Home Blog Page 2

The 30 Fastest-Growing Jobs And Careers For The Next 10 Years


If you are starting out your career or have been in the workforce for a while, it’s important to look into the future. Hockey star Wayne Gretzky famously said, “I skate to where the puck is going, not where it has been.” It’s the same way with your career. You  need to look forward. Anticipate the emerging trends. Figure out how you can leverage your skills to pivot toward a fast-growing career instead of being stuck with a job that’s going nowhere.

I write about the monthly jobs report compiled by the United States Department of Labor. Every month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) shows how many new jobs were created or lost. The data captures a moment in time. This division, as you can imagine, has access to a wealth of information and statistics about jobs and careers. 

While most economists, Wall Street professionals and nerdy guys like me pay attention to the monthly jobs reports, the BLS has some compelling reading for proactive people who strongly desire to advance their careers. It has put together lists of the fastest-growing jobs and careers. Additionally, the BLS shares how much these roles pay.

Before we go into the jobs, let’s look at the sectors that offer rapid growth. To start with, the BLS anticipates that overall employment in the U.S. will grow from “153.5 million to 165.4 million over the 2020–30 decade, an increase of 11.9 million jobs.” 

Employment in the restaurant, bar, travel, hotel and what’s referred to as the “leisure and hospitality sector,” as a catch-all, is projected to increase at the fastest rate. This will occur in response to the the country’s reopening and recovery. During the pandemic, workers in the leisure and hospitality space were one of first to lose their jobs or get furloughed. Now, due to nearly insatiable demand, the jobs have come roaring back. The bounceback has been so enormous that restaurants and businesses complain they can’t find enough workers. Large corporations, such as Walmart, Amazon and Target, have had to respond by offering sign-on bonuses, increases in wages and free tuition to entice people to join their companies.

As you can imagine, in the current and eventually post-pandemic environment, healthcare will take precedence. Understandably, concerns about our health and safety will propel the healthcare and social assistance sector’s continued growth. This space is “projected to add the most jobs of all industry sectors, about 3.3 million jobs over 2020–30.” 

Within healthcare, employment in the individual and family services industry is projected to increase the fastest, with an annual growth rate of 3.3%. Some of the fast-growing healthcare occupations include nurse practitioners, physical therapist assistants and physician assistants. 

A rising demand for the care of an aging Baby-Boomer population, longer life expectancies and continued growth in the number of patients with chronic conditions will call for a steady need for healthcare providers.

Technological advancements are expected to keep growing at a fast pace. We see an acceleration in artificial intelligence, robotics, self-driving vehicles, cryptocurrencies, gaming, virtual reality, online collaborative video platforms and the metaverse. There will be needs across the gamut, ranging from large tech giants to scrappy startups. As business continues moving online, demand will outstrip the supply of suitable job candidates. 

According to the BLS, “Computer and mathematical occupations are expected to see fast employment growth as strong demand is expected for IT security and software development, in part due to increased prevalence of telework spurred by the Covid-19 pandemic.” The downside is that technological changes facilitating increased automation are expected to result in declining employment for office and administrative support occupations.

Tangentially, there will be a large need for people to interpret the vast amount of data to help business leaders make smart, informed decisions. Demand for new products, such as the Internet of Things, and for analyzing and interpreting large datasets are also expected to contribute to fast employment growth for statisticians, information security analysts and data scientists.

We are likely to see a retirement boom. This will open up opportunities for younger workers. Demographics show that by 2030, Baby Boomers will be at least 65 years old. As they age, many will start retiring or leave the workforce. The BLS states, “The increasing share of people ages 65 and older contributes to a projected labor force growth rate that is slower than much of recent history, as well as a continued decline in the labor force participation rate, because older people have lower participation rates compared with younger age groups.”

Other trends, such as moving toward environmentally friendly initiatives, the massive adoption of pets during the pandemic, a mental health crisis, working from home and the desire to improve our health and lives, will create all sorts of new opportunities.  

Here are the jobs that the U.S. Labor Department and BLS project will be the fastest growing jobs going into 2030, along with the median annual pay:

  • Wind turbine service technicians: $56,230
  • Nurse practitioners: $111,680
  • Solar photovoltaic installers: $46,470
  • Statisticians: $92,270
  • Physical therapist assistants: $59,770
  • Information security analysts: $103,590
  • Home health and personal care aides: $27,080
  • Medical and health services managers: $104,280
  • Data scientists and mathematical science occupations, all other: $98,230
  • Physician assistants: $115,390
  • Epidemiologists: $74,560
  • Logisticians: $76,270
  • Speech-language pathologists: $80,480
  • Animal trainers: $31,520
  • Computer numerically controlled tool programmers: $57,740
  • Genetic counselors: $85,700
  • Crematory operators and personal care and service workers, all other: $28,420
  • Operations research analysts: $86,200
  • Actuaries: $111,030
  • Health specialties teachers, postsecondary: $99,090
  • Forest fire inspectors and prevention specialists: $42,150
  • Interpreters and translators: $52,330
  • Athletic trainers: $49,860
  • Respiratory therapists: $62,810
  • Substance abuse, behavioral disorder, and mental health counselors: $47,660
  • Food preparation and serving related workers, all other: $27,080
  • Nursing instructors and teachers, postsecondary: $75,470
  • Woodworkers, all other: $33,630
  • Phlebotomists: $36,320
  • Software developers and software quality assurance analysts and testers: $110,140

This is age when Americans say they plan to retire


Kieferpix | iStock | Getty Images

Many Americans are eager to retire. Yet one big concern about their golden years looms over them – whether or not they will have financial security.

