2 ms·

> The engineers are fine. Says who? Consider the state of the physical sciences. Employment in physics has been problematic since a long time back, chemistry

> The engineers are fine. Says who? Consider the state of the physical sciences. Employment in physics has been problematic since a long time back, chemistry has suffered from outsourcing to East Asia for ten years, and in biology the pharmco bubble is bursting as we speak. That leaves computing. It's not that hard to become qualified to B.S., in this very place we see encouragements to drop out of college and "just start a startup". That's not a sustainable model.

philwelch 14y ago
You're right that science is problematic, but I said engineering. Engineering tends to be paid for by the market, science tends to be paid for by academia and government, which means employment trends in science are slightly more arbitrary.
- HarryHirsch 14y ago
  You are forgetting the chemical and pharmaceutical companies, which always had R&D departments that employed chemists and biologists. Employment in discovery has shrunk, both because it has become too expensive to bring a new drug to market, and the process end was offshored to China, starting about ten years back. No need to invoke the government here.
  - philwelch 14y ago
    As you're pointing out, the private sector has relatively little interest in employing scientists. That's fine--I was mainly talking about business and engineering.
    - HarryHirsch 14y ago
      > As you're pointing out, the private sector has relatively little interest in employing scientists. Boston, San Diego and New Jersey might disagree with you. That's where the pharmcos are.
      - philwelch 14y ago
        First you're telling me that pharmaceuticals aren't employing a lot of scientists, and now you're telling me that they are. I'm not sure where you're going with this. I think "relatively little" (as opposed to "very little" or "none") is a fair characterization of what you said.
        HarryHirsch 14y ago
        It appears that your point is that science graduates have mainly found employment in academia. This is just not so - chemists and biologists have traditionally found employment in the chemical and pharmaceutical industry. My points is this: for a few years now chemistry has moved offshore, there have been heavy layoffs in the pharmaceutical industry, and the synthetic chemistry has been off-shored to contract shops, mainly in East Asia. But the pipeline is long, and any chemist who began their studies in the early 2000s, when the trend started, is (justifiably) pissed off that then cannot find work in their field even with a solid degree. There is talk about alternative career path, but the observation is that those pay less then the original career promised. We see the offshoring trend continue, the biological research is moving offshore as well, the pharmacology bubble is bursting, and soon only management will remain stateside. This heavily afflicts people with advanced degrees. Considering that the common wisdom on this website is "skip college, get to work with the equivalent of a bachelors from Coursera/Khan &c", I cannot see that demographic unaffected. In India and China you can get an excellent education, and you will work for much less than an American or European. I cannot see computer engineering unaffected by the offshoring trend. Exactly what is your point?
        philwelch 14y ago
        You know, I didn't say anything directly about people with advanced degrees in the sciences in my first comment, and I think I should have left it at that because you're picking a fight with me over a topic you brought up.
        HarryHirsch 14y ago

philwelch 14y ago

You're right that science is problematic, but I said engineering. Engineering tends to be paid for by the market, science tends to be paid for by academia and government, which means employment trends in science are slightly more arbitrary.

HarryHirsch 14y ago
You are forgetting the chemical and pharmaceutical companies, which always had R&D departments that employed chemists and biologists. Employment in discovery has shrunk, both because it has become too expensive to bring a new drug to market, and the process end was offshored to China, starting about ten years back. No need to invoke the government here.
- philwelch 14y ago
  As you're pointing out, the private sector has relatively little interest in employing scientists. That's fine--I was mainly talking about business and engineering.
  - HarryHirsch 14y ago
    > As you're pointing out, the private sector has relatively little interest in employing scientists. Boston, San Diego and New Jersey might disagree with you. That's where the pharmcos are.
    - philwelch 14y ago
      First you're telling me that pharmaceuticals aren't employing a lot of scientists, and now you're telling me that they are. I'm not sure where you're going with this. I think "relatively little" (as opposed to "very little" or "none") is a fair characterization of what you said.
      - HarryHirsch 14y ago
        It appears that your point is that science graduates have mainly found employment in academia. This is just not so - chemists and biologists have traditionally found employment in the chemical and pharmaceutical industry. My points is this: for a few years now chemistry has moved offshore, there have been heavy layoffs in the pharmaceutical industry, and the synthetic chemistry has been off-shored to contract shops, mainly in East Asia. But the pipeline is long, and any chemist who began their studies in the early 2000s, when the trend started, is (justifiably) pissed off that then cannot find work in their field even with a solid degree. There is talk about alternative career path, but the observation is that those pay less then the original career promised. We see the offshoring trend continue, the biological research is moving offshore as well, the pharmacology bubble is bursting, and soon only management will remain stateside. This heavily afflicts people with advanced degrees. Considering that the common wisdom on this website is "skip college, get to work with the equivalent of a bachelors from Coursera/Khan &c", I cannot see that demographic unaffected. In India and China you can get an excellent education, and you will work for much less than an American or European. I cannot see computer engineering unaffected by the offshoring trend. Exactly what is your point?
        philwelch 14y ago
        You know, I didn't say anything directly about people with advanced degrees in the sciences in my first comment, and I think I should have left it at that because you're picking a fight with me over a topic you brought up.
        HarryHirsch 14y ago