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.
And what is the ROI of being what you define as a member of the "intelligentsia"?
Being smug because you know it all? Priceless?
The vast majority of college profs don't make big money. They work for community colleges and 3rd tier state schools. It's safe. It's pretty low stress compared to corporate life. You have a ton of time off compared to corporate life. An awful lot of them aren't tenure track and are "instructors" with few or no benefits.
Starting salary at a community college for a tenure track job is in the $40K to $60K range. A department chair late in their career in a high cost of living place might pull in $120K. When you throw in the pension and the time off, it's pretty good compensation but hardly spectacular. A 3rd tier state school is a bit higher than that.
Most high net Americans say they worked their way up from lower class Most high net worth Americans or either Lying, or they are delusional. Most have had some help in some form or another.
The dream is not dead for everyone. Growing up in New York City, I was tracked into the city's magnet schools, which were filled with immigrants and the sons and daughters of immigrants... with parents who were in the lower or lower-middle class. Several went on to the city's specialized high schools and then on to the Ivies and other elite universities. Today, many of my elementary school classmates are now surgeons, lawyers, MBB consultants, and other top 5% (if not top 1%) professions.
My experience is pretty limited. I don't know what it's like growing up outside of the big cities. But I've grown up experiencing social mobility first-hand, and it's still happening today. In New York, if you take a walk down the halls of schools like Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, Brooklyn Tech or even Regis, you'll see that the dream is still alive, at least for some.
Last edited by yellowbelle; 05-28-2016 at 11:02 AM..
Reason: quoted post has been moderated
The right of a society or members of a society or free men to trade or exchange among themselves has nothing to do with "capitalism". Capitalism, socialism and communism are both grown off the tree of 'materialism' and are systems for centralization of resource control. Free exchange, trade, giving or receiving among member of a society is not capitalism, its inherent right. Because I have lemons growing on my private land and I give some to the poor and and trade some with a grocer for cash doesn't make me a capitalist. It just fails to make me a thief because I'm trading with the grocer rather than robbing him.
That is so not true. Maybe an economy where a 200 people handful suck the blood off and life essence off of 4 billion might no longer function. But I know of plenty of people that have lots of money that still work as real estate agents, coffee shop managers, taxi drivers, chauffeurs, etc. Not having to work doesn't mean that you just want to sit around drinking booze and BBQ-ing. I know of people that have plenty of $$$ that start restaurants or bars that create opportunities for waiters and bartenders to make $100+ a night in tips. There are probably some whose biggest fear is in Americans on a wide scale overcoming the lies about economics and spiritual principles that have poisoned American educational and business systems. It has been heavily evidence that anti-American Europeans were a primary factor in dumbing down and destroying the American education system after World War I and World War II. (Books: Closing of the American Mind; The Leipzig Connection : Paulo Lionni). Also: Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto. Most of the dumbing down happened through what was posed as investment or donations to education. Through that the 'investors' were able to influence the curriculum. The main areas they 'funded' to poison was BUSINESS EDUCATION. SURPRISE!!!
Regarding competition: if you really study most industries, wealthy people that have sense work together. They aren't necessarily cutting each other's throats. Regular folk are discouraged from working together because that means competition--instead they are encouraged to cannibalize each other in Tha Hungry Games. Also that idea of working for money as an ultimate objective is a poison that injures too many people (see below).
I know of someone who started taking in lots of $$$ as young as age ~18 simply because he was aware of the principle of needs-to-be-met and set out to lawfully meet needs with high quality service. The irony is that his first minimum wage job was WORKING ON SCHOOL CAMPUS. When he went to college to appease his family he took a minimum wage job on campus. Before that he had been pulling over ~$30/hr. (that didn't include the money he was able to make by hiring someone else and paying them far more what most anyone else would pay).
So imagine going from $30/hr to $5/hr. part-time and having to pay for rent on a place that you have to share with others and filthy bathrooms and low-quality food and have to take out loans to pay for it. In sum, he found college to be full of nonsense, liars (teachers that were full of sh#t and spreading their false pet ideologies and using their jobs to get sexual favors) and drunkards so after a few years [THIS IS COLLEGE?!?! PEOPLE PAY FOR THIS!?!?!] he had enough and so he left and went on to take in $2000-$5000+ per week running at least two businesses.