The average age at which Americans say they plan to retire is 62, according to a recent survey from Natixis Investment Managers.

The anticipated retirement age, however, varied by generation.

The youngest cohort, Generation Y, currently ages 25 to 40, plans to retire at an average age of 59. For Generation X, now 41 to 56, the average age is 60. Baby boomers, meanwhile, who are currently ages 57 to 75, indicated they plan to work longer, with an average expected retirement age of 68.

That’s as 83% of non-retired U.S. investors said they are confident they will be financially secure in retirement. That includes 88% of Gen Y, 82% of Gen X and 79% of baby boomers.

Even so, 41% of respondents said achieving financial security in retirement is “going to take a miracle,” the survey found. That sentiment was highest among Gen Y, with 46%, and Gen X, 45%, while baby boomers came in with 30%.

While there is a general sense of confidence, the results show there are a number of questions people have with regard to retirement planning, said Dave Goodsell, executive director at Natixis’ Center for Investor Insight.

Those questions include: When am I going to retire? How much money am I going to need? How long will the money need to last?

“There are a lot of things that cause nagging doubt for people,” Goodsell said.

The survey included 750 U.S. investors who had a median of $450,000 in investable assets.

The U.S. results are part of a global survey of 8,550 individual investors. Notably, the average retirement age for that broader group around the world was also 62.

The U.S. results show the older people get, the more retirement is elusive, Goodsell said.

For baby boomers, the 68 number may also be prompted by a key threshold for Social Security, he said.

Age 62 is the year at which people first become eligible for Social Security benefits. However, by claiming early, they will receive permanently reduced monthly benefits. If instead they wait until full retirement age – up to age 67, depending on when someone was born – they will get 100% of the benefits they earned.

More from The New Road to Retirement:

Here’s a look at more retirement news.

Research from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College shows that Americans mostly tend to claim retirement benefits either around 62 or their full retirement age as defined by Social Security.

Delaying retirement past age 62 not only has advantages with regard to delaying Social Security benefits. It can also enable someone to wait until Medicare eligibility age – generally 65 – and continue to earn income.

Yet not everyone has a choice as to when they retire, which can happen unexpectedly due to unforeseen health or career circumstances, such as a late career layoff, Goodsell said.

The key to is to prepare for what all circumstances can bring.

“There’s a lot that can be done to educate individuals on what their investment options are, how to go about planning for retirement and how to put the pieces together,” he said.

Report Highlights Growing Economic Crisis and Statewide Network Responds, Promoting Worker-Ownership Solution


KENT, Ohio, Sept. 14, 2021 /PRNewswire/ — Eighteen months into the Covid-19 pandemic and recession, Ohio is facing an unprecedented wave of business-owner retirements, precarious conditions for workers, and severe wealth inequality, according toBuilding Legacies, a report released today by the Ohio Worker Ownership Network and the Ohio Employee Ownership Center at Kent State University.

To address these huge economic problems, government bodies at the state and local levels must help retiring business owners sell their companies to their workers, saving jobs and maintaining legacies. A new network of loan funds has launched around the state to support the transition to worker-owned businesses.

3 Daunting Economic Challenges

As detailed in Building Legacies report, Ohio is currently facing 3 key economic challenges:

  1. Baby-Boomer Business-Owners Set to Retire in Massive Numbers
    In Ohio, baby boomers own 54% of businesses, representing 94,000 firms employing 2.6 million workers. Though more than half of these business owners plan to retire in the next decade, 80% do not have a formal succession plan. And, when put on the market, only 1 in 5 businesses actually sell.
  2. Workers Face Low Wages and Instability
    Today half of workers aged 18-64 earn a median annual income of only $17,950. Poorly paid, insecure employment is growing, and women and people of color are disproportionately represented in low-wage industries.
  3. Wealth Inequality Spikes to New Highs
    Since 1980, the share of income going to the bottom 50% of earners has halved, while the share going to the top 1% has doubled. 

The Worker-Ownership Solution

Why embrace the worker-owned business model? Research shows clear advantages compared to conventional companies:

  • Employee advantage: Employees at worker-owned businesses have higher wages and better benefits.
  • Company advantage: Worker-owned companies are more profitable and productive.
  • Community advantage: Worker-owned businesses are less likely to close, relocate, or lay off workers during downturns.

