The job market is really pissing me off.

[ck_taft325is]

But with how much experience? Engineers start a little shy of that, some more. Add in experience and continued schooling and $100K+ is pretty standard. There's a much more limited long-term salary growth I see with plumbing.

There wouldn't be a lot of things in the world without someone designing them. Engineers fix things too, of a greater technical need and with abilities few others have. I'm a DIY-type and can read and understand how to fix a lot of things around the house, but it's not like the average joe can pick up a book and repair the turbine fan on a jet engine. Even if not as apparent of contribution, people certainly enjoy the ability to commute with airlines. We could rejoice in the ability to shower or flush our shit down, but without engineers we couldn't fly on planes, our cars wouldn't exist like they do, we wouldn't have refined gasoline, and our roads and bridges wouldn't be as well designed or long-lasting.

This is not a "what do we need more" scenerio here. What Luke lined out was in the event of shit hitting the fan, a plumber may come more in handy than a guy that designs things. Sure, when civilization comes back together and large projects are needed, Engineers play a pivotal role. In the realm of income, no, of course a Plumber will not start at a great income. But I know many a plumber that moves from plumbing apprentice to owning their own business and make $100,000 + a year. Their business even more.

My quam was that Engineer's contribute more to Society. I think this statement is elitist and false. If you're an engineer, obviously you'll have some handy-man type skills (dependant on field of engineering). Half the engineers I know are really educated mechanics that love getting their hands dirty and happen to know the math behind the principle.

But to equate a salary to worth to a Society is purely falsehood and again, elitist. I've known people with portfolios and worked for these people that honestly, couldn't hold a hammer. They don't want to. I get that. It's hard work. To claim hard work means that you're less educated, of lesser intelligence or less productive for and to society is ignorant. In my experience there's cases with people where the shoes really couldn't fit on the other feet in terms of chosen fields. Take playing guitar for example... anyone can learn but not everyone can write Stairway to Heaven. While in the same way "anyone" can just "put pipes together" (which for the record is not that simple) or frame a wall, or side a house, or pour a driveway, it is just not that simple.

Anyone can also drive a car. But anyone can get into an accident. The same principle applies. Not everyone is has smart as everyone else and there's nothing wrong with this until the smart person starts to feel above those of lesser intelligence.

I'm not sure what the general debate here is in any case. If it's who contributes more to society? Well, that has nothing to do with what you do but more about who you are. If it's who is more integral in the big scheme of things? This cannot be measured in monetary gain or income. If it's who is smarter? Something can be said for not working hard and being "smart" and getting a degree. Something can also be said for working hard and not being a douche-bag elitist asswipe that has soft hands and treats everyone like they are a lesser form of life.

[StereoInstaller1]

Isn't this kind of like that old fable about all the parts of the body arguing about what part is the most important?

Didn't the asshole win?

Does that mean heeter is the most important member here?

[Farbin Kaiber]

Look I already told you, I deal with the @#$% customers so the engineers don't have to. I have people skills! I am good at dealing with people, can't you understand that? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!

[rwh11385]

ck_taft325is, you type too much.

I was disagreeing that engineers are not practical because they are thinkers, and the world is more benefited by someone with a pipe wrench that can fix your toilet. Every time you go to fill up your car with gasoline (which I assume people are familiar with being on a car enthusiast website), that is made possible by chemical engineers. Surely not as obvious as your toilet flushing but if you are too narrow-minded to see how they influence you... then that is your problem.

Luke was the one equating income with value to society.

And plumbers can make a stable, relocatable salary since they are needed everywhere and regularly, but a few outliers who do well doesn't justify previous statements that they do better in general than engineers. The law of averages have most plumbers making less than what engineers pull fresh out of college working 40 a week or 8/90 with paid holidays and vacation, 4% match 401k, etc. There are merits of a technical profession, but its contributions to society no matter how obvious do not trump those of engineers just because you are somewhat "disconnected" at times from their impact.

