Is Klout worth it?

The idea of Klout affecting our ability to find jobs seems like a natural way for HR workers to sift through job applicants quickly, but it can also be a waste of time for both sides to focus on Klout scores. If you are gaming the system and elevating your score, because you perceive a high score as a direct factor in advancement, then HR workers are going to deceive themselves into hiring people on shallow qualifications. HR workers who use Klout score as a factor in hiring someone also end up wasting the time of interviewees who may not be so focused on what their score is, but instead focus on what they do best. In both cases, a company looking to hire a good analyst, engineer or strategist end up hiring Paris Hilton, a person who knows how to market herself better than presidents. No offense to Hilton; she is highly intelligent and knows what public relations is all about, but I wouldn't hire her to write company policy or manage a department. At the same time though, Klout scores is an indicator for how important your opinion is and its analysis can come with surprising insights, which is what is important to look at when one wants to highlight your Klout score; for what reasons do you have that score? A quick glance at that number will only tell you someone tweeted a lot about something and someone is listening. It could be a person who is applying for a position as a communications strategist is a fan about Red Bull and sky diving. It will not say this person is influential about physics, chemistry or corporate communication or give an assessment of the value of the articles, if any, this person has written, which is often a more accurate indicator of this persons value to any given company.

Is gaming Klout worth it? Not if you do not have the substance to back up the score.

Mississippi - Immigration Law and Southern Poverty Center's Reaction

Mississippi has recently passed a bill aimed at expelling illegal immigrants from the state. The bill specifically voids contracts illegal immigrants signed illegally, bars state held organizations from any business transactions such as issuing drivers licenses and requires the police to check the immigration status of all detainees. It has so far been compared to similar laws in Arizona and Alabama.

The uproar about laws in Arizona and Alabama was about how Arizona was opening the door for police to racially profile people for immigration status and how Alabama was ripping apart families. Southern Poverty Law Center has already promised to sue the state, which may gain some concessions from the state in settlement. I am not holding my breath though.

I view these laws as reactionary to the recession of the economy. As growth stops and an economy shrinks, room for people to put down roots and start a life becomes limited. The space available becomes scarce and fierce competition for what is there starts. If there was growth and prosperity, I doubt these laws would ever be on the table unless there was a serious and threatening issue with criminal activity. However, in a move to protect their own jobs and income, the electorate has decided to start expelling those it can from even competing in a free market.

The Public Relations aspect of Southern Poverty's promise will put it on the wrong side of many in Mississippi who are struggling. They are looking for relief from a poor economy to save their homes and feed their families. People view illegal immigration as a serious contributing factor to their current situation and they are partly correct. Immigration increases competition for what is available on the Job Market.

However, the electorate still does not have the right to abuse illegal immigrants to preserve its own status. As the adage goes, Democracy is two wolves and a lamp deciding what's for dinner; Liberty is a well armed lamb. Southern Poverty in this case is on the side of liberty through law, a principle of our republic and I applaud them for protecting the liberty of the few.

Scandinavia's Job Market

Let me first, for the layman reader, separate the concept of Job Market from Labor Market.
The Job Market can be thought of as a street market, where the supplier, in this case the employer, advertises a product, the job to a customer, the potential employee.
The Labor Market can be thought of as the reverse. Each job seeker is selling him or herself to employers.
The products and services in each market can be lumped together to give a picture of the capabilities and demands of an economy. Each Job Market is competing against other Job Markets to attract the most talented employees to its associated Labor Market. Each Labor Market is competing against other Labor Markets to attract jobs to its associated Job Market.

If you have noticed how the two are interdependent, then you should also see how immigration policy sets up a gate and control for employers and employees entering the market from outside. Denmark's job market is suffering a bit of internal strife at the moment because of actors that wish to restrict immigration and a mismatch between what the Job Market demands and what the Labor Market is offering. Dansk Folke Parti, or the Danish Peoples' Party, is the nationalist party represented in the Danish parliament at the moment. The party has set immigration reform, closing the borders to far more immigrants than before, as a priority for the ruling administration. However, such policy will hamper the Labor Markets ability to fulfill the Job Markets demand and put over qualified or misqualified people in positions that are better suited for people with either on the job training or trade educations.

Currently, the service economy in Denmark is supplied by a highly educated, mostly domestically trained, labor market. 27% have a university or equivalent education. But the Job Market demands employees with basic schooling to fulfill jobs such as garbage man, retirement orderly or janitor. Sourcing people to fill these jobs at the local Labor Market is difficult because few people with a full education are willing to work, what most feel, in a position beneath them. While people strive to the top of commerce and industry, there are too few to support the service economy's activities with basic services. Putting down the gate for immigration will prevent the Labor Market fulling market demands. Yet this also may reveal some of the short comings of the current education policy. Restricting supply will force both markets to adapt to do more with less and perhaps be in a better position for future changes in the global economy.

Sweden on the other hand has an open education policy that ensures the Swedish Job Market's supply of basic service jobs will always be in demand and the Labor Market's supply of new immigrants will be snapped up by the Job Market as second and third generation immigrant families advance themselves and require services. It is a rapid growth, which looks a bit like a bubble...