<p>Finally my main conclusion, major in what you want, because engineering is most likely not going to give you more job security or even pay (once you consider time for layoffs), than majors in pre law, business, and definitely not health care. </p>
<p>Engineering’s only advantage is its CURRENT high starting salary, but once you factor in eventual decrease in demand, decrease in salary, limited opportunities for advancemetn, unemployment during layoffs, it doesn’t really pay all that much over the life of your career. </p>
<p>Do not underestimate overtime for careers in the healthcare industry. Bio fields will kick engineering’s ass in terms opportunities, job security and ultimately pay for the next 30 or so years. So choose what you want, backups are available. </p>
<p>Engineering as a career is a bulls.h.i.t. backup. Someone posted that there are plenty of positions for engineers when she graduated, yeah let’s hear her say that 10 yrs from now. I’ve been talking to my uncles w/20 yrs of experience and they beg to differ.</p>
<p>Yet I still will be majoring in BME or physics, because I enjoy the intellectual stimulation not because of the false perception of a solid engineering career or “high starting salary”. I will try my hand at finding a career in engineering, but i will have a backup plan. </p>
<p>so for all my ranting, choose engineering if you enjoy the intellectual stimulation, but please have a backup plan. (take some bio courses, psych do nursing if engineering doesn’t work out) Imagine being 40 years old with kids and house payments, you’ll take outsourcing much more seriously then.</p>
<p>well it seems i couldn’t find any outsourcing on civil, nuclear, materials, petroleum, geological, not too much on biomedical either (yet).</p>
<p>i didn’t post links on EE or CS, because it should be obvious that those jobs make up 1/3 of engineering jobs and are going to be gone real fast.</p>
<p>"When was the last time you heard of an engineer being laid off?</p>
<p>Think about the last time you heard of a doctor or nurse or PA WORRY about being laid off."</p>
<p>unggio83 - bravo, and checkmate!..if people don’t listen to anything else, they should listen to the two lines above.</p>
<p>uggio - if you keep on doing this, people will think you and I are the same person…please, say something pro-engineering once in a while so that they know we’re two DIFFERENT people ;-)</p>
<p>Once again, unggio83, you’ve missed the point. To repeat, we are talking about comparing occupations on a relative scale. You keep talking about the outsourcing of engineering. Do you honestly believe that bio and pharma jobs are immune to outsourcing? If so, why? India has one of the largest generic pharmaceutical industry of any nation in the world. Not only that, but India is moving rapidly to upgrade its biotech and patent pharmaceutical prowess. </p>
<p>You said it yourself -the jobs that are the least easily outsourced are the ones that require close contact with the consumer. I agree. So to follow that line of logic, why don’t you think that bio and pharma can’t be outsourced? In fact, major US pharmaceutical companies are doing it already. Pfizer and Merck are already building research centers in India and China, with more surely to come. </p>
<p>So you talk about things like the HGP and other major bio advances. The question is - why do you assume that that work has to be done in the US? Do China/India suffer from a lack of people who can do bio research? Research can be done anywhere. Where is it written that bio and chem research can only be done in the US?
</p>
<p>And are you saying you can’t do any of these things with an engineering degree? I think you can. Many have. Plenty of engineers from, say, MIT, go on to medical school.</p>
<p>Hence to me, you have not answered the bio question at all. You have not shown that getting a bio degree is any better than getting an engineering degree. Bio research jobs are being outsourced ,just like engineering jobs are. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And to turn that around, are you saying that if you have only a bachelors in bio or chem, you guaranteeing me that you won’t get laid off? Come on. </p>
<p>In fact, I would expand the issue further. How many fields are there in which you can get just a bachelor’s and be completely immune to layoffs forever? Not too many, are there? Certainly not arts or film. So an engineering bachelor’s is no different from any other bachelor’s in this regard. So why do you keep bringing it up? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The point is that outsourcing will take its toll wherever it can. Obviously there are some physician jobs that cannot be outsourced. But you cannot tell me that there aren’t any at all. There are plenty of extremely expensive medical procedures that you need to survive, but not immediately. For example, if you need tear your ACL, you don’t need surgery immediately. You can even limp for months on a torn ACL, albeit painfully. If you need rotator-cuff surgery, you don’t need it immediately. If you want plastic surgery, then you obviously don’t need that immediately. A stripper who wants a boob job can afford to wait for a bargain. In all of these scenarios, it is highly viable for you to hop on a plane and have the procedure done overseas. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even that, I don’t particularly buy. The advent of telemedicine (basically, doctors delivering care over videoconferences) will ultimately mean less overall demand for even primary-care doctors. You can never safe that anybody is completely safe from outsourcing. </p>
