tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post5290890964793115693..comments2023-08-08T00:37:45.098-07:00Comments on A Philosophy Job Market Blog: But I'm on my Third City, And I'm on my Fourth Car, And I'm on my Fifth ApartmentPseudonymous Grad Studenthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00627480292942427387noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-2644111003324223332008-02-27T13:40:00.000-08:002008-02-27T13:40:00.000-08:00Outstanding means of argumentation:"That sounds an...Outstanding means of argumentation:<BR/><BR/>"That sounds an awful lot like something Hitler would have said...Hence, it is false and should not be taken seriously."<BR/><BR/>vs. <BR/><BR/>"That sounds an awful lot like something a troll would say...Hence, it is false and should not be taken seriously." <BR/><BR/>I'm baiting no one. I'm simply arguing with (what to my mind are) absurdities. Or, at least, with propositions that are taken as obviously true whenever the contraries appear much more self-evident to me. <BR/><BR/>But since I've been labelled a troll, I suppose I should recant...But I won't. You, TPG, are a moron.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-18870215007111026472008-02-27T12:50:00.000-08:002008-02-27T12:50:00.000-08:00The troll-feeding comment snapped me back to reali...The troll-feeding comment snapped me back to reality, thanks. Boy, troll-feeding is weirdly hard to resist isn't it? Sorry for contributing.<BR/><BR/>Again - my relevant tie back to the job market on all this, which I think should get some notice, is that asking about and negotiating parental leaves is something that many people should keep in mind. A paid term of teaching release is usually a reasonable request but you won't get it if you don't ask. Also, finding out a potential school's parental leave policy is often a little window into how tolerant that school will be of your being an actual human being with a life and commitments to other humans.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-24018407836379469692008-02-27T04:29:00.000-08:002008-02-27T04:29:00.000-08:00Stop the presses, ladies & gentlemen...Mr. Zero. T...Stop the presses, ladies & gentlemen...Mr. Zero. Took. A. Class. (Christ, let's all step back...Let the man speak. It's obvious he's earned it.)<BR/><BR/>Anyone here ever take an anthropology class wherein the remains of certain Latin American ruins were analyzed? Think you're getting the whole story here, always? Might we imagine, Mr. Zero, that there are dissenting opinions from those weighing in on child-rearing via day care centers? (Holy shit, even from SCIENTISTS!?!) Might we...Now, granted, I've not took-a-class on the topic. But then again, for 99.9% of human history, no one's taken a goddamned class on it to need to be told how to rear their child. <BR/><BR/>TPG...Your exasperation speaks volumes. "Science, anyone?" Now that's not rhetorical, is it? You're the one who began by invoking "ceteris paribus" around here. And I called bullshit on the fact that daycare centers are _better_ than rearing your child on your own up until K (which is what you originally posted, by the way). My views on maternity laws have very little to do with the case at hand, and your sanctimonious reckonings to the contrary, universities are very rarely private. (Which means the govt. _would_ have to step in on these issues...) <BR/><BR/>Your (1) and (2) are, again, philosophically ridiculous. No one said anything about "good" moms (oops, or dads). I said, as I recall, that it is virtually always better to be able to stay at home with children. But since I have also defended "nanny-dom", how precisely does it follow that I think that "good" moms (and dads) stay home with their children? How? By parity of reasoning, what? Please, enlighten me here. <BR/><BR/>How tolerant we all are here. Especially the jackass calling for comment moderation...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-81865827633369397362008-02-26T20:42:00.000-08:002008-02-26T20:42:00.000-08:00You can actually support a family with a few kids ...You can actually support a family with a few kids on an adjunct's salary in an economically-depressed area, provided that one spouse doesn't work if you've got kids. (The extra salary never makes up for childcare, an extra vehicle with extra transportation costs, a bigger wardrobe for more expensive clothes, and so on.)<BR/><BR/>I know because I've been doing it for several years. It certainly slows one down in progressing toward a Ph.D., but it's financially feasible enough to make me think a higher salary in an area that's not too expensive is much more doable. But it requires being frugal, and I know that's a lot to expect of some people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-83321338151048103762008-02-26T17:37:00.000-08:002008-02-26T17:37:00.000-08:00Welcome to the 1950s folks - did I miss something?...<I>Welcome to the 1950s folks - did I miss something?</I><BR/><BR/>Only that your interlocutor should be considered a troll and you should stop responding to him/her. This statement of his/hers -- "Only an academic could come up with such absurdities" -- suggests, shall we say, a fairly ambiguous interest in the philosophy job market.