<p>We all know that it’s because engineers get laid more often. Actuaries don’t have the required skills and knowledge to build himself a romantic partner.</p>
<p>Krieger: I call him fister roboto.
Pam: But it doesn’t just fist!
Krieger: He’s a fully integrated, multi-fetish artificial being. Shh. And the best part is he’s learning.</p>
<p>Anyone ever see ‘Along Came Polly’? You’d be sitting there assessing the risk of every new girlfriend you had for marriage.</p>
<p>Terrible.</p>
<p>(Yes I’m posting at 5 am… I got caught up reading a book on relativity, I’m sure all of you being nerds like I am understand)</p>
<p>Quiet, nerd. No flag football and ultimate frisby and boat shoes and visors and long sleeve shirts under short sleeve shirts under long sleeve shirts for you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, honestly, that’s a rather weak argument as well. After all, there are far more jobs available as cashiers relative to doctors, but surely we can all agree that cashiers are not better off than doctors. Far from it, in fact. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p><em>Spoiler alert</em> - Coincidentally and sadly, that seems to be precisely what is happening. For tax purposes, Kodak has been steadily demolishing infrastructure - including entire office buildings - as it removes manufacturing capacity. Kodak, by law, has to pay property taxes for every building standing in Eastman Business Park (formerly Kodak Park), therefore the only way to legally avoid those taxes is to demolish unused buildings. </p>
<p>Does the following remind anybody of the movie climax?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNJ8FkUYL4M&feature=related[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNJ8FkUYL4M&feature=related</a></p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - Kodak Park Building 9 Implosion Rochester NY](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQlWmZs3dAc]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQlWmZs3dAc)</p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - Implosion of bldgs 65 & 69, Kodak Park, Rochester](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2AfoOLp56s&feature=related]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2AfoOLp56s&feature=related)</p>
<p>I’ve often wondered how demolishing buildings for tax purposes could actually be socially efficient - couldn’t Kodak just give the buildings away to a homeless shelter? But perhaps nobody - not even the homeless - really wants to live in a former film manufacturing facility, as the site would have to be recoded for residential use, which would surely be expensive.</p>
<p>Acutarial science is boring please…they will cry all the way to the bank. </p>
<p>Engineering employment in tenous and challenging because there are simply too many engineers for the market. better to be a CPA/CA or actuary in a nice plush office making the dough than work in an oily sweaty chemical or manufacturing plant for peanuts and breathing in Lord knows what crap.</p>
<p>Cynical much? That is a completely asinine thing to say. You are assuming several things. For example, only a small portion of engineers work “in an oily sweaty chemical or manufacturing plant for peanuts” and these days, the risk of breathing in nasty stuff is incredibly low. OSHA, believe it or not, does a pretty good job most of the time. Furthermore, only a small percentage of CPA’s sit in “a nice plush office” and I would wager that the percentage is no higher than engineers.</p>
<p>If you want to do something other than engineering, then be my guest. The world needs all sorts of professions. However, spreading false “facts” and misguided opinions about engineering is probably something you want to steer clear of. You will only make yourself look like a fool as the numerous people around here with more experience than you put your rumors to rest.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If that really was the case, then why do engineers make such high starting salaries? After all, if there really were too many engineers for the market, then one would expect engineering companies to simply pay new engineers less. Are those companies simply being stupid?</p>
<p>Go away toronto_guy. Go back to the business majors’ board where you and other people there can show your animosity towards engineers. You do realize that posts like this only indicate how misinformed you really are and seem to suggest that you post lies like this to make yourself feel better.</p>
<p>You and other engineering haters always make claims about how much better business/actuary jobs are than engineering jobs but you provide zero data and zero experience to back it up. You do realize that engineers out-earn accountants throughout their entire careers so I’m not sure why you think they make “dough” while engineers make “peanuts”.</p>
<p>Stop posting idiotic lies and wasting everybody’s time.</p>
<p>“Engineering employment in tenuous and challenging because there are simply too many engineers for the market.”</p>
<p>Where did you get that information from? </p>
<p>Surely, you have not read up on systems or software engineers in defense/INTEL industry. My employer is offering employees up to $8,000 (depending on clearance level) in referral bonuses if we can find systems/software engineers who get hired by my employer. I am in the Washington DC area.</p>
<p>
A true sign of a saturated market. I hear Walmart is offering 10K to find cashiers. Maybe we should switch careers?</p>
<p>“A true sign of a saturated market. I hear Walmart is offering 10K to find cashiers. Maybe we should switch careers?”</p>
<p>Probably saturated where too many defense contracts were awarded…or maybe the Office of Personnel just cannot process enough potential cleared candidates.</p>
<p>
Hehe…I was joking. Outrageous referral bonuses is a sign of a dearth of qualified candidates.</p>
<p>^ I caught the sarcasm interpretation fail but didn’t want to call GT out on it.</p>
<p>“Join the Military! We’ll give you $50,000 and pay your tuition!”</p>
<p>On a serious note, actuaries are probably happier than engineers, on average.</p>
<p>What a great contribution to this discussion Enginox. This is quite a revelation. You have so much data and experience to back up your claims also. Keep up the good work buddy.</p>
<p>On a serious note, I am just going to disregard anything you post. I see a pattern forming here. I know you think engineering and science degrees are too easy but how about actually adding some useful information to a thread instead of posting baseless rhetoric?</p>
<p>To make a claim equally valid to Enginox’s claim:</p>
<p>I personally know one actuary, and he is a very unhappy person, therefore all actuaries are unhappy.</p>
<p>ME76:</p>
<p>Hmm? I have no idea what’s troubling you but I apologize if anything I’ve posted offended you. In any case, my opinion is based on my perception of what actuaries do, mostly assessing risk mathematically. To me, the field seems boring and dull. People that choose that career path must really enjoy it.</p>
<p>"On a serious note, actuaries are probably happier than engineers, on average. "
- Sure they probably are. But what’s the probability?</p>
<p>70% of them are probably happier 60% of the time.</p>