The Best Degrees for Next Generation Jobs

The Millennial Generation – roughly defined as those currently in their 20s – has been hit particularly hard by today’s struggling economy. The national unemployment rate is in double-digit territory, right at 10.0 percent, but the rate for those in their 20s is even higher – currently standing at 14.8 percent for 20-24 year olds and 10.5 percent for those aged between 25-29.

Given the current economic environment, twenty-somethings are experiencing increased anxiety about choosing the right major that will lead to the right career, according to Jordan Goldman, CEO of Unigo.com , an online resource for college information.

CNBC.com asked Goldman for his predictions of the hottest sectors and careers for the next generation and which majors can best prepare students to fill these jobs.

Click ahead to see Goldman’s list of hottest sectors, majors and careers.

By Brooke Sopelsa
Posted 16 Dec 2009

Sector: Health Care
Under President Obama’s health care proposals, millions of additional people will have access to health care. Goldman expects this, along with advances in medical technology, will contribute to an “explosion of jobs” in all medical specialties.

Associated Majors: Biology, Public Health, Health Information Technology, Pharmacy, Nursing

Hot Jobs For Growth: Genetic Counselor, Medical and Public Health Social Worker, Registered Nurse, Clinical Laboratory Technologist, Home Care Aid

Sector: Business
"There will be a great demand for consultants and business development specialists as US companies rush in to work with foreign firms, execute deals, and carry them through to profitability,” predicted Goldman.

Associated Majors: International Finance, Ecommerce, Business Statistics, Information Resource Management, Financial Support Services

Hot Jobs For Growth: International Consultant, Mergers and Acquisitions Specialist, Strategic Planner, Portfolio Manager, Business Analyst

Sector: Green Collar Jobs
"President Obama has promised to create 5 million green collar jobs. These jobs will go towards a wide variety of initiatives as we tackle cleaning up the environment, controlling global warming, gathering energy from more renewable resources, reducing waste and pollution, installing wind turbines and solar panels, cleaning up public transit, enhancing energy efficiency and overhauling the electrical grid,” said Goldman.

Associated Majors: Environmental Science, Natural Resource Management and Policy, Electromechanical Technology, Natural Resource Economics, Architecture

Hot Jobs For Growth: Sustainability Officer, Renewable Energy Technician, Waste Management Consultant, Sustainable Urban Planner, Geophysicist

Sector: Finance
"Although the ailing banking and financial sectors will contract in the short term, in the future the need for bright and creative economists – and the opportunities for all financial-related fields – will rebound and grow to offer lucrative employment,” said Goldman. He predicts business intelligence will be more focused on predictive modeling and offer more real-time analysis.

Associated Majors: Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Investments and Securities, Analysis and Functional Analysis, Financial Planning, Accounting

Hot Jobs For Growth: Forensic Accountant, Credit Analyst, Private Equity, Management Consultant, Securities and Commodities Agent

Sector: Advanced Medical Research
"Over the next two decades, medicine will change from a reactive mode – where doctors wait for people to get sick – to a preventative mode, where medical researchers can prevent you from ever getting sick in the first place,” said Goldman. He expects growth in “personalized” medicine that focuses on the role of genes and the environment, breakthroughs in common diseases due to “systems biology” and more rapid drug discovery and development.

Associated Majors: Biotechnology, Bioinformatics, Cell Biology and Anatomical Sciences, Molecular Pharmacology, Laboratory Technology

Hot Jobs For Growth: Robotics Technician, Nanotechnologist, Simulation Engineer,
Synthetic Biologist, Gene Screener

Sector: Digital Space
"The digital space is transforming every aspect of the workplace and our lives, and jobs in this sector are booming,” said Goldman. He sees strong future growth in digital networks, virtual worlds and robotics.

Associated Majors: Computer Science, Computational Mathematics, Game Design and Development, Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, Data Processing Technology

Hot Jobs for Growth: Interface Designer, Mobile Application Developer, Content Curator, Cyber Security Specialist, Casual Game Developer

Sector: Automotive
"While automobile production is currently dwindling, future demand will exponentially increase for designers and engineers to create the next generation of hybrid and energy-efficient cars,” said Goldman. Goldman predicts auto companies will face far more stringent requirements and standards for energy efficiency in the future.

