does a PhD pretty much mean good money?

gei wrote: ↑Most PhD students are so deep in debt by the time they graduate that it will take them decades to just catch up to their peers who only did their undergrad. I know a couple of PhD graduates and they don't really make any significant amounts of money, however the interest on their $100,000+ student debt is eating them alive.

Don't PhD students not have to pay tuition and get a stipend, or is this only in USA?

Powder + park raider wrote: ↑was there ever a case where a PhD don't make much?

Yes. For instance, one of my best lecturers/instructors in school, a young researcher in RF electronics, and worked on the team that introduced CDMA technology to Nortel's product offerings before returning to school. In 2000, he had an offer from Lucent in New Jersey for $300k/year. He deferred joining the tech sector because he wanted to finish his PhD. By the time 2001 rolled around and his PhD was done, not only was Lucent no longer hiring, but practically nobody was hiring.

Today he is a stay-at-home dad and his wife owns a hairdressing business in Edmonton. As the hiring in the tech sector, and the R&D never really returned.

i seem to have this impression that if you have a PhD, you are automatically respected anywhere you go and you make very good money.

MrsPotato wrote: ↑Actually, you're WAY off on the salary ... I work at yorku as a Prof!!
You're delusional if you think we make 6 figures!!!!!!

No I am not way off. Are you a professor? Do you have tenure or are you just a temp aka a ph.d grad who instructs courses? are you an associate professor, or a real professor?
All of the full time ph.d instructors at Schulich are paid 100k+. Even the professors at york who are department heads and actually full tenured professors are generally paid this. Go look at the ontario sunshine list. If you are just a ph.d instructor, then no, you won't be making that, or if you are just a language or social science instructor of course you will be making penneis.

nauru wrote: ↑I'm curious about why a PhD student would have $100,000+ in debt. You do realise people get paid to do a PhD, right?

Only in very few fields, and usually when pay is involved, there is a very large quid pro quo doing other work for a professor or the institution (ie: teaching) which may delay or prolong the PhD.

This is how what ordinarily would be a 2 year course of study and research (ie: a PhD) ends up being a 5-6 year endeavour for a great many.

Mark, how does that relate to my comment? (since you quoted it)

MrsPotato wrote: ↑For te most part, after spending 10 years in uni, your social skills are pretty much nil.

No company wants to hire with no experience, but with years and years of schooling.
You dont look Profitable in the eyes of a biz.

Did you seriously sacrifice that much time and effort achieving a doctorate in your field, just to trash your own credentials?

I understand a little self-deprecation here n' there, but if you seriously have a PHD, then show some fortitude. It's no small feat. We have enough uneducated people on here taking potshots at university students, we don't need to be taking it from both ends.

We need you to be an emissary.

Syne wrote: ↑Did you seriously sacrifice that much time and effort achieving a doctorate in your field, just to trash your own credentials?

I understand a little self-deprecation here n' there, but if you seriously have a PHD, then show some fortitude. It's no small feat. We have enough uneducated people on here taking potshots at university students, we don't need to be taking it from both ends.

We need you to be an emissary.

It's not completely true what people are saying about "you doing PHD, means you develop anti social behaviors or lack of". The people who usually do a PHD are brain dead in social skills to begin with. So that's why the employers find them unemployable.

If a company owner or CEO actually know what a PHD can produce from scratch, they would hire them. I think the company owners or CEO wants the skills, just not want to pay for it. Of course they can't be the brain dead socially. A minority of PHD actually are good socially, the PHD will get them somewhere.

I keep reading on one thread, some people on here keep trashing university grads just because they themselves are too dumb or too lazy to get an education. Well, the guys who don't get an education, they can join the city union to pick up garbage for an over inflated salary. Of course, they won't have the brains to do better at that job. They do it, the same old way. The uneducated are going to the dogs, because soon the grunt jobs will request that you have a bachelor or at least some college education of some sort.

Powder + park raider wrote: ↑was there ever a case where a PhD don't make much?

i seem to have this impression that if you have a PhD, you are automatically respected anywhere you go and you make very good money.

Your university wants you to think so because their existence depends on you pouring money into their programs. Anyone that has actually tried to get a full time job post graduation can tell you that the real world is not that rosy. People with high education and no experience are pretty unemployable. These people often expect high salary but their over education makes employers scared to choose them.

I'm quite sure there are PhDs out there that are unemployed. Those surveys don't mean anything. Averages are not reflective of your own situation. Most PhDs are wise enough to realize that education alone doesn't get there. They often get co-op or internships to go with their education. So it's not the PhD that makes good money. It's a combination of experience and academic. You should only pursue a PhD if you understand that you still need to build up your resume like everyone else.

Lol most Ph.Ds doing research make like 35k a year. You can get Ph.Ds from the third world who will work for peanuts.

Berrim wrote: ↑Why is he delusional thinking profs make 6 figures?
Here's 2011 Salaries of most Ontario Professors
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/publication ... er11b.html

There's none under 6 figures?

I believe that's because that list is only for those who make $100,000 or more. Anybody who doesn't make at least six figures do not have to be on that list.

pupazzo wrote: ↑Lol most Ph.Ds doing research make like 35k a year. You can get Ph.Ds from the third world who will work for peanuts.