<BR/><BR/>Incidentally: I know people disapprove of comment-deletion, but I'm not sure why <I>moving</I> strings of irrelevant comments into separate posts isn't more popular, and/or better-supported technically by blogging software. But then, I also think there should be dedicated sites for, say, arguing about Israel and Palestine, or "feminism and science" (your source for every online argument that ends up namechecking Larry Summers!), or any number of other things, although I'm not enamored enough of the idea to pony up money for domain registration or hosting fees.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-89593925809867020662008-02-26T16:26:00.000-08:002008-02-26T16:26:00.000-08:00Virtual hugs to Mr. Zero for always saying somethi...Virtual hugs to Mr. Zero for always saying something sensible just when I am about to delete this blog from my bookmark list in exasperation...<BR/><BR/>Science. Try it. Then talk.<BR/><BR/>(oh, urgh, the sound of me trying to restrain myself from pointlessly continuing this argument and failing because I am weak...)<BR/><BR/>I didn't say that I thought the government should subsidize mat leave (though I do believe this). Universities can also subsidize it, and many do. But anyhow my venerable interlocutor has claimed:<BR/><BR/>1. Good moms (or dads - he sarcastically made it gender-neutral at one point) stay at home with their kids for 5 years.<BR/><BR/>2. We should stick with the current US system of 6 unpaid weeks of mat leave and that's it.<BR/><BR/>It would seem to follow pretty immediately that according to him, academic women (parents?) who have kids should quit their tenure-track jobs, since those will only be held for them for 6 weeks and they should stay home (without subsidization) for 5 years. Really, women who are planning on having kids have no business taking up these tenure-track jobs in the first place then, do they?<BR/><BR/>I guess that then the men (other parents?) will have to work extra-long hours to bring home the bacon to support the wife and kids on one income. They won't get to participate much in raising the kids then, but after all someone has to be the provider.<BR/><BR/>Welcome to the 1950s folks - did I miss something?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-91800896448820093132008-02-26T14:24:00.000-08:002008-02-26T14:24:00.000-08:00I took a psychology of child-rearing class in coll...I took a psychology of child-rearing class in college. We looked at a number of studies about day-care. You know, science? Not off-the-cuff musings by philosophers commenting anonymously on some blog? <BR/><BR/>The current consensus, among <I>people who study this kind of thing for a living</I> is that having your kid in a good day-care center is no worse than having him at home with you in any way, and is better in some ways (the ways TPG mentions). <BR/><BR/>Bad day-care centers are very bad. However, it is hard to isolate the effects of bad day-care centers from those of bad parenting, since the kind of parent who is diligent about finding a good day-care center is going to be good about a bunch of other stuff, too; whereas the kind of parent who isn't diligent about finding a good day-care is likely to slack off in other areas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-20257234958553730762008-02-26T11:49:00.000-08:002008-02-26T11:49:00.000-08:00Tenured Philosophy Girl,Care to address the primar...Tenured Philosophy Girl,<BR/><BR/>Care to address the primary point of my post? <BR/><BR/>I guess not. First of all, I do deny that this country's maternity laws suck. Political extremist? Perhaps. I'm not sure. But gauging this country's laws against those of the EU does little to assauge my doubts that the maternity laws in the country are perfectly alright. Are they more civilized in the EU? Wow. That'd be a stretch, now wouldn't it?<BR/><BR/>(And I think I'm educated...but maybe you're right. Perhaps I'm just a dumb schmuck off the street. That difficult to imagine someone disagreeing with you, is it? Automatically qualifies them for uneducated, does it?)<BR/><BR/>That I think children should stay at home with parents in no way entails that I think the government should subsidize it. If you think you can infer one from the other...then honestly, I can't help you. <BR/><BR/>That evil fucking Bush. What a bastard he is. If even evil Bush can see something, why can't I? My take on our current president notwithstanding, I can readily imagine someone thinking and believing that univeral pre-K ought to be the norm. It ought to be the norm, one might think, because there are numerous persons out there who simply cannot afford daycare. And it's got jack-all to do with the fact that a scientist tells us (ceteris-paribus) that children perform much better, are more well-adjusted, (and to resort to your technical jargon) blah-blah-blah. <BR/><BR/>They perform much better than staying at home alone, than staying home with a grandmother who also keeps 12 other kids, than staying within a familial framework wherein they get no attention, than staying at home with a drug and/or alcohol abuser...and on, and on, and on. <BR/><BR/>But then again, I suppose I'm not up on all the research. As apparently are you. And it obviously makes you feel better about your situation. So please, forgive all of this ignorance on my part. <BR/><BR/>But I'm still pretty sure that you are wrong. <BR/><BR/>(I have to go now...I'm jerking my imaginary children out of public school, hiring a nanny, and writing my senator to revoke all maternity laws in this country. Have a good day.