College Selection

[Spanky]

Don't know about other state's top notch schools, but I checked Univ. of NC and North Carolina State Univ. for their undergrad tuition rates and fees. Totals come in right around $5k/yr for in state (UNC might have been a few hundred more than NCSU). Pretty sweet deal for those able to take advantage. Plenty of jobs straight out of college from either place (if you pick one of the "correct" majors) for $40-50k+.

UNC is a great deal - low tuition and highly regarded. Most in-state tuition rate is $9K and 2x for out-of-state.

 

[justin]

UNC is a great deal - low tuition and highly regarded. Most in-state tuition rate is $9K and 2x for out-of-state.

Yep - I took advantage of law school there. "Only" $10k/yr when I graduated in '04. It was only $5k/yr in 2000 when I was shopping for schools. I think they are up to $12k/yr now for new students.

The UNC System board has proposed limiting future tuition increases to "only" 6.5% per year. :

 

[astromeria]

Rice is well endowed with oil money so, although a private school, it costs about the same as the great public universities. Rice freezes a student's annual tuition so it remains the same for all 4 years (at least they did that when my daughter was there).

 

[2B]

My daughter went to Rice

BFD

Rice is a good school. It's about twice the cost of TAMU or UT but for Ivy League it's a super bargain. Being cheap beyond belief, I wasn't going to encourage my son (who, unlike my daughter, had the SAT to apply) unless there was some program that really made a difference. Like I said before, the salaries and success rate don't seem to be any different between solid state schools and the name universities.

One place I think the name does pay off is Harvard or Princeton Law and the few top tier MBA mills. Doing well in the University of Houston MBA program doesn't really get you in the fast track investment banking scene.

 

[justin]

One place I think the name does pay off is Harvard or Princeton Law and the few top tier MBA mills. Doing well in the University of Houston MBA program doesn't really get you in the fast track investment banking scene.

Princeton Law? I assume you meant Yale? Cause Princeton doesn't have a law school. But a harvard/yale JD will open many doors that wouldn't open otherwise.

 

[2B]

Princeton Law? I assume you meant Yale? Cause Princeton doesn't have a law school. But a harvard/yale JD will open many doors that wouldn't open otherwise.

I'm glad to be corrected. I avoid lawyers when possible. Now if Princeton had a law school, I bet they'd get top dollar just on the name.

 

[CybrMike]

This is ambitious Secure Retirement is working for the government? IMHO, being ambitious for your child is NOT hoping that they end up working at some cush government job as a civil engineer. You guys must be pretty jaded to think that this is the "best outcome".

I am always amazed to see so many people who are so unambitious for themselves become so ambitious for their children.

If the goal of life is retirement, and for many it appears to be, why not take the shortest cheapest route to a secure retirement? For a female, seems like there must be places in the Federal for, say, a civil engineer.

Job security for an engineer in industry seems roughly comparable to that of a waitress.

The only thing I can imagine that would amortize any Ivy price bachelor's degree would be Wall Street. And even there, it might be necessary to add another $100,000+ to attend a top tier law or business school.

Plus, at these schools a child will either have to hang around with unbelievable geeks or (at the Ivies) incredible egomaniacs.

Ha

 

[Brat]

Excuse me, but there are damn few cushy government jobs out there. Just as in private industry there are slackers. In both cases that is the result of poor managers.

Today civil engineering is often outsourced because public employers can't retain them. As cities and counties attempt to manage their expenses it is often more cost effective to use professional services contracts. Hot issue in my town after loosing both public works engineers within a year.

Same is happening in building departments. Plan checking is driven by construction activity. Often it is better to outsource the specialty checking (structural, for example) than keep it in-house.

 

[Nords]

This is ambitious Secure Retirement is working for the government?

Think about that sentence, Mike-- a government retirement check is probably the gold standard of "secure retirement". That's just a fact because I think the PBGC has had to take over zero govt pension systems.

IMHO, being ambitious for your child is NOT hoping that they end up working at some cush government job as a civil engineer. You guys must be pretty jaded to think that this is the "best outcome".

So, a few bad apples means that govt workers aren't ambitious? Some of them are trying to fix society while others are just using the job to pay their bills while they're pursuing their "real" interests.

Look at the odds of an entrepreneur succeeding in a winner-take-all industry and compare it to the number of govt workers with secure futures. Gosh, it looks like a higher percentage of govt workers actually have more secure futures than an equivalent population of entrepreneurs. (That might explain why govt salaries are lower and entrpreneurial salaries are higher, in direct proportion to the likelihood of being unemployed.) So maybe for the bigger group of people, employment security is the "best outcome".

