My PhD student friend is 32 and waiting tables to pay rent. What a dummy.

I think you are seeing only what you want to see. I think that if you looked at the real data you would realize that there are not so many humanities phd-holders set up so nicely. Not even close. Not even by a mile. And your attitude of "phd designation indicates ability to make superior life choices" is comical and is exactly what attracts derision from those outside the bizarre world of academia.

BS......... wrote:

I'm calling BS on all the "i make 7 figures" posters.

There are very, very few people who have an income of $1m+.

CEO of major corporations, wall street types, very famous people.

i would literally need to see a tax return to believe anyone here makes that kind of cash. According to the IRS, 235k people made more than 1M in income. Out of 321M people in the US. Yet 2 people in this thread alone have claimed it.

Like i said, BS.....

Both of them also broke 4 min miles

and ran a 2:10 marathon

and have huge c*cks.

You are probably right about the "seven figures" posters, but I make high mid-sixes/low high sixes and also did the Ph.D. thing. My profession is a high stress environment and requires a ton of hard work. It is surprising how many of the people who able to survive in it for the long term are ex-college athletes. In other words, it would not surprise me if high earners were over-represented on this board.

That said-- it is a sad day when we measure the value of a human life by its earning capacity. If I didn't start having kids and significant expenses, I would have been very happy and lead a rewarding life in a job making less than 1/8th of what I am making now. Not every reward is financial, and just because people don't devote themselves to money doesn't mean that they are stupid.

John, John, John, you are perhaps the pot calling the kettle something that it itself is. You see what you want to see in my comment that "most people who complete a Ph.D. in any field are smart enough to avoid disastrous life choices. " You write, in oppistion, that "your attitude of phd designation indicates ability to make superior life choices is comical..."

But what I actually wrote is that people with Ph.Ds are generally smart enough to "avoid disastrous life choices," not that we make "superior life choices."

Does "disastrous" mean the same thing as "superior"? I obviously did not state, nor did I imply, that Ph.Ds make superior life choices than other people. You said I said that, but the evidence shows that I didn't.

To be clear, my experience indicates that Ph.Ds generally make solid, rational life choices, not superior and not inferior life choices relative to the general populous.

Now, on to your other, more substantive point: You argue that if I looked at "the real data" I would realize that most Ph.Ds are not "set up so nicely" as me and my cohort are. Perhaps. But we would need some "real data" in order to verify your claim. My claim is verified by my lived experience and specific examples. But that is anecdotal and you're right to question it.

I wanted the OP lighten up on his friend. I wanted him to know that there is a definite bright side to Ph.D. work in the humanities and that successful outcomes are quite common.

Because I work in education I may have more access to "real data" on this kind of thing than you do if/when I move up the administrative ranks. Right now, I'm pretty much solely focused on teaching my students, editing, publishing and doing service work, so I don't have a lot of time to research general educational data.

I did run across a Chronicle of Higher Ed article relating the findings of a longitudinal study that found that humanities majors, on average, were significantly out-earned by STEM field graduates for the first ten years post-degree completion, but that over the course of a working lifetime the humanities majors out-earned the STEM majors because they were more likely to rise into admin positions. That's not the be all and end all. If I have time today, I'll post the article.

No worries, prof, Utah usually loses. See: that mediocre basketball team. They're no match for the West Coast. Also, John doesn't read well.

John is intimidated by anyone who makes him feel unintelligent, which is a large portion of the population.

I think I found the article you were referring to:

http://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Liberal-Arts-Majors-Fare/144133/

It cherry picks the one of two age groups at the end of a person's career where the arts and crafts majors actually made more (and it may be that the pre-pro crowd was no longer working full time at that point, while the humanities crowd was still working out of necessity). And it conveniently left out the Engineering graduates that were making $30k more a year from it's chart analysis. They were playing with statistics in that study.

That is the article to which I was referring. Thanks for pulling it up. I'll need to look at the study that the article is reporting on before agreeing or disagreeing with you. And I'll need to look more deeply than that one study before coming to any firm conclusions on the matter. Like I said, I'm a bit too busy to do all that right this minute. I also have no set conclusions on the macro reality here. I provided information on the accomplishments of my cohort from a strong but definitely non-elite program to give some balance to the conversation, interjecting the reality that many people with Ph.Ds in the humanities do quite well in the professional world. Ultimately, I just wanted the guy to be nicer to his friend.

I feel fortunate to have had the success that I've had so far in life. I know everything could flip on a dime. Some of my best friends have had their lives turned upside down by illness, job loss, civil war, terrorism, you name it. While material success is very important, I don't judge anyone's worth as a person by what they happen to have or don't have at a particular moment in time.

You appear to have a balanced perspective. Note that science Ph.D.s do start at 50% more than those with a BS, and there is no way in hell you will be anything other than a lab tech if you only have a BS. And with a masters you can rise to the level of Research Associate and that's it. Can be PI for some practical studies but not for something bigger like an NSF grant.

But there is an outspoken minority here who claim to make mid-high six figure incomes with their BA or BS in STEM of course, and they believe that a person's value is only related to their income. Their sub 4 mile, 1600 SAT, $1.2 M house on the hill, 3rd trophy wife, doesn't hurt their self esteem either.

