A question on whether or not you went to college.

Also I humbly ask those of you with advice what might be the best goal for someone that is poor in math and wants to get a degree of some kind. I have a friend that's a programmer making $21 USD an hour, but I hear this field is being outsourced now so trying to go into it is pointless. If that's the case (not that I could've since I suck in math) what else can someone do, specifically me!

I'm finishing it right now....

If you are bad at math, maybe you should go into something like psychology, for example... :)


Hey! You forgot the poll!! :D

Didn't go, neither did my husband. Our friends who did have fared no better than we did, except that they have tons of student debt to pay off and we don't. My husband is an IT making about 24$ an hour. He got his position by starting work in a computer recycling company and building a network from there. He took a few shit jobs as a contractor, but used them to expand his network and reputation in the industry. He now works for a major defense contractor at the head of his department.

Not bad for a 28 year old from a broken home with only a high school education to go on.

As for poor in math but wanting a degree, what are you good at? What do you like to do? If you're going to take on that sort of debt, it may as well be worthwhile.

I'm at college (uni) and to be honest, it's a bit shit. I'm thinking about chucking it in and trying to make money in other ways.

Most older people I know didn't go to uni and have decent jobs, but I can't see how you'd progress. It seems as though a degree is the thing to have these days and if you don't have one you'll get nowhere. That's what I feel has been drummed into me.

Part of me wants to pack it in and go travelling, but it's an escape. I should learn to deal with life here first, I guess.

Long live enterpreneurs!!!!!! :D:D

Just admit it sderenzi.

The only reason you want to go to college is to increase your chances of getting laid.

It's not going to happen.

go to uni for a degree that matters, like engineering (though not with bad math). but you get my idea. get a degree that can get you a job that you must have a degree to get. otherwise, you will be competing with people who have more experience than you, and you might have a hard time getting a job.

as was pointed out, its probably better to not get a degree in something like IT, as long as you are able to network and you know what you are doing.

Learn welding, and work at a factory, that's good money.

A question on whether or not you went to college.

Also I humbly ask those of you with advice what might be the best goal for someone that is poor in math and wants to get a degree of some kind. I have a friend that's a programmer making $21 USD an hour, but I hear this field is being outsourced now so trying to go into it is pointless. If that's the case (not that I could've since I suck in math) what else can someone do, specifically me!


Yes, I went to college. What type of work do you see yourself being happy doing? The reason I ask is that far too many people choose a job for money not realizing they are spending a huge chunk of their lives at the job. The money is never worth it long term if you don't enjoy what it is you're doing.

By the way, if you suck at math then you can get yourself a tutor.

Just admit it sderenzi.

The only reason you want to go to college is to increase your chances of getting laid.

It's not going to happen.

money buys many things.

Regardless of whether you get more money at the end of it or not. College is a great experience and definately worth going - just be careful not to get too much debt when you are there.

Regardless of whether you get more money at the end of it or not. College is a great experience and definately worth going - just be careful not to get too much debt when you are there.

I disagree with the college being a great experience...I feel like crap here in college, waiting for the next day to come, begging myself not to kill myself because I know it will hurt my mom life if she knows I did it, begging myself not to give in to all the hardship and failure in my life, and getting no support whatsoever from people surrounding me...except my parents 500 miles from me....somewhere far away.

Computer jobs are being increasingly outsourced, but partly because the demand is so high compared to the supply, in the US at least. Microsoft, for example, has a few thousand unfilled technical positions on a typical day. They can't hire abroad fast enough. You don't need to be good at math so much as logic.

Saw on TV tonight that the head of Vogue magazine is a high school dropout. The more talent and drive you have, the less you need college. A degree is required for some fields of course. Other than that it just helps in competing against other job candidates. Once hired it becomes mostly irrelevant.

Once hired it becomes mostly irrelevant.

