State of the Union

[Texsox]

Although I do like the slate-pitchiness that alpha hit. Here we are thinking of ways to make college more affordable by tax breaks and public funding. But, boom, there it is: Why don't we just make college cheaper by making it less effective?

 

Here is an insiders thought on what we have done to education. We have jammed the High Schools full of "other stuff" that wasn't present 50 years ago. Health classes, computer classes, career readiness, standardized test remedial classes, etc. that to receive the same core subject education as the grandparents of today's students received, the students now have to attend two years of college. We talk about an Associates Degree being the new HS Diploma.

 

I can honestly say I am working much harder for my money as a HS English teacher than I did as a corporate VP. The stress is different and arguably less. I will have ten students next semester who if they do not pass their state test in English will not graduate with their class. These are English only speakers who just do not have the skills and confidence to pass the test. I am very worried about them. I can tell you heart wrenching stories that a few of my students are going through, eating disorders, parents making decisions that negatively impact their kids, students without food at home, one kid right before Christmas slept a night on the bench at a jail because his mom was arrested and he was afraid to go home alone. Some teachers can block that out, I can't.

 

The disconnect as I see it is between employment and education. For the past decade or two our economy has been growing in lower paying service jobs while our expectations of education are increasing. We are demanding our children learn more and more then accept less and less in employment. We complain about immigrants taking our lowest paying jobs while accepting immigrants who take the highest paying jobs. Why? Because of the nature of the businesses who employ them. Huge tech companies bring in programmers from all over the world or ship the jobs there. They have political power through huge donations and access to politicians. The small farmer who needs a 100 seasonal employees or the restaurant who needs a couple dishwashers doesn't have that pull. Plus, the immigrants taking the minimum wage jobs do not speak English. They are easy targets. We are saving those minimum wage jobs for our children so they can go to work for the immigrant doctors and skilled labor we allow to immigrate.

[EvilMonkey]

. We complain about immigrants taking our lowest paying jobs while accepting immigrants who take the highest paying jobs.

FWIW, I complain about those as well. The H1B-whatever program is as abused as anything.

[EvilMonkey]

What evidence do you have that she was a crappy lawyer?

 

Name recognition has landed a lot of candidates into a lot of positions. In fact in major American politics today, everyone is expected to start there. Also, you really insult American voters. I understand for example that most of the strong hardcore GOP voters on this board are pretty damn smart. For me to say they elected someone based on name recognition is silly. I believe all of us here have similar hopes for America, we just differ in the path to get there. For example starving children, social safety net or let churches, drug testing, and hard work take care of it. Either way no one wants to starve children.

 

Where to live after leaving the White House. Of course politics came into it. But remember Bill left office a young guy with business and humanitarian projects still on his plate. Settling in NY made sense. Try doing that from Arkansas or Wyoming. World figures tend to live in world cities. They left the White House with her favorable rating higher than his. I believe he was a determent to her campaign which was why, if you recall, he kept a really low profile. She also received accolades from Senators on both sides of the aisle for her hard work as a Senator representing her state.

 

She then ran a Presidential campaign that had many, many, Americans voting for her. Again, that is an insult to a lot of the voters that they only saw the Clinton name and voted for her. I'm not a big Hillary fan, I was happy Obama received the nomination, but she is not as we say in Texas, all hat and no cattle.

Let's just start with this. I know the story is that HIllary got fired from the Watergate thing. While that fact itself is false, the guy had said both "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her" and "ell, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions." So right off the bat she did something wrong. And being an influential lawyer is different from being a good lawyer. Remember, she had connections, like an ex-President, that could go a long way for influencing things. Just perhaps not in a jury box?

 

As for leaving, you are correct, they have to go somewhere. But they hunted for a safe place, found a nice Democratic state and went to work. Obama had at least lived in Illinois longer than 6 months before deciding to run for office. And a point for Hillary for actually voting more than Obama did while in the Senate. I will disagree with you in that I believe she is all hat.

[Reddy]

Let's just start with this. I know the story is that HIllary got fired from the Watergate thing. While that fact itself is false, the guy had said both "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her" and "ell, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions." So right off the bat she did something wrong. And being an influential lawyer is different from being a good lawyer. Remember, she had connections, like an ex-President, that could go a long way for influencing things. Just perhaps not in a jury box?

