For the past 17 years I have apparently had a "green job" and didn't know it. I was working "green" before "green" was cool. For the past 17 years I have worked as a wholesale and retail buyer, which is classified by the Obama regime as a "green job" along with financial advisers, reporters and others.


Are you a financial adviser? You may not know it, but you've got a green job. Are you a wholesale buyer? You've got a green job, too. (http://townhall.com/columnists/ByronYork/2010/09/27/administration_inflates_green_jobs_numbers) Or maybe you're a newspaper reporter. You, too, have a green job -- at least according to the Obama administration.

For months, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley has been pushing the administration to substantiate its claims of having created nearly 200,000 green jobs. More fundamentally, Grassley has asked Labor Secretary Hilda Solis to state clearly what a green job is. So far, he hasn't gotten an answer.

Now, Grassley has learned that, in lieu of a settling on a straightforward definition of a green job, the administration has adopted an extraordinarily broad description of such jobs that could include not only financial advisers, wholesale buyers and reporters but also public-relations specialists, marketing managers and many more occupations that have nothing to do with protecting the environment.

If federal money has created any of those jobs, then the administration can claim to have created a green job.

Last June, Grassley sent Solis a letter questioning an administration request for public input on the definition of a green job. Grassley dryly noted that the request came after the government had already spent hundreds of millions of stimulus dollars on green jobs. Given that the administration couldn't nail down just what a green job is, Grassley asked Solis how she determined where those hundreds of millions of dollars went.

In response, Assistant Labor Secretary Jane Oates told Grassley that the department's Bureau of Labor Statistics is "working to develop a definition for green-job sectors and jobs." Oates also noted that the department has "supported occupational research that begins to define green jobs." She specifically suggested he look at work done by a Labor Department project called the Occupational Information Network, also known as O*NET.

So Grassley's staff checked out O*NET and found extensive listings of jobs that could be classified, for government purposes, as "green." The list includes "arbitrators, mediators, and conciliators," "financial analysts," "financial quantitative analysts," "investment underwriters," "marketing managers," "personal financial advisers," "public-relations specialists," "wholesale and retail buyers" and "reporters and correspondents."

Who knew it was so easy to be green? And the O*NET? This not the United States of O*merica.

A link to the Onet source would have been nice, can you dig one up?

For the past 17 years I have apparently had a "green job" and didn't know it. I was working "green" before "green" was cool. For the past 17 years I have worked as a wholesale and retail buyer, which is classified by the Obama regime as a "green job" along with financial advisers, reporters and others.



Who knew it was so easy to be green? And the O*NET? This not the United States of O*merica.

Well it seems I have worked in a green job most of my working life, but I was also green before green was cool, building a passive solar house and using solar water heating back in the 80's. What I know is this; like kermit, it's not easy being green. This weekend on the mountain it is very un-green, red and black will rule

A link to the Onet source would have been nice, can you dig one up?

I linked my source, if you want another feel free to dig it up yourself.

This Grassley person's article is entirely based on the content he found on the Onet but yet there is no link to the source of his article. Odd.

They don't put links in newspapers either, which is where I read this. They don't furnish links on TV or radio, either. I furnished my source, which is Byron York. He furnished his source, Sen. Charles Grassley, whose sources are Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, Assistant Labor Secretary Jane Oates and O*NET.

If you need more sources than that, dig them up yourself. I've furnished my share, prove them wrong.

What is there to prove wrong? An opinion piece based on absent data.

This Grassely person is a US Senator. It is very easy to trace this back to an article by Byron York in the 'Washington Examiner'.
That Sen Grassely has indeed been trying to get the Obots to substantiate their claim can be confirmed by the fact that Sen Grassely linked the article on his official web site :
http://grassley.senate.gov/about/upload/ICYMI-Washington-Examiner-9-24-10-Obama-team-uses-flimflammery-to-inflate-job-numbers.pdf

Further proof is found on his web site in the letter he sent the Obots.
Article (http://grassley.senate.gov/news/Article.cfm?customel_dataPageID_1502=29046)

http://grassley.senate.gov/about/upload/2010-09-23-Letter-to-DOL.pdf

If the Obots are claiming they've created Green Jobs then they should be able to substantiate it. But this is just another abstract like 'jobs saved '.

What's an "obot"?

NK is only interested in disrupting the discussion, not adding to it, so here is my "green job" from O*NET:


Updated 2010
Green Occupation
Summary Report for:
13-1022.00 - Wholesale and Retail Buyers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/13-1022.00), Except Farm Products

Buy merchandise or commodities, other than farm products, for resale to consumers at the wholesale or retail level, including both durable and nondurable goods. Analyze past buying trends, sales records, price, and quality of merchandise to determine value and yield. Select, order, and authorize payment for merchandise according to contractual agreements. May conduct meetings with sales personnel and introduce new products.

Sample of reported job titles: Buyer, Trader, Mechandiser, Procurement Specialist, Category Manager, Merchandise Manager, Product Manager, Purchasing Manager

Tasks


* Use computers to organize and locate inventory, and operate spreadsheet and word processing software.

* Negotiate prices, discount terms and transportation arrangements for merchandise.

* Manage the department for which they buy.

* Confer with sales and purchasing personnel to obtain information about customer needs and preferences.

* Examine, select, order, and purchase at the most favorable price merchandise consistent with quality, quantity, specification requirements and other factors.

