Salaries of US Scientists Drop
jsp
most scientists including physicists have decreased significantly.
See
http://www.jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/sciencesalaries.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jupiter Scientific -- dedicated to the promotion of science
and scientific education through books, the internet,
and other means of communication
http://www.jupiterscientific.org
8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Alfred Einstead
> During the past two years, the salaries of
> most scientists including physicists have decreased significantly.
Too much supply, not enough demand.
It could be worse: it could be the guy-trap known as the
programming field. Guys are flocking in that field in
droves, just as it's in the process of undergoing a major
round of terminal deskilling and complete clericalizing
trivialization.
Robert J. Kolker
Alfred Einstead wrote:
> It could be worse: it could be the guy-trap known as the
> programming field. Guys are flocking in that field in
> droves, just as it's in the process of undergoing a major
> round of terminal deskilling and complete clericalizing
> trivialization.d
Bingo! Right On. All these clever lads (and lasses) who thought mastery
of Java and C++ was high art, soon found out differently.
Bob Kolker
jmfb...@aol.com
whop...@csd.uwm.edu (Alfred Einstead) wrote:
>jspu...@yahoo.com (jsp) wrote:
>> During the past two years, the salaries of
>> most scientists including physicists have decreased significantly.
>
>Too much supply, not enough demand.
How am I supposed to read this datum? 1. Every employed scientist
has received a pay cut. 2. Starting salaries have decreased; but
starting salaries for what? 3. The salaries of jobs transforming
dirt into gold are averaged in with the medical biochem jobs causing
the average for biochem to drop and the average for dirt-to-gold
to rise?
>
>It could be worse: it could be the guy-trap known as the
>programming field. Guys are flocking in that field in
>droves, just as it's in the process of undergoing a major
>round of terminal deskilling and complete clericalizing
>trivialization.
It's a hangover which the field hasn't recovered from. Find
the job niche that is aging and you'll find the niche that will
become the "in thing" for the next five years.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
Roland Franzius
> In article <e58d56ae.03112...@posting.google.com>,
> whop...@csd.uwm.edu (Alfred Einstead) wrote:
>
>>jspu...@yahoo.com (jsp) wrote:
>>
>>>During the past two years, the salaries of
>>>most scientists including physicists have decreased significantly.
>>
>>Too much supply, not enough demand.
>
>
> How am I supposed to read this datum? 1. Every employed scientist
> has received a pay cut. 2. Starting salaries have decreased; but
> starting salaries for what? 3. The salaries of jobs transforming
> dirt into gold are averaged in with the medical biochem jobs causing
> the average for biochem to drop and the average for dirt-to-gold
> to rise?
Consider the averaged effect made up by ten physicists with salaries of
10^6$/a fired or retired.
--
Roland Franzius
Gregory L. Hansen
Alfred Einstead <whop...@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
>jspu...@yahoo.com (jsp) wrote:
>> During the past two years, the salaries of
>> most scientists including physicists have decreased significantly.
>
>Too much supply, not enough demand.
Too much supply versus demand while at the same time, according to stats I
read in a Physics Today, there's less supply. And physics departments
around the country are looking for ways to attract new students. And
Corporate America wants to allow more skilled foreigners into the country
because they can't find enough native technical help. Hmm...
--
"Let us learn to dream, gentlemen, then perhaps we shall find the
truth... But let us beware of publishing our dreams before they have been
put to the proof by the waking understanding." -- Friedrich August Kekulé
Uncle Al
>
> During the past two years, the salaries of
> most scientists including physicists have decreased significantly.
> See
> http://www.jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/sciencesalaries.html
1) Why do you need technical personnel,
2) Why do you need senior technical personnel,
3) Why do you need domestic hires,
4) Why is your infrastructure in the US?
1) You must innovate or the competition wins. The MBA solution is
the cigarette adverising model - if everybody agrees not to do it,
then nobody has to foot the bill.
2) You absolutely don't. MBAs know chrome domes are as fungible as
computer cards. Pull one, insert a newer cheaper one. As long as
everybody plays by the rules... see (1).
3) You absolutely don't. Bring something in from Russia, India, or
China and trade opportunity (not on a spreadsheet) for costs (on a
spreadsheet). You are going to dump them in five years anyway, see
(2).
4) No sane person would do R&D in the US: OSHA, EPA, Haz-Mat,
BATF, War on Drugs, Homeland Severity, wages, benefits, retirement,
general liability, sex and race lawsuits. Go to British Colombia and
all that crap vanishes, plus the Canuckistan government gives you a
major blowjob for importing economic incentives. A chemist getting
$25K/annum in Canada is hot shit. Folks speak English, too, and there
is British Common law. Avoid the Canukistan East Coast like the
plague.
The MBA model is like an eggshell. If anybody external flips a finger
at it, it shatters.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
Maleki
Don't bullshit at your own expense jackass. Reason American
scientists are near-slaves is that they're militarized.
Spirit of military runs the science show in USA.
Enjoy the consequences.
--
asari bar vojude 'u moteratteb nist.
"Jalal Ale-Ahmad"
jmfb...@aol.com
Then it's a sly statistic engineered to have the reader come
to an incorrect solution so that [what?] they vote for Democrats
next year? What is the hidden agenda behind the claim?
Richard Herring
Franzius <roland....@uos.de> writes
--
Richard Herring