 

As for leaving, you are correct, they have to go somewhere. But they hunted for a safe place, found a nice Democratic state and went to work. Obama had at least lived in Illinois longer than 6 months before deciding to run for office. And a point for Hillary for actually voting more than Obama did while in the Senate. I will disagree with you in that I believe she is all hat.

 

She also sponsored almost 900 bills and co-sponsored over 1100 during her tenure.

[caulfield12]

Let's just start with this. I know the story is that HIllary got fired from the Watergate thing. While that fact itself is false, the guy had said both "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her" and "ell, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions." So right off the bat she did something wrong. And being an influential lawyer is different from being a good lawyer. Remember, she had connections, like an ex-President, that could go a long way for influencing things. Just perhaps not in a jury box?

 

As for leaving, you are correct, they have to go somewhere. But they hunted for a safe place, found a nice Democratic state and went to work. Obama had at least lived in Illinois longer than 6 months before deciding to run for office. And a point for Hillary for actually voting more than Obama did while in the Senate. I will disagree with you in that I believe she is all hat.

 

How many times did Abraham Lincoln fail, get fired, go bankrupt or lose a race? Shouldn't that career record have disqualified him?

 

You're acting like she is Rick Perry or something.

[Reddy]

How many times did Abraham Lincoln fail, get fired, go bankrupt or lose a race? Shouldn't that career record have disqualified him?

 

You're acting like she is Rick Perry or something.

Caulfield for the win

 

Lincoln was a terrible f***ing lawyer! hahaha

[EvilMonkey]

She also sponsored almost 900 bills and co-sponsored over 1100 during her tenure.

You got some data for that? If she sponsored or co sponsored 200 bills by herself, in that short of a time frame, just imagine how many other bills are out there to be voted on. I thought our congress did nothing? I looked at several sites but none would give totals.

 

I looked here, and it has 10 pages of about 50 votes on each. 500 is a lot short of 2000. And most of them are not sponsored or co sponsored. 61 co sponsors and 5 sponsored.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/5...on#.VMQTNP7F8fY

[EvilMonkey]

How many times did Abraham Lincoln fail, get fired, go bankrupt or lose a race? Shouldn't that career record have disqualified him?

 

You're acting like she is Rick Perry or something.

When was the last time she practiced law?

[Jake]

A primer on professorships and salaries. You have four basic levels of professors:

 

-Adjunct/Lecturer/lots of names for this

-Assistant Prof

-Associate Prof

-Full/no-adjective Prof

 

Adjuncts and the like are taken on one-year or one-semester contracts and at research universities teach the lion's share of undergraduate courses. Most of the rest are taught by graduate students, who are actually much more expensive than adjuncts (because the home department pays their tuition). Your average adjunct that is working full-time (not always or usually case) will make $30-50k per year while having a course load that demands they work at least 60 hours per week. That is without doing research/publishing, which is the only way an adjunct can advance their career. If they do want to do research, assume they are working 80-100 hours/week. Usually, adjuncts do not get health insurance and the like, but I would imagine that full-time ones might. Either way, since most of their work is done outside the classroom and is therefore unstructured, the unis can play games with their supposed working hours.

 

An assistant professor is paid far better and has a modicum of job security. At a top public, research university, expect an associate prof to make $60-$75k depending on their field. This person will not teach many undergraduate courses and is expected to do a lot of research. At private liberal arts colleges, they will do a lot of teaching and will have slightly lower research expectations. At a non-research university, they will do a lot of teaching and have fairly low research expectations. They also will have lots of administrative responsibilities, like advising and departmental affairs, in comparison to an adjunct. However, these will be less than their more senior colleagues.

 

After six years (this is the norm, but may vary), this person will go up for tenure review. If granted tenure, they will be promoted to associate and becomes far more difficult to fire. If not, they will be fired - usually. The review determines whether the professor has published impactful research, has achieved visibility in the field, has taught well, and has served the university in other capacities. Different universities will vary in which of those criteria matter most. This is where the term "publish or perish" comes from. This is not like high school tenure - at most schools, there are a huge portion of people denied tenure. In my department last year, four people were up for review and all were denied.

