tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post6311154315478716284..comments2023-09-28T08:13:11.489-07:00Comments on Only In It For The Gold: Why "In It for the Gold"Michael Tobishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-32521347869537419832009-03-07T10:53:00.000-08:002009-03-07T10:53:00.000-08:00Well, "lucrative" is a relative term; for many peo...Well, "lucrative" is a relative term; for many people, any sort of professional/technical job is lucrative. As an undergraduate, when I got a summer job as a low-level mathematician/programmer at the US Bureau of Mines, it was far more "lucrative" than my previous one washing dishes at a Holiday Inn.<BR/><BR/>In particular, note that NASA GISS is located in Manhattan, so any of those folks could have moved down to Wall Street with no problem.<BR/><BR/>But, certainly the basic point is quite valid. Anyone with the skillset to do do climate modeling could better elsewhere,and at least a few years ago.<BR/><BR/>NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND does graduate degrees in science with the primary goal of getting rich. Yes, it happens every once in a while but it's pretty rare. [A PhD in a some engineering discipline, or especially an undergrad degree in engineering or maybe science, followed by an MBA are better bets if the goal is getting rich.]<BR/><BR/>I used to help sell computers to Wall Street "rocket scientists" in the fine old 1990s. At that time (although probably not so much now), I used to keep running into old Bell Labs people who'd moved there, had much fancier titles, and were making a lot more money than at Bell Labs, which was not a penurious employer.John Masheyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17786354229618237133noreply@blogger.com