Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Math is a useless degree. The math teacher shortage is a scam, and in the private market, a math degree is worth nothing more than any old dumbass degree like basket weaving.
Over the last 14 years, I've been keeping track of the number of jobs I've seen advertised that require a math degree... not "math or accounting or basket weaving" etc., just math only. It's not a few, it's not just one, it's ZERO.
Today, one has to look beyond the bachelor's degree. There was a time when earning a bachelor's degree was the end-all leading to a job and a career for life. Not anymore. One has to look at a bachelor's degree as a foundation in preparation for further study, which will eventually lead to one or more careers (since most will change careers at least once before retirement).
For instance, a BS in Mathematics is invaluable in preparation for A PhD program that is heavily math-oriented in a field that involves a great deal of research such a mathematical modeling, statistics, signal and image processing, graphical applications, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic optimization. One could go on to earn a law degree and become a patent lawyer well-versed in any technological, scientific application which requires an extensive understanding of mathematics.
Mathematics is heavily used in emerging technology applications of every kind, so you're not likely to find jobs that advertise for BS in specifically "mathematics." You will for instance find jobs requiring an EE degree, which is heavily math-oriented. In signal processing, DSP is a key term signaling that one should be well-versed in mathematics. Many areas of computer science require a heavy math background.
So to say that a BS in math is a worthless degree is incredibly naive and short-sighted no offense.
Actuaries need a degree is Actuarial Science. Even 42 years ago that was required. And beyond that there are a series of very difficult certification tests that potential actuaries must pass to get any job at all. I believe there are 12+ levels. Even graduates in Actuarial Science have to move through these tests. I remember an acquaintance who has straight A's and who was at the considered amazing level of 4 or 5 in the tests when he graduated.
No, there are tons of actuaries with math or engineering or even degrees like physics and so on and so forth.
However, the tests are difficult and curved....and everyone taking them is smarter than heck so they are challenging and a serious time committment.
Pay is good though and employers will help you with the exam process.
So to say that a BS in math is a worthless degree is incredibly naive and short-sighted no offense.
Very important statement there.
Additionally, people who care enough to get a specific degree like this, should care enough to do what it takes to get the job they want, teaching or otherwise. To expect it to be handed to you or easily granted is indeed naive and shortsighted.
Our strategy with our two daughters was to get them into programs that had the most networking potential so the wifes brother is a big shot for the government in the fisheries department and his life long best friend is a big shot in environment Canada, both kids are in University taking degrees in environmental sciences with almost a guaranteed job at something environmental when they're ready to start working..
Become a plumber.
Look 50 years ago, a college degree was something that got you a job. Now, nearly anyone can get into college. College is the new high school diploma. For any job a college degree is the base requirement.
Absolutely true. I would advise nobody to go to college nowadays; a vocation or trade is the only way to make a decent living. The news reported yesterday that 1/2 of the current college-age generation will get college degrees.
In the late 1980s I realized the college degree was worth nothing, since every job I applied for had at least 100 qualified applicants. So I got a Master's Degree, and for a while I could get a job easily whenever we had to move for my husband's job. That ended around the year 2000. Now, even the Master's Degree is trumped by ten or more people who are way overqualified for the job in question, and have more education than they need.
What this Country needs is a vast reduction in work force, to correct for the vast reduction in jobs. Stopping immigration totally should be a no-brainer. Reducing natural population growth by providing tax benefits to those who have no children, with a tax penalty for one and higher taxes for more. All the efforts to make people stay in the work force after age 65 (by moving the retirement age forward, reducing benefits, etc.) are totally counter-productive.
What we need is a President who actually has a plan for turning the Country around, rather than an inexperienced community organizer with ADD (from Chicago, no less) who jumps from one "politically interesting" fancy to the next, with no sense of national priorities.
Absolutely true. I would advise nobody to go to college nowadays; a vocation or trade is the only way to make a decent living. The news reported yesterday that 1/2 of the current college-age generation will get college degrees.