 

An associate professor can only be fired with cause, which is meant to grant academic freedom. With no right to fire arbitrarily, a tenured professor can teach about subjects that are unpopular or pursue lines of research that might be controversial. This is very important in all fields, which for varying reasons could otherwise be subject to the biases of the political or administrative powers at the time. Associate professors have lower undegraduate teaching loads, are expected to mentor graduate students, and have more service responsibilities. They will earn around $75-$90k at a top research university.

 

The full professor position has no formal entrance process. A given department will have a number of full professorial spots, given to associates that have achieved even greater excellence in their field, or teaching, or service to the university. These are powerful retention and recruiting tools as they allow more prestige to the individual and more money. A common reason to see a hotshot associate leave his or her position is because another school offered a full professorial spot. Here is where you reach the upper end of salaries, sometimes but not always in excess of $100k at top research schools. Scientists who bring in millions in grant funding will sometimes see their salaries go into $200k range, but of course this is a good tradeoff to the school given the grant funds and prestige from that research. It would be uncommon for a professor to get this position sooner than about 15-20 years after receiving their PhD, and the vast majority of career tenure-track professors never attain a full professorship.

 

Relevant statistics about university instructors in the US

In 1975, 57% of employed instructors at US colleges were either on the tenure-track (assistant profs) or tenured. 30% were part-time, most of whom were practicioners in the fields in which they were teaching. For instance, a journalist teaching a class on reporting or an injury lawyer teaching law students on personal injury law. As of 2011, 30% of all professors are tenure-track or tenured. 51% are part-time, though many are cobbling together full-time work by working at multiple universities in the same area. As of 2011, graduate student instructors were virtually equal in number to tenure/tenure-track faculty. Of course, part-time instructors outnumbered them all.

 

At research universities (think U of I), 40% of instructors are graduate students and 20% are part-time. 25% have tenure or are on tenure-track. At community colleges, nearly 75% are part-time, even higher for for-profit schools. At "master's" institutions (think Ill. St., SIU, etc.), 50% are part-time faculty.

 

Since the late 1970s, the compensation for professors of all kinds have grown more slowly than all other positions, such as uni president and various administrative positions that existed both then and now. Since 2006, the median head coaching salaries in college football and basketball have doubled - professor salaries have not changed or gone down.

 

Info about U of Illinois, for reference:

 

Of the operating budget, 15% is given by the state of Illinois. The rest comes from things like tuition, donations, earned interest on the endowment, federal grants to research projects, etc. UIUC won't say what portion of their budget goes to faculty specifically, but less than 20% of their budget goes to "instruction," which includes both faculty salaries and the infrastructure and supplies needed for teaching.

 

If you want U of I to spend less money, going after the instructors is a bad bet. Of course, considering how little of its funding comes from the state, it's hardly a state institution anyway. Whereas in 1970 U of I got 12 state dollars for each tuition dollar, they now 0.5 state dollars for each tuition dollar. They get half the state help that they did 15 years ago. It just hasn't been a priority. We spend twice as much on the department of corrections than we do higher ed.

[Reddy]

You got some data for that? If she sponsored or co sponsored 200 bills by herself, in that short of a time frame, just imagine how many other bills are out there to be voted on. I thought our congress did nothing? I looked at several sites but none would give totals.

 

I looked here, and it has 10 pages of about 50 votes on each. 500 is a lot short of 2000. And most of them are not sponsored or co sponsored. 61 co sponsors and 5 sponsored.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/5...on#.VMQTNP7F8fY

 

Here ya go, buddy. It's actually over 3,000 combined bills.

 

https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/1631

[Reddy]

When was the last time she practiced law?

 

Tell me about Lincoln's history as a lawyer.

[ptatc]

A primer on professorships and salaries. You have four basic levels of professors:

 

 

The full professor position has no formal entrance process. A given department will have a number of full professorial spots, given to associates that have achieved even greater excellence in their field, or teaching, or service to the university. These are powerful retention and recruiting tools as they allow more prestige to the individual and more money. A common reason to see a hotshot associate leave his or her position is because another school offered a full professorial spot. Here is where you reach the upper end of salaries, sometimes but not always in excess of $100k at top research schools. Scientists who bring in millions in grant funding will sometimes see their salaries go into $200k range, but of course this is a good tradeoff to the school given the grant funds and prestige from that research. It would be uncommon for a professor to get this position sooner than about 15-20 years after receiving their PhD, and the vast majority of career tenure-track professors never attain a full professorship.

