Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 112 posts

Re: Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

#11

Post by brianlweiner »

stdbrouw wrote: post #5
dorfsmay wrote: post #2

I'm actually surprised well-off students choose science over well-paying careers given that it is well known that there is no money in research. My own kids and their friends often express that science is interesting but they won't get into it because of that.

Isn't it a well-known phenomenon that the children of well-to-do parents often end up in the arts and other fields with high cultural capital? Having money allows you to not worry about money.

"I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study Painting and Poetry Mathematicks and Philosophy." - John Adams

*he struck through painting and poetry.

Re: Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

#12

Post by colmvp »

dorfsmay wrote: post #2

I'm actually surprised well-off students choose science over well-paying careers given that it is well known that there is no money in research. My own kids and their friends often express that science is interesting but they won't get into it because of that.

I came from a well-to-do family and well... my parents pushed me to go into medicine/finance/science, partially because they perceived those industries as making a lot of money and for the prestige. Science might not be as lucrative as finance/medicine, but in my circles, people certainly respect an intellectual scientist more than they do a lowly designer (me!).

I went into tech as a designer before the wave hit largely because I love computers and the digital medium. They opposed it because of the uncertainty of the industry ("How do you make money as a designer?") but supported me financially while I went through college. Long story short I was able to help make a lucrative company in SV.

I guess to answer your question, I very well could've gone into science because of my parents and well, the prestige.

Re: Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

#13

Post by kaitai »

As I write this, there are just a small number of comments, all saying "there's no money in research" and "scientists are paid less than McDonald's burger flipper". It's like a whole section of disgruntled grad students who wanted to be professors. There is tons of money in science! People who "fail out" of or never wanted to pursue the stupid academic dream become active in patent law, become managers at pharma and biomed companies, oversee quality control at chemical firms, write documentation for medical devices, run labs, work as lab techs. These are all good jobs compared to the jobs the majority of Americans are qualified for.

Seems like HN has a very warped view, this view that "there's no money in research" means some poor kid is better off flipping burgers into her 50s than becoming a lab manager.

Re: Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

#15

Post by ap22213 »

Man, wish I could find the link - I had read something probably 10 years ago that discussed the abnormally high number of independently wealthy people in academia and research. Makes sense given how expensive it is and how infrequently it nets positive ROI.

A big part of science are 'ideas', and ideas are interesting things in Human culture. To be the 'idea person' in a social group requires considerable social status. I see so many people in corporations battling to have their ideas win. I see so many people of higher status claiming ownership of the ideas of those 'beneath' them. I see plenty of great ideas being ignored because of who proposes them. And, it's very rare to see an outsider's idea gain influence.

They say that execution matters much more than ideas - but they go hand-in-hand. The person who gets to execute also gets to choose the idea.

Given the comparitive physical weakness of the Human, 'the idea' is their number one weapon and asset. It enables power. So, there are probably a lot of social reasons why most lower-status (lower income) people are kept out of science and research. It's probably more of a systematic result of Human behavior than just being poor.

Re: Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

#16

Post by glubby »

8fGTBjZxBcHq wrote: post #8
saiya-jin wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the easier kids have it during childhood, the harder the reality hits later (if ever). some frugality in upbringing instead of just throwing money on them to compensate lack of time spent with them goes much, much longer way

I get what you're trying to say but I just want to point out that reality still probably hits harder when life was always hard. Growing up with nothing into an adulthood with no support network and few prospects, where our society blames you for being in that situation, is a harder draw than being taken care of until you're halfway through college then having to find your own way.

"Life is not easy for any of us. But what of that?" - Marie Curie.

Re: Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

#18

Post by existencebox »

kaitai wrote: post #13

As I write this, there are just a small number of comments, all saying "there's no money in research" and "scientists are paid less than McDonald's burger flipper". It's like a whole section of disgruntled grad students who wanted to be professors. There is tons of money in science! People who "fail out" of or never wanted to pursue the stupid academic dream become active in patent law, become managers at pharma and…

I would warn your optimism however, my wife is a lab manager (performs research, publishes, ostensibly as involved in the science as any PHD) but I would by no stretch of the word say she makes "good money"; both of us made more back when we were service workers. The perception in her group is that the positions that pay even close to tech (some of the ones you list, manager at pharma company etc) are almost paramount if not more difficult to e.g. getting a manager position at google. If you're not top of the pile material, good fucking luck. (and you'll likely have some very high expectations to get there, PHD+extensive research the minima of, which again unlike tech, are less able to be fulfilled while making good money as well, and typically require more upfront investment)

I would say that in my experience the closer you get to science (or the further from money, perhaps?) the harder good money is to come by. (Left an academic tech position myself a while back; tripled my salary overnight)

Re: Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers

#20

Post by 6stringmerc »

kaitai wrote: post #13

As I write this, there are just a small number of comments, all saying "there's no money in research" and "scientists are paid less than McDonald's burger flipper". It's like a whole section of disgruntled grad students who wanted to be professors. There is tons of money in science! People who "fail out" of or never wanted to pursue the stupid academic dream become active in patent law, become managers at pharma and…

What you described, where the money is at, is commonly referred to as "industry" and yes it is "science" oriented but pursuit of profit definitely changes the dynamic away from academic pursuit of advancement of the human species that, more often than not, results in failed outcomes rather than something that can make money. Who are you to judge and deride the "stupid academic dream" from which all those industries have their genesis? The reason there are loud and worthwhile voices critical of what "business mentalities" have done to cheapen the profession and academic nature of research, and consistently "privitize" the results of partnerships done in academic settings. If the industry wasn't so "warped" as it is now, then maybe the view being shared here wouldn't reflect that. Going "Rah rah join the dick-pill-selling-company-brigade" is fine if that's what you want to do, but that's not really science with a capital S.
Post reply on HN