Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits? - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to General Talk

Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby The Artful Dodger » Thu May 19, 2011 4:15 pm

Madison wrote:Just for fun, here's a Wall Street Journal article about the financial end of a degree versus just a high school diploma. And seeing as how it was written just over a year ago, the gap is even smaller now (college tuition has gone up since then, high paying jobs have fallen since then):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703822404575019082819966538.html


I have only glossed over this, but here's the problem I have with the article and the study. There will be some degree holders who will earn a great deal more than fellow new grads and high school grads. I'm talking management consultants, investment bankers, engineers, scientists, and essentially any entry-level position that's considered the cream of the crop. At the bottom end, take those college grads who find short-term work (let's say, waiting tables and bartending) just while they're looking for and interviewing for the positions they want to get eventually. Within five years time, there's a good chance those who eventually find a desirable white-collar job are likely to make more than their high school grad counterparts. Needless to say, those who started at the cream of the crop positions are likely to make more, hold higher positions, or even go back for their postgraduate degree and make more. Student loans are an issue, of course, in a person's net income, but they can be paid for often times, in affordable consolidated installments. As long as they didn't take out way too much debt, the trouble of paying those loans off is exaggerated.

Not to mention, this article conveniently overlooks the other positive effects of a college education. Confirmation bias, much?
Image
The Artful Dodger
Chief Wikitect
Chief Wikitect

User avatar
CafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 21885
(Past Year: 623)
Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Not nineteen forever

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby The Artful Dodger » Thu May 19, 2011 4:27 pm

On topic of that WSJ article, here's a comment to that article which sums up my thoughts nicely as well. You can find it on Page 1 of comments:

Andrew Clearfield wrote:You seem to be assuming that the only reason anyone would go to college is to make more money. If that is in fact the only reason one is there, then yes, it should be evaluated solely in terms of lifetime income expectancy. And if there were a reasonable alternative to a college education (for example, if high schools were better, or if a purely technical education were an adequate substitute in terms of career aspirations) I would agree that, yes, most of these people should go somewhere else, because they certainly aren't going to add much to the academic atmosphere or to the enterprise of learning. Unfortunately, we have no alternative, and your advising anyone not to attend at least a four-year college (unless, of course, they are intellectually incapable of getting through) is irresponsible advice.

Unless one is so utterly materialistic as to be nauseating, all careers are not fungible. If you have to cost out the differential benefits of getting a job as a used-car salesman versus the higher cost of becoming a physician, you are not only not appropriate material for a university, you are probably not appropriate material for any profession whatever. But most young people have at least vague aspirations. Looking for work without a university degree is not usually a good strategy for satisfying them.


I particularly liked this part...

Andrew Clearfield wrote:There is also the 'lottery factor'—and this particular lottery gives much better odds than any other. The chances of one's earning more than say, $100,000 a year at peak income, without a college diploma is very low. The chances of earning such an income with four years of college is considerably higher, and with a graduate or professional degree still higher. Especially if one screens out, as one should, those who deliberately choose low-paying careers (in the arts, education, the ministry, social work, etc.—most of which require not only college, but graduate degrees as well), the correlation between the fact of a college education and the potential for very high income becomes much stronger.


Once again, the success stories of those with no college degree are there. They're harder to find, however, and it's harder to achieve.

Rest of the comment...

Andrew Clearfield wrote:It is also unhelpful to examine outcomes only a few years after graduation. Nine years after my graduation, I had a Ph.D. and no prospects, and would have been food for such an article as yours. Five years after that, I was earning over $200,000 a year, and in a field which was utterly unrelated to that of my doctorate. This pattern has continued, and I am by no means one of the more successful of my peers.

This entirely leaves aside the intellectual benefits one might—and should—obtain from an education. Yes, there are those who get nothing from the experience, and only ruin the environment for others. But there are also those with no intellectual interests upon entering college, who acquire some to their surprise and the surprise of others. Then there are those who think they didn't get anything useful out of college, only to realize many years later that they had learned something invaluable. Yes, there is always the self-made multi-billionaire who brags about how he never got anything useful out of a book. This of course assumes that the only thing really worth having is a billion dollars, and that it will be easier to make a billion dollars if you have nothing else of any import in your mind.

I agree that if there were some alternative, one would only educate an élite at universities, and leave career training to lesser schools. (And make no mistake, such a group would again constitute an élite, as it once did, and still does even in most advanced democracies.) But given the system we have to work with, and the not-entirely un-laudable second or third chance it gives underperforming young people to attain some distinction, to boil the decision whether to attend college down to mean earning capacity seems pointless at best, and positively deceitful in many cases.


Not my view, having just glossed not read the article with close attention. I'll throw it in anyway because there are articles like this that again support one bias and conveniently brush aside other opinions:

Andrew Clearfield wrote:Every few years, it seems that the Journal feels compelled to run a piece like this. I'm not sure whether it is to satisfy a presumed anti-intellectual strain in some readers, or to demonstrate that a journalist has mastered the technique of discounting cash flows, while acquiring a superficial grasp of probability theory. There is the odd chance that such an article inspires the occasional insecure and miserly curmudgeon to refuse to pay for his daughter's (it usually is his daughter's, sons are too important to such people) education at a better school, but such people rarely have their opinions formed by the Wall Street Journal. What it does do is reinforce the impression that business people are utterly cold-blooded, totally materialistic, and rabidly anti-intellectual, which is not only very bad PR for the sector, it is also in my experience frequently untrue.

