.
I feel your view comes from someone single with very few commitments while mine is not single with many commitments.
A young grad has little problem being flexible and moving around, a mature grad faces different challenges.