<p>The net effect is that primary care doctors will be able to “see” more patients than normally could, which ultimately means the nation needs less primary-care doctors. For example, let’s say that telemedicine provides the ability for primary-care doctors to treat 5 times more patients than they do now. Well, the number of patients hasn’t increased. That therefore means that you need 5 times less primary-care doctors. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I think a FAR better comparison is to look at people with bio undergrad degrees who went to medical school, and people with engineering degrees, who also went to medical school. Who has more job security? I think you must agree that that’s a wash. </p>
<p>Perhaps another fair way to look at it is to look at doctors vs. undergrad engineers who then got their MBA’s from elite schools. After all, I would argue that getting into med-school is somewhat equivalent to getting an elite MBA. Even then, I don’t think it is totally comparable, because I would argue that going through med-school, then through the medical internship and residency is probably substantially harder than getting an elite MBA. But in any case, THAT Is fair.</p>
<p>Getitng a doctorate in engineering is something you do for a hobby. An engineering Phd is not a professional degree the way that an MD is, so the two are not comparable. An Engineering PhD is more akin to a fine arts degree in that you do it because you love the field as a hobby, not because you actually expect to advance yourself financially by doing is. It has been well-established that getting an engineering doctorate is actually a LOSING propostition from a financial standpoint because the salary you forgo by staying in school is not compensated for by the boost in salary once you’ve attained the doctorate. Just like you don’t want me to keep talking about arts and film degrees, I would advise you to stop talking about engineering doctorates. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is that so great? </p>
<p>"But when the 34-year-old Long Island native leaves his New York City office, he returns to a life he says he never bargained for: a spartan rented room here, 42 miles south of the city. Assigned to one of the world’s most expensive cities with a salary of just $48,000 and with more than $106,000 in student loans to pay off and credit-card debts near $10,000 he says it’s all he can afford. </p>
<p>“I took an oath when I joined the FBI,” says the agent, who has been with the FBI for four years and who asked not to be identified. “I never thought it would also include a vow of poverty.”</p>
<p>His story is similar to those of dozens of FBI agents whose dire financial situations have created what bureau officials acknowledge is a growing threat to national security."</p>
<p>And once again, you’re comparing nationwide engineering salaries vs. blue-collar salaries in the Bay Area. You know as well as I do that salaries of engineering Bay Area jobs are also higher than that of engineers nationwide. What we should be doing is comparing Silicon Valley engineering salaries vs. blue-collar Silicon Valley salaries. Why don’t you do that?</p>
<p>First off, was I talking about nurses? No, I was talking about PA’s. And the fact is, the laws have changed such that PA’s can be classified as exempt employees, which means they become ineligible for OT. </p>
<p>It’s not about a choice. It’s about a change in the law. I see that you didn’t bother to read the link I presented. Well, please read it. You will see that it is not mandatory that PA’s or nurses be allowed OT. Might they get it from union negotiations? Perhaps. But the point is, the law does not require it. </p>
<p>While you bring up the issue, let’s not forget that some engineers also make OT. True, not so much in the Bay Area. However, I have been in other parts of the country where engineers pick up OT. And I’m sure there are parts of the country where PA’s and nurses don’t get any OT. So I don’t know why you keep harping the point of OT like it’s a differentiating factor nationwide. Regionally, perhaps. But nationwide, it’s difficult to make generalizations.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As shown by my CNN posts, the salaries for engineers has certainly not gone down in the last 3 years. 2002 was the nadir point, and salaries have recovered. As far as open positions are concerned, that’s a red herring. How can salaries be going up when open positions go down? The law of supply and demand dictates that where open positions go down, salaries also go down. </p>
<p>You’re also being unfair in your analysis. Engineers can start to work just after 4 years of undergrad. As we have discussed before, PA’s generally need more training and years of education than the engineer needs in order to start work. As you’ve shown in the UCDavis PA program, that program won’t admit people who don’t have 4000 hours of demonstrated hands-on care work. And that’s just a minimum requirement to get into the program. A guy can start an engineering degree with no prior engineering experience. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nice try, but what you should be looking at is not EE, but CS. After all, most EE students end up going to CS,and in fact, many times, the teaching of the two fields is fused into what is known as EECS. And since you like the BLS, the BLS states that CS will be one of the fasteset growing occupations in the next 10 years.</p>