...once hired...and than once fired...than what? doesnt it become relevant? :rolleyes: :p

I live 30 miles from uni and have to drive there every day. It sucks. I haven't met many interesting people. I hate the subjects. I hate going there. I hate commuting in rush hour.

I've been slacking recently. Well, I've been sleeping about 12 hours a day and not turning up. I'm fucking depressed.

*hugs draqon*

I live 30 miles from uni and have to drive there every day. It sucks. I haven't met many interesting people. I hate the subjects. I hate going there. I hate commuting in rush hour.

I've been slacking recently. Well, I've been sleeping about 12 hours a day and not turning up. I'm fucking depressed.

*hugs draqon*

*hugs phonetic* *yawns* *presses ALT-F4* *goes to sleep* :cool: :cool:

...once hired...and than once fired...than what? doesnt it become relevant? :rolleyes: :p
Sure, but less so, because then you have more experience. After 5 years of experience, no degree is not an issue. For me at least.

I live 30 miles from uni and have to drive there every day. It sucks. I haven't met many interesting people. I hate the subjects. I hate going there. I hate commuting in rush hour.

I've been slacking recently. Well, I've been sleeping about 12 hours a day and not turning up. I'm fucking depressed.

I concur with your opinion! I'd also like to mention I slept 12 hours a day normally without even attending a college LMAO. The reason you're depressed if because the sleep is being disturbed and everyone needs it, so get some more rest and be good :-) As for the interesting people, I think everyone is interesting in their own way, the only real problem is that in college as many have mentioned nobody really cares for you, they only care about themselves and what they desire. This is a sad reflection on humanity in general, but mostly you feel as if there is no real social support in college, hell the only way to actually find one is to become involved with some athletic activity or debate team. Well who knows I went but only for a short while, I think college is more depressing because you realize people are desperate for money, and to get it they'll make-up pretend degrees, etc.

I disagree with the college being a great experience...I feel like crap here in college, waiting for the next day to come, begging myself not to kill myself because I know it will hurt my mom life if she knows I did it, begging myself not to give in to all the hardship and failure in my life, and getting no support whatsoever from people surrounding me...except my parents 500 miles from me....somewhere far away.



Sorry to hear that. It was a great experience for me anyway, and for many others I know. There will obviously be exceptions.

College is not for everyone, it is true. In that case there are many other ways you can spend a few years when you are young, doing something other than a 9 to 5. What I think is important though is that we dont leave highschool, go straight into a conventional type job and then spend the rest of our lives focused on how much we can earn.

College is a great way to spend some quality time, not working, with (hopefully) a great crowd of people. And also learn something and improve our minds in the process. If we do a vocational degree it also improves our carreer prospects.

Maybe it is difficult to see when you are there and struggling, but when you look back things often have a different light.... sometimes its good to choose a college close to home, then you get the best from both worlds.;)

the only real problem is that in college as many have mentioned nobody really cares for you, they only care about themselves and what they desire. This is a sad reflection on humanity in general, but mostly you feel as if there is no real social support in college.

Well bad news folks, things are excatly the same as this out of college as in it..

You think if you were working now you would be in this amazing caring environment where everyone is really interesting and friendly......get real, this is the world we live in. (and partly the age you are at)

So, you might as well be in college feeling like this than out of it..

Alternately, you might as well stay out of college and not have to pay for it.

Alternately, you might as well stay out of college and not have to pay for it.

Or go to university in England where we have free higher education...:cool:


(At least it used to be when I went.. they charge £1000 per year standard fee now, which still isn't much by USA standards, and of course you have to be a british citizen to take advantage of this)


All you have to pay for here are living expenses... ... and legal drinking starts at 18 in the UK not 21.. so the student bar selling cheap beer is an important focus of student life.:D

Scotland does free education, £0 per year. Assuming you've lived here 3 or more years.

Drinking is meh. Not too cheap, but cheaper than pubs I s'pose.

I don't like drinking. That's one of my biggest problems as a student. Living 30 miles away makes it pretty difficult to get home at 3am, too.

