[GuiA]

It widely varies (I was in a PhD program for 2 years, left it for startups, am planning to go back at some point in the next 18-36 months because I miss research A LOT and teaching just as much, if not more).

I personally love teaching as much as research (teaching as in lecturing, but also as in advising students working on a senior project, training undergraduate researchers, first year grad students, etc), and I see the two as inseparable. There are others who would rather teach than research (although they are a minority in my experience); but yes, the majority of people prefer research to teaching, and see teaching as a chore which only wastes their precious brain time (I could not disagree more with such a position). I wouldn't say it's 99.99% though - maybe closer to 60-70%. I wonder if there have been studies about that.

To those who think teaching is a waste of time that would be better spent on research, and that a "real" researcher is too good for teaching - I always point to this writing by RPF: http://www.pitt.edu/~druzdzel/feynman.html

[PeterisP]

I believe that teaching and research should be treated as two different career paths - they require different skill sets and motivation, and it would be great if people could choose to proceed in one or another or both if they want. The only thing that would have to change is how the universities make their job offers; make two distinct positions and recruit for both.

[kazagistar]

Such things exist... successful researchers can get buyouts from most of their classes at some universities. The problem is, there is way more teaching that needs to be done then research that needs to be paid for.

Also, in many places, the professors teach the grad students, who teach the undergrads in kind, like a big pyramid, but it requires active research to keep the professors relevant to the grad students.