The next time you want to comment upon the appalling cost of higher education, please come up with a more sensible metric upon which to compare it.
Image
The Artful Dodger
Chief Wikitect
Chief Wikitect

User avatar
CafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 21885
(Past Year: 623)
Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Not nineteen forever

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby Madison » Thu May 19, 2011 4:34 pm

The Artful Dodger wrote:I'm talking about any kind of business and business owner. From the Mom and Pop stores to the high growth startup on the brink of world domination.

There's still a good deal of risk in opening a dance studio. Everything from location, local market, local size, pricing, staffing, etc. A lot of small businesses fail because they don't get all/any of those factors right. Sure, there's plenty of small businesses that enjoy success, like the dance studio owner. There are plenty others that enjoy modest success, there are plenty who do enough to make ends meet, and plenty who just fail too. You're also not accounting for those people for whatever reason couldn't lift their business off the ground.

From my experience, for every 10 people:

1 becomes a rave success (well exceeded expectations)
3 enjoy modest success (meeting expectation or doing a modest bit better than expectation)
3 are doing enough to make ends meet
3 flat out fail

This is something I can't quantify off the top of my head, but from what I've observed from say, restaurants to startups, this tends to be how I'd perceive the rate of success and failure. That's a conservative outlook, perhaps, but it's one I'm more likely to subscribe to. That's just me, however.

My point still holds true. The self-made non-college graduate story is hard to find. Oh, they're most definitely around, but in the numbers you think them to be, I doubt it. Not everyone has the opportunities, skills, and upside to make it on their own with their own business. College tends to be the main source for a lot of people to find those things.


According to your numbers above, 3 out of 10 fail. That isn't the majority, which is exactly what I have been saying. My own personal experience with family/friends opening businesses is better than 10/1 on success vs. failure, so maybe I'm slightly above the norm, but even you just admitted the majority don't fail which is the opposite of what you've been saying. Either someone can open a business and make enough to pay their bills (success) or the can't (failure). 3 out of 10 may be a lot of people, but it isn't the majority, not by a long shot.

Sure, there are people out there who aren't able to open their own business, simply because they lack common sense (some simply never have the funds, but since the business was never existed, they can't be on the success/fail tally). I know someone who was so dumb that they failed at opening a bar. 8-o How the heck do you fail at that? Booze sells itself, it takes very little skill to run a successful bar, it takes a whole lot more skill to fail at it. :-b To be serious, they failed because the location stunk and they were way too tight fisted with money (underfunded a bit). Lost a fortune in that failed endeavor because it didn't have 1 single profitable month in the couple of years it was open.

Nothing ever withstands the test of time, eventually. That said, I do think some people are exaggerating the lifespan of Facebook/Twitter being cut short later. Many high-growth startups have a 4-5 year lifespan at best, but the likes of Facebook and Twitter are on the cusp of building something lasting like Amazon and eBay, both of whom thriving remnants of the dot-com crash. Facebook and Twitter might one day go the Yahoo route of too much structure and bureaucracy too fast, but that won't be enough for it to fade away eventually (Yahoo certainly hasn't).


We'll see, but I see Twitter going away a lot faster than you do. Facebook is a lot more solid right now, in fact I'd say they are still moving forward. I can't say that about Twitter.

I'm sure you don't. I'm just saying it's human nature to remember the articles that support their views (and discard others). It's called a confirmation or affirmation bias.


I happen to remember when articles disagree with me as well, when those start adding up, it is time to re-evaluate my position to see if maybe things have changed.

I do understand what you are saying though, it's like Texas Hold 'Em. People always remember when their aces get cracked, but they easily forget how often their aces hold up. I can assure you that isn't the case with me (be it poker or articles). The ones I easily forget are the non-committal boring pieces.

It sure sounds like you do, especially keeping in mind some of your negative personal feelings about college. You've also said that people can learn the same skills they can going straight to the working world than in college. That infers an opinion that college isn't worth it in the end, or that it has marginal payoff.

I don't think anyone is debating a college degree is overvalued. Where we differ is I'm saying that college is still a standard for most employers. Coupled with the experiential aspect of college, a college education still carries value, a lot of value. It's only that there's less value in a college degree because there are more equally talented college grads entering the workforce than in years past, with little to differentiate between them.


Yes, the payoff of a college degree is marginal in my eyes. Here's another way of looking at it. Let's say you won a radio contest, the prize was a certificate for dinner at McDonalds, and the certificate never arrived. Hey, it's a free dinner, so there is value there, but is it worth the effort to try to get the certificate mailed again? That's what I'm saying. College has value, but is it really worth 4 years of your life? In my case, the payoff isn't/wasn't worth it, and I believe that is the case for most people, but they just don't realize it.

The monetary and hidden costs of hiring and training could be chickenfeed for bigger companies, but to small and medium sized numbers, it's more substantial.