I would like to mention college is good for people who are smart, I however am not one that was ever very bright with memorizations :-Z~

Computer jobs are being increasingly outsourced, but partly because the demand is so high compared to the supply, in the US at least. Microsoft, for example, has a few thousand unfilled technical positions on a typical day. They can't hire abroad fast enough. You don't need to be good at math so much as logic.

Saw on TV tonight that the head of Vogue magazine is a high school dropout. The more talent and drive you have, the less you need college. A degree is required for some fields of course. Other than that it just helps in competing against other job candidates. Once hired it becomes mostly irrelevant.

I'm an enterpreneur. However, college gave me some business ideas, and some skills that might turn out to be very useful. So I see going to college as a good thing.

As far as getting a degree, I think it is actually pointless. I don't mind getting a diploma, because it takes only 2 years to get it. But spending 4 years on it and getting deep into debt.... it's jut not worth it....

I would like to mention college is good for people who are smart, I however am not one that was ever very bright with memorizations :-Z~
If you have to memorize, you don't understand.

Don't go to uni to learn. Other ways are far easier and cheaper. Go in order to have that silly piece of paper that other humans have been trained to respect. A university degree is like fiat money, only with a more instable value. Whatever you do, make it interesting.

Statistics show that college grads make about 40% more income than high school grads.

Statistics show that college grads make about 40% more income than high school grads.

Did it count in BG? HS vs. Colledge income statistics doesn't make a lot of sense. Since it assumes that income is one variable fuction of kind of diploma. For purity of experiment, one would need two lives, one with and another without diploma. Or, one could compare incomes of people of similar IQ&backgrounds (i.e. income level of their parents) vs. their educational level. Such a statistics would've been much like a bucket of a cold water onto marketing efforts of the university-industrial complex, that's why it will never be allowed. Besides, it would be nice to include expenditures in this statistics also. Yes, nondegreed guy could make less $, but he doesn't need to pay back 100K+interest loan either. Does statistics account for that? There is a lie, damn lie and ....

Yes, it's a misleading stat. It implies that a degree helps you to make more, which may not be so. It could be that those who are more talented at earning income have a natural greater tendency to get a degree too.

And a more meaningful stat would be for net worth rather than income, since as Dixon notes there are often loans to pay back, and interest in the US is now 6%. It could cost $250K to get a degree after paying interest, and that doesn't include the lost opportunity to make interest on that money.

A question on whether or not you went to college.

Also I humbly ask those of you with advice what might be the best goal for someone that is poor in math and wants to get a degree of some kind. I have a friend that's a programmer making $21 USD an hour, but I hear this field is being outsourced now so trying to go into it is pointless. If that's the case (not that I could've since I suck in math) what else can someone do, specifically me!I check the "some college" box in forms.

Dropouts in the house!

It would be interesting to see the benefit to the economy and individuals (if any) of permitting certain would-be students to receive all their student loan monies directly, and to use it for starting a business or investing instead of for classes, with the same loan terms.

you guys don't seem to understand. some degrees will make you better off, others wont have much effect. if you get a degree in humanities, or anthropology, or some other liberal arts degree, you may find that it didn't help. however, there are plenty of degrees that teach you skills much faster and better than trying to learn them from on-the-job training.

bottom line: some degrees are crap, some are not. technical degrees are usually not crap, as the average person would have a hard time learning and applying, say, differential equations on their own.