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-77612608895721028532008-02-26T10:50:00.000-08:002008-02-26T10:50:00.000-08:00anon most-recently-3:37: You are a strange person....anon most-recently-3:37: You are a strange person.<BR/><BR/>"And, oh dear, this horrible country and its paternity/maternity leave laws...How uncivilized, how utterly terrible! Surely the government should subsidize at _least_ the first four or five years...At _least_."<BR/><BR/>Do you actually, seriously deny that this countries maternity laws suck compared to every other civilized country? Wow, I have literally never heard an educated person deny that.<BR/><BR/>And why in the world would you think that I - the very person who you are bashing for thinking that there's no reason at all for kids to stay at home for 4 or 5 years - think we should have 4 or 5 years of mat leave? Everything I have said shows I wouldn't think this. What a strange charge! It does seem, however, that you maybe should believe in such a thing. Personally, I think a paid 6 months or year off like most developed countries have is just about right.<BR/><BR/>You may not know it but I am pretty confident that it is you who is coming off sounding like the political extremist, not I. Why do you think that even the fucking family-values-snorting Bush administration has acknowledged that universal free Pre-K is worth spending tax dollars on??? Because ALL the research shows that 3 and 4 year olds do best - ceteris paribus blah blah blah - when they go to school (or something like it) rather than stay home.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-49498241743225332392008-02-26T06:59:00.000-08:002008-02-26T06:59:00.000-08:00I believe the point has been made, but I'm still a...I believe the point has been made, but I'm still absolutely blown away by the utter cluelessness of anyone who could see $69K as "peanuts." <BR/><BR/>Can you *see* the other people in the world around you, or are they invisible to you? <BR/><BR/>Do you think that the only people whose lives could possibly be worth living are your co-professionals at your law firm/i-bank/consulting firm and the sexy rich people you see on TV? <BR/><BR/>If you can't make ends meet on $69,000, it's *your* fault, not the salary's.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-53408794080399458112008-02-25T15:37:00.000-08:002008-02-25T15:37:00.000-08:00"Um, yeah, all else being equal. Science and commo..."Um, yeah, all else being equal. Science and common sense support the idea that being cloistered away with one person with very little going on in her life and lots of other domestic responsibilities taking up her time and attention is not as good as being surrounded by other kids of all sorts and cared for by adults who have chosen to work with kids despite the low pay, are trained to do so, and are there for the sole purpose of attending to the kids."<BR/><BR/>Umm...No. "Common sense" tells me none of the above. "Common sense" tells me that a child needs his/her parents a helluva' lot more during that stage of life than they do the madness of a daycare scene. "Professionals"? "Trained?" You've seriously got to be kidding me. <BR/><BR/>Because children today, who've gone through daycare, are so much more well-adjusted than those of us who - God forbid - were raised by stay-at-home parents? All else being equal? I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Only an academic could come up with such absurdities. <BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong - I don't find fault with those who use daycares. I'm sure some (emphasis) are quite nice. But don't try the backward justification that it's actually _better_ than staying with a parent. That might make you feel a helluva' lot better - but my bet is that it's false. At least, that's what "common sense" tells me. <BR/> <BR/>And, oh dear, this horrible country and its paternity/maternity leave laws...How uncivilized, how utterly terrible! Surely the government should subsidize at _least_ the first four or five years...At _least_. <BR/><BR/>I wish I could say that I don't mean to mock you. But I do so mean it. If what you say makes you feel better about leaving your kids at daycare and/or sending them to public school, fine. I, nor anyone else from I can tell, have no problem with it. But your means of justifying this (by the way, who _asked_ you to justify this - as I recall, you're the one who attacked a guy for discussing a nanny?) and your apparent celebration of it is beyond nonsense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-69687859501412976362008-02-25T13:46:00.000-08:002008-02-25T13:46:00.000-08:00I got me 3 siblings, and parents whose combined in...I got me 3 siblings, and parents whose <I>combined</I> income is not too far above the level of the hypothetical janitor. We've turned out just fine. We've never lived in the lap of luxury, but we got everything we needed. It turns out that a parent bringing in 69K wasn't among the things we needed, nor was a full-time nanny. True story!