For example, in my finance days, my company sought to hire another financial analyst and a CFO candidate to take over for my former boss (this was a startup, and a small department). We went six months having to pay recruiting firms (we didn't have an HR department) to actively push us candidates. When they sent over three candidates that met our screening process, they wound up being quite inferior during the interviewing stage despite their experience on paper. It would have been a much bigger cost to then hire one candidate and eventually to let him go (severance) and push the ante for another candidate. We quit the process altogether and hired financial consultants to help out with the legwork.


I can see how that would cost your company some money, but I've never worked anywhere where we paid a recruiting firm to send us candidates. Everyone I've ever dealt with was happy to send us candidates. They earn commission if we hire their person (or people), so they bend over backwards to try to earn money.

Severance is true and something I don't generally take into consideration. My bad. :-b

It depends on the field, the company, and location. I tend to think people in California are more aware of the prices on their heads, in general, and they'll push for raises/promotions when they realize how much they're worth to the company after completing a few important projects. Also, software engineers here and in the Bay Area have their share of options, to the point employers have to be too careful about underpaying them.


Texas was #1 in job growth last year according to an article I read on Yahoo's front page last week, so people here know they have options when it comes to jobs. Most just don't want to switch to a new job, so they remain underpaid.

Where I live, that just isn't the case.

As far as studying poetry when your major is electrical engineering, again, you're missing the point of college education entirely.


That's another reason why Texas is best. We don't need no stinkin' laddy daddie fancy schmancy name on a piece of paper, we simply need people that can do their job. :-D

Wouldn't requiring someone to take a poetry class when their major is electrical engineering be "broadening one's horizons", which is a mantra of some colleges? Hey, I get it, you want to add all of this "intangible" stuff to college and that's cool. But Jeter's dreamy eyes have had no effect on his performance on the field.

The Artful Dodger wrote:
Madison wrote:Just for fun, here's a Wall Street Journal article about the financial end of a degree versus just a high school diploma. And seeing as how it was written just over a year ago, the gap is even smaller now (college tuition has gone up since then, high paying jobs have fallen since then):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703822404575019082819966538.html


I have only glossed over this, but here's the problem I have with the article and the study. There will be some degree holders who will earn a great deal more than fellow new grads and high school grads. I'm talking management consultants, investment bankers, engineers, scientists, and essentially any entry-level position that's considered the cream of the crop. At the bottom end, take those college grads who find short-term work (let's say, waiting tables and bartending) just while they're looking for and interviewing for the positions they want to get eventually. Within five years time, there's a good chance those who eventually find a desirable white-collar job are likely to make more than their high school grad counterparts. Needless to say, those who started at the cream of the crop positions are likely to make more, hold higher positions, or even go back for their postgraduate degree and make more. Student loans are an issue, of course, in a person's net income, but they can be paid for often times, in affordable consolidated installments. As long as they didn't take out way too much debt, the trouble of paying those loans off is exaggerated.

Not to mention, this article conveniently overlooks the other positive effects of a college education. Confirmation bias, much?


True, the cream of the crop of college student will do quite well. On the overall though, the gap is quite small. That's what we (or at least I) have been discussing. I'm talking about the normal, typical college student. If we only wanted to talk about the elite 2%, there would be no discussion. Heck, why not just talk about the #1 student, I mean that person is capable of absolutely anything (seriously). But why talk about that 1 person? Would be pointless. So I'm discussing that for the typical college student, a degree isn't worth anything close to what they think it will be worth.

Yeah, the article overlooks the "intangibles", such horrible writers. ;-7 :-b
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 53856
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby Madison » Thu May 19, 2011 4:45 pm

The Artful Dodger wrote:On topic of that WSJ article, here's a comment to that article which sums up my thoughts nicely as well. You can find it on Page 1 of comments:

Andrew Clearfield wrote:You seem to be assuming that the only reason anyone would go to college is to make more money. If that is in fact the only reason one is there, then yes, it should be evaluated solely in terms of lifetime income expectancy. And if there were a reasonable alternative to a college education (for example, if high schools were better, or if a purely technical education were an adequate substitute in terms of career aspirations) I would agree that, yes, most of these people should go somewhere else, because they certainly aren't going to add much to the academic atmosphere or to the enterprise of learning. Unfortunately, we have no alternative, and your advising anyone not to attend at least a four-year college (unless, of course, they are intellectually incapable of getting through) is irresponsible advice.

Unless one is so utterly materialistic as to be nauseating, all careers are not fungible. If you have to cost out the differential benefits of getting a job as a used-car salesman versus the higher cost of becoming a physician, you are not only not appropriate material for a university, you are probably not appropriate material for any profession whatever. But most young people have at least vague aspirations. Looking for work without a university degree is not usually a good strategy for satisfying them.


I particularly liked this part...

Andrew Clearfield wrote:There is also the 'lottery factor'—and this particular lottery gives much better odds than any other. The chances of one's earning more than say, $100,000 a year at peak income, without a college diploma is very low. The chances of earning such an income with four years of college is considerably higher, and with a graduate or professional degree still higher. Especially if one screens out, as one should, those who deliberately choose low-paying careers (in the arts, education, the ministry, social work, etc.—most of which require not only college, but graduate degrees as well), the correlation between the fact of a college education and the potential for very high income becomes much stronger.