Good point, Cato. I was reading a study recently that was comparing the average lifetime earnings of various graduate degrees. Whilst medical and law degrees naturally increased lifetime earnings quite a bit, those in the humanities actually lowered average lifetime earnings very slightly! This study applied to immediately post-baccalaureate degreees alone, however, and not to subsequent doctoral and other terminal degrees.

you guys don't seem to understand. some degrees will make you better off, others wont have much effect. if you get a degree in humanities, or anthropology, or some other liberal arts degree, you may find that it didn't help. however, there are plenty of degrees that teach you skills much faster and better than trying to learn them from on-the-job training.

bottom line: some degrees are crap, some are not. technical degrees are usually not crap, as the average person would have a hard time learning and applying, say, differential equations on their own.
In most of the fields engineers with all that education and skills are unemployable (as engineers) past 40. Besides, it's liberal arts/business guys will be most likely in management, while 4 eyed technical guys will be either trying frantically to break into the management or exploring other areas, which don't really need all those technical skills they've wasted lots time and money to acquire. Bottom up, it's more about your personality and likabiltiy than about your skills and education as far as mighty above the average incomes concerned.

I disagree dixonmassey,

technical guys move easily into management positions. what do you base your position on?

maybe they will never be CEO, but every engineering place I know of is fine with promoting engineers to management.

edit: this is just like that damn "its not the size, its how you use it" argument. what people fail to realize is that you can be smart and still network. just like you can have a big gun and know how to use it. the two are not mutually exclusive. however, given the same ability to network, the technical guy will go a lot farther than the liberal arts major.

I don't see how you can say the stats are wrong or misleading. Given that the average college grad makes 40% more, he pays off the 100K loan in less than 5 years, then he is homefree.

I don't see how you can say the stats are wrong or misleading. Given that the average college grad makes 40% more, he pays off the 100K loan in less than 5 years, then he is homefree.

Have you failed broken English reading comprehension 101? I've written why such a statistics is misleading above. If you can/care explain why my objections are wrong. And bonus question, do you think GW would've make much less $ without college diploma?

It is worth asking the question: are lifetime earnings, for example, the best measure of "success"?

If somebody with a liberal Arts degree makes huge contributions to society - contributions which are not recognised and valued in the same way as, say, being the CEO of a big oil company - and therefore earns less than they might have done without their degree, have they "failed"?

The assumption that economic value is the only value a person has, and that their economic output is their only possible valuable output, is the catchcry of economic rationalists. Don't be sucked in by the rhetoric.

Also, remember that a guy without a degree is making money during the time college guy is getting his education and working to pay off the loans. Thus simple arythmetics "how much time does it take to pay off the loans" need to be modified to account for this. Roughly speaking, college graduates need to spend 4 years (minimum) in college + 3-N years to pay off his expenses. Non college guy is keeping on making $ during this time. Thus, an average college guy need more time than 4+3(N) years to catch up not to speak of getting ahead. Need I to remind you that an average career lasts fo 7 years. Thus, college guy, who just started getting ahead financially, likely will need to educate himself again to stay employed (i.e. more lost time and $).

I think that's falling ratio benefits/cost of college diploma is largely responsible for falling enrolment of men to colleges in the USA. White male are well known for following the money.

There are also intangible factors such as quality of degree, quality of university, family connexions, and the power and scope of one's alumni network.

It is worth asking the question: are lifetime earnings, for example, the best measure of "success"?

If somebody with a liberal Arts degree makes huge contributions to society - contributions which are not recognised and valued in the same way as, say, being the CEO of a big oil company - and therefore earns less than they might have done without their degree, have they "failed"?

The assumption that economic value is the only value a person has, and that their economic output is their only possible valuable output, is the catchcry of economic rationalists. Don't be sucked in by the rhetoric.


BTW, liberal arts majors much more frequently become CEOs than Ph.Ds, for example. There is aristocracy of the wealth in the capitalist countries. It doesn't really matter what kind of degree (if any) golden youth will acquire, they will be our leaders (and money makers) in any case.

BTW, liberal arts majors much more frequently become CEOs than Ph.Ds, for example. There is aristocracy of the wealth in the capitalist countries. It doesn't really matter what kind of degree (if any) golden youth will acquire, they will be our leaders (and money makers) in any case.

I think that with a Ph.D., you are less likely to be considered for "less specialized jobs." At least liberal arts majors are not totally specialized in a single area, which could demonstrate the ability to adapt.

