Originally Posted by Aces4 (Post 1674182)

Many of those are the college colors of their children or grandchildren, not their parents or they support their state colleges.

Originally Posted by thelegges (Post 1674197)

If I had to show my children and grands college colors it would cover my entire home. It would include 12 institutions. If I am flying a flag or paint my cart, it because we attended, not on the accomplishments of others

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1674164)

How does one access a persons ability to understand demographics, marketing, economics, human resources? Some people would say that not having to work today may be a good indicator of their successful understanding of the world of business. Living a satisfying life with friends and family and travel might be another. Most people here are not college educated but do not think that they are not intelligent and well read and very up on things and successful by most criteria..

The Villages is different than many other places in this world with similar demographics. It is a successful small city run as a successful private business. It is a triumph of capitalism by a family who is not at all attempting to look important or chic or powerful.

One of the very hallmarks of this place is it's lack of pretense by most people. Many, many people could live in much more expensive homes than they do. Most people do not care how much or how little their friends have. At the square a bus driver will spend the evening with the CEO of a large company and both may not notice the difference between them, but more than that each has a lovely time. Yes.

I say this. MOST people who live here in The Villages who are in their seventies came from not much money. Sometimes NO car in their youth. The majority of these seventy year olds who live here could not afford college or dance lessons or piano lessons when they were young. They still live carefully and do not come close to spending themselves out. Living off another or the charity of another is a terrible thought to them. They won't be doing go fund me's even if they are in dire need.

There are those who are exceptions, but I think that The Villages is a wonderful place because of it wealth of hard working people who come here to live like millionaires with quite a few who have become millionaires. But they aren't telling.

Originally Posted by Jazuela (Post 1674207)

So Gracie, tell us all in your infinite wisdom of someone who has lived in the Villages and grew up during a time when a top university cost around $15,000 per year including room and board, when gas was around $30 cents for the "hi-test" and the USO was jitterbugging their way through the war, when there was no minimum wage, but the average weekly paycheck for those men who DID work for a living (since most women did NOT work for a living), covered food, clothing, shelter...where men were the breadwinners and women kept the house clean and her womb full.

where will the resources come from to staff all the new businesses in the area, in 2019?

In a world where a woman who actually wants to stay home with the kids while dad brings home the bacon is a luxury that most families can't afford, where a year a a top university will cost around $80k or more, where gas continues battling $4/hour, and minimum wage might pay half the rent, and no utilities?

Originally Posted by billethkid (Post 1674247)

Since we are so far off topic I guess I will jump in.
Back in our day we did not need $10 per pack cigarettes.

We did not need a $50 per month data plan for our $400 smart phone.

$200 sneakers! $100 jeans!?

A new(er) car was never in the equation.

Just to name a few.

Today it takes more than one job to fulfill the wants of individuals. The needs (real needs) are at a whole different level.

Comparing then and now is comparing a grape to a water melon!!

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1674227)

The resources to staff all of the new businesses will be drawn by the businesses themselves. A rising tide lifts all ships. People seeking jobs will seek the new businesses.

Originally Posted by Jazuela (Post 1674260)

Which people? Where will they live, where will they come from, what will they do when they're not working? Which people will be attracted enough to these jobs, AND qualified to accept them, AND in a financial position to afford them, that these businesses will draw employees?

And don't forget the criteria here, because it's real:

1. Seniors relying on social security must either earn more than their social security check, OR work very few hours. So the jobs need to be either REALLY GOOD high paying full time jobs, OR really crappy low-paying part time jobs, if their target employee is a senior on social security.

2. Non-seniors who are healthy enough to work these jobs, will need health care. If they are being subsidized, then working will immediately cause their premiums to rise, and might disqualify them from any subsidies at all. So if the target potential unemployed person seeking work is someone who qualifies for subsidies, the jobs need to either a) come with comprehensive health care or b) pay enough to cover the employee's full cost of premiums on top of paying the rent/mortgage utility bills taxes etc.

So again: where will these resources - these potential employees come from? Who will they be?

Originally Posted by billethkid (Post 1673641)

At it's current level it is very difficult for retail/commercial/restaurants/service companies to get sufficient people to staff the businesses that serve the needs of residents of TV. Now add all the future businesses as TV continues it's expansion South.

There is not sufficient affordable housing. There is a limit to how far folks are willing to drive to get here to work.

One of the negative side effects is compromised selectivity when looking for the best of the best.
Another is that businesses ability to replace currently unacceptable performing employees.