Once again, the success stories of those with no college degree are there. They're harder to find, however, and it's harder to achieve.

Rest of the comment...

Andrew Clearfield wrote:It is also unhelpful to examine outcomes only a few years after graduation. Nine years after my graduation, I had a Ph.D. and no prospects, and would have been food for such an article as yours. Five years after that, I was earning over $200,000 a year, and in a field which was utterly unrelated to that of my doctorate. This pattern has continued, and I am by no means one of the more successful of my peers.

This entirely leaves aside the intellectual benefits one might—and should—obtain from an education. Yes, there are those who get nothing from the experience, and only ruin the environment for others. But there are also those with no intellectual interests upon entering college, who acquire some to their surprise and the surprise of others. Then there are those who think they didn't get anything useful out of college, only to realize many years later that they had learned something invaluable. Yes, there is always the self-made multi-billionaire who brags about how he never got anything useful out of a book. This of course assumes that the only thing really worth having is a billion dollars, and that it will be easier to make a billion dollars if you have nothing else of any import in your mind.

I agree that if there were some alternative, one would only educate an élite at universities, and leave career training to lesser schools. (And make no mistake, such a group would again constitute an élite, as it once did, and still does even in most advanced democracies.) But given the system we have to work with, and the not-entirely un-laudable second or third chance it gives underperforming young people to attain some distinction, to boil the decision whether to attend college down to mean earning capacity seems pointless at best, and positively deceitful in many cases.


Not my view, having just glossed not read the article with close attention. I'll throw it in anyway because there are articles like this that again support one bias and conveniently brush aside other opinions:

Andrew Clearfield wrote:Every few years, it seems that the Journal feels compelled to run a piece like this. I'm not sure whether it is to satisfy a presumed anti-intellectual strain in some readers, or to demonstrate that a journalist has mastered the technique of discounting cash flows, while acquiring a superficial grasp of probability theory. There is the odd chance that such an article inspires the occasional insecure and miserly curmudgeon to refuse to pay for his daughter's (it usually is his daughter's, sons are too important to such people) education at a better school, but such people rarely have their opinions formed by the Wall Street Journal. What it does do is reinforce the impression that business people are utterly cold-blooded, totally materialistic, and rabidly anti-intellectual, which is not only very bad PR for the sector, it is also in my experience frequently untrue.

The next time you want to comment upon the appalling cost of higher education, please come up with a more sensible metric upon which to compare it.


Haha, wow. :-b I don't typically read the comments under articles, but that made for a good laugh. Being pompous and arrogant has value, but that guy takes it to a whole new level. :-b

Not hard to argue with him on it, but why waste my time? Clearly he is smarter than me (and everyone else, according to him). ;-7

But thanks for injecting a nice piece of humor into this thread, I'm still grinning like an idiot at it. :-b
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 53856
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby Madison » Thu May 19, 2011 4:49 pm

Lofunzo wrote:By definition, I don't see how you can depend on someone for something and consider yourself completely independent. That seems like a contradiction to me. You can be almost independent, pretty independent, or approaching independence but I don't see how you can claim independence when you need someone else for something, no matter how small it is. If you want to share a phone bill, car insurance, etc., I have no issue. I just don't see how you would be able to claim complete independence if you did.


See, Lo is a lot nicer about it than I am. Kudos Lo. ;-D

For me, if someone is even a tiny fraction of dependent on someone, then they aren't independent. Either someone is independent or they are not, and it is very black and white as far as I am concerned. Now if they are dependent, then there are varying levels of dependence.
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 53856
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby The Artful Dodger » Thu May 19, 2011 5:09 pm

Madison wrote:According to your numbers above, 3 out of 10 fail. That isn't the majority, which is exactly what I have been saying.


And there are 3 of 10 who are making ends meet or struggling to... that's 6 out of 10 business owners and businesses struggling and/or failing. Not to mention, there is never a final outcome for any business aside from failure. Any successful business will go down to at least the ones that generate modest returns with the wrong people and policies.

If people realized that starting a business would lead to a 40% chance of returns, they wouldn't be taking up a job or going to college, would they? It's so difficult to run a business, to start from scratch. Even the people who do realize it's difficult don't fully appreciate how difficult it is until they've seen it firsthand. There's a reason why 1 out of every 10 IMO, become a great success... and by that I mean, besting expectations by some distance. Everything has to come together for it to work not just well, but very well. It's not a formula people can bottle and sell for a dime a dozen.

Madison wrote:Either someone can open a business and make enough to pay their bills (success) or the can't (failure). 3 out of 10 may be a lot of people, but it isn't the majority, not by a long shot.


So, success for you is just to break even? For a lot of business owners, that's not a great thing unless the reward outweighs the risk and that reward is coming sooner than later. Breaking even and having just some marginal remainder left, isn't what I'd call success either.