Needless to say he had to pay off maybe $40K or so in student loans and he did and never looked back. Over the years he trained many people and would take them out on his jobs and pay them even though they didn't do much but he taught them how to be of service and helped them gain skills. From his lazy relatives and "friends" he gathered a lot of hatred because those kinds of people want an excuse for their misery--for them it has to be someone else rather than themselves and their narrow-minded, stingy inequitable beliefs.
But he always provided high quality service whether it was fixing concrete sidewalks or computers. He didn't buy fancy cars, gamble, go to prostitutes or do drugs. However where did he spend his money other than on the basics? Most of the money he spent was on TRAINING and BOOKS (those scary books that most people don't want anything to do with)! In his house was a vast technical library. Also, he always kept two cars in case one broke down but never took out a car note. If you saw his cars you would NEVER realize he made $5,000 per week. They weren't wrecks, they were just average (and of course he repaired his own cars).
His lazy and shady friends and relatives would pay $600/month for luxury cars and would do drugs to deal with the stress. Him? Nope. Instead he might pay $2,000 to attend a Concrete Fabrication Course or take an advanced technical course such a course in Marine (Underwater) Welding. When things got too stressful, he could ask someone to fill in for him and spend a week floating in the pool or riding his bike in the state park.
Also, when one of his relatives stole money from him, instead of shooting them or putting them in jail he laughed and Karma would have it he pulled in more than 20 times the amount they stole within a couple months.
But imagine, you're 17, 18, 19 or 20 and you go from $30/hr to making $5/hr and can hardly afford pizza or going anywhere, stuck on campus, paying for rent for a room you have to share with strangers. Why? Because you're so-called "friends" and "family" coerce you to "get an education" so that you can "get a real job" (ultimately he came to to the conclusion that they were very envious and also very stupid and wanted him to be just as stupid). A 'real job' meaning slaving for someone and getting ripped off in the process (they pay you 20% of what they should or can pay you)?
Re: Also that idea of working for money as an ultimate objective is a poison that injures too many people.
The meaning of this is that he FIRST AND FOREMOST provided service that was needed and the spiritual principles caused money (a tool for obtaining resources) and resources to flow to him. He served God and others not money and the result is that MONEY and other resources came to him. "Doing anything for money" is more like prostitution. Making money your idol is a bad idea. And people who worship money can be very dangerous.
You just nitpicked a couple of positions and tried to pass it off like that proves everyone not in college are making good money. What about dishwashers, cashiers, ticket takers at movies, nursing assistants, fast food workers etc? Just because you know a few people who are making good money does not prove anyone can and is. There is just not enough higher paying jobs for everyone. If everyone did move up businesses would loss tons of profit or close down because no one would be working there. The rest of what you wrote is nonsense and has little to do with what I was talking about.
The vast majority of college profs don't make big money. They work for community colleges and 3rd tier state schools. It's safe. It's pretty low stress compared to corporate life. You have a ton of time off compared to corporate life. An awful lot of them aren't tenure track and are "instructors" with few or no benefits.
Starting salary at a community college for a tenure track job is in the $40K to $60K range. A department chair late in their career in a high cost of living place might pull in $120K. When you throw in the pension and the time off, it's pretty good compensation but hardly spectacular. A 3rd tier state school is a bit higher than that.
Doubtless this happens. But one of my workplace responsibilities is to advise on the awarding of academic research grants. Grant-proposals require disclosure of expenses, and a typical proposal has one summer-month of academic salary. For a tenure-tracked full professor, this ranges from $10K/month on the very lowest end, to $30K+/month.
My point isn't to debate the range of academic salaries, or whether this or that level of pay is justified, vs. say the costs of tuition or expenditure on federal grants. Rather, what I notice is that most of the US-born senior professors come from what might be termed humble backgrounds. They're not from the blue-blooded gentry. Many of them speak with the handicaps of the working-class environment from which they're removed by only one generation.
Now for the delicate question of US-born vs. foreign-born academics. I do not wish to make an immigrant-bashing assertion. On the contrary, if anything I assert the reverse. Most of the professors of whom I speak are not from China or India. They are from Europe. Besides being fluent in English, many are fluent in French and German, and have passable knowledge of Latin and Greek – to which they were exposed in elite schools, and then the best national universities, such as Oxford or Cambridge. They're certainly reasonably affluent, but not outright wealthy. They chose a career in the sciences, but could have just as easily chosen one in the diplomatic corps, or medicine, or the arts. But not in business. There's something vulgar and pedestrian about business.