There is a formal process to go from associate to full professor. It varies by institution as does most of these description. It usually involves 4 more years of additional employment. It includes at least 3-7 publications, exemplary reviews of instructions by peers, administrators and students, as well as service to the department, college, university and community.

It took me 12 years of employment post-doc to become a full professor. I still do not make near 100k, although I am at the states smallest public university. I may get to the 100k level by 30 years, if I hang around that long.

[Jake]

There is a formal process to go from associate to full professor. It varies by institution as does most of these description. It usually involves 4 more years of additional employment. It includes at least 3-7 publications, exemplary reviews of instructions by peers, administrators and students, as well as service to the department, college, university and community.

It took me 12 years of employment post-doc to become a full professor. I still do not make near 100k, although I am at the states smallest public university. I may get to the 100k level by 30 years, if I hang around that long.

 

Maybe that varies by discipline or institution type, then. Where I've been there have typically been only a number of full lines open, keeping some people stuck in the associate position - or so they said!

[ptatc]

Maybe that varies by discipline or institution type, then. Where I've been there have typically been only a number of full lines open, keeping some people stuck in the associate position - or so they said!

That is true. I was referring to how they need to go about it. There needs to be available spots open.

[EvilMonkey]

Here ya go, buddy. It's actually over 3,000 combined bills.

 

https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/1631

All I have to say is that list proves that all congresscritters have too much time on their hands.

S.Res.720 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month?

S.Con.Res.103 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A concurrent resolution recognizing the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the Minority AIDS Initiative.?

S.3567 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A bill to establish a Commission on the conflict between Russia and Georgia, and for other purposes.?

S.Res.630 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A resolution recognizing the importance of connecting foster youth to the workforce through internship programs, and encouraging employers to increase employment of former foster youth.?

S.3317 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, as the "Corporal John P. Sigsbee Post Office".?

S.Amdt.2823 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

Description: To require a report on plans to alleviate congestion and flight delays in the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Airspace?

 

Very interesting selection of things. If everyone else's is just as wide, they just need to go home more often.

 

Oh, and you guys keep bringing up Lincoln. Look it up yourself if you are interested.

[Reddy]

All I have to say is that list proves that all congresscritters have too much time on their hands.

S.Res.720 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month?

S.Con.Res.103 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A concurrent resolution recognizing the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the Minority AIDS Initiative.?

S.3567 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A bill to establish a Commission on the conflict between Russia and Georgia, and for other purposes.?

S.Res.630 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A resolution recognizing the importance of connecting foster youth to the workforce through internship programs, and encouraging employers to increase employment of former foster youth.?

S.3317 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, as the "Corporal John P. Sigsbee Post Office".?

S.Amdt.2823 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

Description: To require a report on plans to alleviate congestion and flight delays in the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Airspace?

 

Very interesting selection of things. If everyone else's is just as wide, they just need to go home more often.

 

Oh, and you guys keep bringing up Lincoln. Look it up yourself if you are interested.

 

I can't see what you find wrong about any of those things, to be honest.

 

What do you think congress DOES with most of its time?

 

[StrangeSox]

Really not sure what's supposed to be wrong with s.3567. Should congress ignore major international issues?

[Texsox]

All I have to say is that list proves that all congresscritters have too much time on their hands.

S.Res.720 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month?

S.Con.Res.103 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A concurrent resolution recognizing the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the Minority AIDS Initiative.?

S.3567 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A bill to establish a Commission on the conflict between Russia and Georgia, and for other purposes.?

S.Res.630 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A resolution recognizing the importance of connecting foster youth to the workforce through internship programs, and encouraging employers to increase employment of former foster youth.?

S.3317 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, as the "Corporal John P. Sigsbee Post Office".?

S.Amdt.2823 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)

Description: To require a report on plans to alleviate congestion and flight delays in the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Airspace?

 

Very interesting selection of things. If everyone else's is just as wide, they just need to go home more often.

 

Oh, and you guys keep bringing up Lincoln. Look it up yourself if you are interested.

 

As a business owner weren't there a lot of minor details you were required to keep track of? These things are relegated to staffers in most cases. A lot of this is silly stuff that we require congress to do. Who else should name a post office? You know the s*** storm that happens when you pick the wrong person.