Madison wrote:I know someone who was so dumb that they failed at opening a bar. 8-o How the heck do you fail at that? Booze sells itself, it takes very little skill to run a successful bar, it takes a whole lot more skill to fail at it. :-b To be serious, they failed because the location stunk and they were way too tight fisted with money (underfunded a bit). Lost a fortune in that failed endeavor because it didn't have 1 single profitable month in the couple of years it was open.


:-b

I find it laughable that you believe there's little skill to run a bar. From an owner's perspective, they have to consider everything when opening a bar. Not just the location, it's the decor and the atmosphere they want to set, it's about meeting the needs to a certain set of clientele, making it the kind of bar they want to hang out in their bar crawls. It's not the booze the bar is selling, it's an experience. People come for the booze, sure, but they also want more than just a place to drink... and this is a need that most don't consciously realize.

Madison wrote:
Nothing ever withstands the test of time, eventually. That said, I do think some people are exaggerating the lifespan of Facebook/Twitter being cut short later. Many high-growth startups have a 4-5 year lifespan at best, but the likes of Facebook and Twitter are on the cusp of building something lasting like Amazon and eBay, both of whom thriving remnants of the dot-com crash. Facebook and Twitter might one day go the Yahoo route of too much structure and bureaucracy too fast, but that won't be enough for it to fade away eventually (Yahoo certainly hasn't).


We'll see, but I see Twitter going away a lot faster than you do. Facebook is a lot more solid right now, in fact I'd say they are still moving forward. I can't say that about Twitter.


Again, subject for another thread. Really, what's your basis for that? Aside, from the "sheeple" and all that generalized nonsense. I'll give you a few good business reasons why Twitter creates value now and can continue to do so in the long term too.

Madison wrote:Yes, the payoff of a college degree is marginal in my eyes. Here's another way of looking at it. Let's say you won a radio contest, the prize was a certificate for dinner at McDonalds, and the certificate never arrived. Hey, it's a free dinner, so there is value there, but is it worth the effort to try to get the certificate mailed again? That's what I'm saying. College has value, but is it really worth 4 years of your life? In my case, the payoff isn't/wasn't worth it, and I believe that is the case for most people, but they just don't realize it.


Conversely, I don't think you truly realize the value of a college education as much as you believe people don't realize the devaluing of a college degree.

Personally, I didn't always enjoy the college experience and there were times when I thought I was better off quitting school for the startup world. I don't regret not leaving college and the experience was absolutely worth it. I could've done much worse if I was so stubborn because the likelihood of crashing and burning was certainly there for me, if I quit.

With that said, I think of starting a business as liking metal music. A lot of people don't like metal for reasons of their own and they prefer to listen to rock music. That's something I won't hold against them and that dislike is something I perfectly understand. The same goes for business and college. I understand most can't go to business for themselves and that's something I don't recommend to a lot of people, nor do I press the issue with them. Taking the safer route in college is what most would prefer to do and it's something I can't blame them for (of course, I recommend taking that route).

As for the analogy, I don't like McDonald's. I don't care about collecting the certificate either way. :-b

Madison wrote:
Where I live, that just isn't the case.

As far as studying poetry when your major is electrical engineering, again, you're missing the point of college education entirely.


That's another reason why Texas is best. We don't need no stinkin' laddy daddie fancy schmancy name on a piece of paper, we simply need people that can do their job. :-D

Wouldn't requiring someone to take a poetry class when their major is electrical engineering be "broadening one's horizons", which is a mantra of some colleges? Hey, I get it, you want to add all of this "intangible" stuff to college and that's cool. But Jeter's dreamy eyes have had no effect on his performance on the field.


Jingoistic rubbish about Texas. :-t

Once again, a college education should be more than just preparing someone to work in a specific field. If that was the case, college would be a one-dimensional overglorified trade school, but it's more than that. It's about being a more well-rounded person. Also, people change majors like they do careers, because they discover what they feel for the moment is their true calling. In fact, I became a business minor initially when I was solely working on my computer science degree. I took a couple of business classes, really found it was to my liking, and took it as my second major. I sometimes feel I have an edge over other software engineers in making the egress to entrepreneurship because I've had exposure to business in my academics and in my career.

Madison wrote:
The Artful Dodger wrote:
Madison wrote:Just for fun, here's a Wall Street Journal article about the financial end of a degree versus just a high school diploma. And seeing as how it was written just over a year ago, the gap is even smaller now (college tuition has gone up since then, high paying jobs have fallen since then):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703822404575019082819966538.html


I have only glossed over this, but here's the problem I have with the article and the study. There will be some degree holders who will earn a great deal more than fellow new grads and high school grads. I'm talking management consultants, investment bankers, engineers, scientists, and essentially any entry-level position that's considered the cream of the crop. At the bottom end, take those college grads who find short-term work (let's say, waiting tables and bartending) just while they're looking for and interviewing for the positions they want to get eventually. Within five years time, there's a good chance those who eventually find a desirable white-collar job are likely to make more than their high school grad counterparts. Needless to say, those who started at the cream of the crop positions are likely to make more, hold higher positions, or even go back for their postgraduate degree and make more. Student loans are an issue, of course, in a person's net income, but they can be paid for often times, in affordable consolidated installments. As long as they didn't take out way too much debt, the trouble of paying those loans off is exaggerated.