<p>Now, I know what you’re going to say. You’re going to say that outsourcing is going to take a lot of CS jobs. True. But then why does the BLS talk about CS being an extremely fast-growing field? The simple fact is, you can’t outsource all CS jobs. If that were possible, then why don’t companies do that? Why hasn’t Microsoft, Oracle, Google, and Yahoo outsourced the entire company to India already? I’m sure Bill Gates doesn’t enjoy paying American programmers 100k when he could pay Indian programmers 10k, so why doesn’t he just outsource all of those jobs right now? Why is Microsoft continuing to hire like gangbusters around the Redmond area - in fact, having doubled employment in the Redmond office in the last few years? It’s not just Microsoft hiring some Indians (which they are doing) but also hiring people to expand the Redmond office. Why? Is Bill Gates being stupid? </p>
<p>The fact is, CS jobs are going to increase on both sides of the ocean. Yes, Indians will eat into the growth of CS jobs here. So domestic CS job growth will not be as fast as it would have been without outsourcing. But every single study put out indicates that the aggregate number of CS jobs in the US is forecast to grow vigorously for at least the next decade. Obviously simple code-jockey jobs will go to India. What will develop are those jobs that will combine intimate CS knowledge with knowledge of customers and of business practices, particularly management. As a domestic CS guy, you will probably be in charge of managing the code written by a team of low-level Indian coders. That will be the new big CS job of the next decade. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why what’s this I see in the news?</p>
<p>“Greater Southeast cuts 200; doctors, nurses let go. Financially strapped Greater Southeast Community Hospital has laid off a quarter of its staff…Workers in virtually all departments were let go – from doctors and nurses to housekeepers and technicians,”</p>
<p>golubb_u, i’m not sure what you mean. after all, read post 82. "
When was the last time you heard of a nurse being laid off?" then read post 87. “Layoff notices were sent out last week to the 50 registered nurses at The Hospital, with their last day being July 20.”</p>
<p>yeah, the last time i heard of a nurse being laid off was…oh…about 5 minutes ago. it’s not that uncommon - community hospitals are usually cash-strapped and end up having to make cuts JUST LIKE OTHER BUSINESSES to stay afloat.</p>
<p>And to repeat myself, I completely fail to see how bio gives you any more of a backup plan than does an engineering degree. Like I said, an engineer can also go and become a doctor or a PA or a nurse or a fireman or any of these other career paths you suggested. What, just because you studied engineering, that means you’re not allowed to become a nurse? I don’t think so. You think that no engineers ever go to law school or medical school? </p>
<p>Look, the fact is, engineering bachelor’s degrees are no worse than bachelor’s degrees in practically any other field when it comes to layoffs. Sure, engineers can get laid off. But business guys can get laid off. Bio guys can get laid off. Happened to numerous people that I know - Pfizer, for example, has laid off thousands of people, including plenty of scientists, in the last few years. </p>
<p>Yet the simple fact is, engineers, if nothing else, still have a career backup that consists of a job with a strong starting salary. Does bio have that? Remind me again, what’s the starting salary for bio majors again? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would like you to post those links. In particular, I want to see government statistics that show that the number of EECS jobs is actually going down. Not that the growth won’t be hurt by outsourcing, obviously it will. But that the absolute number of EECS jobs in the country will go down. All the government statistics agree that the number will actually increase, and increase substantially. Obviously, it won’t increase by as much as it would without outsourcing, but that’s an entirely different thing than saying that the number of jobs will actually decline on an absolute scale.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To repeat, Why what’s this I see in the news?</p>
<p>“Greater Southeast cuts 200; doctors, nurses let go. Financially strapped Greater Southeast Community Hospital has laid off a quarter of its staff…Workers in virtually all departments were let go – from doctors and nurses to housekeepers and technicians,”</p>
<p>So, perhaps you’d like to explain to us again how nurses never get laid off? I’d really like to hear that explanation again.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And what exactly have I said that is false? Why don’t you point out a quote where I have said something that is demonstrably false. Oh, you can’t do it, can you?</p>
<p>On the other hand, I believe you have said things that are false. For example, you say that nurses never get laid off. So maybe you could explain those news articles that talk about nurses getting laid off. </p>