 

Foster Care, Pancreatic Awareness, Animal Welfare, these are things that the public asks for, take little time, and may be worthwhile. This really goes back to teh days when people actually had input with their elected officials. Eliminate this and it places the elected officials one more step removed from their constituents.

[Y2HH]

Here is an insiders thought on what we have done to education. We have jammed the High Schools full of "other stuff" that wasn't present 50 years ago. Health classes, computer classes, career readiness, standardized test remedial classes, etc. that to receive the same core subject education as the grandparents of today's students received, the students now have to attend two years of college. We talk about an Associates Degree being the new HS Diploma.

 

I can honestly say I am working much harder for my money as a HS English teacher than I did as a corporate VP. The stress is different and arguably less. I will have ten students next semester who if they do not pass their state test in English will not graduate with their class. These are English only speakers who just do not have the skills and confidence to pass the test. I am very worried about them. I can tell you heart wrenching stories that a few of my students are going through, eating disorders, parents making decisions that negatively impact their kids, students without food at home, one kid right before Christmas slept a night on the bench at a jail because his mom was arrested and he was afraid to go home alone. Some teachers can block that out, I can't.

 

The disconnect as I see it is between employment and education. For the past decade or two our economy has been growing in lower paying service jobs while our expectations of education are increasing. We are demanding our children learn more and more then accept less and less in employment. We complain about immigrants taking our lowest paying jobs while accepting immigrants who take the highest paying jobs. Why? Because of the nature of the businesses who employ them. Huge tech companies bring in programmers from all over the world or ship the jobs there. They have political power through huge donations and access to politicians. The small farmer who needs a 100 seasonal employees or the restaurant who needs a couple dishwashers doesn't have that pull. Plus, the immigrants taking the minimum wage jobs do not speak English. They are easy targets. We are saving those minimum wage jobs for our children so they can go to work for the immigrant doctors and skilled labor we allow to immigrate.

 

Some great points here, Tex.

 

We try to do too much with too little time these days. Instead of hammering home 5 or 6 subjects over a span of 8 hours (for example), we're now trying to teach 12 subjects with the same allotted time, therefore, while the kids will know a little more about everything, they'll also know far less about certain things, such as history, math, and other historically "core" curriculum.

 

The disconnect I see is that we've "arrived" as a nation, and instead of telling our kids what they need to hear, we tell them to chase their dreams and love what they do -- because we can. Now, this is not necessarily a bad thing, as it reflects the much higher standard of living we have now. Unfortunately, this mindset works for a low percentage of the population who have the right parents and happen to be born into the right circumstances to live through the "struggle period" of chasing dreams, while for others, that chase will result in a struggle that will never end. Historically, we taught our kids the skills in life that would allow them to get decent jobs. Even today, carpenters, plumbers, electricians are things we no longer tell our kids to chase, because they'll result in good jobs later in life, instead we teach them to chase their dreams and play baseball, or be a pop star, or "love what they do", which usually results in low paying jobs when those dreams come up short and they have no real fallback skill. Now, I realize many of you will begin spewing anecdotes here to prove you can, in fact, love what you do AND make really good money doing it, but like I said, for MOST that's simply not a reality.

 

For all the hype you hear about how bad things are, overall, we've never lived better or easier lives in this country. Three generations shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves, as the saying goes, and if I'm not mistaken, we're in the second generation of this now, with many of us telling the third generation everything's going to be all-right, and that they'll want for nothing. Until we're gone, that is, and then their lack of fallback skill means blowing every dime the first two generations left for them to get to that point. And then the fourth generation can start with nothing, and repeat the process all over again.

 

"Don't love your job, love the money it pays ... and use that money to do what you love." -Y2HH, Crushing dreams since 1999.

Edited January 26, 2015 by Y2HH

[caulfield12]

Some great points here, Tex.

 

We try to do too much with too little time these days. Instead of hammering home 5 or 6 subjects over a span of 8 hours (for example), we're now trying to teach 12 subjects with the same allotted time, therefore, while the kids will know a little more about everything, they'll also know far less about certain things, such as history, math, and other historically "core" curriculum.

