Is harvard engineering (Biomedical especially) famous?

[rtkysg]

<p>

And you are purposefully forgetting my basic premise which is to ask why can’t engineering jobs be made better? You still deliberately choose not to answer the question.

</p>

<p>As I said, engineering jobs include a huge variety. It ranges from the most elite design engineer to the mediocre testing engineer. Engineering is a large sector where you could see the not so small chasm between the elite and mediocre on the bell curve. Accordingly, the number elite engineering jobs would be only a small percentage of those engineering job figures, which, taking an absolute number, may not be less than ibanking/consulting jobs. If you ask why the whole engineering curve couldn’t shift to the right direction, the answer lies on the strength of the economy it supports. Ibanking/consulting pays better on the average because it has small curve distribution, has better employee on the average, similar to professions in law and medicine. It is illogical to ask why can’t engineering jobs be made better while it has a large and wide distribution of bell curve. What we can see is that there’re numerous engineering jobs at the right tail of this curve that would be at least as good as ibanking jobs.</p>

<p>

An unfair comparison? A more fair comparison is to compare a manager/director at an engineering company vs. a McKinsey director. Who do you think gets paid more here?

</p>

<p>How about we compare the CEO’s salary at McKinsey and Google or Oracle or Intel. Look, generally it’s easier to become a manager in tech companies than in finance and consulting company. </p>

<p>

And even that is missing the point. Most people go to McKinsey not to become director but in order to vault them into a top management position at a regular company. Plenty of top tech companies like Cisco draw their managers not from in-house engineers who climb the ladder, but from people jumping from consulting.

</p>

<p>Managers from consulting? they’re only placed in some certain non-tech depts whereas by large the technical departments’ managers are all the people from tech companies.</p>

<p>

He doesn’t do that. He could do it. He doesn’t want to do it. That indicates that he doesn’t really care about the future prominence of American engineering. If he really did, he could and would do something about it. He is one of the few people in the world who has the power to change this. The fact that he doesn’t do it indicates that he doesn’t want to do it.

</p>

<p>LOL, what it means is that he is more concerned with his money than the future of American engineers. In fact this should be able to show you that Microsoft has enough engineers despite the fact that many of its employees are Internationals. Therefore he only gives suggestion to Americans to have more engineers but not action.</p>

<p>

Let me tell you. I don’t want to be harsh, if you’re so weak-willed that you won’t do something just because you’re afraid that some jerks might laugh at you, you’re not going to accomplish very much in your life anyway. You better develop some self-confidence.

</p>

<p>Not everyone wants to be Gandhi or Lincoln, you can accomplish so much being conservative and ordinary. In fact, taking measure from your environment and being afraid of the people perception may give flexibility and strength of being highly adaptive. You don’t need to be extreme to have high accomplishment. Over self-confidence and defiance against the norms may harm you in the end.</p>