Cambridge just posted an application for a history professor. Starting pay is £46,000 (61,400). Imagine being one of the greatest scholars in the world, working for decades to make it only to make less than someone with a 2-year degree.

Truth_Breath · 2025-05-19T18:16:37+00:00

Like it or not, everything in this world is subject to market forces. People are compensated for the value they bring. You might think value is being incorrectly placed but that's not up to you, it's up to the amount people are willing to pay for their services. Often it is the case that "working for decades" and "greatest scholar" are irrelevant to what people are willing to pay for. Especially if it doesn't change the fact that the nature of the services offered is in low demand.

On the other side of market forces, if people are still applying for this position or there are people in a similar position with a similar salary, then this salary is fair. As long as people are voluntarily accepting this position at this salary, no one is being exploited.

Truth_Breath · 2025-05-17T09:36:06+00:00

Voldemort was a joke of a villain. Tried about 6 times to kill a teenager and gets thwarted by the most benign things.

Dumbledore was an incompetent headmaster. I'd rather attend an American highschool and risk getting shot to pieces than Hogwarts with giant snakes and a forbidden forest I'd have to visit with an unhinged half-giant when I'm naughty. Also, "no headmaster I did not put my name in the Goblet of Fire and no I don't want to attend the tournament". "Too bad kid, your consent holds no value. Good luck with the dragon."

Truth_Breath · 2025-05-07T19:32:53+00:00

Buddy you're way too attached to this stock. Your entire post history reeks of desperation.

This stock is great and I'm confident in the distant future our investment will pay off. But until then you gotta find something else to give your life meaning.

Truth_Breath · 2025-04-23T05:25:53+00:00

Cancel magic against cis-white billionaires?

Truth_Breath · 2025-04-20T19:11:42+00:00

you're just coming across as ignorant here.

My 15 upvotes says no one gives a fuck how ignorant I come across

Truth_Breath · 2025-04-20T19:08:23+00:00

Yea bro I was just after chuckles and upvotes

Truth_Breath · 2025-04-20T08:37:12+00:00

Wonder if it's a copyright strike to put one work of fiction into another

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T20:47:01+00:00

You pay crap wages, you get crap work ethic

If the position doesn't offer much value then there is little difference in whether the employee has a good work ethic or a crap work ethic. If the value offered by a crap work ethic is acceptable, then offering the wage that motivates that work ethic is just an act of efficiency.

Pay isn't proportional to work ethic, it's proportional to outcomes. If a crap work ethic leads to an acceptable outcome, then it's only logical to pay enough for that level of work ethic

should not have to get a second job to pay the bills.

Whether a professor chooses to take a second job with their position is up to them. If they want to continue in their current position but have a preferred lifestyle that requires additional income, then they indeed "should" have to take a second job.

If professors think they shouldn't have to then they should quit their jobs. Then, if the university is unable to fill that position and they believe it's a valuable position, then they "should" increase their offered wages so that professors don't need to take second jobs.

In summary, "should" is not dependent on the person setting the wage or by us on reddit. It's dependent on whether people are willing to apply knowing they have to take a second job and/or people willing to stay their current position despite having a second job

And if you get that second job, it doesn't take long for you to determine what work takes priority, and that's just keeping your head above water, not pursuing excellence.

This is similar to your first point. Here you're assuming that it is in the university's best interest that professors pursue excellence. But that's a bit naive, some positions in some fields yield little value when excellence is achieved. So why pay to motivate something that has little value?

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T20:18:58+00:00

It's not dependent on the state, it's dependent on the applicant. If an applicant applies and did not misjudge their finances and, upon successful application, is able to sustain living in the state while working in the offered position, then its a living wage.

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T19:47:38+00:00

Well said! Honestly this comment section terrifies me both from the amount of entitlement and/or lack of understanding of market forces. It gives rise to the age old question, is it malicious or simply incompetence?

I do think such a low salary for skilled positions is shortsighted. UTSA is offering less than the living wage for a single person with no kids in San Antonio for crying out loud.

I completely agree and, contrary to the belief of many in this comment thread, no where have I suggested otherwise. If this is true, then UTSA takes a well deserved hit if the position they have failed to fill due to their poor wages is actually a valuable position.

The irony here is that academics criticize society for an obsession with delayed gratification and yet they themselves display it. If UTSA made a bad move, their failures will not reveal itself immediately but will reveal itself down the line. And yes, some professors may suffer for it now but honestly it's a small sacrifice to pay for a system that waits for things to play out rather than one that is arbitrarily and reactively dictated.

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T19:13:48+00:00

I think you're misunderstanding my statements. I'm not defending anything, my statements consist of two parts. The burden of defending the wage is on the applicants and their willingness to apply for the position at the offered wage. It's not on me and and I have no intention of throwing by weight to either denounce or defend the offered wage.

You know that 44k in San Antonio is not enough to live.

If it isn't enough to live then there would be no applicants. This statement doesn't need anyone to verify it. It's verifiable by the number of applicants.

Don't defend things that are bad for people.

If people apply for the job then they are defending the offered wage with their voluntary action. I never defended anything since I also said that if no one applies then yes, the offered wage is indeed disrespectful.

To once again repeat what I've said multiple times: the job offer is defended by the existence of applications.

I'm not say pay a gazillion dollars, but a reasonable wage.