* Analyze and monitor sales records, trends and economic conditions to anticipate consumer buying patterns and determine what the company will sell and how much inventory is needed.

* Set or recommend mark-up rates, mark-down rates, and selling prices for merchandise.

* Authorize payment of invoices or return of merchandise.

* Interview and work closely with vendors to obtain and develop desired products.

* Conduct staff meetings with sales personnel to introduce new merchandise.

Any questions, NK?

I've been librarian for 30 years. Ain't nothing greener than that.

They cut down trees for books .

Question... are libraries lending ;or are they going to be able to lend e-books ?

I'm sorry, librarian (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/25-4021.00)is not in the green economy sector, it doesn't have the "green" logo.

Update for ex: Did a search for "pot smoker" (http://online.onetcenter.org/find/quick?s=pot+smoker) and the O*NET returned 179 hits, including one with "bright outlook" in the green sector, Environmental Science and Protection Technicians, Including Health. It looks like thanks to Obamacare and his green initiative there's a big future as a pot smoker in the health care industry.

I'm sorry, librarian (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/25-4021.00)is not in the green economy sector, it doesn't have the "green" logo.
It's going electronic now -- ebooks, video games, DVDs, computer stations, lots of programs for adults and kids. No one reads paper books any longer (or soon won't be).

I want to borrow ebooks for a Kindle . Is that in place now ?

I want to borrow ebooks for a Kindle . Is that in place now ?very few place are ready for that yet. Their IT infrastructure would have to retool to make sure some DRM is in place so the wholesale copying of works isn't done. Here's a good article:
Libraries, Ebooks, and Competition (http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/community/libraryculture/885871-271/libraries_ebooks_and_competition.html.csp)

I want to borrow ebooks for a Kindle . Is that in place now ?
Yup. Many libraries now give patrons the ability to download ebooks from their Web site. (At the end of the loan period, the ebook "disappears" from the patron's reader.) These libraries offer for loan Nooks and Kindles and other ebook readers. Bill Gates (and maybe Jeff Bezos) has offered ebook readers for free to seniors, especially to homebound ones who can then download ebooks for loan or purchase from various Web sites. We considered adding that impetus to our homebound program (but I retired and the effort has, at least temporarily, been shelved).

I think it will be a valuable service. Right now the cost of an Amazon download is competitive to new hardcover purchases ,but I really don't want to pay same for a book that is readily available in public libraries(especially for older books ).

Right now the cost of an Amazon download is competitive to new hardcover purchases
They are? The ones I've seen are significantly cheaper. I'll revisit Amazon and doublecheck.

***ADDED*** A $12 print book has a $1.49 Kindle download. A $15.95 print book has a $5 download. The most expensive Kindle download I saw was for $10-11 (for a print book listed at $40).

Most of the retail outlets I use discount their prices . I would never think of paying the cover price.

Most of the retail outlets I use discount their prices . I would never think of paying the cover price.
You had said, "Right now the cost of an Amazon download is competitive to new hardcover purchases," which is not true, and I checked Amazon to confirm that conclusion. You had said nothing about buying discounted books, remainders, etc.

All I know is Amazon is responsible for a bunch of 'green' jobs - Wholesale and Retail Buyers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/13-1022.00), Supply Chain Managers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/11-9199.04), Truck Drivers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/53-3032.00), Shipping, Receiving, and Traffic Clerks (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/43-5071.00), Sales Representatives (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/41-4011.00), Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/53-7062.00) and more.

All I know is Amazon is responsible for a bunch of 'green' jobs - Wholesale and Retail Buyers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/13-1022.00), Supply Chain Managers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/11-9199.04), Truck Drivers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/53-3032.00), Shipping, Receiving, and Traffic Clerks (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/43-5071.00), Sales Representatives (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/41-4011.00), Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers (http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/53-7062.00) and more.

Can someone enlighten me regarding what is GREEN about cutting down trees to print books and shipping the damn things all over the world

Trees are a renewable resource ,assuming the forests are properly managed .

Big assumption there Tom we have done so well managing the Amazon and indonesian rainforest. If I catch your response correctly the book selling industry is a green industry, is there some sort of smog over there that is clouding your thinking, perhaps it's called GOP? Do you honestly think paper making is a green industry? Here's a primer on green industry, a little different to the BO definitions but
http://logistics.about.com/od/greensupplychain/a/newgreenind.htm

I can't speak to how the rest of the world manages their forests. The US is a net carbon sink ,and a major reason for that is forest management that includes logging .

I can't speak to how the rest of the world manages their forests. The US is a net carbon sink ,and a major reason for that is forest management that includes logging .

Yes well done but 5% of anything is still 5%, in other words not likely to have much impact

Who knew it was so easy to be green? And the O*NET? This not the United States of O*merica.Hello Steve:

Yeah, it's really interesting what you can do when you change the meaning of words. You can take a dirty job and call it green... You can torture people and call it enhanced interrogation... You know, stuff that government does...

excon

Yeah, it's really interesting what you can do when you change the meaning of words. You can take a dirty job and call it green..

I agree, terms like "global climate disruption," "overseas contingency operations," '"man-caused disaster" don't tell the true story. This guy even changed “freedom of religion” to “freedom of worship” for some inexplicabler4 reason so it's no surprise he would label my job a "green job."

Well, back to work. Got to see how many planes and trucks I can get moving today.