Not to mention, this article conveniently overlooks the other positive effects of a college education. Confirmation bias, much?


True, the cream of the crop of college student will do quite well. On the overall though, the gap is quite small. That's what we (or at least I) have been discussing. I'm talking about the normal, typical college student. If we only wanted to talk about the elite 2%, there would be no discussion. Heck, why not just talk about the #1 student, I mean that person is capable of absolutely anything (seriously). But why talk about that 1 person? Would be pointless. So I'm discussing that for the typical college student, a degree isn't worth anything close to what they think it will be worth.

Yeah, the article overlooks the "intangibles", such horrible writers. ;-7 :-b


I find it ironic that you think there's an elite 2% when it comes to graduates and fail to realize there's a smaller percentage/portion of "elite" entrepreneurs/businesses compared to the number of top-notch college grads.

Your normal, typical college student... that's such a broad definition. For instance, what separates a "normal typical college student" within Ivy League schools? What separates a normal typical college student from Stanford than UCLA? UCLA from Long Beach State?

All I'm saying is that study is faulty. The income effects of a college education don't kick in right after college for a lot of new grads, instantly. It's more likely to pay dividends a year, two, three, and five years later down the line and within 5 years, a college grad will likely make more than a high school counterpart.
Image
The Artful Dodger
Chief Wikitect
Chief Wikitect

User avatar
CafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 21885
(Past Year: 623)
Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Not nineteen forever

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby The Artful Dodger » Thu May 19, 2011 5:13 pm

Madison wrote:Haha, wow. :-b I don't typically read the comments under articles, but that made for a good laugh. Being pompous and arrogant has value, but that guy takes it to a whole new level. :-b

Not hard to argue with him on it, but why waste my time? Clearly he is smarter than me (and everyone else, according to him). ;-7

But thanks for injecting a nice piece of humor into this thread, I'm still grinning like an idiot at it. :-b


Ah, the good old arrogance defense. When someone makes a reasonably viable argument, you just make a stink about how arrogant they are. It's brilliantly convenient.

Personally, I never see the value in pointing someone out for being arrogant or snobby. That really isn't the worst insult in the world.
Image
The Artful Dodger
Chief Wikitect
Chief Wikitect

User avatar
CafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 21885
(Past Year: 623)
Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Not nineteen forever

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby Madison » Thu May 19, 2011 5:37 pm

Anyone know what the oddest thing about this discussion is? None of this is news, but I don't know who already knows this and who doesn't, so... I generally don't have a very high opinion of the typical high school graduate, I gripe that schools don't actually teach anything, and I gripe that there are too many idiots in this world lacking both book smarts and common sense. So shouldn't I be the first in line rooting and cheering for kids to go to college? :-S

Anyway...

The Artful Dodger wrote:And there are 3 of 10 who are making ends meet or struggling to... that's 6 out of 10 business owners and businesses struggling and/or failing. Not to mention, there is never a final outcome for any business aside from failure. Any successful business will go down to at least the ones that generate modest returns with the wrong people and policies.

If people realized that starting a business would lead to a 40% chance of returns, they wouldn't be taking up a job or going to college, would they? It's so difficult to run a business, to start from scratch. Even the people who do realize it's difficult don't fully appreciate how difficult it is until they've seen it firsthand. There's a reason why 1 out of every 10 IMO, become a great success... and by that I mean, besting expectations by some distance. Everything has to come together for it to work not just well, but very well. It's not a formula people can bottle and sell for a dime a dozen.


7 out of 10 are paying their bills. 7 out of 10 are surviving. 3 out of 10 failed.

Running a business is easy unless you're talking about running something really big from the get-go. The bar example? I can do that in my sleep.

So, success for you is just to break even? For a lot of business owners, that's not a great thing unless the reward outweighs the risk and that reward is coming sooner than later. Breaking even and having just some marginal remainder left, isn't what I'd call success either.


Breaking even isn't a failure to me. If the business can operate and pay its bills, that is a success. It may not be worth the effort, but it isn't a failure.

:-b

I find it laughable that you believe there's little skill to run a bar. From an owner's perspective, they have to consider everything when opening a bar. Not just the location, it's the decor and the atmosphere they want to set, it's about meeting the needs to a certain set of clientele, making it the kind of bar they want to hang out in their bar crawls. It's not the booze the bar is selling, it's an experience. People come for the booze, sure, but they also want more than just a place to drink... and this is a need that most don't consciously realize.


Laugh all you like, but it isn't rocket science. The biggest pain in the butt with a bar is the licenses, contracts with suppliers, TABC, and keeping minors out. Not that any of it is hard, just a pain. Basically everything else is simple.

Again, subject for another thread. Really, what's your basis for that? Aside, from the "sheeple" and all that generalized nonsense. I'll give you a few good business reasons why Twitter creates value now and can continue to do so in the long term too.


You don't have to believe me, just watch. B-)

Conversely, I don't think you truly realize the value of a college education as much as you believe people don't realize the devaluing of a college degree.