New Funds Support Worker-Ownership

To create a fairer and more resilient economy, loan funds have launched across Ohio to help retiring business owners sell their companies to their workers, thereby building a foundation for sustainable wealth. The following are now offering loans to transition existing businesses to worker ownership:

A statewide network is also providing technical assistance to facilitate the transition to worker-ownership.Co-op Cincy,Co-op Dayton,Evergreen Cooperatives, and theOEOC all offer these services.

Actions Needed

Building Legacies, the report released today by the Network and the OEOC, details key actions that are needed to support worker ownership in Ohio. State and local governments, and economic development organizations around Ohio—should take the following steps:

  • Invest money to assist in the transition of businesses to worker-ownership
  • Engage businesses that anchor communities, educating them about succession planning and the worker-ownership option
  • Partner with Ohio Worker Ownership Network members to support transitions and give technical assistance

 Ohio Worker Ownership Network

In 2020, ten organizations from across Ohio formed the Ohio Worker Ownership Network (OWoN) with the aim of supporting worker-owned businesses. OWoN increases awareness about the benefits of worker-ownership among business owners, economic development agencies, officials, and the public. OWoN also connects stakeholders while offering training and assistance with transitions.

OWoN is composed ofCo-op Cincy, theOhio Employee Ownership Center at Kent State University,Co-op Dayton,The Fund for Employee Ownership,The Center for the Creation of Cooperation,Cleveland Owns, theCFAES Center for Cooperatives at Ohio State University, theJunction Economic Transformation Center,Co-op Columbus, and Co-op Nelsonville.

Media contact:
Michael Palmieri
[email protected]

SOURCE Ohio Employee Ownership Center at Kent State University

BofA study: Latinos are main reason N.J. population, workforce has continued to grow


The 2021 New Jersey Latino GDP Report released by Bank of America on Thursday spelled out the significant impact Latinos have on the Gross Domestic Product of the state and the country.

The impact, however, goes deeper than that. The study showed Latinos are making strong and consistent contributions to New Jersey’s population and labor force.

According to a report from the Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA — which looked deeply at New Jersey and seven other key states — if it were it not for Latinos, both the population and the labor force of New Jersey would have contracted from 2010-18.

During that time, Latinos added an average of 37,500 people per year to the state’s population, while the population of non-Latinos shrank by an average of 17,500 people per year.

During that same time, the number of Latinos in the labor force increased by an average of 18,500 workers per year, while the number of non-Latinos shrank by an average of 7,500 workers per year.

The study stressed that the growing importance of labor force growth cannot be overstated.

According to Federal Reserve economists, the number of people retiring in the U.S. is forecast to increase substantially over the next year, peaking in 2022 at close to 350,000 mostly non-Latino baby boomers retiring each month. This dangerous shortage of workers is a demographic crisis that threatens the country’s ability to maintain even modest economic growth.

Latinos appear to be on their way to mitigating this demographic disaster, adding substantial numbers to the population of working age adults and to the labor force, the report’s authors said.

The economic contribution of Latinos in New Jersey, as with U.S. Latinos broadly, is driven by rapid gains in human capital, the study said.

In New Jersey, from 2010-18, Latino educational attainment grew at a rate 3.3 times faster than the educational attainment of non-Latinos. Over those nine years, the Latino labor force participation rate was an average of 5.2 percentage points higher than non-Latinos. In 2018, Latino labor force participation was a full 5.4 percentage points higher.

How 9/11 changed America’s wars and a generation of troops and veterans


It would be very difficult for a generation of service members and veterans who have known nothing but war to comprehend what life in America was like before Sept. 11, 2001.

There was a time from when the Berlin Wall fell to when the World Trade Center’s twin towers fell that the United States appeared to be invincible.

The conflicts fought during the 1990s were relatively quick and mostly decisive, with the notable exception of the U.S. military’s mission to Somalia that resulted in the Battle of Mogadishu later made famous in the book “Black Hawk Down.”

Following the crushing defeat of Saddam Hussein’s forces in the first Gulf War, then-President George H. W. Bush proclaimed to a group of conservative state lawmakers in March 1991, ”By God, we’ve kicked [the] Vietnam syndrome once and for all.”

How 9/11 changed the nature of American war — and how it shaped those who fight it
FILE PHOTO: A US soldier inside his Humvee patrols the highway between the Iraqi Sunni cities of Ramadi and Fallujah, west of Baghdad, 21 November 2004. (Photo credit should read AHMAD AL-RUBAYE/AFP via Getty Images)

With the fall of the Soviet Union later that year, America’s defeat in Vietnam suddenly looked like an anachronistic speed bump on the road to ultimate victory in the Cold War. The U.S. military, which had been greatly strengthened under former President Ronald Reagan, was clearly without peer. Any country insane enough to challenge the United States militarily would be smashed in a matter of weeks, if not days.