<p>Look, I never said that engineering was the greatest thing since sliced bread. On the other hand, I am saying that, when you’re deciding what to major in for your bachelor’s degrees, the alternatives to majoring in engineering aren’t exactly paradise either. If you want to go to college and get a bachelor’s degree, it has to be in SOMETHING. I fail to see what else you can major in that is significantly better than engineering. After you get an engineering degree, you can decide to be a fireman or go to med-school, or a PA, or whatever. Or you can work as an engineer, which isn’t the greatest thing in the world, but it’s better than nothing. Contrast that with what the guy who majored in bio has. What does he got? </p>
<p>The point is that the engineering guy has all the options that the bio guy has, plus one more option. THAT’S THE POINT. Is that extra option the greatest thing ever? No. But at least it’s there. Plenty of people don’t even have that option.</p>
<p>First off, that’s a MEDIAN salary. That means that half of the firefighters out there make even less than that. </p>
<p>Besides, these are BLS numbers we’re talking about. You seem to like BLS because you quote BLS yourself a lot. So I have no problem in also quoting BLS. The fact is, nationwide, you know and I know that firefighters are making less than engineers. I’m sure in certain locations, firefighters may be making more. But nationwide, they are not. I don’t think you can seriously dispute this point. </p>
<p>I have a friend right now who goes to a good school and will be receiving his degree in biochem/ minor in math. However, his GPA is a 3.3 and that’s not going to guarantee him med school - as a matter of fact, he may not even get into medical school. Right now, he seriously wants to find a job. He wants to make money and he CAN’T because his majors won’t allow him to.</p>
<p>Had he been an engineer, he wouldn’t had to face that fact. He could have been a mechE or a chemE or an EE and made around 50,000 dollars starting! But now, he’s forced to go grad school in biochemistry and get his masters after which he’ll reapply to medical school. He doesn’t want to stay 5 years in biochem grad. school to get his P.H.D. His options are really narrowed right now. Had he been an engineer, his options would have been so much more flexible.</p>
<p>golubb, please stop talking. Can somebody shut this moron up? Golubb, I’m interested in knowing what college you attend to so I can warn all the propective engineering and technical majors to stay away from you.</p>
<p>Sakky is simply stating that as a bachelor’s degree, engineering is a very good choice. An engineer, over the long run can anything that a chemistry or english major can do. He can go to medical school, law school, whatever…</p>
<p>However, engineering is at an advantage because unlike an undergraduate chemistry or english major, engineers can get immediate jobs that pay around 50,000 $. A bio-chem or biology major is forced to pursue a graduate degree unlike an engineer.</p>
<p>Unggio83---------I can understand your concern with engineering. Indeed, when someone goes past the age of 30, he’s at a risk. But I never said persue engineering as a permanent profession armed with just an undergraduate degree did I? As an engineer just out of undergrad., it becomes imperative that you go back to college and get some sort of a graduate degree after several years - an MBA, a degree in financial engineering, a P.H.D in a pure science, whatever…</p>
<p>An engineer needs to back to college to that graduate degree and make his resume extremely versatile and things like outsourcing won’t bother him anymore.</p>
<p>No, repeat, I have dealt with all of uggio’s arguments. He has destroyed nothing. </p>
<p>Besides, you’re one to talk when you talk about arguments getting destroyed. I seem to recall both you and unggio grudgingly admitting that engineering is a pretty good thing to get a bachelor’s degree in, compared to the other things you could get a bachelor’s degree in. And that’s the crux of my entire argument. Nobody has managed to besmirch this argument yet. Not even you, golubb. </p>
<p>Or do you want to take another shot at it? If engineering is such a bad thing to do your undergrad in, then what’s better?</p>
<p>before i start my argument about the demand for nursing, read the following:</p>
<p>"By 2010, California will have a shortage of 47,600 nurses. That shortage will have grown to 116,000 vacant nursing jobs by 2020. California needs an additional 9,500 nurses every year for the next five years just to meet demand. Yet Californias colleges and universities only graduate 6,000 nurses each year, far below the number needed, and turn away almost 50 percent of applicants whom they cannot accommodate due to lack of teachers and facilities. "</p>
<p>now about the first link you gave concerning nursing layoffs. (<a href=“http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8696150/[/url]”>http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8696150/</a>)
excerpt from link
" he did not expect any major layoffs at the D.C. hospital, which was crushed in late 2002 when its main lender, National Century Financial Enterprises of Dublin, Ohio, collapsed. This forced Greater Southeast into financial turmoil, and it resulted in the hospital losing its prime contract to run the D.C. Healthcare Alliance.