But you know, to a person they are probably 27 to 37 yr old bitter somethings still getting a monthly $400 check from their mom.

Well 2 out 3 ain't bad

There was an article in the New York Times about truckers. What if you were a trucker who did it out of high school, made good money, but you've got no relationships and your health is bad. Maybe I would choose to be a PhD instead of doing that.

Anyway. We all have choices and sometimes the choice isn't clear when we're younger. A lot of people are just trying to do the best that they can. I didn't have much of an income in my twenties and now I'm training to work in public utilities. I'll eventually have an ok income.

Was it worth not making much money? Well, maybe I could have done things differently. Like joining the Air Force out of high school so that I could at least have a good foundation of savings to work with. I did a lot of climbing, skiing, and traveling during my twenties. That will hopefully stay with me for life.

Tell me, where did Elon Musk attend graduate school? Gates? Jobs? How about lower tier people like Gladwell? Where had Sam Harris gone to grad school when he wrote The End of Faith? Christopher Hitchens? Was attaining a PhD essential to Jared Diamond writing Guns, Germs, and Steel?

You're just one more conventional dimwit who can't think outside the box.

what a sucka wrote:

Podunk U. wrote:

[quote]what a sucka wrote:

[quote]mastered and doctored wrote:

Tell me, where did Elon Musk attend graduate school? Gates? Jobs? How about lower tier people like Gladwell? Where had Sam Harris gone to grad school when he wrote The End of Faith? Christopher Hitchens? Was attaining a PhD essential to Jared Diamond writing Guns, Germs, and Steel?

You're just one more conventional dimwit who can't think outside the box.

Egads. You know that I can cite people who've achieved great things who have graduate educations, right? For example, Jared Diamond, who obviously thinks higher education is worthwhile as he is a full professor at UCLA. It takes a long, long immersion in academia to become a full professor, especially at one of the top-ranking universities in America. He finished his Ph.D. in 1961. Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Galileo, MLK, and two or three other people also thought grad school was a good idea.

And I could probably add more names to your list of great men/women without advanced degree education than you can. Here goes: Copernicus, Abraham Lincoln, Socrates, Aristotle, Buddha, Malcolm X, Jesus, the guy from Good Times, Puffy Diddy Daddy and Kim Kardashian.

Instead of trying to disprove something that can't be disproved, that the majority of "the best of the best" in the fields cited have some kind of advanced degree education, you just name three or four exceptions to the rule. Excellent argumentative tactic. We're all impressed.

I'll not read you my bio, which would disprove your ideas about me, because that would be way too LRC, but suffice it to say that if you ran across it while looking for books to read you wouldn't know which "box" to put me in.

And, ultimately, the problem w/ the OP in this thread (is that you? I forget) is the same as yours with me. A raft of assumptions and prejudgments and talking points. It's tiresome so I'll leave it there and get back to my work.

PhD usually get paid a salary while they are students including free medical insurance and other benefits and have all tuition waived. So unless she is getting a PhD in non sciences which it doesn't sound like she is hence the times she should be fine on the salary. Most schools pay between 30K-35K for all years in PhD program. Not too bad for just being a student. All the PhD students I am friends with are pretty happy and say the money is enough. After PhD, usually get paid if go to industry 100K or academia 60-80K.

You missed the point.

grenio wrote:

what a sucka wrote:

She spent 3.5 years getting a master's (mastered out of a PhD program since there were issues with her adviser), then she started a PhD with another prof. Now she is almost 32 with a net worth of nothing, is serving tables on the side in order to pay rent, and will be 35 by the time she's done with her PhD. Geezus Christ. Can you say "opportunity cost"? What a waste. These types have some serious ego problems.

I assume you were hoping to get a bunch of replies saying she's an idiot, and that would make you feel better?

Be honest - how many times have you asked her out and gotten denied? You gave yourself away with describing 'these types' as having 'some serious ego problems.' That's been man-speak for hurt feelings for about 4,000 years.

+1

hangry wrote:

grenio wrote:

I assume you were hoping to get a bunch of replies saying she's an idiot, and that would make you feel better?

Be honest - how many times have you asked her out and gotten denied? You gave yourself away with describing 'these types' as having 'some serious ego problems.' That's been man-speak for hurt feelings for about 4,000 years.

+1

"These types" refers to any person who mindlessly pursues a higher degree for the sake of being called "doctor" someday with no regard to anything else. Women do fall into this category more often than men, but that truth is irrelevant to my post.

what a sucka wrote:

hangry wrote:

+1

"These types" refers to any person who mindlessly pursues a higher degree for the sake of being called "doctor" someday with no regard to anything else. Women do fall into this category more often than men, but that truth is irrelevant to my post.

don't call me doctor, not fit to

what a sucka wrote:

"These types" refers to any person who mindlessly pursues a higher degree for the sake of being called "doctor" someday with no regard to anything else. Women do fall into this category more often than men, but that truth is irrelevant to my post.

You are pulling stuff right out of your ass and trying to make hay out of it. Butt hey, look at me, fool on the hill!

It's pathetically comical. Keep up the good work.