Kief-

Kief- t1_jed9qjj wrote

Public good is a widely used economics term that refers to a good such that, once provided, the good is 1) non-rivalrous and 2) non-excludable. By this definition transit is not a public good.

Non-rivalrous basically means “your use doesn’t affect my use.” Crowding out can occur very easily in transit so it’s rivalrous.

Non-excludable basically means no one can prevent you from accessing it. We install payment systems at the entrance so we do exclude people.

Textbook examples of public goods include national defense and clean air. Public transit should be well supported and financed, but they’re right it doesn’t meet the definition.

1

Kief- t1_j9tpe6w wrote

Of course, I’m sure 120k+ AP starting positions exist. I didn’t say AP positions are strictly in the 90-110k range. That’s the ballpark and you can find observation points above and below that range.

My point was that PhDs often choose a lower comp even when outside option is available, which is a different situation from master’s. E.g. Business professors with 180k+ salary can find higher paying positions in industry if they wanted to leave academia. So wouldn’t you agree masters vs PhD salaries are not comparable because of the selection bias?

2

Kief- t1_j9sdqtz wrote

PhDs (especially quant or STEM) are not appropriate comparisons to masters or average salary in DC. Those who want tenure-track professor positions choose to accept low compensation (~90-110k). But they have industry jobs as an outside option if and whenever they want to leave. The current market rate for PhDs with no work experience is 200-250k and many employers offer 6-figure signing bonuses in finance, consulting, pharma, tech (well, maybe not tech at the moment). Government pay is somewhere in between, and those positions generally start at GS-13. If you want to become a professor money probably isn’t the reason you got a PhD anyway.

−7