🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3v3f2j$lrk@rebecca.albany.edu>, pb019@csc.albany.edu says...
>
>In article <3ulcqa$flk@upsn2.u-psud.fr>,
>OGER  <oger@trefle.isv.cnrs-gif.fr> wrote:
>>Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>>It is unfortunately the same in France. They are reducing both the
>>number of grants, and their duration, from 3 years to 2 or 2 and a half
>>years. They say two year is enough to get a Ph D! Probably in math and 
>>computer science, but not in Biological Sciences.
>>
>>Unfortunately for us too, we are not allowed live on unemployement
>>benefits, and work at the same time, so we are to work for free!
>>
>>
>>Phil
>
>
>In U.S., if you are a good basketball player (and especially a college 
>drop-out), you become a millionaire. On the other hand, if you are a good
>scientist (and especially work long and hard enough to be a Ph.D.), you are 
>a loser.
>
>Oh yes, I forgot! Another way to make money in U.S. is by being a 
conservative 
>politician. You talk everything but science. People like that around here.
>
>And people don't like if you are a scientist and still talk politics.
>
I did my PhD during a time of belt-tightening in Australia and my 3 year 
grant ranged from $4100 p.a. to $5100 p.a. during that time.  Come to 
Australia now, guys - the grants are up to $16,000 tax free these days and 
they seem to be just giving them away to anyone who wants them.  All of the 
bright students seem to be deserting chemistry PhD courses and getting a 
job!  Hence the higher rewards for those who couldn't find a job.  In 
addition, it seems that while many employers LIKE to employ people with 
PhDs, they often start behind bare degree graduates of the same age who have 
"practical experience". 

:-)  <c'mon, you know that I'm not referring to YOU personally> ;-)

Chris