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-243297579922293242008-02-25T09:02:00.000-08:002008-02-25T09:02:00.000-08:00Follow-up comment - I feel the need to add that th...Follow-up comment - I feel the need to add that this all started with a conversation about preschool-aged kids. I do think there are important benefits to infants spending most of their time at home with primary caregivers, even though the abysmal maternity leave in this country, including at most universities, often makes this impossible. Infants have very different needs than preschoolers.<BR/><BR/>Nice tie back to the job market (finally) - one thing I haven't seen discussed at all on this blog, tellingly, is finding out about and even negotiating maternal/parental leave once you get an offer. I know many people who have negotiated for a paid term off at schools that have the horrible minimal 6-weeks-no-pay policy. This is really important to negotiate NOW if you think you'll ever have kids, whether or not kids feel like a pretty distant scenario for you at the moment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-16138721758788675842008-02-25T08:43:00.000-08:002008-02-25T08:43:00.000-08:00"So, according to your reasoning, those who go to ..."So, according to your reasoning, those who go to daycare are better off than those who (gasp!) stay at home with mom...Who chooses to be a home-maker, keeping her child until kindergarten."<BR/><BR/>Um, yeah, all else being equal. Science and common sense support the idea that being cloistered away with one person with very little going on in her life and lots of other domestic responsibilities taking up her time and attention is not as good as being surrounded by other kids of all sorts and cared for by adults who have chosen to work with kids despite the low pay, are trained to do so, and are there for the sole purpose of attending to the kids.<BR/><BR/>Not that there aren't bad daycares and excellent nannies/SAH parents and plenty of exceptions of course.<BR/><BR/>And don't play dumb - obviously my point was that the kids wet their pants because they are stressed by being away from home for the first time, not that they'd never been toilet trained at home. <BR/><BR/>I wasn't looking for a medal at all for sending my kid to public kindergarten. Just looking to avoid the idea that those of us who believe in daycare and public school are worse parents.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-24840271879739182952008-02-25T04:26:00.000-08:002008-02-25T04:26:00.000-08:00How tolerant of you, tenured philosophy girl, to a...How tolerant of you, tenured philosophy girl, to allow your son to dance with the plebs...So, according to your reasoning, those who go to daycare are better off than those who (gasp!) stay at home with mom...Who chooses to be a home-maker, keeping her child until kindergarten. (Which, so far as I'm aware, is when children normally begin learning not to wet their pants and how to play with glue.) <BR/><BR/>Ooops. Sorry. Or if Daddy decides to stay home to be the home-maker. <BR/><BR/>And two cheers to you for sending your child to public school. When society gets around to it, I'm sure you'll get a medal for your good deed.<BR/><BR/>Daycare = Tolerance<BR/>Public School = Tolerance<BR/><BR/>Damn. Glad you made me aware of that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-28477392277690224572008-02-24T20:24:00.000-08:002008-02-24T20:24:00.000-08:00Anonymous 10:04 a.m. is so wrong. Let's take this...Anonymous 10:04 a.m. is so wrong. Let's take this one by one from someone who (1) came out of a Leiter-unknown program (which, by the way, has a very high job placement success rate); (2) does Continental and Postmodern Political Philosophy; (3) is, to put it bluntly, not the smartest fellow any of us know, nor the best writer, nor the most productive publisher; and (4) is in the last weeks of pre-tenure stress.<BR/><BR/>Anon 10:04 says "there is practically no pay": I've been teaching 10 years, and make about $75K; I have a good-sized house in one of the priciest markets in the country, bought when interest rates were low four years ago; I eat out where and when I want, buy whatever toys I want, donate to charitable organizations with the extra.<BR/><BR/>Anon 10:04 says "you can hardly have a family (SO and/or kids), you can't support yourself well and cannot support a family on this level of pay": I have a wife who works part-time and volunteers the rest; we are currently childless, but that is changing in the next year, and we foresee no inability to support them, though there will be obvious lifestyle changes and additional (reasonable) frugality.<BR/><BR/>Anon 10:04 says "you can't choose where you will live at all really and will be away from people you might want to live near": Of course this is true for some, but I progressed my way through the profession (via VAP in Buttsville and risky Sabbatical Replacement) to the wonderful and highly sought-after urban center where I now work and live.