Let’s Ride! (slowly)

Much of my life’s progress has been delayed due to my strict adherence to rules, whether I understood them or not, and the sacred obedience to authority–ANY authority, meaning: anyone who knew something I did not!

 

What was more disturbing is that I found out there are more aged people like me, than I ever imagined!

I listened to those who were more astute than I, or at least seemingly so, for the credentials we were taught to revere; those who had seniority, and of course, those who held more power than I. What I found was that most of them that counseled me, did so without truly considering my personality, my character, my frailties and my strengths, when they advised me.

If one looks at historical documents of my education and credentials, it is an absolute document, however, the person assessing my credentials is not absolute, but subjective to their own views of such credentials. They advised me from their own perspective, saying they believed I needed more of this or that, or various other types of classes or credentials, because they would note: “educational rhetoric is continually changing, etc.,” and therefore, they would set me always behind my goals and the time at which I thought I would be ready to teach.

                                           
So their advice was not a good fit most of the time, but they were my ‘authorities.’

We could compare it to a person who has had a suit tailored exactly to their bodice, and then someone comes a long in the clothing industry and says, “You should really be wearing a seersucker suit, which is more acceptable to the times–here: you must wear this one.”

But what if the seersucker suit to which they are addressing, fits awkward upon one’s body, and is not conducive to the body at all? This is my argument with “credentials” that are non-specific to the general educational practice, rather than the person’s use of it, or the person’s personality and character skills, in spite of it.

The reason for this rigid assessment, I believe, is that they do not care about the person on any personal level, but they simply want to gain revenue for the schools to pay for professorial and administrative paychecks that are furnished from governmental entities. Meantime, the jobs go to their friends, colleagues, family members, and so forth. So when I am unable to pay loans, they simply get new blood to go to college, with the threat of shortages in each field, so that students believe they will be hired by the time they get out of college. Instead, a number of them will be like me: unable to pay for student loans, being hounded by the student loan lenders, making us ill, and finally having us become criminal to their view, because we begin to disappear.

Let me return to my personal dilemma. I spent too much time tailoring my education to others’ assessment of the general market, rather than my personal life, so that by the time I was finished with my master’s program, no one hired me because I was too old. Further, do not let the law convince you otherwise.

The law regarding discrimination has been created mainly to cover those who do discriminate. They can say they do not discriminate, by handing out the documents that say they are not discriminating, yet they do discriminate. It is a ruse of the worse kind. Most people worry about race, creed, gender or disability.

What is the point of all this discussion? The most discriminated against are the aged. They do not hire them because they are slower, less strong, and do not jump as high as someone younger, without needing a bit of time to process mentally the instruction given to them. On the contrary, many older persons have wisdom of experience, and could benefit younger people, but youth hate being told something they think they know more about by virtue of their credentials!

If there really was no discrimination against older aged people, there would be an appendage to the law of discrimination, which would read that when an aged person is hired, employers will need to allow for their differences (such as a disabled individual) and make accommodations for them in that way.

 

                                                     

 

Thus, the story ends that I am saddled with the grand educational total of loans, of  $150,000, and growing, for the interest rates applied are not stationary. Why would those types of interest rates even be imposed on students of any kind, I do not understand!  My loans started out being about $90,000. Interest allowed from the government, on student education loans, caused those loans to increase.

I can in no way pay them back by the time I die, as I am unemployed, and by now–from the harrassment of the multiple daily phone calls I have received for all these years by the lender, (Navient, in this case) I am gradually becoming more and more disabled with Arthritis, Stress, Fybromialgia (excessive nerve pain and inflammation), and various maladies that are known to be caused by acute stress. It is comparable to PTSD. If only the interest STOPPED, and I would be able to pay what I could (my Social Security check is $500.00 per month) I might at least feel contributive to my situation. I have received notice that I must pay two loans that add to over $2000.00 per month. That would make anyone sick!

 

What I’d like to do is sue the education department for false representation, having been told that teachers are needed, but never hiring me in interviews due to excessive interviewees! It was advertising on television from school like University of Phoenix, and others similar, that created a hoopla about not having enough teachers to hire, because even after I acquired my master’s and credential for teaching, after over 200+ job applications to unified school districts and colleges, I was never hired. Specifically for colleges I was told I need yet MORE credentials to tie to my general education master’s degree.

What a fabricated ruse of a corporate business we’ve conjured. I say  corporate because most corporations are owners of the schools, colleges, well…. just about everything.

I want to see changes made to the law of regarding the discrimination against aged people, to allow them to work, but to allow their differences to be accommodations as is the disabled. They cannot be held to the same standards as young and physically youthful people, because they are not the same.

Otherwise, if the aged are slower than a young person, they will simply write them up and tell them they cannot “keep up” with the others… of COURSE they can’t! Their bodies and minds are heavily laden with years of activity, and while they still need and WANT to be active, our country needs to help them remain intact, by giving them jobs, and expecting those jobs to be less fruitful, but rewarding in t he long run, to our entire country.

I suppose this whole post may seem embittered but that is not the intent. The intent is for people to consider and make a concerted effort to hire aged people, but make accommodations for their “differences.”

The idea that I am touting here, is not in the law, but it should be. I would like to work to make it so. Most older people do not WANT to simply die because they are old; they want to be useful until they die naturally. Why not let them? They may have a wealth of wisdom to impart to the younger generations. As a country I think our greatest weakness is that we have no respect for the elderly. By respect, I don’t mean to tilt  your hat when they walk by, but allow them the same involvement in the work force, if that is what they want, or to be home, if that is what they want, but to just give them such respect that you trust them to make the right decisions toward their ends.

Leave a Reply