[quote]the ignorance in your post is astounding[/quote]
condescension is not an argument…
[quote]a. assume a starting salary of 40k (very low end for a software engineer)
b. ignoring the increase in salary year over year versus percentage - assume a 5% annual raise for cost of living and performance [/quote]
40k is average starting range for my area, but probably 10k or so higher for yours. Experience is the difference maker.
[quote](since you're obviously SO talented)[/quote]
more condescension…
[quote]c. 5% of 40,000 is 2,000
d. 10 years * 2,000 = 20,000[/quote]
4 years of 30k(40k - 25% for government theft fee is 30k per year) = 120k plus the cost of the degree (I'm going to arbitrarily say 40k for my area). So just starting out fresh from college, a graduate will be around 160k behind in total earnings than someone who earned their position by merit alone, not 20k.
[quote]Great job making a valid point.[/quote]
still more condescension …
[quote]your last statement is just childish and inflammatory - good way to discredit yourself. its not like the most brilliant minds in the world have PhDs - you know, doctors, physicists working at CERN…what do those idiots know anyways?[/quote]
my statement was:
[quote]If you want to work for the government and be a mooch, then by all means you should get a degree.[/quote]
Ok, Captain Condescendo, my argument wasn't that those people are idiots as those were your words. My argument was that working for the state is mooching. It is mooching because the money the state pays its employees comes from coercive confiscation and is redistributed based upon political determination. It is mooching because a person chooses specifically, without coercion, to be employed by the state. I never said anything about doctors or physicists. Sounds like you are assuming that I am against education, which is the kind of argument that statists use when a market anarchist says 'Abolish the Department of Education'. I am against state control of education, because state accreditation decides which institutions are allowed to determine who is 'worthy' through peer review conducted by state approved third parties. Certainly, I think merit and capacity to perform should be measured, but why should the state hold a monopoly, enforced by violence, funded by theft, on who is worthy? If you are against big brother, how can you be in favor of big brother's monopoly on determining merit? I and the company I work for say let the market decide who should be successful.
[quote]
getting a degree is as much about proving to an employer that you are willing to better yourself, study and follow through with something as it is about the education. it fast tracks you into a salaried position with better pay, and it gives you something to hang your hat on, even if you want to pursue other interests.[/quote]
It is a matter of perspective. My perspective is that a degree just means you have state approval to work in a field and this approval will be recognized by other statists looking to hire obedient subjects. State accreditation and subsidization of education is a barrier to entry and uses legal power in many cases to protect entrenched professionals from people who would compete. I think degrees impress Human Resources bureaucrats and accountants more than actual software engineers. At our company, the engineers decide who to hire because we've burned through too many state approved developers that were recommended by our HR department. Half our development shop do not have degrees. The 2 most productive people we have do not have degrees or any formal training. (I am not one of those 2 by the way). I wasn't hired by HR managers. I was invited to the team by the software engineers at my company because I impressed them with my motivation and skill to warrant an opportunity. I got my position because I earned it, without some state autocrat putting the rubber stamp on a piece of paper saying I was worthy.
[quote]so you can continue to pimp your horseshit line about not getting a degree being a great idea, but youre a moron.[/quote]
Is there a college course on mastering condescension these days because you have it down to a science.
I'm sorry for not being good enough to exist in your world. Maybe you should get a law passed that forbids anyone from using the term 'software engineer' to earn a wage unless they have a piece of paper from a state approved education camp stating they are fit for employment. That will teach me a lesson. Sorry to question my betters.
Your calculations are only considering those few that actually finish and get a degree.
How about the vast majority of college students that drop out: debt and no degree?
[quote author=DanBinnun link=topic=4319.msg47887#msg47887 date=1291079523]
[quote author=KBCraig link=topic=4319.msg47886#msg47886 date=1291075441]
[quote author=DanBinnun link=topic=4319.msg47885#msg47885 date=1291074965]
I'm sorry, but this is poor life advice to give to someone fresh out of school.
To get a paying job and start a career in an engineering field a degree is a requirement for hiring. Period.[/quote]
If you want a job, perhaps. But if you want to work, and be years ahead of your age peers, it's great advice.
I'm not in the software field, but I've talked to plenty of people who are, who are mostly self-taught and doing quite well. Some of them are right here in the NH forums.
[/quote]
Um, sorry but software engineering is a career, working at walmart is a job.
Being that I myself, am an engineer, I would advise the OP to get a degree and secure the possibility of a career.
Money is necessary for survival,and you can just as easily self train while getting a degree - your angle is hollow and in general terrible advice.
[/quote]
Money is necessary for survival? Since when? (Not that I myself have the expertise or balls to prove your statement wrong by running out into the wilderness.)