<BR/><BR/>Anon 10:04 says "You will work like a DOG grading papers and creating courses." Um, yes, I work very hard (my dogs, on the other hand, do almost no work, but my wife and I do take them on hour-long hikes most days). I create courses on a regular basis because I love teaching, love learning, I'm really good at it, and the satisfaction I receive from this is huge.<BR/><BR/>Anon 10:04 says "You will practically never have non-work-related vacations": This is pretty stupid. First, conferences are a great way to travel, especially if you have a travel budget. But even without it, my wife and I have gone to Hawaii and Mexico, spend weekends at B&B's in the mountains, whatever. And what do you call summertime, and the six weeks of winter break, sitting at home reading, writing, cooking, hiking, dreaming up new courses and new books! <BR/><BR/>We're not doing this on family money, folks. Just some decent decision-making capacity, and a lot of hard work. It hasn't sucked for a minute. While I know I'm "lucky," I also know that I've made intelligent, ethical and strategic decisions, helped other people who have helped me back in turn, and tried my damnedest to be fabulous at every turn.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-37093208656534837742008-02-24T15:01:00.000-08:002008-02-24T15:01:00.000-08:0011:05/1:09 - True. What got my panties in a snitc...11:05/1:09 - True. What got my panties in a snitch was 10:04's absurd, offensive, ignorant claim that there exist 'maybe one or two good daycares', and the sanctimonious conclusion that daycare was a "last resort".<BR/><BR/>I have to take your word for it about the cost of day care in Boston. But please remember that Boston is exceptionally expensive. People who are not (un?)lucky enough to land jobs in Boston, Manhattan, San Francisco, and maybe one or two other cites aren't looking at necessary costs anything like that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-32631417824140762742008-02-24T13:11:00.000-08:002008-02-24T13:11:00.000-08:00Anon 12:32 - thanks! Not only do I now know a ver...Anon 12:32 - thanks! Not only do I now know a very cool new slang term that can help me seem hip to the cool kids, but I also now know something about Welsh loanwords.<BR/><BR/>I am jumping on the pwned bandwagon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-41198038226153818652008-02-24T13:09:00.000-08:002008-02-24T13:09:00.000-08:00tenured philosophy girl,11:05 again. I agree we'r...tenured philosophy girl,<BR/><BR/>11:05 again. I agree we're thread-jacking, but the deed's been done...<BR/><BR/>I just wanted to second your view that there are lots of good reasons to favor day care over a nannies. I just wanted to point out in my earlier post that the cost isn't one. Day care is not obviously less of a luxury item than a nanny.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-33844542795839175622008-02-24T13:06:00.000-08:002008-02-24T13:06:00.000-08:0012:32,I think in many parts of the country it woul...12:32,<BR/><BR/>I think in many parts of the country it would be insane to pay that much for day care. The point of my post was that in certain parts of the country, it's not obvious how to avoid doing so. Rate chart here:<BR/><BR/>http://childcare.harvard.edu/pdf/ratecard.pdf<BR/><BR/>As I said, we could find something cheaper -- we looked at several less expensive places -- but by "cheaper", I mean "15-20% less". Can you fathom what would might count as a good reason for spending $2400/month on day care for two kids? If not, then you can't fathom what might count as a good reason for sending your kids to day care in the Boston area.<BR/><BR/>Happily, we're moving to the midwest in the fall, where child care will "only" cost about $1800/month.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-30460354092301181472008-02-24T12:32:00.000-08:002008-02-24T12:32:00.000-08:00anon 11:05: you spend $3,000/month on daycare?! I ...anon 11:05: you spend $3,000/month on daycare?! I can't fathom what might count as a good reason for that. This does not mean you don't have the right to, of course. But still. Probably over 99% of humans who have turned out okay did so w/o such daycare.<BR/><BR/>Re pwned: <BR/><BR/>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PwnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-19007874669409677902008-02-24T11:05:00.000-08:002008-02-24T11:05:00.000-08:00Come on, man. You can afford to have kids on 70 gr...<I>Come on, man. You can afford to have kids on 70 grand a year. You don't need a nanny. You know how I know? Because I know that there are janitors at your school, and I know that they don't make anything close to what you do, and I know that they have kids, and I know they don't have nannies. QED</I><BR/><BR/>You're definitely right that you "can afford to have kids" on 70 grand a year, especially if you don't live in a major coastal metro. But one thing to keep in mind about that janitor is that she's likely to have family in the area to help with the kids: you don't have to be willing to move far away from your family to get a job as a janitor. Just about all of my non-philosophy friends with kids have much lower child care costs than I do for this very reason. That's just anecdotal evidence, of course.