In the late 1980s I realized the college degree was worth nothing, since every job I applied for had at least 100 qualified applicants. So I got a Master's Degree, and for a while I could get a job easily whenever we had to move for my husband's job. That ended around the year 2000. Now, even the Master's Degree is trumped by ten or more people who are way overqualified for the job in question, and have more education than they need.
What this Country needs is a vast reduction in work force, to correct for the vast reduction in jobs. Stopping immigration totally should be a no-brainer. Reducing natural population growth by providing tax benefits to those who have no children, with a tax penalty for one and higher taxes for more. All the efforts to make people stay in the work force after age 65 (by moving the retirement age forward, reducing benefits, etc.) are totally counter-productive.
What we need is a President who actually has a plan for turning the Country around, rather than an inexperienced community organizer with ADD (from Chicago, no less) who jumps from one "politically interesting" fancy to the next, with no sense of national priorities.
I agreed with everything you said until you threw in the political bashing for no apparent reason which had nothing to do with the previous stuff. Anyone who thinks that the president of the usa has any real power is living in the 1950's still.
Its like in PA, where we have a certain college classmate of mine running for Governer. He says, "I will fix the state government by presenting a sweeping plan for reform to the legislature in my first week of office." is that not the dumbest thing you ever heard? Most of the problem is the do nothing legislature. They will simply vote it down or just ignore it and no pass any of it. Why would a sweeping initiative help when they can't pass even non-sweeping initiatives becausethey can't compromise with each other and are locked in un-wavering idealogical battles. Government is all about compromise.
What this Country needs is a vast reduction in work force, to correct for the vast reduction in jobs. Stopping immigration totally should be a no-brainer. Reducing natural population growth by providing tax benefits to those who have no children, with a tax penalty for one and higher taxes for more. All the efforts to make people stay in the work force after age 65 (by moving the retirement age forward, reducing benefits, etc.) are totally counter-productive.
Wealth is (and jobs are) created, not fixed. If a lower population resulted in a higher living standard then living standards in the United States would have been much higher in 1800 than they are today. Take your argument to its logical conclusion. If everybody in the country stopped working tomorrow and sat around doing nothing then nothing would be produced. It wouldn't be long until everyone starved. This is not an argument for limitless population growth - the quantities of some natural resources are indeed fixed. But having large numbers of otherwise capable workers idle is crippling to an economy, not helpful.
Wealth is (and jobs are) created, not fixed. If a lower population resulted in a higher living standard then living standards in the United States would have been much higher in 1800 than they are today. Take your argument to its logical conclusion. If everybody in the country stopped working tomorrow and sat around doing nothing then nothing would be produced. It wouldn't be long until everyone starved. This is not an argument for limitless population growth - the quantities of some natural resources are indeed fixed. But having large numbers of otherwise capable workers idle is crippling to an economy, not helpful.
I didn't take the OP literally in that section, but in a general way some of that sounds discussable, but it has nothing to do with the Bachelor's in math, and we're hijacking the thread.
I didn't take the OP literally in that section, but in a general way some of that sounds discussable, but it has nothing to do with the Bachelor's in math, and we're hijacking the thread.
I agree. Belongs in another thread. My apologies to the OP and the moderator.
A Math BA doesn't get you a teaching job since you aren't certified and school systems are being rated/judged on number of "highly qualified" (meaning holding a state teaching certificate) staff members are employed.
If you want to teach your degree should be BS ________________ Education. And no, your time isn't taken up in pedagogy classes. I had to have 60 credits just in my major, in addition to the general requirements, in addition to pedagogy classes to get my original teaching certificate.
The problem a lot of you guys on here have who want to teach is that you didn't get a teaching degree but a BA. Aren't college advisors doing their jobs?
Depends on the state-in MN you would get a degree in math with a minor in secondary education if you want to be "highly qualified" and get a teaching license.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
No, there are tons of actuaries with math or engineering or even degrees like physics and so on and so forth.
However, the tests are difficult and curved....and everyone taking them is smarter than heck so they are challenging and a serious time committment.
Pay is good though and employers will help you with the exam process.
We have a few friends that are actuaries and they were all math majors in college.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