My point, then, is that the American "elite" is the material elite, while elsewhere the elite is a cultural elite. A huge reason behind America's dominance in science and engineering is that America is a welcoming milieu for the world's cultural elite to settle here and to thrive. But the native engendering of such an elite is sparse and threadbare. Because, you know, "return on investment", and all that.
Last edited by ohio_peasant; 05-27-2016 at 04:28 PM..
Most high net Americans say they worked their way up from lower class Most high net worth Americans or either Lying, or they are delusional. Most have had some help in some form or another.
I had nice parents who supported my aspirations. They sacrificed a more comfortable life for themselves so they could send me to an elite private college. They never made over $16,000 a year.
I greatly appreciate this. But I had to do elite private college-level work, then pay for graduate school myself, then get a job, get a better job...you know the rest. I did not do it all by myself but I went from working class to upper middle class (which is what a $3 million portfolio is, if you're retired or almost retired) in one generation as did most of my other moderately prosperous neighbors and friends.
My former boss went from being the son of a welfare mother to running a multi-billion dollar corporation and has a net worth at least 10 times mine - probably more - I haven't asked.
It is called wage slavery, a modification, the idea is the same - force us to work for the strategically placed 1:20,000 individuals controlling us through jobs and wages.You have no right to exist unless they can extract "value" from you. Simple.
"Value" is a meaningless slogan. You cannot define it.
You should apologize to anyone that's every had an association with slavery. Slavery means you don't have a choice.
You have a choice. Many people lead very fulfilling lives selling their time to one or two employers for their life. They don't get rich, but you don't have to get rich to have a nice life. Of course that employer makes money from that, otherwise, why would he/she/they risk their savings to begin the business in the first place.
Value is what something is worth to another person. To a collector, a Mickey Mantle baseball card is worth a lot of money, to me, it's worth $5. If some idiot is too lazy to go find a collector and sells me the card for $5 instead, why would I be blamed? He asks what I'd pay, I say $5. That person chooses to sell because they think it's their best option. A slave doesn't get the decision to sell/not sell.
Your labor is the same thing. Say you are a rocket scientist, but you want to live in Boise, Idaho. Maybe they don't need any rocket scientists there. Maybe someone needs a repairman for airplanes though, and you need to eat. Why would you expect a rocket scientist wage? For that matter, why would you even expect a good repairman wage, because you are not trained as a repair person, merely have talent that someone else can develop for you to do something useful.
You are not a slave to anyone but yourself. I understand that may mean you have a horrid master, but America works because it is an imperfect meritocracy, not an imperfect socialist paradise.
Doubtless this happens. But one of my workplace responsibilities is to advise on the awarding of academic research grants. Grant-proposals require disclosure of expenses, and a typical proposal has one summer-month of academic salary. For a tenure-tracked full professor, this ranges from $10K/month on the very lowest end, to $30K+/month.
My point isn't to debate the range of academic salaries, or whether this or that level of pay is justified, vs. say the costs of tuition or expenditure on federal grants. Rather, what I notice is that most of the US-born senior professors come from what might be termed humble backgrounds. They're not from the blue-blooded gentry. Many of them speak with the handicaps of the working-class environment from which they're removed by only one generation.
Now for the delicate question of US-born vs. foreign-born academics. I do not wish to make an immigrant-bashing assertion. On the contrary, if anything I assert the reverse. Most of the professors of whom I speak are not from China or India. They are from Europe. Besides being fluent in English, many are fluent in French and German, and have passable knowledge of Latin and Greek – to which they were exposed in elite schools, and then the best national universities, such as Oxford or Cambridge. They're certainly reasonably affluent, but not outright wealthy. They chose a career in the sciences, but could have just as easily chosen one in the diplomatic corps, or medicine, or the arts. But not in business. There's something vulgar and pedestrian about business.
My point, then, is that the American "elite" is the material elite, while elsewhere the elite is a cultural elite. A huge reason behind America's dominance in science and engineering is that America is a welcoming milieu for the world's cultural elite to settle here and to thrive. But the native engendering of such an elite is sparse and threadbare. Because, you know, "return on investment", and all that.
Oh dear, this is a vulgar and pedestrian thread. I'm rather surprised an Oxford woman, of course deterred by the thoughtless and contrite accumulation of wealth, would have stumbled into this Economics section. It must be a rather brutish surprise.