Throughout the 1990s, U.S. troops were dispatched to the former Yugoslavia on missions that seemed to underscore America’s military might. NATO’s campaign to assist Kosovar Albanians against the Serbs was conducted entirely from the air. Even though the airstrikes were far from crippling, the notion of ground combat no longer seemed relevant.

The myth of America’s invincibility did not wear off immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks. Initially, the United States was able to rout the Taliban with a handful of special operators and CIA officers backed by overwhelming airpower.

America had seemingly avoided the trap of sending thousands of troops to the “Graveyard of Empires,” and we all had a good laugh at the Russians. 

How 9/11 changed the nature of American war — and how it shaped those who fight it
FILE PHOTO: A soldier with the 82nd Airborne Division watches as a CH-47 Chinook helicopter prepares to land in preparation for the extraction of Afghan and U.S. soldiers on Dec. 29, 2019 in Southeastern Afghanistan. (Photo by Master Sgt. Alejandro Licea.)

Things began to change with the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. This was not the Gulf War, where Americans were awed by grainy television images of smart bombs blowing up targets with God-like accuracy. This became a war of ambushes, roadside bombs, and enemies who did not wear uniforms.

Troops on the ground stacked up to clear rooms as the war devolved into urban fighting. Every trip outside the wire became as suicidal as going over the top in World War I. The term “Improvised Explosive Device” – or “IED” – became synonymous with death and severe injury.

America seemed less awe inspiring as multimillion dollar equipment was destroyed by bombs detonated with 19th Century technology. Eventually, Afghanistan too became a war of IEDs, suicide bombers, terrorists, and invisible wounds.

Advances in technology saved the lives of countless troops who would have died in previous wars, but they also had to endure blast-related injuries that left them in soul-crushing pain. It would take years for the military to acknowledge that service members who survived blasts seemingly unscathed were actually suffering from mild Traumatic Brain Injury.

How 9/11 changed the nature of American war — and how it shaped those who fight it
Army veteran Brad Schwarz has a tattoo on his back with a quote from William Shakespeare’s Henry V as a tribute to fallen friends he served with in Iraq. Schwarz uses a service dog to help him cope with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to his 2008 tour in Iraq. He also has memory loss related to Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and he must walk with a cane because of vertebrae and nerve damage in his back and legs. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

The military and Department of Veterans Affairs gave the Forever War generation dozens of pills – too many to count – to keep them whole. Many washed down their meds with alcohol, a potentially fatal combination. 

Suicide has been the scourge of the Forever Wars. More than 30,000 service members and veterans have died by suicide since Sept. 11, 2001, and that is more than four times the number of troops killed in combat.

The Global War on Terror has been a bleeding wound for much of the world. Since 2001, at least 801,000 people have died across the globe, of which 42% were civilians, a 2019 study by Brown University found.

The enduring legacy of Sept. 11 is how the American concept of war has changed. Wars are no longer quick and easy. They are endless, and while troops deploy to combat zones over and over again, most civilians have no idea who they are fighting or why.

How 9/11 changed the nature of American war — and how it shaped those who fight it
In this May 2, 2021 file photo, a U.S. flag is lowered as American and Afghan soldiers attend a handover ceremony from the U.S. Army to the Afghan National Army, at Camp Antonik, in Helmand province, southern Afghanistan. (Afghan Ministry of Defense Press Office via AP, File)

For those who have taken part in the post Sept. 11 wars, cynicism runs deep. Many veterans took part in the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riot, showing the painful divisions among troops and veterans about whom they trust and which facts they believe.

It will be up to the Forever War generation to begin the healing. Those who have survived have an obligation to succeed where the Baby Boomers failed and stop the United States from sending its sons and daughters into harm’s way for unattainable goals.

Your task will be to prevent future generations from being treated as if they were expendable.

Not getting the Pentagon Run-Down? Sign up here!

More great stories on Task & Purpose

Want to write for Task & Purpose? Learn more here and be sure to check out more great stories on our homepage.

Kennedy: Boomers, the ‘cool’ generation


One night last week I was admiring my new Apple watch when I decided to send a photo to my son in Birmingham, Alabama.

“Like my new watch?” I texted, fishing for a compliment.

“Yeah, that looks cool,” our 19-year-old wrote back.

His text reminded me of a thought that’s been rattling around in my head for awhile, and that is the incredible, everlasting durability of the word “cool.”

Most English modifiers come and go, rarely surviving a generation.

For example, “awesome” is already beginning to sound dated. For Baby Boomers, the use of “awesome” is an affectation anyway. It clearly belongs to Generation X and their Gen Z offspring who have been told of their totally awesome awesomeness since they were wrapped in a hospital blanket.

But cool belongs to Boomers. We own it. And we are passing it down for those who will honor its contributions to society.

By definition, Boomers were born during the mid-20th century at a time when “cool” became what one language expert has called “the most popular slang term in the English language.”