 

The disconnect I see is that we've "arrived" as a nation, and instead of telling our kids what they need to hear, we tell them to chase their dreams and love what they do -- because we can. Now, this is not necessarily a bad thing, as it reflects the much higher standard of living we have now. Unfortunately, this mindset works for a low percentage of the population who have the right parents and happen to be born into the right circumstances to live through the "struggle period" of chasing dreams, while for others, that chase will result in a struggle that will never end. Historically, we taught our kids the skills in life that would allow them to get decent jobs. Even today, carpenters, plumbers, electricians are things we no longer tell our kids to chase, because they'll result in good jobs later in life, instead we teach them to chase their dreams and play baseball, or be a pop star, or "love what they do", which usually results in low paying jobs when those dreams come up short and they have no real fallback skill. Now, I realize many of you will begin spewing anecdotes here to prove you can, in fact, love what you do AND make really good money doing it, but like I said, for MOST that's simply not a reality.

 

For all the hype you hear about how bad things are, overall, we've never lived better or easier lives in this country. Three generations shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves, as the saying goes, and if I'm not mistaken, we're in the second generation of this now, with many of us telling the third generation everything's going to be all-right, and that they'll want for nothing. Until we're gone, that is, and then their lack of fallback skill means blowing every dime the first two generations left for them to get to that point. And then the fourth generation can start with nothing, and repeat the process all over again.

 

"Don't love your job, love the money it pays ... and use that money to do what you love." -Y2HH, Crushing dreams since 1999.

 

Feel like I'm at a Tony Robbins seminar, lol.

Not that I would ever spend money on one of those things.

 

Just a preference for the George Clooney/Up In the Air backpack spiel, haha.

 

 

 

http://m.mlb.com/cutfour/2015/01/25/107462...-universe-crown

Speaking of living the dream, Mike Stanton "helping" out with judging at the Miss Universe pageant

 

Wonder how many digits/twitter handles/fb likes those new contract dollars earned him at the after party?

[Texsox]

"Don't love your job, love the money it pays ... and use that money to do what you love." -Y2HH, Crushing dreams since 1999.

 

That is the exact advice a fellow educator gave his son who is considering being an archaeologist. Be Phil Collins instead and buy every Alamo artifact worth owning and fill the dream that way. I can't say I disagree.

 

 

 

[Chisoxfn]

That is the exact advice a fellow educator gave his son who is considering being an archaeologist. Be Phil Collins instead and buy every Alamo artifact worth owning and fill the dream that way. I can't say I disagree.

I would third that advice. I'd also say that the more important part of job satisfaction isn't the actual duties of the job but the people you work with (in many instances) anyway.

[Y2HH]

I would third that advice. I'd also say that the more important part of job satisfaction isn't the actual duties of the job but the people you work with (in many instances) anyway.

 

Who you work with is HUGE in terms of having a good time at work, wherever that may be. I don't care if you are one of those "ohhhhh, I just looooveeee my job" type of people, if those you work with are a bunch of asshats, that love won't last.

 

I don't hate my job...but I wouldn't call it a love fest, either. There are a LOT of things I love more than being at work, such as my family, friends, road trips, good restaurants, a vodka martini, fishing, etc...I'd rather be doing those things than working. But work isn't bad...I don't hate being here, either...but I do it because I'm pretty good at it and I get paid...not because I love it.

[Chisoxfn]

Who you work with is HUGE in terms of having a good time at work, wherever that may be. I don't care if you are one of those "ohhhhh, I just looooveeee my job" type of people, if those you work with are a bunch of asshats, that love won't last.

 

I don't hate my job...but I wouldn't call it a love fest, either. There are a LOT of things I love more than being at work, such as my family, friends, road trips, good restaurants, a vodka martini, fishing, etc...I'd rather be doing those things than working. But work isn't bad...I don't hate being here, either...but I do it because I'm pretty good at it and I get paid...not because I love it.

Other than fishing and vodka martini's, which I'd replace with some other leisure activities, you've pretty much nailed it.

[southsider2k5]

Who you work with is HUGE in terms of having a good time at work, wherever that may be. I don't care if you are one of those "ohhhhh, I just looooveeee my job" type of people, if those you work with are a bunch of asshats, that love won't last.

 

I don't hate my job...but I wouldn't call it a love fest, either. There are a LOT of things I love more than being at work, such as my family, friends, road trips, good restaurants, a vodka martini, fishing, etc...I'd rather be doing those things than working. But work isn't bad...I don't hate being here, either...but I do it because I'm pretty good at it and I get paid...not because I love it.

 

This is dead on balls accurate.