Scientists are not  compensated adequately for their efforts and contributions.

This is one of the reasons, young people are not joining this profession.

Talent remained outside the profession, research remain deficient, and country's contribution in research is lagging behind.

At this moment, unfortunately, the prestige of the scientist (as, indeed, and a university professor) in society is not very high, primarily because of the low (compared to the other) income. I would like to believe that in the foreseeable future the situation will change for the better, at least a little.

Dear Dr. Klyndyuk

I agree with you and hope for a better and brighter future for scientists/professors when they and their contributions are recognized, appreciated/respected and copiously compensated (wishful thinking!) by the society.

Best wishes.

Scientific research will not attract the best brains and the quality of research will come down in future.

Dear Er. Anil Kumar

Thank you for your candid opinion. Can you throw light on what should be done to correct the situation to attract young and bright minds?

Good luck.

The salaries of high school teachers and researchers depend very much on the country. The american universities pay, as far as I know, well. The european universities pay considerably less. However, the professors have some important privileges. The tenured position is an example of that. This is important advantage in the time of unemployement we are about to live.

What may be the reason on these relatively low salaries of professors in Europe? Probably, the fact that the society (and taxpayers) takes them on its charge for life. Moreover, this happens in the time of low demography and therefore low taxes income - this is an important financial effort for the society.

What I miss personnally: it is a lot of limitations, e.g. in France, with regards of developing an economic activity basing onto the research (creating start ups). This may be useful for the professor and for the taxpayers.

Dear Prof. Pawlowski

Thank you for your thought provoking response. In most of the developing countries the salaries are meager and alternate job opportunities are scarce. Therefore scientists/professors tend to stick to a job at a single place and be satisfied with whatever they earn. How can this situation be improved?

Best wishes.

Researchers provides road map of tomorrow and they should be encouraged to continue their function and environment should be created to attract brains towards. For that, their facilities (directly or indirectly) need to be increased so that they and their family live life as good as others (attractive income groups).

Dear Dr. Manilal

Thank you for your suggestions.

Best wishes.

Respected All,

Scientist should collaborate with industries, technologists and corporate  in commercial prospective, that may uplift the  financial and social status of researcher. In the return, Young brains may attract towards the  research.

Dear Dr. Dhanraj

Thank you for your interesting suggestion. In India and several other countries scientists/professors may not be allowed to freely collaborate with industries. Such freedom exists in IITs and IIMs in India, but in other Central/State Government funded institutions there are limitations due to patent/copy right and other IPR issues. Nevertheless, let us hope for the best in future.

Best wishes. 

But industries want to have taxpayer's money too to pay for their research.  There is here a big problem to my mind. The society got used (at least for the richer countries) to get help from the state (taxpayers) for whatever.  Our politicians got blackmailed by the economic actors. Bank and Companies are much too powerful.

Bright brains needs freedom. So a descent living from a tenure track is the minimum. The highly paid good brains live under stress, which is negativ for creation. Only a very small percentage can have enough money to gain the needed freedom.

At a big Korean company (IT-Telcom-Electronics) the average life-time of a fresh engineer in the R&D departement is 2,5 years..  the good brains gets squeezed before they run well.  

the economic actors should deeply rethink their models..  stop the money slavery.

our politicians also should rethink their position (but these are nobody else than we, in democracy regimes).   may be, we should consume differently, and also have little more trust in ourselves, and try not to want a security for everything. pay less for insurances, but pay more taxes (and oblige the rich companies to do so too). 

I have no solution. On one side I want tenure tracks, but on the other I argue to have less security.

Fact is that our european social system is a mess. much too expensive.  but I believe that they are progress.

privatisation is OK, market competition is fine..    just we should prevent to have state interventions in everything (that is corruption).   we should have let the banks go bankrupt in 2008. I do not see any progress from this experimental fact that money is dead.

we should stop to fear our economic actors..    they are clever, they will want to push us to wars,  just to keep us running (working) and consuming.

would be nice if education could deliver us from endoctrination of any color.

it is dangerous (see the latest assassination) but that is our fate..  as soon as you run into fear, your are lost and sucked by the vampires which make our economy.

Keep strong, and prevent the politicians from losing all their power.(our power).

Dear Dr. Alberts

Wow! I think you have hit the nail on the coffin. Yes, I do agree with many of the issues you raised, but the fact remains-what are we to do? Adjust, confine ourselves to our laboratories, cover ourselves with the veil of science and pretend that nothing is happening outside? or fight back, but how? Nice food for thought.

