College - Yes or No

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by sderenzi, Dec 13, 2006.

  1. Lord Hillyer Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,777
    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.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. dixonmassey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,151

    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.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Absane Rocket Surgeon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,989
    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?"
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. cato less hate, more science Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,959
    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)
    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.
     
  8. cato less hate, more science Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,959

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    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)
     
  9. dixonmassey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,151
    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
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2006
  10. Sandoz Girl Named Sandoz Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    480
    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.
     
  11. dixonmassey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,151
    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.
     
  12. cato less hate, more science Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,959
    it has actually only cost me about $10k so far, and I am done with most of my junior level classes.

    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.
     
  13. Sandoz Girl Named Sandoz Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    480
    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.
     
  14. dixonmassey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,151
    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.
     
  15. zanket Human Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,777
    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.
     
  16. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    Have you read books about negotiation? Which ones would you recommend?
     
  17. zanket Human Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,777
    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.
     
  18. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    So what is the basics of negotiation?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. SycknesS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    69
    College is fun, go out and socialize and you'll have a good time.
     
  20. zanket Human Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,777
    I googled for "negotiation" and quickly found a few tutorials, including those for salary negotiation; check them out. The #1 basic is confidence.
     
  21. Sandoz Girl Named Sandoz Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    480
    Oh, okay.

    But all that will stop once the Revolution starts, right?
     
  22. Chatha big brown was screwed up Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,867
    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.
     
  23. zanket Human Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,777
    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.
     

Share This Page