"
So in fact, the reason these nurses were laid off was actually because of the collapse of bank lending and loss of a contract. The hopspital just did not have enough money to pay the nurses, but the economy still demands nursing services. </p>
<p>"Reardon says as Greater Southeast improves its finances, it will begin to hire “judiciously,” perhaps even taking back some of the workers it recently had to cut. "</p>
<p>Look at the real reason behind the layoff, obviously the contract for hospital services in the D.C. area had to go to somebody else, it was just that the hospital lost its source of immediate funding. in time those nurses will be rehired. Also an option those nurses have is to go work in another town where they will definitely have a job. </p>
<p>as to your second link on nursing layoffs, I respond anything can happen. however nursing layoffs is a very very tiny problem, if it is oa problem at all, compared to layoffs in engineering. Those nurses can easily get hired at another hospital. </p>
<p>my concluding point, imagine 10 years from now:</p>
<p>There is a 45 year old nurse who has just been laid off(very unlikely to happen), he’s got kids, health insurance payments, and house payments. (oh yeah, a lot of nurses get free basic health care, i.e. shots vaccinations and such)</p>
<p>There is a 45 year old engineer who has just been laid off (very likely), he’s got kids, health insurance payments, and house payments.</p>
<p>Which would you rather be 10 years from now?
laid off engineer or a temporarily laid off nurse (116,000 job openings). </p>
<p>as i’ve posted once before my buddy that works in an Orange county hospital, has 6 pages of open positions for nurses. i will post the name of the hospital when i find out (call and check how many positions are open).</p>
<p>so anyways, about the overtime of PA’s, sakky you state that OT will be extinct in the future for PA’s, though i’ve seen your link, it does not specify that it is a law, just merely a proposal. I seriously doubt that it’s going to happen. I do not believe you know anymore than me about the future of OT for PA’s, so i take what you said as merely an opinion. Again the demand will will determine the pay.</p>
<p>my point is to say that engineering is definitely not a better major in terms of career stability and even pay (in the long run), than a bio related major or other majors. i didn’t say that a bio major is DEFINITELY better off, but in terms of job security & long term pay health care will trump engineering each and every time. Engineering as a major is not really worse than bio either, as you and i both agree both majors can become nurses and PA’s and blue collar workers. </p>
<p>However I am mainly talking about people majoring in engineering in the “false hopes” of a stable career. Why do you think I’m majoring in a physical science, physics or engineering? I love the intellectual aspect of engineering not the perceived “high pay”. it is a great possibility that i can be laid off, and I am advising people of backup options. i am also advising people looking for secure job prospects that there are other majors besides engineering that will also have secure backup options.</p>
<p>As to your link about Comp Sci being in extreme demand, i must look a little deeper on that one. I am VERY surprised. from now on i guess i have to post multiple sources on my claims.</p>
<p>For now my response pertains to nursing and health care, i will respond to other points you made later this week.</p>
<p>Sakky, try to make multiple posts instead of one really long post, more people will read it. That’s what i will do from now on. at the beginning of each post i will explicitly state which topic i’m going to discuss.</p>
<p>i have a feeling that we’re the only ones reading our posts. :-)</p>
<p>I will discuss why engineering outsourcing today is very different than outsourcing in the 80s. I do not believe we will bounce back and adapt to come out on top.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In the 80s we lost manufacturing and production of high tech jobs to Asia. American engineers adapted and moved on to research and development. Why did R&D stay in America during the 80s? Because it was cheaper to have R&D in America, more qualified engineers, resources, & experience etc… </p>
<p>The transistor, Pentium processor, Microsoft, all the ground breaking innovation in software and technology, google, everything started NOT in China, not India, not Taiwan but in America. This boom of innovation started in the 70s and has led up to the dotcom bust. It takes time for developing Asian countries to catch up with modern technology. Now that china and India are developing and competing in the global work force, things will be different for American engineers. 20 years has passed. Asia has been doing manufacturing and production for at least 20 years now. With the internet they can now do s.h.i.t.loads of R&D from a distance, lots of their top engineers are educated at top schools like Stanford, mit, Berkeley and end up going back to their home country for work for the offshore division of American tech companies. Autocad drafting for MEs is easily outsourced, so is the design aspect. I wont even mention outsourcing for EEs and CS. We all know manufacturing is gone. (Im exaggerating a little about manufacturing being gone.)</p>
<p>Back to why I believe American techies will not bounce back, in the 80s engineers moved to higher ground in R&D. Today R&D is not only being outsourced but offshored. Offshoring is physically moving that part of the company overseas. R&D was the last front for American engineers. Wheres the higher ground now? Companies like intel and Microsoft are investing hundreds of millions in offshore counterparts. </p>
<p>There is a lot of wishful thinking about the outsourcing phenomenon about how there will always be jobs for them, or the newest fad, engineering management. To be in management you must have someone to manage, its getting harder since jobs are shrinking in america, so unless you speak hindi or mandarin or plan on working in china or India, you probably will not be in as much demand as you thought.</p>