Why More Scientists And Engineers Aren't The Answer Joe Weisenthal

[Demeter]

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-more-scientists-and-engineers-isnt-the-answer-for-the-us-2009-3

It's become an article of faith among the intelligentsia that the way to really stimulate the economy over the long run is to graduate a new generation of engineering and scientific brainiacs to innovate our way into the 21st century. Sure, in the short term the government can manufacture some jolts through spending or whatnot, but we're constantly reminded that to compete in the global economy, we must invest more in science and science education...Here's how we should think about the question: What are the major challenges and opportunities that thace the country?

-- Healthcare. Given the spiraling cost of healthcare, and the fact that few people are satisfied with our system, this is obviously one of the most fertile industries for growth. But our problem isn't a lack of science. Our problem isn't that engineers haven't created enough dubious miracle pills. It's that our conception of the system is wrong. We have antiquated models for healthcare delivery on all kinds of fronts, from how it's paid for to who patients see when they get ill. We could rattle off several ideas for how we might fix healthcare, and only a few of them would involve actual technological advances. If anything, we need more medium-skilled technicians to replace full-skilled doctors to perform more routine tasks.

-- Education. Our system is in shambles and has been dysfunctional for a long time. We have a huge problem of matching students up against the type of education that would suit them -- more vocational training for many of them would be good -- and for many students there's no upside in being educated. It's a gaping opportunity, but it's not a science question. It's more a matter policy and design than anything else.

-- Financial services. We have a tremendous need for true financial services innovation. Not in the sense of how Wall Street conceived of it, but in genuinely useful financial services for consumers. Like ATMs and ETFs and index funds. We also need better financial services for the lower classes, a demographic that few companies have figured out how to service well.

-- Energy. Ok, this is one area where we expect that the big challenges will be solved by engineers...Many of the big breakthroughs these days have nothing to do with engineering, but rather creativity in thinking how people will interact. Take Twitter and Facebook. Sure, there are engineering challenges, but the breakthroughs all creative. The engineering is in incidental to their success....We could go on. But the point is that there's nothing special about scientists and engineers in their ability to positively contribute to our standard of living. Lots of people make positive contributions, and we should get rid of our un-grounded biases against or for certain careers.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. We Also Need Tarriffs

It's the only way to stop the torrent of jobs from flowing to micro-wage countries. The Clinton/Summers almost-free trade with China legislation has been a neutron bomb for US blue collar workers, and white collar workers are next.

[POAS]

3. Welcome fellow protectionist!

May our tribe increase!

[MannyGoldstein]

4. It's Surprising That There Are So Few Of Us

It's the only thing that can work. You know when something makes the WTO types scream in horror, it must be a good thing.

[blue97keet]

9. Right, the WTO types

and financial geniuses could learn a lesson from safety-critical engineering about risk management and failure analysis.

[blue97keet]

8. Obama told the usual offshoring lie

In his latest "town hall meeting" Obama indulged in the usual "only low skill low wage jobs are subject to offshoring" lie that has been perpetrated for decades, when everybody knows that high skill high wage jobs are an even more attractive target for offshoring for obvious reasons. If there is always somebody cheaper to do whatever that is not physically nailed to the ground just what future is there for any type of work in America outside of strip mining perhaps? Yes we do need more employed vs. unemployed scientists and engineers.

[ixion]

2. It's not merely a matter of technical prowess

It's having a greater percentage of your population be intelligent -- whether engineers, scientists, artists or philosophers. It's going to take people with an understanding of history (something sorely lacking in our current apparatus) to fix things. Engineers and scientists, among other professions, stimulate the collective mind and help raise the bar back up from it's near neanderthal lows.

Oh, and as far as the areas (Healthcare/Education/Finanace) mentioned by the author that "don't" need more engineers, consider that all those areas require software and hardware engineers to make it happen. They require architects and engineers to make energy efficient buildings for them to work in. They require scientists in healthcare to innovate in that industry and wrest if from the hands of Big Pharma, and the insurance lobby.

Education -- the hard sciences as well as the soft -- is something we sorely need in this country.

[Demeter]

5. I Think the Point Is Our Engineers Cannot Save Us from Our Policy Makers

as every engineer knows, they (management) treat us like mushrooms: keep us in the dark and feed us bullshit, then cut off our heads for a meal.

[Submariner]

6. In my profession

Marine biology. It takes about 2-3 years to ge an M.S., and another 3 for a Phd. The course work in organic chemistry and statistics can be tough.

I've heard the financial sector can get these MBA's like Bush got in a year or less, with theoretical financial models occupying most of the curriculum. It appears in the real world the derivatives thingy and the other financial manipulations they invented did a lot to get us in the mess we're in now.

MBA's can, and do make probably 3 or more times what I can earn, which is probably one of the reasons students divert to the easier money jobs anyway.

What I would like to see is some form of mandatory environmental science class in high school and college, so the student has some exposure to the impacts humans make on the planet and biodiversity. If they do not want to be scientists or engineers, that's understandable, but they should at least have some background knowledge that they can apply in their workplace, or at home.

[jody]

7. The REAL answer is more Scientists And Engineers in the Senate and House and fewer lawyers. n/t

[xocet]

10. Interesting...

Many aspects (if not most) of our modern way of living are based on knowledge won through science and adapted for use through engineering. There are many policy problems that cannot be solved by educating more engineers and scientists, but it never hurts to have more people who actually understand aspects of the natural world with some fine detail.

Some ridiculous statements from the OP are:

"Our problem isn't that engineers haven't created enough dubious miracle pills." (What about the pills that worked?)

"We have a tremendous need for true financial services innovation." (How well has that worked out?)

"Many of the big breakthroughs these days have nothing to do with engineering, but rather creativity in thinking how people will interact." (Why is this under the heading energy?)


Ignorance in how our policy is shaped is the problem: people don't appreciate science enough in this country. Take the stem-cell issue as an example. Take the religious right as an example. Etc.