I don't see anything wrong with a kid who wants to build a state highway or teach high-school science or work with disadvantaged people. Those are all govt jobs around here, and there's nothing jaded about my outlook.

 

[Spanky]

In retrospect, I would have retired with a nice pension by now if I had worked for the government. The notion that government jobs are unchalleging and that only unambitious people work for the government is overly generalized or unfounded.

 

[justin]

As a private consultant civil engineer, I frequently look at comparable jobs working for cities or the state. The pay is usually fairly comparable to private employers around here, and the work demand is lower at almost all levels of work (unless you get into the executive management level).

And I interact with these jokers on a daily basis - trust me, most of them CAN get by with very little work. Many of them do work hard and some of them are extremely competent. I would have no problem working in a number of govt jobs, and don't view it as "unambitious".

 

[2B]

My first hand experience with government workers was what I saw as a contractor at NASA after getting downsized from a private sector job. While there, I heard civil servants complaining about their low pay relative to private industry and counting the days until they could take their retirement. My opinion is that most of them wouldn't have lasted in the private sector with the work ethic they demonstrated. Most were overpaid for what they contributed to the space program and based on their backgrounds private industry wouldn't have paid them any more. Most existed to talk to other civil servants who only were there to talk to them. There were a couple civil servants that had outside businesses. They came and went as needed to support their other job. These people were well known to be absent frequently and not really functioning in whatever their function was supposed to be. I was less than impressed. I got out at the first decent opportunity.

If that is how our whole government works, our only hope with not having to learn Chinese or Russian is that those governments are worse.

 

[audreyh1]

In retrospect, I would have retired with a nice pension by now if I had worked for the government. The notion that government jobs are unchalleging and that only unambitious people work for the government is overly generalized or unfounded.

3 semesters as an engineering intern for NASA had me completely convinced otherwise. The contractors were the worst - lots of clock watchers as I recall. The NASA engineers, although bright and nice, generous people, really were stuck with unchallenging work. Their main job was to supervise the contractors - really very little design work at all. It was very hands-off.

The first thing I looked for when I graduated with my BSEE was find a small company where I could really get my hands dirty and do design work right away. Lucky for me, I was employee #24, the company was successful, and the rest is history!

NASA tried to warn me about what I would be giving up if I didn't sign with them! I might end up being a struggling single mother with insufficient benefits was a particular scenario I recall. Hah! I'm sure glad benefits didn't skew my early career choices. When you are right out of school is when you can afford to forgo benefits for great career experience, etc. Later, when you have a family and have saddled yourself with financial obligations you can play safer if you need to.

Audrey

 

[Brat]

I think the spread between private industry and public agency comp depends on the community. Odds are in the Bay area the spread is huge while in towns like Redding public agency employment may have an edge. [Using away from home examples, I am not in CA]

NASA has its own culture, not your typical public employer.

 

[donheff]

If that is how our whole government works, our only hope with not having to learn Chinese or Russian is that those governments are worse.

Exxon, now there is a place where you could find people with a real work ethic. Or am I thinking of Global Crossing?

 

[2B]

Exxon, now there is a place where you could find people with a real work ethic. Or am I thinking of Global Crossing?

Actually, I worked for Exxon many years ago. The part I started with was still called Esso. It's actually one of the few places that either didn't run me off or have me leave because they were going to. I tend not to be politically astute. I'm sure no one yet sensed that in this forum.

In any large organization issues develop with "productivity." In the private sector when times get tough, purges clean out some of the problem children but, unfortunately, some of the productive non-politically savvy. In any event the organization becomes leaner and more focused. In the government when times get tough, they raise taxes.

 

[Spanky]

In the government when times get tough, they raise taxes.

.. and cut programs or benefits.

 

[2B]

.. and cut programs or benefits.

When it's done, it's not enough and not anywhere near what the private sector does.

 

[CybrMike]

I just mean if this is your dream (govt employee), then it just seems like pretty low standards to me. Seems to me most kids in college would dream a little bigger, be a little more ambitious than that. Maybe not. I know that wasn't my dream.

Think about that sentence, Mike-- a government retirement check is probably the gold standard of "secure retirement". That's just a fact because I think the PBGC has had to take over zero govt pension systems.
So, a few bad apples means that govt workers aren't ambitious? Some of them are trying to fix society while others are just using the job to pay their bills while they're pursuing their "real" interests.