Personally, I didn't always enjoy the college experience and there were times when I thought I was better off quitting school for the startup world. I don't regret not leaving college and the experience was absolutely worth it. I could've done much worse if I was so stubborn because the likelihood of crashing and burning was certainly there for me, if I quit.

With that said, I think of starting a business as liking metal music. A lot of people don't like metal for reasons of their own and they prefer to listen to rock music. That's something I won't hold against them and that dislike is something I perfectly understand. The same goes for business and college. I understand most can't go to business for themselves and that's something I don't recommend to a lot of people, nor do I press the issue with them. Taking the safer route in college is what most would prefer to do and it's something I can't blame them for (of course, I recommend taking that route).

As for the analogy, I don't like McDonald's. I don't care about collecting the certificate either way. :-b


True, I probably undervalue college. I can admit that. Most can't admit they overvalue it though. And I undervalue it by less than they overvalue it by.

Hey, if people want to go to college, more power to them. I'm not trying to start a revolt against college or anything. :-b I simply think people should temper their expectations and really look at what they want out of life. Really look at college, the good and bad, and evaluate if it is worth it to them or not. Don't go simply because you think you "should" or it is the next step or anything. Really look at it and decide on your own.

Jingoistic rubbish about Texas. :-t

Once again, a college education should be more than just preparing someone to work in a specific field. If that was the case, college would be a one-dimensional overglorified trade school, but it's more than that. It's about being a more well-rounded person. Also, people change majors like they do careers, because they discover what they feel for the moment is their true calling. In fact, I became a business minor initially when I was solely working on my computer science degree. I took a couple of business classes, really found it was to my liking, and took it as my second major. I sometimes feel I have an edge over other software engineers in making the egress to entrepreneurship because I've had exposure to business in my academics and in my career.


"Well rounded person" sounds a lot like "broadening one's horizons", which is what I said. :-D

I find it ironic that you think there's an elite 2% when it comes to graduates and fail to realize there's a smaller percentage/portion of "elite" entrepreneurs/businesses compared to the number of top-notch college grads.

Your normal, typical college student... that's such a broad definition. For instance, what separates a "normal typical college student" within Ivy League schools? What separates a normal typical college student from Stanford than UCLA? UCLA from Long Beach State?

All I'm saying is that study is faulty. The income effects of a college education don't kick in right after college for a lot of new grads, instantly. It's more likely to pay dividends a year, two, three, and five years later down the line and within 5 years, a college grad will likely make more than a high school counterpart.


I just tossed a number out there, it's probably an elite 1% or less when it comes to college students now that I actually think about it. And I've acknowledged that the elite businesses (billionaires) are rare more than once.

We all learned that 2+2=4 and it doesn't matter what school is on our diploma. ;-)

Of course the study isn't perfect, no study is. But it does show the gap isn't as big as some people think. Use the $250K number or the $800K number, both are smaller than what most people think the value of college is.

Ah, the good old arrogance defense. When someone makes a reasonably viable argument, you just make a stink about how arrogant they are. It's brilliantly convenient.

Personally, I never see the value in pointing someone out for being arrogant or snobby. That really isn't the worst insult in the world.


Reasonably viable? Obviously I disagree, and obviously I have no problem writing pages and pages about a topic, but why bother with someone like that?

I did you one better, I actually acknowledged there is value in being pompous and arrogant. Seriously, the guy is just so far out to lunch that my time is more valuable than he will ever be. It's not a matter of convenience, it is simply that he isn't worth a response from me (speaking of being arrogant! :-b ).
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 53856
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby buffalobillsrul2002 » Thu May 19, 2011 5:40 pm

Urban hit it on the head with his point about Comparative/Absolute Advantage. There's no reason to actually be independent (other than to trumpet about it) when the reality is that we all win by not being independent, unless you find intrinsic value in your independence that is greater than what you give up by being dependent on others. That's why North Korea is a failure. Of course, you want the ability to be independent if necessary (or relatively independent if necessary; the reality is that few of us currently have the ability to actually be self-sustaining if society collapsed). That's why the US holds oil reserves instead of drilling everything out now. It just gives you added benefit in "negotiations".

As for the college thing, I'd agree that there are certainly kids going to college who probably shouldn't be, and who likely won't be more successful because of their degree and/or wasted their four years. But it's difficult to figure out if college is for you or not until you go (it's really not at all like high school in any way, at least it wasn't for me). And I'll disagree with anyone who says that "broadening your horizons" isn't the point of college. The course that probably benefited me the most was in college was a course I took in literature (and i'm an engineering/business major). Will I use it to earn me money? No. But the course gave my confidence a big blow originally (i'm bad at poetry; good at lots of other school stuff), but then gave me a boost once I realized I could actually learn stuff if I worked hard. Plus I'm better at having a better understanding of movies now. And learning is a skill. There is no doubt in my mind that college hones your skill of learning tremendously. For me it's been a better source of improving my ability to learn than anything else I've done during the four years between high school and now...
buffalobillsrul2002
Major League Manager
Major League Manager


Posts: 1349
(Past Year: 5)
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Job insight.. More $$$ or Benefits?

Postby The Artful Dodger » Thu May 19, 2011 5:56 pm

Madison wrote:7 out of 10 are paying their bills. 7 out of 10 are surviving. 3 out of 10 failed.