Our parents, the so-called Greatest Generation, were not “cool” people. For example, I never remember my Army sergeant father telling my bank teller mother, “Honey, why don’t you put on that cool new Tom Jones album.”

In a 2014 essay published in Humanities magazine, writer David Skinner notes: “Cool is still cool. The word, the emotional style and that whole flavor of cultural cachet remains ascendant after more than a half century.”

Right on.

According to Skinner, the modern popular usage of “cool” dates to the 1940s and 1950s, but cool has been around since Shakespeare’s time. Which is fitting because Shakespeare was a cool dude. I see you, William Shakespeare, rocking that clipped beard and popped collar.

People have been trying to supplant “cool” for decades, but you can’t kill cool. We’ve cycled through “bad,” “rad,” “gnarly,” “chill,” “dope,” “sic.” But nothing sticks.

Cool has its own shape and attitude. I imagine the two “o’s” in the middle as a pair of smoke rings. A word that tilts its head back and blows smoke rings is impervious to the cycles of hipness.

Too, cool is easy to pronounce. You barely have to move your teeth and lips to say cool, merely raising your tongue to the roof of your mouth to clip the “l” at the end.

some text
File Photo / Author Ian Fleming’s secret agent James Bond (here played by Sean Connery) is the king of cool.

When I think of cool, I imagine Marilyn Monroe, JFK, young Elvis, Michael Jordan, Quincy Jones. In the movie realm, the king of cool is James Bond.

I feel like some of today’s kids are trying to supplant “cool” by bending the temperature metaphor back on itself.

Won’t work.

I don’t think it’s coincidence that the vocabulary of today’s youth trends toward extreme heat. These days things are “hot,” or they are “lit,” or most recently they are simply “fire.”

But, alas, “fire” doesn’t cancel cool any more than paper covers scissors.

So, speaking for Boomers everywhere, we’d appreciate it if the cool kids stopped trying to microwave our favorite word.

Just chill, OK?



Email Mark Kennedy at [email protected]com.

When it comes to social care, politicians need to stop fearing the elderly


Ageing Populations updates

The writer is author of ‘Extra Time: Ten Lessons For Living Longer Better’

Ouch. Almost 20 years after Tony Blair promised to “fix” social care, Boris Johnson has grasped the nettle — and seen his poll ratings fall. How this plays out, for him and for the country, will depend on two things. Can he revolutionise the NHS and social care, not just pump money in? And can he bring the generations together, not push them further apart?

The prime minister has injected new funds into services which primarily support the old, by raising a tax which falls largely on the young. His raid on National Insurance, which takes the UK’s tax burden to a historic high, was devised to tiptoe around the grey vote which skews Conservative. But the early polls suggest that group is not grateful. They don’t Iike tax rises at all, including on their grandchildren.

Politicians are afraid of the old. President Emmanuel Macron has still not managed to raise the French pension age above 62, although the country’s average citizen now lives to 83. In Greece, a top court has forced the government to reverse pension cuts after an outcry. Meanwhile, the Spanish government is paying bribes to persuade people to keep working past 66. In the UK, the Labour leader attacked the prime minister for taxing lower and younger earners but simultaneously insisted he guarantee that no one would ever have to sell their home to pay for care.

These contortions are driven by the growing numbers of over-65s — they make up 20% of the population of those countries I’ve mentioned — and their legendary propensity to vote. The courting of this group in the UK has led to a haphazard accumulation of perks: the free bus pass, the winter fuel allowance and the £10 Christmas bonus for pensioners, introduced as a temporary measure in 1972 but still with us today. The triple-lock on pensions has raced ahead of inflation, taking the average incomes of UK pensioner households past those of working age households for the first time (although one in five pensioners still lives in poverty).

Longer lives and falling birth rates are stretching the social contract to breaking point. For the past 50 years, citizens of industrialised countries have expected that if they worked hard and paid tax, they would get rising living standards, a welfare safety net and a pension. That contract was a powerful expression of social solidarity. But now, there are fewer young people to support older generations. And baby boomers have amassed a growing share of wealth. Households headed by 30-year-olds are now only half as likely to own their own homes as baby boomers were at the same age. 

Property — and the desire to pass it on to one’s children — is a strong undertow in British politics. The house price inflation of the past 20 years, stoked by successive governments, has turned many Englishmen’s homes into castles of unexpected wealth. Home-owners’ determination to fortify these castles against the taxman has been a major obstacle to social care reform. In 2017, Theresa May had to back down, amid howls of outrage, after sensibly proposing to cap the highest costs but ask people to contribute from their estates after death.