Good luck.

I think germans do pretty well. even if their Banks poisoned Greece and Spain and or others states.  At least not wanting to make debts is a good thing.

Debts are always promises on a better future.  Be realistic and stop making promises nobody can hold.   Research should be for free. Invest in it but do not expect (bet) on the results.  The Banks are misusing our belief in a bright future by giving credits.

It is natural to be optimistic, but avoid to bet on it.  Build progress but choose the right one: to me one based on solidarity.  The strong should feel responsible for the weak.

And then sustainability.. the engagement in green power is paying out little by little.

Germany is lucky since the left has learned the lessons of economy (at least the old one,  you can not live spending more than your ressources).

It is so that economy has created new ressources with time. ( what is Facebook worth, it sells your life)  Today even your scientist idea is one which is transformed in Dollar and credits..

It is all a risk management game.   But today there is to much risk distributed to each of us,  the responsabilities get too strong..  to much stress is created.. preventing thinking, and just feeding populistic talks (wrong solutions which are not reflected).

so just we have to give back our savings, our securities (gained by hard working) and start to behave and consume in a sustainable way.   States should not be allowed to make any debts, no gambling for states.  Be responsible..not promise what can not be hold.

Risks need to be taken, but let the strong do that.. and it is definitively not the role of states (we, most of us weak) to back-up the gambling of the strong.

we scientists can help the gambler by providing solutions to their problem, but not take over the responsibility.

not a very concrete solution , i agree.. 

Scientists are not  compensated adequately for their efforts and contributions.

This is one of the reasons, young people are not joining this profession.

Talent remained outside the profession, research remain deficient, and country's contribution in research is lagging behind.

Dear Rajeswara Rao: In a theoretical plan, as in any other profession, true quality should be effectively compensated. In my opinion, I believe that Richard Bach book “Jonathan Livingston Seagull” gives a good example of what the work of a good scientist could/should be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Livingston_Seagull

Payment is not equivalent to the contribution. Industries make a fortune out of successful research. 

Scientists are not adequatly compensated for their contributions, and I do think that this will not change soon! Scientific research will not attract the best, while the quality of research may decrease unless the policy of scientific wages is changed! Maybe the emerging world problems bring such new policy faster in favour of scientists!

This issue is important. Unfair compensation for scientists not adequate even to their contribution and other efforts for the society. This might not be encouraged the young people. So I agree with what Subhash C. Kundu in his answer "Talent remained outside the profession, research remain deficient, and country's contribution in research is lagging behind."

Dear Prof. Subhash

In the 17th,18th,19th and part of 20th centuries, science attracted brilliant brains and their contributions are overwhelming! But in the latter part of 20th century and in the 21st century, technology took over pushing science to the background. Private companies seized the opportunity and made profits attracting young talent. Yes, talent remained outside the scientific profession. With governments focusing on popular, vote bank policies, can science attract the kind of funding it deserves? We cross our fingers, wait and watch for better times ahead.

Thank you for your participation and eliciting your rich views.

Regards

Dear Prof. Mario

I agree with your practical views that some scientists are fortunate to get recognized and compensated through rewards and other benefits while large section of scientists retire with whatever they can make. It is also true that physical work is much easier than serious scientific/intelligent out put that requires both physical and intelligence inputs.

Thank you for your contributions.

Regards.

Dear Prof. Diogo

Are you suggesting that many scientists' contributions do not deserve adequate compensation? Can you please clarify?

Thank you for participation and the link to the book.

Best wishes.

Dear Ms. Soni

I like your noble idea that recognition and fame for a scientist are more than monitory compensation. But the fact is while monetary compensation is regular/monthly and do not require any further effort to retain it, recognition and fame require constant efforts to retain them for a long time.

In countries like India and other developing nations, it is true adequate facilities do not exist for young people to pursue science as a career. The time and effort involved are too long and there is no guarantee of employment. In the private sector on the other hand a young person can join with lesser qualification at an young age and through hard work can climb up the ladder much faster than in science.

Excellent view of a young researcher!

Best of luck in all your endeavors.

Dear Prof. Ljubomir

Thank you for your participation and candid views. But do not you think that it is sad state of affairs that we wait for world problems only scientists can solve?

I join you in wishing for better times ahead.

Regards.

Dear Prof. Fikrat Hassan

Thank you for your participation and your valuable comments. Can you suggest some ways to attract young talent?

Regards.