More and more job opportunities to come....insufficient work force to fill the current jobs.

How to attract and maintain "good" help!?!

Originally Posted by Jazuela (Post 1674271)

So then Gracie, your answer to the actual question being asked in the original post - which I've quoted above is:

you don't know. Which is in agreement with me, because I don't think it will be easy to attract "good help" to businesses in the Villages in a market of "the lowest unemployment rates in history" (according to some in the federal government), in an area comprised primarily of senior retirees who have little interest in returning to the work force, in an area with insufficient low income housing to shelter people wanting to enter the work force but needing to support themselves and their families, and not wanting to substitute entitlements for "thoughts and prayers."

Originally Posted by Jazuela (Post 1674260)

Which people? Where will they live, where will they come from, what will they do when they're not working? Which people will be attracted enough to these jobs, AND qualified to accept them, AND in a financial position to afford them, that these businesses will draw employees?

And don't forget the criteria here, because it's real:

1. Seniors relying on social security must either earn more than their social security check, OR work very few hours. So the jobs need to be either REALLY GOOD high paying full time jobs, OR really crappy low-paying part time jobs, if their target employee is a senior on social security.

2. Non-seniors who are healthy enough to work these jobs, will need health care. If they are being subsidized, then working will immediately cause their premiums to rise, and might disqualify them from any subsidies at all. So if the target potential unemployed person seeking work is someone who qualifies for subsidies, the jobs need to either a) come with comprehensive health care or b) pay enough to cover the employee's full cost of premiums on top of paying the rent/mortgage utility bills taxes etc.

So again: where will these resources - these potential employees come from? Who will they be?

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore (Post 1674170)

Would love to see some type of proof or facts, that even MOST Villagers...came from 'poor' backgrounds.

Broad-brush statements can be made by anyone with just an opinion and an agenda (and make proclamations, pretending to speak for MOST others), but require actual proof...to have even a scintilla of credibility.

It's boring at best, completely deceiving at worst, having someone drone on about how their anecdotal experiences...somehow apply to most other people. :ohdear:

Originally Posted by Aces4 (Post 1674183)

I agree with Gracie. The incivility on this forum makes me wonder how many here have any education.

Originally Posted by Jazuela (Post 1674260)

1. Seniors relying on social security must either earn more than their social security check, OR work very few hours. So the jobs need to be either REALLY GOOD high paying full time jobs, OR really crappy low-paying part time jobs, if their target employee is a senior on social security.

Originally Posted by Aloha1 (Post 1674288)

Huh? This comment makes no sense. If you are already getting Social Security, you can work as much or little as you want and it has NO effect on your monthly SS payment. Therefore to work or not to work is an individual choice. Some folks like to bag groceries at Publix because it gets them out and around others and it's a low stress way to make extra income.

Originally Posted by Boomer (Post 1674295)

Actually, there is more to it. It is not as simple as what was said in the quote above.

The quote above applies only to those who choose to wait until reaching full SS age before collecting.

Those who choose to collect SS at 62, or somewhere before their full SS age, have to calculate earned income limitations should they decide to work. That is because SS benefits are reduced by $1 for every $2 earned over a certain limit. The earned income limit for 2019 is $17,640. ($1470 per month)

Originally Posted by Jazuela (Post 1674335)

Not just those who "choose" to get SS at age 62 but those whose jobs, companies, departments were eliminated when you're almost 62, and starting over in the work force after over 20 years at the same job, when you were planning on retiring in a few years anyway, is not practical or pragmatic. Sometimes "early retirement" isn't a choice.

Originally Posted by Boomer (Post 1674341)

You are right, Jazuela. (I chose the wrong verb. “Choose” in this circumstance is loaded with the wrong connotation.)

What you are talking about is absolutely true. It just happened to someone we know. And to heap insult upon injury, though he is close to Medicare age, his wife is 3 years behind him, making the scramble for healthcare awful It was obvious age-discrimination, but the big companies have the big legal departments.

Originally Posted by Velvet (Post 1673827)

Yes, I was a bit taken aback too. I thought New Jersey must pay their teacher’s well.

Originally Posted by Boomer (Post 1674341)

You are right, Jazuela. (I chose the wrong verb. “Choose” in this circumstance is loaded with the wrong connotation.)

What you are talking about is absolutely true. It just happened to someone we know. And to heap insult upon injury, though he is close to Medicare age, his wife is 3 years behind him, making the scramble for healthcare awful.

It was obvious age-discrimination, but the big companies have the big legal departments.