However, if I came across an individual with a liberal arts degree, I would likely ask myself "why didn't he choose a degree with more forus?"

Need I to remind you that an average career lasts fo 7 years.
assuming that figure it accurate, I highly doubt the guys with technical degrees are changing careers that fast. I only know one person who got a technical degree and didn't stay in that career field. however, the people I know with no degrees do, in fact, change jobs frequently.

that could be something else to take into consideration while looking into college. if you want to stay in the same career for a long time, go with a technical degree. however, if you would rather not do the same thing for the rest for your life, get a non-technical degree, or non at all.

I just did a little calculation with numbers from here (link (http://www.forbes.com/2003/07/28/cx_dd_0728mondaymatch.html))
and given their data, the person with the degree passes the non-degree (in net earning since high school) in under 13 years.

once you consider the cost they list for college is pretty high, and the fact that you can work while in college, it actually is brighter than that even.

if I put my cost of college in, and what I earn in the summers, I will pass the average non-degree in less than 9 years from high school. thats assuming they make 30k a year straight out of high school, on average.

http://www.strayer.edu/images/upload/life_earn_lg.gif
also, that seems to show a significant difference. by around age 60 a college grad will earn about double, thats significant. if you trust strayer (kinda ify)

assuming that figure it accurate, I highly doubt the guys with technical degrees are changing careers that fast. I only know one person who got a technical degree and didn't stay in that career field. however, the people I know with no degrees do, in fact, change jobs frequently.

that could be something else to take into consideration while looking into college. if you want to stay in the same career for a long time, go with a technical degree. however, if you would rather not do the same thing for the rest for your life, get a non-technical degree, or non at all.

I just did a little calculation with numbers from here (link (http://www.forbes.com/2003/07/28/cx_dd_0728mondaymatch.html))
and given their data, the person with the degree passes the non-degree (in net earning since high school) in under 13 years.

once you consider the cost they list for college is pretty high, and the fact that you can work while in college, it actually is brighter than that even.

if I put my cost of college in, and what I earn in the summers, I will pass the average non-degree in less than 9 years from high school. thats assuming they make 30k a year straight out of high school, on average.

I hope you do working on a technical degree to verify your theories up close and personal later on. If it's not civil engineering&architecture (which as far as I know are the safest bet) get ready to be mightily surprised on how long will your career last and how long will it take you to catch up with a 30k guy. Let's say that your degree cost you 80K in direct expenses + 30*4 -4*5=100k in lost income; it's 180k; your target is to get even in 5 years after graduation, therefore, X*5=180 + 5*30; X=330/5=66k/year; Fairly small % of college graduates will reach 66k/year in 5 years; Average graduate will be lucky to clear 40-50k upon graduation, that is the very best average number. And don't forget about those nasty lay offs and the rule of thumb - "the more education you've got, the longer you need to look for a job". Now, let's assume that 30k is as intelligent and driven (or nasty and ruthless, watever will bring the loot) as you are. In this case, he may count for more than $30k/year. We were talking about 4 years degree. Which, provided the right choice of the field&university may indeed pay itself off in reasonable amount of time.

Now let's consider a "technical" Ph.D. (average 10 years in college + 2-10 years of $30k/year postdocing. The salary of those guys should be >100k to justify the trouble (+ease of finding a job). Only few will get >100k/year, many will look for a job for 1 year or more. Besides, the average career life of a scientist is indeed 8 years. Does it explain why majority of grad students (especially) and faculty are foreighners?

Here is excerpt from an industry publication:
Here's roughly how the conversation went. This is the cleaned-up version. The darker version is a lot grumpier.

Why do engineers over the age of 35 often prove ineffective, or even unemployable?

They are 10 to 12 years out of school, increasingly obsolete, and usually replaced by younger, cheaper, and smarter engineers. Companies don't want to pay the price of keeping more senior engineers on board.

What are older engineers to do?

They should enroll in their closest on-line university, quickly earn an MBA, and hope they can salvage their career by transitioning over into a management track.