Pace tua, perhaps the madam would be more comfortable in the parlor awaiting tea and worthy consort, it's just down from the entrance to the Mausoleum.
Those seem like impossible amounts for insurance premiums. You must be getting a heck of a deal through work, or something. The low cost of your car ($15 gas and no maintenance) is also an impossibility for most people in our autocentric nation..
Yes, I do have good insurance through work, although the co-pays have gone up a lot (but are still reasonable). I live a block away from my job and I live in a car-centric city/metro area. Believe me, it didn't just happen magically. It took me 11 years to have the work/apartment setup I've had over the last several years. And despite being a block from work, I've had other issues, such as homeless people camping across the street from my building for just over a year (and all their noise, screaming in the middle of the night, barking dogs any time of day or night, etc.) until the cops/city finally took action just over a month ago. So while it's been mostly good, it hasn't all been a bed of roses, either.
The car repairs were somewhat merged into the other expenses, as I believe I noted. Yes, not living a car centric lifestyle helps. But even before when I drove like everyone else, I still saved more than 10%. My car is getting old, though...at some point I'm thinking of getting a new one. But I also may get rid of the car and just go with Zipcar, the car sharing service. If I do buy another car, I will sell some taxable investments and I'm sure I will keep it for at least 10 years, although I will try to go for 15 or 20. I bought my current car used when it was 4 years old & have had it for 16 years. For 8 of those years I had a fairly typical commute (20-30 minutes one way in rush hour traffic, depending on where I lived at the time).
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller
That being said, I feel like it's pretty clear a young single professional with no kids can live cheaply and save up lots of money..
Technically, I'm not even a professional. 50K isn't considered a professional salary around here, but thanks for the compliment . As far as single professionals living cheaply goes....I SEE SINGLE PROFESSIONALS WITH NO KIDS WHO EARN MORE THAN ME SAVE MUCH LESS THAN ME EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK--no joke. That includes my very own sister (single with no kids who's earned more than me for many years) who I have to constantly nag to save a lousy $2k per year for retirement. The statistics pretty much show that single people are generally among the broke-est people in America, and that includes single people with no kids. It goes back to what I said before....there's this strong tendency to think that if only YOU were single with no kids, you'd be able to save as much as I do. Theoretically true....In reality, most people never do it. So it's not as easy as it looks. Trust me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller
The broader problem is that relatively few people are in the position to be single professionals with no kids. I guess one could say "people shouldn't have kids", but there are a lot of problems with that like "do we really think only millionaires should be allowed to have kids?". And we as a country don't need or want 150 million professionals.
Like I said, I'm not a professional. Although a good percentage of us have college degrees, it's by no means everyone. My job only requires a HS Diploma.
The "only millionaires should have kids" think is hyperbole. How about this for starters: Get married (and stay married). THEN have kids. In that order. As I already said, 40% of kids today are born outside of marriage. No wonder the middle class is shrinking. Even liberal leaning think tanks are admitting this is a serious problem.
Scholar Kay Hymowitz, author of Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and Unequal Families in a Post-Marital Age,..... says it's not that harsh economic conditions lead to women having children without fathers, but that the decision to have children without fathers leads to harsh, and self-perpetuating, economic conditions. She explains that having the belief that a solid marriage is central to one's life—that it precedes starting a family—encourages women and men to make important choices based on self-discipline and deliberation. This is a formula "needed for upward mobility,
Ron Haskins and I learned that if individuals do just three things — finish high school, work full time and marry before they have children — their chances of being poor drop from 15 percent to 2 percent. Mitt Romney has cited this research on the campaign trail, but these issues transcend presidential politics. Stronger public support for single-parent families — such as subsidies or tax credits for child care, and the earned-income tax credit — is needed, but no government program is likely to reduce child poverty as much as bringing back marriage as the preferable way of raising children.
Most high net Americans say they worked their way up from lower class Most high net worth Americans or either Lying, or they are delusional. Most have had some help in some form or another.
There is truth in what you say in that work smarter not harder is more practical--it doesn't necessarily mean rip anyone off. But putting one's energies into that which is most likely to produce good returns vs pouring energy into evil boss-man's evil craphole of a business while he pays you 3% of what he should vs. working somewhere else for higher pay vs. taking a vocational course in marine welding on the side and getting out of the hellhold as soon as the stars duz align most deliciously.
Last edited by yellowbelle; 05-28-2016 at 11:03 AM..
Reason: quoted post has been moderated
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.
