"another" and "better" career alternative?.....Nope!

Brian Moore moore at onsager.bd.psu.edu
Mon Jan 15 16:44:41 EST 2001

In article <93u1q3$afc$1 at flood.xnet.com>,
John Jacobson <johnjac at nospam.xnet.com> wrote:
>"DPH" <kgclg15 at kg.hsanet.net> wrote in message
>news:3A6276F4.ED8CD560 at kg.hsanet.net...
>> Arthur Sowers wrote:
>> > Thats not bad considering what I see
>> > as health plan benefits (and I do medical insurance billing now for a
>> > livlihood, so I know what people have).
>> It is bad.  They're down to $31.73 before we take out for the phone
>> truck maintenance and maybe its installment loan payments.
>  Man, that's low. Those guys are working their asses off in a high-risk job
>for far less than what I make comfortably sitting at my relatively safe PC.
>Programming sure beats that moving job Sowers is crowing about.

Agreed.  If you can get the work.

Part of the misunderstanding here is from the crossposting.  Art's
context is sci.research.careers where the discussion is 
about science research, mostly by Ph.D.'s in science.  In
that field the job prospects range from reasonably good to 
nonexistent, depending on your point of view.  In general they are
much worse than most people from outside the fields would guess,
which is part of "the myth."  So, Art enjoys tweaking the noses
of some science Ph.D.'s in low paying, low security research jobs
and try to show them how they could be doing better by doing such 
things like driving a truck.

The small overlap this might have to do with programming is only
from the fact that some science Ph.D.'s wind up learning large
amounts of programming, so they sometimes can also consider
the software job market (if they target themselves right).

But, more generally, there is a widespread belief among the populace
that there is a shortage of people trained in "science and technical"
fields.  To the extent that this belief, which presumably stems
from the great job market in certain areas of IT, lops over to
include science Ph.D.s, it is something that is worth discusssing,
and I think worth dispelling.

Part of the context of the broad-based support for H1-B comes, I 
think from this vague belief that there is an across the board
shortage of "science and tecnical" people.  Such shortages
are only in a few certain fields, which unfortunately is a nuanced position
that most congresspeople can't grasp.


Brian G. Moore, School of Science, Penn State Erie--The Behrend College
bgm4 at psu.edu , (814)-898-6334

More information about the Bioforum mailing list