The passionate rows within the Conservative party over social care reflect the fear that older voters will resist any assault on their wealth — but also the recognition that many are grandparents, who are deeply concerned about the impact of high borrowing and tax upon future generations. In fact the much-maligned baby boomers are the new “sandwich” generation: standing at the school gate to pick up their grandchildren, acting as the Bank of Mum and Dad, and sometimes caring for their own elderly relatives. In the US, almost a quarter of pre-school infants are cared for by a grandparent and one in ten lives in a household headed by a grandparent. In the UK, unpaid caregivers, often caring for a spouse, save the state more than £10bn a year. 

So politicians may be running scared of a caricature which isn’t entirely accurate. They don’t help by sustaining the myth that 65 is still “old”. We urgently need to update our welfare state to reflect the fact that many older people are still working — and should not be exempt from National Insurance — while others are beset by chronic disease and do need support. We need to start seeing the over-65s as a national asset, not a liability. 

The current social care system is riddled with unfairness. It will not be truly fixed until everyone pays in and has a stake. But it will get support if it becomes far more ambitious for the frail and disabled; ends the loneliness which propels so many into care homes; lets professional carers use their judgment, not follow tick boxes; and recognises that unpaid carers, who put their lives on hold to care for loved ones, are the backbone of Britain. 

People often ask me why it has taken so long for any government to tackle social care. The shameful truth is that we don’t want to think about it, save for it or pay for something which we each hope we will not need. Some people assume that they will be cared for on the NHS; others believe they have already “paid in” through National Insurance. Unfortunately, neither is true. But politicians have been afraid to admit it. 

Stinging the young to pay for the old wasn’t the best way to pay for social care. But without meaning to, the prime minister has raised the stakes. If he revolutionises the service, the old will be happier to stump up: and the young may face less of a sting in the tail.

Outdoor Vacation Market to Reach $3,326.4 Bn, Globally, by 2030 at 16.2% CAGR: Allied Market Research


PORTLAND, Ore., Sept. 9, 2021 /PRNewswire/ — Allied Market Research published a report, titled,Outdoor Vacation Market by Tour Type (Volunteering trips, Culinary Tour, Leisure Tour, Heritage trip and Others), Traveler Type (Couple, Family, Solo and Group), Age Group (Generation Z, Millennial and Baby Boomers) and Mode of Booking (Travel Agent and OTA): Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast 2021–2030.”According to the report, the global outdoor vacation industry generated $500.3 billion in 2020, and is expected to reach $3,326.4 billion by 2030, witnessing a CAGR of 16.2 from 2021 to 2030.        

Drivers, restraints, and opportunities

Inclination of people toward unique and exotic holiday experiences, surge in online bookings, rise of social media and its positive impact, and high penetration of internet drive the growth of the global outdoor vacation market. However, rise in terrorism & crime rate, political uncertainty, and natural calamities and inadequate support infrastructure hinder the market growth. On the other hand, demand for enhanced service standards and eco-friendly tourism create new opportunities in the coming years.

Request Sample Report at: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/request-sample/13447

Covid-19 Scenario

  • The outdoor vacation industry is one of the industries that have been hit hard across the world due to lockdown restrictions and travel bans. During the Covid-19 pandemic, national and international travel activities were banned to restrict the spread.
  • The associated sectors such as hospitality, travel agencies, tour operators, and transportation services have been affected considerably.
  • To cope up with the difficult times, governments of various countries have been taking necessary measures and precautions for attracting traditional tourist destinations and recover from the losses incurred during the lockdown.

The leisure tour segment to maintain its leadership status during the forecast period

Based on tour type, the leisure tour segment contributed to the highest share in 2020, accounting for around two-fifths of the global outdoor vacation market, and is expected to maintain its leadership status during the forecast period. This is attributed toinclination toward unique and exotic holiday destinations to get away from the daily hectic schedule and willingness to learn and understand the local culture. However, the volunteering trips segment is expected to manifest the highest CAGR of 18.9% from 2021 to 2030. This is due tobenefits of volunteering trips such as meeting with new people, developing knowledge and sensitivity of other cultures, and availing work experience and networking opportunities.

The generation Z segment to continue its dominance in terms of revenue by 2030

Based on age group, the generation Z segment accounted for the highest share in 2020, holding nearly two-fifths of the global outdoor vacation market, and is estimated to continue its dominance in terms of revenue during the forecast period. Moreover, this segment is expected to witness the fastest CAGR of 18.1% from 2021 to 2030. This is due todevelopment of online channels for offering convenience in bookings and rise in investment in digital marketing to attract customers.The research also analyzes the segments including millennials and baby boomers. 

Asia-Pacific, followed by Europe and North America, to continue its lead position by 2030

Based on region, Asia-Pacific, followed by Europe and North America, held the highest market share in 2020, accounting for nearly one-third of the global outdoor vacation market, and is projected to continue its lead position by 2030. This is due to rigorous promotion & advertising of tourism by governments and rich cultural heritage of countries in the region. However, LAMEA is expected to portray the largest CAGR of 18.3% during the forecast period, owing to advancements in transportation and information technology that shade the public limelight on unknown geographical destinations and favorable government initiatives.

For Purchase Enquiry at: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/purchase-enquiry/13447

Leading market players

  • Abercrombie & Kent USA LLC
  • Butterfield & Robinson
  • Cox & Kings Ltd.
  • Kensington Tours
  • Micato Safari
  • Scott Dunn Ltd.
  • Tauck, Inc.
  • Thomas Cook India Ltd.
  • Travcoa Corporation
  • TUI Group
  • American Express Travel

Avenue Library Subscription | Request for 14 days free trial of before buying: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/avenue/trial/starter

Get more information: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/library-access

Similar Reports:

Sports Tourism Market: Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2021–2030

Business Travel Market: Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2021-2028

Leisure Travel Market: Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2021-2027

Culinary Tourism Market: Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2020-2027

About Us:

Allied Market Research (AMR) is a full-service market research and business-consulting wing of Allied Analytics LLP based in Portland, Oregon. Allied Market Research provides global enterprises as well as medium and small businesses with unmatched quality of “Market Research Reports” and “Business Intelligence Solutions.” AMR has a targeted view to provide business insights and consulting to assist its clients to make strategic business decisions and achieve sustainable growth in their respective market domains. AMR offers its services across 11 industry verticals including Life Sciences, Consumer Goods, Materials & Chemicals, Construction & Manufacturing, Food & Beverages, Energy & Power, Semiconductor & Electronics, Automotive & Transportation, ICT & Media, Aerospace & Defense, and BFSI.

We are in professional corporate relations with various companies and this helps us in digging out market data that helps us generate accurate research data tables and confirms utmost accuracy in our market forecasting. Each and every data presented in the reports published by us is extracted through primary interviews with top officials from leading companies of domain concerned. Our secondary data procurement methodology includes deep online and offline research and discussion with knowledgeable professionals and analysts in the industry.


David Correa
5933 NE Win Sivers Drive
#205, Portland, OR 97220
United States
Toll Free: 1-800-792-5285
UK: +44-845-528-1300
Hong Kong: +852-301-84916
India (Pune): +91-20-66346060
Fax: +1-855-550-5975
[email protected]
Web: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com
Follow Us on: LinkedIn Twitter

SOURCE Allied Market Research

How To Plan Your Day And Improve Your Time-Management The Agile Way


With Covid-19, the advancement of the tech industry and the development of hybrid teams, the digital overload is increasing and exhausting 85% of the employees. A LinkedIn survey found that: 74% of women say they were very or somewhat stressed for work-related reasons, compared with just 61% of employed male respondents. On a generational level, millennials (ages 25 to 39) were most likely to report work-related stress, at 71%. Conversely, baby boomers (ages 55) were least stressed, at 61%.

A McKinsey research that showed companies that practiced agile methods were better at adjusting during this crisis emphasized the need to become agile to improve productivity. While agile Scrum and Agile practices were designed by and for software developers, the principles can be applied to other industries beyond technology, especially to improve personal productivity.

While personal productivity can seem daunting, making small changes every week to your routine can drive significant results, reducing your total working time and making it more efficient and best of all, enjoyable. Planning your day in advance will reduce not only stress but also prevent procrastination.

Here are some steps to plan your week and improve your time-management:

1)     Decide how many hours you want to work a week; that can be your “sprint” in Scrum terms.

2)     Define three main objectives that you need to accomplish during the week. Simply think of the main tasks or projects you NEED to complete.

3)     Now go to the details: have a list of all the tasks that you want to accomplish (aka backlog in agile)

4)     Time-box in your calendar all the events and meetings that have a due date or specific timeline.

5)     Prioritize those tasks based on the urgency (due date) and importance (are they linked to your objectives?). Sometimes we prioritize based on first in, first out, or based on the urgency of others. Define your own priorities in advance.

6)     Add time estimates to your tasks to get a better sense of your workload. Make sure to include everything you need to accomplish the task: the total time for writing an email, for example, includes writing it, reviewing it and sending it. If you don’t plan time for all three steps, you are overestimating your calendar.

Now that you have your baseline for the week. The trick is not to plan every day but to organize the workload by day. This way, you are agile enough to adapt to any changes, delays, or new tasks. Here is how:

1)     On Sunday evening, select the tasks you are going to do on Monday. If you already assigned time estimates, you can plan the maximum number of tasks that you can actually do without going over the number of hours you want to work.

2)     Make sure again the tasks are organized based on the priority you set before. Arrange your tasks in the order that you want to work on them

3)     Combine into a single to-do list your calendar events, meetings pending emails and tasks. Sometimes you have your own to-do list on paper, then another one online, and your team uses a different one: make sure all of them are aligned.

4)     Bump to another day any not essential tasks for you to get done that day, not to push yourself to the edge.

5)     Have a backlog ready with the rest of the tasks you need to accomplish during the week, so in case you finish earlier with your current list, you already have something else to work on and prevents procrastination.