Associated Majors: Transportation and Highway Engineering, Environmental Science, Natural Resource Management and Policy, Drafting and Design, Industrial Safety Technology

Hot Jobs For Growth: Energy Efficiency Manager, Automotive Field Technician Specialist, Industrial Production Manager, Mechanical Engineer, Energy Conservation Engineer

Corporate Taxes and their affects on price of goods/services.

http://www.finweb.com/taxes/are-most-corporate-tax-hikes-passed-on-to-consumers.html

Health care and National debt

Here are interesting videos discussing the health care costs and the national debt.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1337157284&play=1

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1337163453&play=1

Who Really Pays

Extracted below is a current article on the 3 health care bills currently working their way through the Senate and House. Just do a quick read and look at those fees/taxes/penalties the health care industry will pay? I'd ask anyone to rationalize what happens to those fees etc. once paid by companies. I suggest most will end up being paid by 'we the consumer' of health care in one fashion or another. a. One way we'll pay may be through lower dividends paid out by the companies to retirement fund holders/investors/me/you, b. two higher charges for health services to consumers, c. three fewer services to the consumer, d. four less capital investment that makes the providers more efficient/effective providers, or e. four lower profit which also will contribute to item four. The bottom line is that 'We The Consumer" will pay the fees which should be described as INDIRECT TAXES on US. Give me a break, do we really want to spend more money on health care?

"Quote" House Democratic, House GOP and Senate Democratic health care bills compared

By Erica Werner and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press Writers
On 8:25 pm EST, Saturday November 7, 2009

House version:

There are also more than $400 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid; a new $20 billion fee on medical device makers; $13 billion from limiting contributions to flexible spending accounts; sizable penalties paid by individuals and employers who don't obtain coverage; and a mix of other corporate taxes and fees.
REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYERS: Employers must provide insurance to their employees or pay a penalty of 8 percent of payroll.

Senate version:

Fees on insurance companies, drug makers, medical device manufacturers. Tax levied on insurance companies, equal to 40 percent of total premiums paid on insurance plans costing more than $8,000 annually for individuals and $21,000 for families. But that number may rise to $23,000. Retirees over age 55 and people in high-risk professions may be allowed to have somewhat more valuable plans before they're taxed. Cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. A fee on employers whose workers receive government subsidies to help them pay premiums. Fines on people who fail to purchase coverage. "End-Quote"

Executive Compensation and TARP funds

There are a number of companies that took TARP funds and from a percentage of a company's capital view effectively is owned by the government, 51% or more of the capital is held by Uncle Sam. Executive pay for those companies should come under review and modification by the government, they are the owners. The same rules should apply to companies wherein the government has a minority stake, less than 50%, the stakeholders should determine compensation and who should lead the company based on their ownership percentage. Looking at Citigroup the government owns less than 50% but seems to be able to manage the company the same as if it owned over 50%. This is bewildering to me. What are the rights of the majority owners (stock and bond holders that hold over 50% of the company capital). Why can the government, effectively, push them aside when it comes to compensation or even who should run the company? Bewildering.

I certainly agree that compensation needs to be tied to performance and new rules should be instituted to reward/punish risk and earnings contribution. The idea of claw back based on future results appears to be unmanageable. What happens if the employee leaves etc.? I favor a compensation plan where the bonus is spread across future years based on when the results will be realized, this might be 3, 10 or more years. The bonus an employee receives each year should be weighted wherein the payout percentage in the latter years is heaviest and in the early year(s) far less. This provides time to understand if the investment strategy has proven itself out/failed. Tracking this for say the top few hundred investment pros/executives will be hell to manage and cost some money but will need to be done.

Since when did insurance companies become 'THE' solution for all of the health care issues?

It seems in the past an insurance company role was to assess risk and based on the results, established policy coverage terms, set prices and issue policies. This resulted in the insurance company receiving premiums and making payments, as required, to the policy holder. Insurance companies weren't seen as 'the' most important player in 'minimizing' the policy holder risks....nope...the policy holder was held accountable for minimizing risk.

Today the health care discussions are focused on what is wrong with health insurance companies. These companies are, and should be, criticized for their policies on 'pre-existing conditions' and always pushing back on claims before making payments. I also wonder when they became the experts on our health care experience so that we hold them responsible for correcting the inefficiencies? It is bewildering to me how they ended up in this role and whether they should have the role, I think not. Heck, when it come to health care reform I'd just like to get a consolidated bill from the labs, doctors, technicians etc. for diagnosis and treatment for a health issue.

Why do business taxes make sense?

It seems logical to me that if we raise revenue through business taxes, new or current, that the majority of that tax just comes back to 'a' consumer in higher prices for the business service/product. It also seems true that by raising the cost of the business service/product they become less competitive on the world scene, likely resulting in lost business which than may translate into a loss of US jobs. In either case 'we' pay. What am I missing?