You are aware that plumbers make as much or more than Engineers, right?

Kinda refutes your statements...if the income is the barometer, plumbers are certainly worth more to society, as they have basically similar incomes, are far more versatile in their choices of habitat (as in employment is EVERYWHERE)

[ck_taft325is]

ck_taft325is, you type too much.

I was disagreeing that engineers are not practical because they are thinkers, and the world is more benefited by someone with a pipe wrench that can fix your toilet. Every time you go to fill up your car with gasoline (which I assume people are familiar with being on a car enthusiast website), that is made possible by chemical engineers. Surely not as obvious as your toilet flushing but if you are too narrow-minded to see how they influence you... then that is your problem.

Luke was the one equating income with value to society.

And plumbers can make a stable, relocatable salary since they are needed everywhere and regularly, but a few outliers who do well doesn't justify previous statements that they do better in general than engineers. The law of averages have most plumbers making less than what engineers pull fresh out of college working 40 a week or 8/90 with paid holidays and vacation, 4% match 401k, etc. There are merits of a technical profession, but its contributions to society no matter how obvious do not trump those of engineers just because you are somewhat "disconnected" at times from their impact.

You obviously failed to read what I wrote since you think I type too much.

Let me sum it up for you.

I agree.

Good?

[Farbin Kaiber]

^ Now you are getting it.

[rwh11385]

You obviously failed to read what I wrote since you think I type too much.

Let me sum it up for you.

I agree.

Good?

I read it, but it assumed I said things I didn't and was missed the point entirely. Volume does not equal to value.

Some people in the world are simple and only consider what they can see in front of them or what directly impacts them. Ignoring engineers' contribution to society because you don't observe it is like thanking the deli guy for your meat and withholding any acknowledgement of the hardwork of the cattleman.

[ck_taft325is]

I read it, but it assumed I said things I didn't and was missed the point entirely. Volume does not equal to value.

I don't think I was just replying to you.

[drift]

Jobs up here are screwed. I need something that's just part time and can't find shit.

I keep seeing how things are getting better....definition of getting better= losing less jobs. Seriously.

My wife just got a pay cut as well. Shit ain't looking good. And this Government is fucking it up more imo. I'm really getting pissed.

Place your rants here ....

How old are you?
What's your primary skill, level of education & accomplishment ?
Did you work for government or private company?
How much did you make from your previous job(s)?
How many job applications did you submit?
How many interviews turned you down?
How long have you been receiving unemployment benefit?
How much you owe (anyone)?

[Hallen]

I only read one line in you're post and would like to refute it:
"This whole downturn is the fault of government intervention in the markets, as was the great depression"

The Great Depression was a result of Margin-Buying. Where banks would invest stored money. This system eventually fell apart because the stocks reached prices that were absolutely absurd. Once the bubble burst the investments stopped paying, the banks lost the money that Americans entrusted them with. This caused a rush of Americans who wanted to withdraw their money. Basically the whole entire economy "froze up"

I am not educated enough in the subject of the current recession to make a comment, but I don't think government intervention was the main cause. I think it had something to do with people taking out loans for more than they could actually afford, and mass foreclosures ensued.

Your talking symptoms and results rather than causes. The stock market boom of the late 20's and 30's are exactly the same as the housing boom of the auts (you know, the first 10 years of this century). The 20's and 30's boom was caused by loose monetary supply by the Fed, just like the housing boom was fed by the same source. Of course, this latest thing was also fueled by really stupid regulations on housing mortgages, and by the lack of risk to banks because they knew they were "too big to fail" and would get bailed out if things went horribly wrong.
Anyway, the great depression was caused by excessive amounts of money being put into the system. It had to go somewhere, so it got dumped into the market which created a feeding frenzy and perceived lack of risk. When the bubble burst, well, we know what happened.

You are aware that plumbers make as much or more than Engineers, right?