6)     Set a timer to know exactly how much time you spent on each activity vs. plan and to make sure you focus on one task at a time. (this is maximizing the amount of work not done in agile terms)

7)     What time would you like to wrap up work? Add it to your calendar to prevent working long hours. It would help if you also considered the time for breaks, lunch and exercise. Add them to your calendar if needed (aka time-box your activities).

The key to avoiding getting frustrated in the time-management process is improving your workflow by planning doable to-do lists aligned to your priorities, having a balanced workload and being disciplined about following the to-do list. By analyzing what went wrong and what went well at the end of each week, you will be able to get the best time-management process that fits your own needs.

Suspending the pensions triple lock will still hit young people | Craig Berry


The “triple lock” is the most high-profile and contested area of pensions policy. It is also the most misunderstood. The lock, which ensures state pensions rise annually by the highest of average earnings growth, inflation or 2.5%, is almost always discussed in terms of the trade-off between pensioner benefits and working-age benefits. But to frame it simply like this is an error.

Thérèse Coffey has today announced the suspension of the triple lock. It will be welcomed by those who believe we need to rebalance public spending from the old to the young. However, despite many arguments to the contrary, young people are in fact among the main beneficiaries of the triple lock. They would actually suffer from its removal.

The idea that scrapping the triple lock would be in the interests of intergenerational fairness rests on a false presumption that if we spend more money on one group of people, we must spend less on another. Yet we can and should spend more on social security for young and old people alike. More important, because the triple lock will have been in operation for decades by the time younger people reach retirement, they will benefit from pensions that are far greater than those of today’s retirees – such is the power of compound growth over time.

To believe that a Conservative government would invest what it saves by removing the triple lock on today’s young people requires some magical thinking. In practice, by reducing the state pension accrual rate (the entitlements we build up in return for paying national insurance), scrapping the triple lock would effectively amount to a significant tax hike on young people. That’s because the tax they pay now would entitle them to a lower income in retirement than previously anticipated.

George Osborne introduced the triple lock in 2010 in order to reward the Conservatives’ ageing support base. But the right policy introduced for the wrong reasons is still the right policy. The value of the UK state pension is already one of the lowest in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (worth less than in any EU country). This was exacerbated by the then coalition government’s abolition of the state second pension (creating a single state pension benefit) which, of course, harms today’s young people the most, because they will spend most or all of their working life entitled to only the new state pension, rather than the more generous previous system.

Some argue that the UK system is fairly unique because it spends more on subsidising private pensions through pensions tax relief (which costs about £20bn a year). But tax relief does not work as a saving incentive, and its benefits are concentrated on the wealthiest savers. There remains no credible case against the state simply investing these billions in its own state pension system, given its unrivalled capacity to manage very long-term financial risks arising from economic downturns and demographic change.

It is clear that today’s young people – saddled with student debt and facing astronomical housing costs – are unlikely to accumulate wealth at the same rate as the baby boomers. Yet this does not mean that the rather meagre state pension should not continue to increase. If the government really wants to alleviate intergenerational inequality then it should tax some of the wealth that older generations have accumulated. It is worth remembering that the recently and soon-to-be retired have already seen large cuts to their lifetime state pension income due to increases in state pension age – which impact most unjustly upon poorer groups with lower life expectancy.

The bleak prospects facing many young people are all the more reason to boost the value of the state pension, so they can look forward to higher financial security in retirement. Doing it gradually (in other words, using the triple lock or something similar) is the best way of ensuring the benefits of increasing the state pension accrue mainly to the young.

This doesn’t mean there can be a cast-iron guarantee that the triple lock will remain in place in perpetuity. But the case for increasing the value of the state pension, whether by maintaining the triple lock or another similar measure, is overwhelming. The best way of directing state pension expenditure towards younger generations would, of course, be a steep, one-off increase in its value as these people approach retirement. But increasing the state pension gradually is much more likely to be feasible, politically, than the prospect of a more radical increase at some undefined future point. This is precisely because of the way the triple lock benefits today’s retirees a bit, while it will stealthily benefit tomorrow’s retirees a lot.

The more we raise the state pension now, the harder it will be to cut it back in future. And even if it were the case that the triple lock is intergenerationally unfair now, it would be a small price to pay if steadily increasing the state pension eventually reduces younger cohorts’ reliance on private options as the old world of occupational pensions crumbles.

It is worth noting, finally, that the present debate around state pension indexation is not really focused on the triple lock at all. The third “lock” in the current policy is the 2.5% bit, but the state pension had been due to rise sharply by 8% due to the second lock, that is, earnings growth – as a result of the peculiar way in which the Covid-19 pandemic has affected the UK labour market. Some see this as policy failure; I see it as a silver lining. It was the Thatcher government that removed the state pension “earning link” in 1980, leading to an avalanche of pensioner poverty, and its restoration rightly became an article of faith on the left. If we cannot support all benefits rising in line with living standards, without exception, then we cannot make the case for any benefits doing so.