What happens to companies when all of their engineers are young, without a history in the industry or in the company?

The company - and the industry - loses its corporate/technical memory and becomes, in the long run, more and more ineffectual. Everybody has to re-invent the wheel over and over again, because anybody who had previously invented the wheel is no longer with the company. The development process is less efficient and more reliant on outside consultants who are hired project by project, further emphasizing the lack of continuity and long-term in-house expertise. It's been particularly bad for

I'd just like to point out for those who think that lib arts majors don't have careers, investment banks and consulting groups keep snapping them up, because a good liberal arts education shows a flexible, inventive yet rigorous mind.

I'd just like to point out for those who think that lib arts majors don't have careers, investment banks and consulting groups keep snapping them up, because a good liberal arts education shows a flexible, inventive yet rigorous mind.

Also, it may mean that lib arts are better at entertaining clients and bosses with their "sophistication". It could also mean that people tend to surround themselves with likeminded, likewitted, likedumbjokelaughing, like etc. to create cozy work/play environment.

Let's say that your degree cost you 80K
it has actually only cost me about $10k so far, and I am done with most of my junior level classes.

Average graduate will be lucky to clear 40-50k upon graduation, that is the very best average number.
I am an engineering major, 45k/year is average starting pay. also, I have a interview with smiths Aerospace tomorrow, and they pay well.

edit: also, I have no intention of becoming obsolete. not only do I love engineering as a hobby, but I plan to take graduate courses while I work.

Also, it may mean that lib arts are better at entertaining clients and bosses with their "sophistication". It could also mean that people tend to surround themselves with likeminded, likewitted, likedumbjokelaughing, like etc. to create cozy work/play environment.Right. Someone who thinks people who make hiring decisions in financial companies would favor workplace quality over the bottomline has obviously no concept of how the financial sector works.

Right. Someone who thinks people who make hiring decisions in financial companies would favor workplace quality over the bottomline has obviously no concept of how the financial sector works.

Is this guy also wrong and knows nothing about workplace? Besides, it's possible that schmoozing skills and likebilty are more important for the bottomline than anything else.

I have had a chance to observe quite a few companies in the U.S. from the inside, and have spotted a certain constancy in the staffing profile. At the top, there is a group of highly compensated senior lunch-eaters. They tend to spend all of their time pleasing each other in various ways, big and small. They often hold advanced degrees in disciplines such as Technical Schmoozing and Relativistic Bean-counting. They are obsessive on the subject of money, and cultivate a posh country set atmosphere, even if they are just one generation out of the coal mines. Ask them to solve a technical problem — and they will politely demur, often taking the opportunity to flash their wit with a self-deprecating joke or two.

Somewhat further down the hierarchy are the people who actually do the work. They tend to have fewer social graces and communication skills, but they do know how to get the work done. Among them are found the technical innovators, who are often the company's raison d'être.

More often than not, the senior lunch-eaters at the top are native-born Americans, and, more often than not, the ones lower down are either visiting foreigners or immigrants. These find themselves in a variety of situations, from the working visa holders who are often forced to choose between keeping their job and going home, to those who are waiting for a green card and must play their other cards just right, to those who have one, to citizens.

The natives at the top always try to standardize the job descriptions and lower the pay scale of the immigrants at the bottom, playing them against each other, while trying to portray themselves as super-achieving entrepreneurial mavericks who can't be pinned down to a mere set of marketable skills. The opposite is often the case: the natives are often the commodity items, and would perform similar functions whether their business were biotechnology or salted fish, while those who work for them may be unique specialists, doing what has never been done before.

Good post Dixon. There's a lot of truth there.

Those starting their careers would do well to get their head out of the clouds and realize that employers will work against them (always trying to minimize the number of those they employ and what they pay). There is a lot of risk in the job market no matter how well you plan, so the best thing to do is plan for an uncertain future. I think it's easier to do that when you keep your education costs down, while still being at the top of the pack in terms of skill.

