The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time

I have a feeling that you're equating a PhD with a Master's or Bachelor's degree. The ultimate goal of a PhD is to prepare you to do 'real research' in that you're trained to collaborate with academics, dig through academic materials, compile results, and ultimately add to the knowledge of mankind. This is fundamentally different from a BS or MS. Replacing the academic setting for this, in my opinion, would be suboptimal, if not detrimental. This is academia in its purest form almost...basically what it was originally intended to do! Not train people for the job market, but to further the actual academic studies of everything!

What you're forgetting is that if there are a ton of hungry PhD's running around looking for work where your Joe-Master's Degree or Jim-Bachelor's Degrees are looking for work, chances are they may displace quite a few of those guys if they look to enter the standard work force. Not because a PhD makes one inherently better, but because it seems like so many employers look at paper qualifications, and actually a lot of PhD's did work REALLY HARD to get their PhD...so at least they've shown they can work really hard on something and come up with a contribution.

Also, government budget cuts never seem to affect military research, where a TON of research dollars stems from. I have a feeling that the government will get its house in order without massive research spending cuts.

It kind of depends on your point of view, I suppose. Let's take a look at two examples.

> Example 1: Highschool dropout with no advanced education earning minimum wage; 23 years old:

Gross minimum wage for 23yo and above € 1424,40 per month, assuming a 40h workweek. Usually with paid overtime and some benefits depending on employer.

> Example 2: Student who excelled at high school until 18, completed bachelor at 21, completed master in science at 23, started PhD at 24:

Gross wage[1] €2000 per month, with realistically a 45h to 50h workweek. Better benefits and usually a 13th month. Intellectually more challenging work (probably), but few career possibilities in the academic field.

--

Also you have to take into account that the grad student has to pay substantially more in taxes than the minimum wage employee. The difference was only 1.5x to start with, after taxes the PhD student will probably only earn 25% more than the minimum wage employee. Just for the record, I'm not arguing against education here, or even making any statement about whether it makes sense to do a PhD. Just adding some numbers because your message makes it seem like PhDs are well compensated given their intelligence and the work they have to put in. From my point of view they're ridiculously underpaid.

A few of my friends are grad students, and they all live in 600 square feet (55 meter squared) apartments. It kind of sucks to live a 600 square foot apartment until you're 29-30, with no substantial savings for a down-payment on a house for after you graduate.

Source 1: https://intranet.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=91ae4d5c-5d21...

Yes, this is somewhat true -- I know several professors that accept virtually any student as an advisor, provided they're willing to work on their over-arching research program.

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing, though. In some of these fields, one of the bottlenecks seems to be the low numbers of researchers worldwide in the area. While the students do provide cheap labour, they also (depending on the fame of the professor) get immense networking resources. Since the field has comparatively few people, the big names all know each other, and all help get their students hired post-thesis.

Nepotism? Perhaps. But for the research program I'm thinking of in particular, if the problem does get solved, it'll revolutionize mathematics. Talking to some of the students involved, I feel that's why they're willing to put up with being cheap labor -- they're getting paid in happiness and a feeling of being worthy.

I agree with the argument that PhD's might be underpaid a bit, but I think the author is exaggerating when he says that universities exploit them to get cheap research done, or that there are too many PhD's being produced by the system in general (as if this had a strongly negative impact on our society?)