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

UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

kron4.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 122 posts

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#101

Post by ensignavenger »

orionsbelt wrote: post #11
avg_dev wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course you are correct, nobody is ever promised anything like the ability to fulfill their dreams or to live a decent quality of life. But maybe the universities could pay them a living wage for teaching six classes a week.

$70k is a living wage in Los Angeles; he his homeless by choice. To be clear, I’m not saying he is not underpaid. He might need a roommate and to live in a crappy apartment and not in Westwood to make it workable, which does not seem fair for a PhD teaching physics. But it’s not homeless level.

Zillow lists over 1300 places for rent in Los Angeles for less than $1600 a month, which is easily affordable on a $70k salary.

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#102

Post by s1artibartfast »

poincaredisk wrote: post #10
delichon wrote: post #7

This is a physicist who could likely make much more in the private sector. That's a compromise I've had to make too. I spend my weekdays doing work that I have little interest in and has less chance of improving the human condition, but it let me buy a house and pay the taxes and fees. If I instead choose to do what I'm interested in I'd be lucky to afford renting a room in someone else's house. I admire the guy for…

>But I'm not owed a decent salary in return for following my own dreams rather than my employer's dreams. Nobody is. Of course. On the other hand, one has to wonder which of this two occupations helps humanity more, and it's this the one that's paid better. And if not, should we rethink the way we reward work to prioritize things that help society instead.

Sounds like there is an excess supply of physicists and physics professors, so on the margin they are no help at all.

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#103

Post by qeternity »

flatline wrote: post #45

Academia is exploitative. The financial incentives are a symptom of the bigger problem. Is university career training for industry or for an academic track? It is not made clear to people entering the system, and is often murky to everyone years into a degree. There is encouragement for education for its own sake, there’s encouragement for education for a high paying career, and there’s encouragement to merge these t…

> Academia is exploitative.

As another commenter noted, this person could likely easily go into the private sector and earn multiples of their salary. Also $70k is smack on for median salaries in LA. This person chooses to work in academia. He is not being exploited. Presumably he finds it more fulfilling to do what he does currently. And good for him. But that’s a luxury. Nothing in life guarantees your dream job and your dream salary.

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#104

Post by honestAbe22 »

delichon wrote: post #7

This is a physicist who could likely make much more in the private sector. That's a compromise I've had to make too. I spend my weekdays doing work that I have little interest in and has less chance of improving the human condition, but it let me buy a house and pay the taxes and fees. If I instead choose to do what I'm interested in I'd be lucky to afford renting a room in someone else's house. I admire the guy for…

[dead]

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#105

Post by beej71 »

david38 wrote: post #91
serf wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

less educators produce less educated, that's absolutely how it works. the incentives, the logistics and finances of how we get to a point like that -- well that's where it gets muddier.

No it isn’t. You’re implying education = higher standard of living, more jobs. It doesn’t. One man can make a video lesson and teach millions, so more educators doesn’t mean more educated. You can change the teacher:student ratio and still improve the number of educated. If you think this is false, then anything beyond 1:1 tutors is bad. Yet UCLA doesn’t operate on 1:1 ratios. Finally, what makes you think there will…

> You can change the teacher:student ratio and still improve the number of educated. If you think this is false, then anything beyond 1:1 tutors is bad.

Anything beyond it isn't bad, per se, but it is less optional.

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#107

Post by cxr »

didgeoridoo wrote: post #64
cute_boi wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People seem to think it is easy to have roommates. My roommates were horrible, they wouldn't clean anything, blast music and always a privacy risks.

When I was living in Cambridge (MA) in the early 2010s, it was unthinkable to not have a flatmate or four. By far the most economical situation was to rent a 4 or 5 bedroom house. Doing this, you could easily have a sub-1k rent within a 10 minute walk of the Harvard or Central T stops. Not to “kids these days” it or anything, but the entitlement over not being able to afford a private, one-bedroom apartment in a fant…

> the entitlement over not being able to afford a private, one-bedroom apartment in a fantastically-popular city center is just absolutely mind-blowing

I used to think this way—that is, just like you—in my 20s. From my experience growing up, I was used to not having nice or even merely adequate things, and it was the norm to go without. I'm less cavalier about declaring it entitlement now. Why shouldn't an adult, even a brand new (i.e. young) one, not have their own place? I realized that I didn't have a good reason to justify the status quo (where a home of your own is out of reach), only that it was the status quo, and the thrust of my old position really just came down to something akin to the old saw that Hardship- is good for you because "it builds character"—even though I'd never really found that argument persuasive when I'd encounter it elsewhere. (Just like the old retort "life's not fair", it seemed I'd only ever encounter it from someone in the process of actively trying to screw you over while trying to paint your indignance about it as unreasonable.)

Not saying everyone should expect the works, but I can't exactly fault anyone who would be content with a 12x10 kitchen attached to an 8x10 office that doubles as a bedroom but isn't able to have it. And that's without even addressing the fact that we're likely talking about a situation where you're losing all this money on something you didn't even get equity for!

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#108

Post by hackable_sand »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #62
winter_blue wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean an artificial economic situation that NIMBYs have created by making it nearly impossible to build new homes. It’s not a fair situation from any perspective. NIMBYs are slowly destroying California’s heart, and turning it into a place where only people with a 100k+ (and soon 200k+) income can afford a home.

Then leave.

There are other solutions than violence.

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#109

Post by MrMan »

Volundr wrote: post #98
Ekaros wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply and demand, the pay would increase if there was no one willing to take the job. Maybe gig workers and fast food workers and everyone else also should be paid living wage... I think they are lot more deserving and necessary than people working in universities.

> Maybe gig workers and fast food workers and everyone else also should be paid living wage... I think you'll find that there's a lot of overlap in the group of people who think this guy should be paid more and those who want more pay for the people you named. > I think they are lot more deserving and necessary than people working in universities. I'm not sure I'm prepared to cosign on the idea that the guy saving me…

[dead]

Re: UCLA professor says he's homeless due to low pay

#110

Post by didgeoridoo »

cxr wrote: post #107
didgeoridoo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was living in Cambridge (MA) in the early 2010s, it was unthinkable to not have a flatmate or four. By far the most economical situation was to rent a 4 or 5 bedroom house. Doing this, you could easily have a sub-1k rent within a 10 minute walk of the Harvard or Central T stops. Not to “kids these days” it or anything, but the entitlement over not being able to afford a private, one-bedroom apartment in a fant…

> the entitlement over not being able to afford a private, one-bedroom apartment in a fantastically-popular city center is just absolutely mind-blowing I used to think this way—that is, just like you—in my 20s. From my experience growing up, I was used to not having nice or even merely adequate things, and it was the norm to go without. I'm less cavalier about declaring it entitlement now. Why shouldn't an adult, eve…

I don’t know man, it’s not like I said the peasants should be content with their gruel. A private apartment in the center of one of the most desirable ZIP codes on the planet is an inherently limited good. Believing you deserve it (over, say, a family with kids who truly do need the space and privacy) is kind of the definition of entitlement.

And it’s not like it was a barely tolerable existence — I wouldn’t trade my five years living in a glorified flophouse for anything, even after that time my housemate attempted to clean their vomit off the bathroom floor at 3 in the morning with the communal Roomba. I guess that was hardship of a sort, but hardship creates friends and memories — I don’t think I built an ounce of “character”, but I had a hell of a time.

Post reply on HN