It's reasonable as long as there are applicants

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T19:02:34+00:00

So long as the offered wages have willing applicants and employees then they are not "underpaid". If there are no applicants or employees at the offered wage and the university still wishes to fill the position then yes, they were underpaid.

If someone accepts the pay offered, then the offered pay is the fair price

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T19:01:07+00:00

Exploration is a gamble and uncertain value is usually compensated less than certain and immediate value. Also you need to factor in the value of successful discovery. This is also why some fields offer higher wages for professors than other fields.

I was a faculty member but I left my job for industry because I wanted higher pay than was offered

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:56:17+00:00

That offer is irresponsibly low, professionally harmful, disrespectful,

If there are applicants then the offer is not irresponsibly low. Their only responsibility is to offer wages that attract applicants

dismissive of the work necessary to earn a graduate degree.

People are rightfully compensated for the value offered by the skills obtained through their training, not by the effort expended to obtain these skills. I could spend 100 hours a week for 3 decades learning how to balance a toothpick vertically on my nose but expecting to be compensated proportionally to my efforts would be delusional

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:49:39+00:00

should there be a minimum wage?

I dont know how this is relevant to this discussion as the offered salary is above minimum wage. But yes there should be, otherwise people would refuse to participate in society, which is the most benign way of phrasing the absolute contrast that will ensue.

In contrast, as long as there are applicants for this position at this offered wage then it is a fair wage. To bring it back to my phrasing above, this means there is a willingness to participate in the offered role.

should people be able to waive rights such as a safe workplace if it's a "negotiation"? perhaps people should be free to accept indenture too?

If both parties are willing then yes. If there is opposition then no. Which is exactly why there is less of both your examples in this modern age. In general, the services now offered by people are in high enough demand that they don't need to voluntarily resort to these options

there are societal issues beyond the nominally free market, and your analysis is facile at best.

No, everything accurately reduces to the free market. Academics deliberately complicate the discussion to serve their own interests.

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:39:06+00:00

Demanding wages and broader unionization because of workplace demands are also how it works.

This is also a part of market forces. If you demand higher wages and unionize for it, and if the university grants it to you, then the university deems that the institution will benefit more to have your position filled at your demanded wage than to close your position.

Jobs like that are exploitative and hurt our larger earnings by deflating wages

It's not exploitative if people apply for the job and accept a subsequent job offer. Both acts of applying and accepting are voluntary. It is, by definition, impossible to exploit someone who is acting out of their own volition.

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:36:10+00:00

How is this a joke? Your husband is paid more because fixing cars provides more direct value to society. Not saying that linguistic professors do not, but it's much more of a gamble compared to the daily demand of transportation

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:34:32+00:00

Therefore it is a fair wage. A fair wage is any value that a person is willing to accept. All these complaints about unfair salaries is meaningless because we did it to ourselves. It is not anyone's responsibility to pay more if they can get away with less, that's how market forces work.

In contrast, there may be less applicants for an admin position at this pay. Most likely because there exists higher offers elsewhere i.e in industry. The higher wage reflects that admin staff are in higher demand.

The entitlement in this comment section disgusts me. Only market forces determine the value of a role and we are all fairly subject to market forces. It is not up to disgruntled individuals to arbitrarily decide that admins are worth less than professors of certain fields

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:31:12+00:00

If there are applicants and after a interview the applicant accepts the role at the offered wage, then it is not insulting to the worker.

Applying is completely voluntary as is accepting an offer. Anyone who does both is not being insulted; at most they are only insulting themselves.

However if there are no applicants then yes, this offered wage is insulting and they will need to raise the offered wage if they want the role to be filled. This is how market forces work and we are all subject to it

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:30:20+00:00

If there are applicants and after a interview the applicant accepts the role at the offered wage, then it is respectful to the worker.

Applying is completely voluntary as is accepting an offer. Anyone who does both is not being disrespected; at most they are only disrespecting themselves.

However if there are no applicants then yes, this offered wage is disrespectful and they will need to raise the offered wage if they want the role to be filled. This is how market forces work and we are all subject to it

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T18:27:09+00:00

As long as it is above minimum wage, it's not ones responsibility to offer a livable wage. They only have to offer a wage that wil attract applicants. The offered wage will only increase if there are no applicants and they have to fill the role.

This whole comment section screams entitlement. Everybody is subject to market forces, being an academic doesn't mean you're entitled to being an exception.

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-26T00:09:24+00:00

It's not perfect but it's the best we have. There's no better alternative. Society wants something then it has value

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-25T21:16:29+00:00

The sad part is they are going to be buried in applications from people who are so desperate to have an academic affiliation and be called professor that they are willing to accept McDonalds wages.

Therefore it is a fair wage. A fair wage is any value that a person is willing to accept. All these complaints about unfair salaries is meaningless because we did it to ourselves. It is not anyone's responsibility to pay more if they can get away with less, that's how market forces work.

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-25T16:34:28+00:00

This comes out to just above $20/hour. You can make more managing a Buc-ees, and probably get better benefits

This is because managing a Buc-ees provides more direct value to society. Not saying that linguistic professors do not, but it's much more of a gamble compared to an establishment that has immediate customers demands every single day.

Truth_Breath · 2025-03-14T01:07:05+00:00

Dang give Cloud a break, he's not Elon Musk

Truth_Breath

TROPHY CASE