I guess my point is present in your argument as well, you note the importance of advancement and the furthering of a career in a chosen field (that they presumably enjoy and are highly interested in) as the impetus for graduate education. Then point they added compensation as only part of the motivation, and not the whole. I was noting the arguments made against graduate education relate the whole of the experience to simple monetary gain, which, is highly problematic and will leave the person with a poor impression of their "investment." Getting an MBA does not a millionaire make, nor does a law degree equate to the paychecks of OJ Simpson's legal team (dated reference, but I just watched a Family Guy episode on the matter, so . . .). It is better to approach the degree for what it gives in knowledge than what it may lead to in money. Also, there are no bad guys amongst those who want to learn and I apologize if my comment seemed to argue such (yes, that is incredibly corny).

My point regarding a counterbalance was simply this: slightly tongue in cheek or not, 2 articles rallying against graduate education leaves the site in the unsavory position of coming across as anti-intellectual. Nothing to do with producing a balanced (and thus, mostly stale) site, nor advocating faux counterpoints to editorials. Just that I think that most commentators and writers are not anti-intellectual (including in the writers of these two articles), but the site now seemingly forwards such a position. I find this troubling and unintended, so I noted it. The "feel" of the site is an amalgamation of the articles, with the comments peppered in. This shifted the "feel" for me in a way I did not like, much as the "public execution" shifted the "feel" for others.

Which program are you in? I found a disparate number of programs offer full funding and stipends across Humanities, Social Sciences, Physical Sciences and Mathematics, Health Sciences, Engineering, and Communication disciplines for both doctorate and masters degrees, with their acceptances on (www.thegradcafe.com)'s results section. If there is no funding available in your field, I would recommend looking into other Graduate Assistantships that are not program specific, perhaps on the administrative side of campus (many offer full tuition waivers with the minimum graduate assistant pay, which on my campus is a floor of 10.25 an hour).

Hmm . . . a lot of the arguments against graduate school come across as highly materialistic (why go to grad school when you can have a kick ass car?! why pay 100,000 for a piece of paper?!). Grad school is about learning, not about a paycheck. If you are going for only an extra zero on the end of your check, you're going for the wrong reasons (and will probably end up fairly vindictive about the process).

Also, the second post on the subject this week with no counterpoint argument leaves the site with a fairly anti-intellectual stand point against further education (which, I assume, many contributors would strongly disagree with including those who support this post).

Finally, some masters and almost all PhDs are fully funded with a stipend (even in the humanities!) so the debt argument is vastly over-pronounced in these arguments. Yes, some students self-finance; however, many achieve their PhD and masters completely for free through TAs, RAs, Lab positions, Writing Lab assignments, GAs, grants, and fellowships.

Madison has a history of rioting (youtube: Halloween on State street), this could get real ugly if the students join forces with the people of the city. Especially if the riot police is not ready.

Best hope is recall elections. Due to drastically low voter turn out it is easier to meet the % (which escapes me currently) of the total vote to initiate a recall. Woot for low voter turn out? (ignoring the fact that it caused this problem in the first place).

BOO. You're thinking of the accent more local to North/South Dakota and Minnesota. Ya der hey. Most of lower Wisconsin has a "non-regional dialect" or "no accent" (which is why early news anchors tried to speak like a Midwestern).

Forget next election. 8 of the GOP Senators are available to repeal NOW. I remember hearing one senator needed 25,000 signatures and they got 10% in ONE DAY.

Woah, woah, woah. Roberts doesn't want to "overreach" on a decision does he. No, that would be terrible, just terrible. Never EVER overreach.

Unless of course it favors multi-national corporations, like in Citizens United. Then over reach like a mother fucker. Supreme Court Justices gotta eat, too!

Woot woot. Totally agree. I used to live in Wisconsin and it is delightful to my non-political friends all riled up and protesting. Woot for political activism!

While I generally agree, there is currently a protest of several thousand Wisconsin teachers sleeping in the capital building over the union busting of their new, tea-party governor. So it does happen here, too. Although much more infrequently and much less violently oppressed.

Oh, I feel so bad for everyone in that film, but foremost Jennifer Connelly. I would treat you right and not make you go ass to ass for heroin. Call me.