How do you know. You have any cumpares in this situation?

JK400 wrote: ↑Sadly, these days even graduating at the top of your class of an undergraduate program, say the top 5%, can bar you from employment. It's not uncommon for a top 5% graduate in ECE to send out hundreds, or even sometimes thousands of resumes and not receive a single response, or even have anyone read their resume. With HR taking over and destroying companies these days, resumes are often filtered for the right buzz words and 'soft skills' rather than the technical abilities. Employers are often intimidated by people with more education and intelligence than them, and they are also intimidated by people with confidence who are in good shape and have full heads of hair. With the collapse of Nortel, the market is now flooded far past the saturation point and the likelihood of you winning the HR selection lottery recruitment process is almost nothing.

No, employers are as you pointed out , do not care for people who think they are more intelligent or better because they are in good shape or have hair. Doesn't make them anymore employable. Work is work, much different than school.

HR is taking over because people with just a good resume/grades were hired with poor results. Technical abilities/hard skills are not what matters unless you are a grunt, and grunts are interchangeable. You want hires who have soft skills because that's what it actually takes to succeed. But a lot of the booksmart grads don't know that. That's why HR is there to filter those junk out.

JK400 wrote: ↑Sadly, these days even graduating at the top of your class of an undergraduate program, say the top 5%, can bar you from employment. It's not uncommon for a top 5% graduate in ECE to send out hundreds, or even sometimes thousands of resumes and not receive a single response, or even have anyone read their resume. With HR taking over and destroying companies these days, resumes are often filtered for the right buzz words and 'soft skills' rather than the technical abilities. Employers are often intimidated by people with more education and intelligence than them, and they are also intimidated by people with confidence who are in good shape and have full heads of hair. With the collapse of Nortel, the market is now flooded far past the saturation point and the likelihood of you winning the HR selection lottery recruitment process is almost nothing.

this is quite true. get a phd for self fulfillment, but don't expect monetary gains. the value of a phd is only significant in countries and companies that do R&D. in canada, the number of companies that falls in these categories is much smaller, hence the supply and demand equation favors the employers and they can pretty much hire at the lower pay scales. with the number of years that it takes to graduate with a phd, getting a phd in canada for monetary reasons is not advisable.

pupazzo wrote: ↑Lol most Ph.Ds doing research make like 35k a year. You can get Ph.Ds from the third world who will work for peanuts.

And that's exactly what's happening. After the Nortel bust, the top of the class guys who took the courses on embedded software development and microcontroller programming prepared for a job in industry while the lower level guys took the 'power' courses. Since the EE job market was pretty much non-existent after the collapse of Nortel, far worse than the CS market, many of these guys fell back on higher degrees while waiting for the tech sector to recover, which never happened. Instead of taking a risk with someone with industry experience who employers believe will just run back to the tech sector when it gets hot again, they're instead hiring Ph.Ds for 35k a year from places like India and China on H1B visas.

There are no guarantees in life. PHD means f all.

nasa25 wrote: ↑How do you know. You have any cumpares in this situation?

I know the academic world very well. Luckily my cumpare has fat stacks so I don't have to deal with all that noise.

No PhD does not = lots of money. And it certainly doesn't = professor. Positions for professors are very very limited. Instead universities hire ppl with PhDs and call them instructors that way they can be paid less and teach more students. A professor is someone who has proven themselves in their field, has years of experience and eventually obtains tenure. If you want to be a professor (other than for the money) then go for it. If you want the money, then be prepared for whatever you get because there's guarantee you'll ever be one, lots of PhDs out there.

Also keep in mind all PhDs are not equal. Heck that goes for anything down to the bachelors level, degrees in different fields of study are just not equal in value and opportunity. Just keep that in mind.

JK400 wrote: ↑Sadly, these days even graduating at the top of your class of an undergraduate program, say the top 5%, can bar you from employment. It's not uncommon for a top 5% graduate in ECE to send out hundreds, or even sometimes thousands of resumes and not receive a single response, or even have anyone read their resume. With HR taking over and destroying companies these days, resumes are often filtered for the right buzz words and 'soft skills' rather than the technical abilities. Employers are often intimidated by people with more education and intelligence than them, and they are also intimidated by people with confidence who are in good shape and have full heads of hair. With the collapse of Nortel, the market is now flooded far past the saturation point and the likelihood of you winning the HR selection lottery recruitment process is almost nothing.

Lol did you just copy and paste a post from Mark?

Mark77 wrote: ↑Yes. For instance, one of my best lecturers/instructors in school, a young researcher in RF electronics, and worked on the team that introduced CDMA technology to Nortel's product offerings before returning to school. In 2000, he had an offer from Lucent in New Jersey for $300k/year. He deferred joining the tech sector because he wanted to finish his PhD. By the time 2001 rolled around and his PhD was done, not only was Lucent no longer hiring, but practically nobody was hiring.

Today he is a stay-at-home dad and his wife owns a hairdressing business in Edmonton. As the hiring in the tech sector, and the R&D never really returned.

that's his fault for not taking advantage of the opportunity presented to him at the time, case in point, bill gates and steve jobs dropped out of school to take advantage of the tech sector when they had the chance. Also, for 300k/yr, I'd drop out of grade school if I ever got that offer.