<BR/><BR/>Also, the nanny-bashing is kind of ridiculous. As I posted above (2:43pm), my wife and I pay almost $3000/month for day care for two kids. That's high -- we have a number of reasons for doing it; I won't bore you -- but it's not *crazy* high for our area. We could save four or five hundred a month by going somewhere else, though of course that, too, isn't straightforward, since most places have waiting lists, etc. Anyway, I just wanted to point out that at $15/hour, a nanny would be a bit cheaper. <BR/><BR/>Of course the child care problem is hardly unique to philosophers! The only reason it's worth bringing up is that in my experience people who don't have kids are usually pretty shocked to find out how expensive child care is, at least for kids who aren't school-age yet. What seems like a juicy salary -- especially from the perspective of a graduate student! -- might not even be enough to live on if you want to have kids, at least in some parts of the country.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-9492581461637451862008-02-24T11:04:00.000-08:002008-02-24T11:04:00.000-08:00To Mr. Zero - Thanks dude! Awesome comment! I fee...To Mr. Zero - Thanks dude! Awesome comment! <BR/><BR/>I feel very stupid asking this and I am sure it is obvious but can someone please explain the 'pwned' thing to me and other possibe Clueless Compatriots?<BR/><BR/>10:04 -<BR/><BR/>This all feels a bit like thread-hijacking to me but since others are doing it too...<BR/><BR/>When my son started kindergarten, the school (yup, public school - I'm the evil mom that lets my kid mix with the plebs, don't forget) regularly divided the kids into two classes - one for the kids who had been in daycare and could be assumed to have basic social and learning skills, and one for the kids who had been stuck at home with mom or a nanny and were wracked by separation anxiety and completely incapable of sharing the glue stick. The daycare kids spent the first half of kindergarten learning how to read and add, while the stuck-at-home kids spent the first half of kindergarten learning how to share the glue and not wet their pants or cry when their moms/nannies dropped them off. The school administrators were completely up front about this.<BR/><BR/>Actually I have done tons of research on this (and will send cites, not anecdotes, to anyone who cares) - daycare kids are sick less, better adjusted, and watch way less TV than the stuck-at-home lot. They come out lower on no interesting measures. That's science, not someone's unsupported impressions of the day cares in his neighborhood that he has not actually used.<BR/><BR/>The Victorian era is over. Give me a break.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-65415985380921313672008-02-24T10:40:00.000-08:002008-02-24T10:40:00.000-08:0010:04--You are right about how location affects li...10:04--<BR/><BR/>You are right about how location affects lifestyle. But there are two sides to that story.<BR/><BR/>I teach in an economically depressed part of the country, and that allows me to own my own home, go to Europe on vacation if I choose, buy a new car, eat out a lot, and in general live the way I want (I have no kids, and don't plan on having any. But if I did, I could do well here. Most colleagues have kids, and they like the area and describe it as a "great place to have a familiy"). And that is all very nice.<BR/><BR/>But, since this is an economically depressed area, it kind of sucks also. Not much to do. Not much of an art scene. Most people outside the school are uneducated and very, very poor. Good amount of petty, senseless crime.<BR/><BR/>Had I gotten a job in NYC, SF, Seattle, Portland, or any other city that I love, then I would love my city, but hate my cramped apartment, long for owning a house, eat out only on my b-day....you get the picture.<BR/><BR/>So this is, of course, one sacrifice we make: live in a depressed area, and afford many of the goods of life, or live in an attrative area, and be broke and struggling for quite some time. We actually hired someone in a TT job from the Bay area the other year because she opted for the house, land, etc. over the big city. I think she wonders whether she did the right thing quite a bit these days.<BR/><BR/>Personally, I think I am in the better place. I can afford to eat out in NYC when I go there; my friends who live close to that area never do, since all of their money goes to rent, transportation, etc. Ironically enough, I know more about the food and art scenes there than they do; I enjoy their city more than they can. And then I go to Paris in the summer, while they sit in their apartment wondering whether they can afford to turn on the AC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944513327283802005.post-55277330211412827922008-02-24T10:21:00.000-08:002008-02-24T10:21:00.000-08:00what financial advantadge do they have over philos...<I>what financial advantadge do they have over philosophers?</I><BR/><BR/>Presumably they started earning steady money in their early 20s instead of their late-30s, and have no debt associated with an additional decade plus in school. (Or am I the only one here who got a terminal MA first and then took off a few years to think really hard about whether or not I wanted to do a PhD?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com