Kinda refutes your statements...if the income is the barometer, plumbers are certainly worth more to society, as they have basically similar incomes, are far more versatile in their choices of habitat (as in employment is EVERYWHERE) and are not limited by the size of the company/community plus their skillset requires far more adaptive thinking.

All in all, were I forced to live in a place that basic infrastructure had collapsed (Tsunami, Earthquake, other major natural disasters, whatever) If I had a choice between casting my lot with an engineer or a plumber, I will take the plumber.

I know this sounds arrogant and bigoted, but it's still true: the value you provide to society is represented by what you get paid. At least, that's how it should work if we actually had a free market. That value would change continually based off of the needs of society. I should also state that Society = the economomy; it's the same thing.

Obviously, there are things that we value that has no price tag associated with it. Those things cannot be bought or owned so you must disregard them in this conversation (things like love and compassion and you mom) But, in all things that provide value, we must measure with a dollar amount since we can't measure it any other way.

Do not confuse the value of the human being with the value they provide to society. They are two completely different things. So, a top fund manager, or a skilled engineer in a valuable field, are going to make lots more than a plumber. Why? Simple: the guy who can be that engineer could be a plumber, but most plumbers have no hope of ever being that engineer. Either because of intelligence or aptitude or attitude. Plumbers are great and we are all willing to pay them a good amount to come fix my broken pipes. They provide a ton of value. But not nearly as much as others. I can figure my own piping out, thanks very much (not very well, but well enough). I can't figure out how to make a computer from scratch. That's the difference. (plus, a plumber can only provide value to one person at a time. That engineer designs one widget that could be used by millions at the same time. He has much, much higher earning potential.)

Anyway, it isn't personal, and it isn't about who is better than who. I'd much rather hang out with a plumber than a fund manager (the fund manger would smell too bad).

[StereoInstaller1]

Luke was the one equating income with value to society.

No, not even remotely true.

In fact, I say value is value, and income is income. That is why there are 2 separate words for those 2 concepts.

I would say that it is my opinion that income is what society has decided make a person have higher or lower value.

That whole "Value to society" thing is why hot young bitches still fuck fat old men.

[ck_taft325is]

No, not even remotely true.

In fact, I say value is value, and income is income. That is why there are 2 separate words for those 2 concepts.

I would say that it is my opinion that income is what society has decided make a person have higher or lower value.

That whole "Value to society" thing is why hot young bitches still fuck fat old men.

I just can't see the flaw in Luke's logic on this one

[z31maniac]

No, not even remotely true.

In fact, I say value is value, and income is income. That is why there are 2 separate words for those 2 concepts.

I would say that it is my opinion that income is what society has decided make a person have higher or lower value.

That whole "Value to society" thing is why hot young bitches still fuck fat old men.

I would say your value determines your income.

2 concepts that are inter-related.

[ck_taft325is]

I think a point missing here is that Society and Monetary gain/income are not all that one can contribute to society. Sorry, it's not. There's an incredible amount more that's done by many I know under the $50,000 bracket.

I don't think anyone is inherently wrong here, just different sides of the same elephant.

[rwh11385]

I don't think someone's contribution to society is reflected solely by their income. Take K-12 teachers who are not well paid but greatly important. Their influence is immeasurable, but because there's a supply and demand at hand and many people can do it (TFA, etc.) they cannot bring in that much. If the job isn't that fun, then there is a premium to encourage a healthy supply of labor. A unique desire to work in a field few others aim for could mean a great reward doing something you enjoy. But popular careers can weigh down the income because of people wanting to do it, or more are capable of doing it. That doesn't mean the contribution is less valuable to society because more people enjoy the work they do.

Speaking of which - I hope that this economy helps to underline for people in college to study something they enjoy and want to do, rather than looking at salary averages to determine what they want to do for 40+ years of their life.

Once again, I also think the government should motivate people to fill gaps and areas of need more than they currently do. I know MI is retraining auto workers for chemical jobs, and that's a start. Everyone is running with their heads cutoff, and not really getting enough info on where they could go.