Look at the odds of an entrepreneur succeeding in a winner-take-all industry and compare it to the number of govt workers with secure futures. Gosh, it looks like a higher percentage of govt workers actually have more secure futures than an equivalent population of entrepreneurs. (That might explain why govt salaries are lower and entrpreneurial salaries are higher, in direct proportion to the likelihood of being unemployed.) So maybe for the bigger group of people, employment security is the "best outcome".

I don't see anything wrong with a kid who wants to build a state highway or teach high-school science or work with disadvantaged people. Those are all govt jobs around here, and there's nothing jaded about my outlook.

 

[samclem]

I just mean if this is your dream (govt employee), then it just seems like pretty low standards to me. Seems to me most kids in college would dream a little bigger, be a little more ambitious than that. Maybe not. I know that wasn't my dream.

I don't think many college students think to themselves "yeah, cool--I'd like to be a government employee!!" They probably also don't think "I hope to be chained in a little cubicle all day." But, that's what most of them (and us) do (did).

There are a lot of highly dedicated and hardworking folks in government service. I continue to work with them frequently. Yes, there are also slackers. A kid with a masters degree in econ or poli sci could do an awful lot worse than a career in the Foreign Service, CIA, DoD, etc. And a lot of jobs at the state/local level have a fairly big impact on a lot of people.

 

[2B]

About six months before I left my NASA contractor position, a new grad was hired into our group. He took less money than he could have gotten "in the private sector" but he was in awe at the prospect of working for NASA. He was totally disillusioned before I left and I didn't do it to him.

NASA contractors aren't paid "comparable" salaries to the Houston market and they get what they pay for. During the Millennium Recession, they got some pretty good talent for cheap. (I like to include myself in that group ) Now that the market is hot, most of the "younger" or more motivated have left for better paying jobs. The life is pretty easy as a contractor and its a great "almost retired" job. There was one super engineer from BP that stayed on because it was so easy and he just wanted something to do. He was still living of his severance and was drawing a retirement annuity.

 

[donheff]

I understand these anti-government rants. Heck, in some ways I feel the same way when I see deficits back on the rise and a war that looks more and more like a VN style quagmire. But I think when you take these attitudes too far you end up reaping what you sow by driving young people away from public service. Just two examples:

In the government when times get tough, they raise taxes.

This isn't caused by government workers. It is caused by the idiots you and I put in office. And then, when the inevitable backlash occurs, the government cuts come fast and furious and the laws hamstring managers with a lack of flexibility that would challenge any private sector exec. I oversaw the downsizing of my agency from 26,000 to 14,500 over three years (after which I moved from HR to IT so I could have some fun). Funding constraints forced us to effect some of the cuts early in the fiscal year which results in "Christmas RIFS." That is a nice a present as you get in any private sector job.

I just mean if this is your dream (govt employee), then it just seems like pretty low standards to me. Seems to me most kids in college would dream a little bigger, be a little more ambitious than that. Maybe not. I know that wasn't my dream.

You are pointing at every soldier in Afganistan/Iraq with that quote. As well as the police and fire fighters who climbed up the twin towers.

I can remember surveys taken in the 80s during the height of that period of Fed bashing that showed that individual Amercans actually hold diametrically opposed opinions. They think public workers in general are slackers, but they also rate most (not all) public servants they actually come into contact with (from postal delivery to SS clerks) as excellent.

 

[2B]

They think public workers in general are slackers, but they also rate most (not all) public servants they actually come into contact with (from postal delivery to SS clerks) as excellent.

I'll bet there weren't many that included IRS workers in the "excellent" group.

This isn't caused by government workers. It is caused by the idiots you and I put in office.

I agree. Elected officials at all levels try to buy support with special deals for public workers. In Texas whenever anyone talks about improving education, it is code for higher teacher salaries. No politician wants to discuss the district football stadiums or other infrastructure monuments that would make most ancient kings proud.

Note that the Christmas RIF is after the election.

 

[jeff2006]

I'll bet there weren't many that included IRS workers in the "excellent" group.

The few times I've dealt with them, they've been fair and square, polite, and professional (no, I'm not one myself).

 

[Spanky]

let's get back to college selection - just received a letter from University of Nebraska at Lincoln. They will pledge free tuition plus $2000 for room and board if you name them as the first college of choice. Does anyone know the resason that a college would insist on that?