Running a business is easy unless you're talking about running something really big from the get-go. The bar example? I can do that in my sleep.


:-b

You deserve a lot of credit, Mad. The last few posts really made me laugh. Even running a small business, be it a barbershop, a restaurant, a bar, is difficult. If it looks easy, it could be deceiving.

...and again, you're reading too much into my rate of success/failure. That's just an approximation off the top of my head. Nonetheless, I would say that 7 of those every 10 people are better off getting an education and a higher-paying job, if they're in it to make better money than they could have working for someone. However, many people go into business for different reasons other than money, like erm, independence from anybody (working for anybody, chiefly)... and that's better than money.

:-b

I find it laughable that you believe there's little skill to run a bar. From an owner's perspective, they have to consider everything when opening a bar. Not just the location, it's the decor and the atmosphere they want to set, it's about meeting the needs to a certain set of clientele, making it the kind of bar they want to hang out in their bar crawls. It's not the booze the bar is selling, it's an experience. People come for the booze, sure, but they also want more than just a place to drink... and this is a need that most don't consciously realize.


Laugh all you like, but it isn't rocket science. The biggest pain in the butt with a bar is the licenses, contracts with suppliers, TABC, and keeping minors out. Not that any of it is hard, just a pain. Basically everything else is simple.


It isn't rocket science, but running a bar has its measure of difficulty. The other pains in the arse are those business-related things you've quoted.

Again, subject for another thread. Really, what's your basis for that? Aside, from the "sheeple" and all that generalized nonsense. I'll give you a few good business reasons why Twitter creates value now and can continue to do so in the long term too.


You don't have to believe me, just watch. B-)


I'm being raptured on May 21, so if I'm not there to see it, you know where I'll be.

Hey, if people want to go to college, more power to them. I'm not trying to start a revolt against college or anything. :-b I simply think people should temper their expectations and really look at what they want out of life. Really look at college, the good and bad, and evaluate if it is worth it to them or not. Don't go simply because you think you "should" or it is the next step or anything. Really look at it and decide on your own.


I'll agree with that, especially your last bit. For many, college is that next step and that's the realization.

"Well rounded person" sounds a lot like "broadening one's horizons", which is what I said. :-D


You'll never fully appreciate the perspective of why a college education matters. End of.

I find it ironic that you think there's an elite 2% when it comes to graduates and fail to realize there's a smaller percentage/portion of "elite" entrepreneurs/businesses compared to the number of top-notch college grads.

Your normal, typical college student... that's such a broad definition. For instance, what separates a "normal typical college student" within Ivy League schools? What separates a normal typical college student from Stanford than UCLA? UCLA from Long Beach State?

All I'm saying is that study is faulty. The income effects of a college education don't kick in right after college for a lot of new grads, instantly. It's more likely to pay dividends a year, two, three, and five years later down the line and within 5 years, a college grad will likely make more than a high school counterpart.


I just tossed a number out there, it's probably an elite 1% or less when it comes to college students now that I actually think about it. And I've acknowledged that the elite businesses (billionaires) are rare more than once.

We all learned that 2+2=4 and it doesn't matter what school is on our diploma. ;-)


:-b

You don't give college students enough credit, do you? I'm sure the elite is more like 5-10% compared to the business world, which is more like the elite 1%. College grads and businesses are apples and oranges, to be fair though.

Ah, the good old arrogance defense. When someone makes a reasonably viable argument, you just make a stink about how arrogant they are. It's brilliantly convenient.

Personally, I never see the value in pointing someone out for being arrogant or snobby. That really isn't the worst insult in the world.


Reasonably viable? Obviously I disagree, and obviously I have no problem writing pages and pages about a topic, but why bother with someone like that?

I did you one better, I actually acknowledged there is value in being pompous and arrogant. Seriously, the guy is just so far out to lunch that my time is more valuable than he will ever be. It's not a matter of convenience, it is simply that he isn't worth a response from me (speaking of being arrogant! :-b ).


Erm, no comment, but I do know when I read your posts, I'm entering an enchanted fantasy world. It's brilliant.
Image
The Artful Dodger
Chief Wikitect
Chief Wikitect

User avatar
CafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 21885
(Past Year: 623)
Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Not nineteen forever

PreviousNext

Return to General Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 0 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Tuesday, Jul. 29
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

LA Angels at Baltimore
(7:05 pm)
Seattle at Cleveland
(7:05 pm)
Chi White Sox at Detroit
(7:08 pm)
Milwaukee at Tampa Bay
(7:10 pm)
indoors
Philadelphia at NY Mets
(7:10 pm)
Washington at Miami
(7:10 pm)
indoors
Arizona at Cincinnati
(7:10 pm)
Toronto at Boston
(7:10 pm)
Colorado at Chi Cubs
(8:05 pm)
NY Yankees at Texas
(8:05 pm)
Oakland at Houston
(8:10 pm)
Minnesota at Kansas City
(8:10 pm)
Atlanta at LA Dodgers
(10:10 pm)
St. Louis at San Diego
(10:10 pm)
Pittsburgh at San Francisco
(10:15 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact