6 ms·

Does it make me a bad human being if I feel zero pity for highly educated people who do not understand the basics of supply and demand in their chosen job marke

Does it make me a bad human being if I feel zero pity for highly educated people who do not understand the basics of supply and demand in their chosen job market?

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
jseliger 14y ago
I suspect people downvoted you because of the tone and your use of a rhetorical question—if you'd just said, "I don't pity highly educated people who don't understand supply and demand in their chosen job market." And you know what? You're right. I'm in English Lit grad school, and the number one thing I tell other people who are contemplating it is not to go. Then I tell them to read Louis Menand's The Marketplace of Ideas and Thomas Benton's articles: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Big-Lie-About-the-Life-of/63937/ http://chronicle.com/article/The-Big-Lie-About-the-Life-of/6... .
sparsevector 14y ago
I think the problem is more complicated than basic supply and demand. There is a lot of demand for college education. Enrollment is higher than it has ever been, and the people profiled in this article have jobs. The problem is that in order to cut cost colleges are hiring more and more adjunct professors as opposed to full-time, tenure track professors. It's not uncommon for these adjunct professors to take on jobs at multiple community colleges in order to make enough. The end result is that they are doing as much or more work than a full time professor but for less pay.
- wtvanhest 14y ago
  It is still over supplied. If it weren't then colleges would be forced to hire tenure track professors to fill the positions since there wouldn't be enough people to teach.
  - kijin 14y ago
    Why would colleges want to hire tenure-track professors if adjuncts can teach the same number of students for less money? The full-time vs. adjunct debate has nothing to do with whether college is over- or under-supplied. It's a problem with how colleges supply whatever it is that they supply.
    - sunsu 14y ago
      "Why would colleges want to hire tenure-track professors if adjuncts can teach the same number of students for less money?" That is precisely the point. There is an oversupply of people willing to do the job and thus people are willing to do it for less money (teaching adjunct). If there were a shortage, then the university would be forced to pay more and give more benefits (hire tenure track).
      - kijin 14y ago
        There seems to be a lot of confusion in this thread about what one another is saying. sparsevector said that colleges are not oversupplied, because there's a lot of demand for them. wtvanhest replied with a comment that sounds as if colleges are oversupplied, when in fact his evidence suggests that teachers are oversupplied. That's off-topic. So I was trying to point that out, and now you're repeating wtvanhest's argument that teachers are oversupplied. That's not a bad argument in itself, and I'm not downvoting you (HN doesn't allow me to downvote replies to my own comment) but it's still off-topic in the context of sparsevector's argument above.
        wtvanhest 14y ago
        I downvoted his comment while trying to upvote it. (android phone is hard to use hn on) which is probably why it went grey. I am talking about professors since that is what the article is about and completely not worrying about colleges since that is off topic. The entire point of the article is that a person who decides to get a PhD in history should be paid because they went to school for 4 years. To me, that concept is ridiculous and people don't get to be paid a lot for what they want to do in the absence of basic economic theory. Too many professors, not enough demand = low pay. It sucks that person made that choice, but there are plenty of secretarial jobs which pay above poverty level which someone with a PhD in history could get.
StevenRayOrr 14y ago
Medieval History, English, & Film Studies. I shouldn't throw stones, because my chosen discipline of Political Theory is not exactly a bustling field. But: what did they think they were getting into? Education for the sake of education is fine, but it is incredibly difficult to take care of a family when you completely ignore economics. Study what you love, sure, but don't expect that it will lead you to financial success.
- Agathos 14y ago
  They do exactly what people outside of academia do: look at those who came before. They see their advisors doing fine. Academia is weirdly deceptive in that way.
  - yummyfajitas 14y ago
    This is a silly excuse for anyone who started grad school after google was invented. It's also a silly excuse for anyone in their 2nd year who ever spoke to a 5-6th year.
gjm11 14y ago
Since you ask: Yes, actually, it does.
- YuriNiyazov 14y ago
  By what moral standard?
  - Cadsby 14y ago
    By one different than your own? Not being snarky, and I'll assume your original question was asked in good faith. However, logical arguments, no matter how well crafted, tend not change people's minds about moral issues. If you don't care, then you don't care. And there's probably nothing that can be said in this thread that will change your position on the matter.

Does it make me a bad human being if I feel zero pity for highly educated people who do not understand the basics of supply and demand in their chosen job market?

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

jseliger 14y ago

I suspect people downvoted you because of the tone and your use of a rhetorical question—if you'd just said, "I don't pity highly educated people who don't understand supply and demand in their chosen job market." And you know what? You're right. I'm in English Lit grad school, and the number one thing I tell other people who are contemplating it is not to go. Then I tell them to read Louis Menand's The Marketplace of Ideas and Thomas Benton's articles: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Big-Lie-About-the-Life-of/63937/ http://chronicle.com/article/The-Big-Lie-About-the-Life-of/6... .

sparsevector 14y ago

I think the problem is more complicated than basic supply and demand. There is a lot of demand for college education. Enrollment is higher than it has ever been, and the people profiled in this article have jobs. The problem is that in order to cut cost colleges are hiring more and more adjunct professors as opposed to full-time, tenure track professors. It's not uncommon for these adjunct professors to take on jobs at multiple community colleges in order to make enough. The end result is that they are doing as much or more work than a full time professor but for less pay.

wtvanhest 14y ago
It is still over supplied. If it weren't then colleges would be forced to hire tenure track professors to fill the positions since there wouldn't be enough people to teach.
- kijin 14y ago
  Why would colleges want to hire tenure-track professors if adjuncts can teach the same number of students for less money? The full-time vs. adjunct debate has nothing to do with whether college is over- or under-supplied. It's a problem with how colleges supply whatever it is that they supply.
  - sunsu 14y ago
    "Why would colleges want to hire tenure-track professors if adjuncts can teach the same number of students for less money?" That is precisely the point. There is an oversupply of people willing to do the job and thus people are willing to do it for less money (teaching adjunct). If there were a shortage, then the university would be forced to pay more and give more benefits (hire tenure track).
    - kijin 14y ago
      There seems to be a lot of confusion in this thread about what one another is saying. sparsevector said that colleges are not oversupplied, because there's a lot of demand for them. wtvanhest replied with a comment that sounds as if colleges are oversupplied, when in fact his evidence suggests that teachers are oversupplied. That's off-topic. So I was trying to point that out, and now you're repeating wtvanhest's argument that teachers are oversupplied. That's not a bad argument in itself, and I'm not downvoting you (HN doesn't allow me to downvote replies to my own comment) but it's still off-topic in the context of sparsevector's argument above.
      - wtvanhest 14y ago
        I downvoted his comment while trying to upvote it. (android phone is hard to use hn on) which is probably why it went grey. I am talking about professors since that is what the article is about and completely not worrying about colleges since that is off topic. The entire point of the article is that a person who decides to get a PhD in history should be paid because they went to school for 4 years. To me, that concept is ridiculous and people don't get to be paid a lot for what they want to do in the absence of basic economic theory. Too many professors, not enough demand = low pay. It sucks that person made that choice, but there are plenty of secretarial jobs which pay above poverty level which someone with a PhD in history could get.

StevenRayOrr 14y ago

Medieval History, English, & Film Studies. I shouldn't throw stones, because my chosen discipline of Political Theory is not exactly a bustling field. But: what did they think they were getting into? Education for the sake of education is fine, but it is incredibly difficult to take care of a family when you completely ignore economics. Study what you love, sure, but don't expect that it will lead you to financial success.

Agathos 14y ago
They do exactly what people outside of academia do: look at those who came before. They see their advisors doing fine. Academia is weirdly deceptive in that way.
- yummyfajitas 14y ago
  This is a silly excuse for anyone who started grad school after google was invented. It's also a silly excuse for anyone in their 2nd year who ever spoke to a 5-6th year.

gjm11 14y ago

Since you ask: Yes, actually, it does.

YuriNiyazov 14y ago
By what moral standard?
- Cadsby 14y ago
  By one different than your own? Not being snarky, and I'll assume your original question was asked in good faith. However, logical arguments, no matter how well crafted, tend not change people's minds about moral issues. If you don't care, then you don't care. And there's probably nothing that can be said in this thread that will change your position on the matter.