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

51–60 of 122 posts

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

#51

Post by robertlagrant »

Cheer2171 wrote: post #28
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…

> I admire the guy for choosing to do more important work and making sacrifices to do it. But I'm not owed a decent salary in return for following my own dreams rather than my employer's dreams. Nobody is. Students at public universities deserve good instructors. Stop applying a capitalist market rationale to public services. Are you one of those people who thinks that whatever price the market offers for labor is ax…

> Stop applying a capitalist market rationale to public services.

We're discussing wages. Wages are all about that rationale. If you make a choice you should abide by it.

This is nothing to do with what students "deserve", whatever that means.

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

#52

Post by BobaFloutist »

mistersquid wrote: post #23

McKeown should be paid more, without question, but he is a lecturer, not a faculty member. His title and appointment is not as a "Professor". [0] This is due to the hierarchical ranking system of academic institutions. McKeown's qualifications may be the same as his more highly ranked colleagues, but the tiered system which rewards research does not pay as much for lecturers whose primary assignment is to teach. [0]…

I mean, yeah, that's kind of the problem.

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

#54

Post by ghaff »

zrobotics wrote: post #37
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.

OK, I also live with roommates while I'm saving up a downpayment and waiting for mortgage rates to drop. But c'mon, there's a huge difference between being homeless and having roommates. I've been close to being homeless before, and at that point I would have been happy to have even the shittiesy roommates if it meant not sleeping on the streets. I'm disgusted at the implication that 70k isn't enough to live in LA. Y…

Well, he even says one of his criteria is he doesn’t want a long commute. There’s cheaper housing in LA. You just won’t favor it given other options.

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

#55

Post by [deleted] »

newyankee wrote: post #33
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.

It is also that US is mostly filled with either very large single family homes or apartments in areas where rents are generally always high. A focus on efficient, individual space that is like 400 sq ft. dense studios but which actually translates into lower rent (e.g. 2500$ in the example to somewhere 1000-1500$ is needed). A lot of reforms and time needed for this.

[deleted]

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

#57

Post by medo-bear »

Cheer2171 wrote: post #28
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…

> I admire the guy for choosing to do more important work and making sacrifices to do it. But I'm not owed a decent salary in return for following my own dreams rather than my employer's dreams. Nobody is. Students at public universities deserve good instructors. Stop applying a capitalist market rationale to public services. Are you one of those people who thinks that whatever price the market offers for labor is ax…

[flagged]

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

#59

Post by alephnerd »

65 wrote: post #44
beezle wrote: post #30

Per smartasset.com: 70K salary in Los Angeles - Gross $5,833/mo, filing single, including federal, state, fica, state disability gives a monthly take home of $4,447 So find it hard to believe he is "homeless", seems to be more by choice. And if the take home after paying rent is still too high, do like most others do - get a roommate to share expenses.

Yeah, seems obvious getting a roommate would be the answer here. I'm not sure if that's not as culturally acceptable in LA as here in NYC but there are people in their 40s and beyond who have roommates.

It's culturally acceptable to get a roommate in LA - especially to live in a neighborhood like Westwood.

Furthermore, he could live 20 minutes away in another neighborhood instead of Westwood - which is LA's version of Lower East Side in NYC - and get a 1bdrm for $1800-2400.

This is truly out of touch, because so many Los Angelenos have a combined household income at or below $70,000 yet are able to raise families and live a middle class life in LA.

This does not mean that lecturer pay shouldn't be increased - lecturers in humanities fields at UCLA get paid WAAAAY worse than $70k, and would fight to get that kind of a salary alone.

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

#60

Post by robertlagrant »

elashri wrote: post #48
nordsieck wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> should we rethink the way we reward work to prioritize things that help society instead. The problem is that everyone has different ideas about what helps society. At least the current system, where people are compensated based on supply and demand, people actually want what's being produced. In contrast to the old soviet system where top down production decisions mean that what's "best for society" is of no use to…

Why do you pick the two extreme situations. Isn't there a possibility of a middle ground?

The current system is not an extreme. Only concentrating power into the people who will pick what is good for society is extreme.
Post reply on HN