I think most college students do themselves a disfavor when they learn fairly useless things while ignoring the most useful things. For example, I think negotiation should be near the top of the list of things to learn, but few are adept at it. Skip some humanities classes to read a few books on negotiation. You might make 50% more throughout your career just by doing that.

Have you read books about negotiation? Which ones would you recommend?

I have three such books at home; they're old. I recommend you go to a large bookstore or library and check out the selection. They'll probably all overlap each other, since there's not too much to it when you boil it down. You can get a full lesson in a few days of spare-time reading.

Here's some advice about which the books typically say the opposite: For most negotiations, I suggest negotiating only on price; i.e. don't give a reason, just state amounts. That way the other side has the hardest time objecting. You'll learn all about objections in the books. Become adept at giving "reasons" that contain no useful information for the other side.

The most common negotiating mistake I see is people giving a range for a requested salary expectation in interviews. It makes no sense to give a range, because you'll almost certainly be offered the lower figure, or worse. Instead give only one figure that is at or near the top end of what you think the job will pay for your skills, based on your research.

So what is the basics of negotiation? :)

College is fun, go out and socialize and you'll have a good time.

So what is the basics of negotiation? :)
I googled for "negotiation" and quickly found a few tutorials, including those for salary negotiation; check them out. The #1 basic is confidence.

I have had a chance to observe quite a few companies in the U.S. from the inside, and have spotted a certain constancy in the staffing profile. At the top, there is a group of highly compensated senior lunch-eaters. They tend to spend all of their time pleasing each other in various ways, big and small. They often hold advanced degrees in disciplines such as Technical Schmoozing and Relativistic Bean-counting. They are obsessive on the subject of money, and cultivate a posh country set atmosphere, even if they are just one generation out of the coal mines. Ask them to solve a technical problem — and they will politely demur, often taking the opportunity to flash their wit with a self-deprecating joke or two.

Somewhat further down the hierarchy are the people who actually do the work. They tend to have fewer social graces and communication skills, but they do know how to get the work done. Among them are found the technical innovators, who are often the company's raison d'être.

More often than not, the senior lunch-eaters at the top are native-born Americans, and, more often than not, the ones lower down are either visiting foreigners or immigrants. These find themselves in a variety of situations, from the working visa holders who are often forced to choose between keeping their job and going home, to those who are waiting for a green card and must play their other cards just right, to those who have one, to citizens.

The natives at the top always try to standardize the job descriptions and lower the pay scale of the immigrants at the bottom, playing them against each other, while trying to portray themselves as super-achieving entrepreneurial mavericks who can't be pinned down to a mere set of marketable skills. The opposite is often the case: the natives are often the commodity items, and would perform similar functions whether their business were biotechnology or salted fish, while those who work for them may be unique specialists, doing what has never been done before.Oh, okay.

But all that will stop once the Revolution starts, right?

I'm going back to college at 25, first I want to know how sensible that is. I took 3 years out after I finished my first degree. I am one of those guys going back into college partly because of lack of further opportunities. I plan on taking pre-pharm or chemical enginnering. College was fun for me back in the hay days. I am a black guy, I dated my first white girl in college. I made lots of friends, some of whom are making mucho bucks.

If you haven't already, I suggest you do a realistic assessment of the job market for those fields. If there's plenty of jobs, take the salary you can expect, and the full cost of the education, including lost opportunity cost (mainly the money you could make working during that time), and figure out the breakeven point in the future at which you'll start to profit from the decision to go back to school.

If you have a 4-year degree already, regardless of what it is for, the odds are that going back to college is not a good financial decision. If you lack job opportunities, that may be because of the area in which you live; you may want to consider moving. But it sounds like you may have non-financial reasons to go back to college as well.

Thank you for all the info, zanket. :)

I'm glad to see you all appreciate my thread so well, of course it is my genius that spawned it into being :-)~

: winks : @ James R