[Rancid]

I should rephrase what I said. I didn't mean we should reduce the number of overall graduates of higher education. I'm saying we should reduce the number of graduates from traditional 4 year colleges, but also increase the graduates from trade/tech/vocational schools.

[Someneck]

quote="Someneck"]
They Russians got into space before the Americans

Sputnik and all that


bleep bleep sputnik 1957
quote]

By devoting huge amounts of resources to it, it was basically a prestige project for the commies and the commies didnt care how much it harmed the general population to spend so much energy on this project, the americans however were restrained from engaging too much into these types of wasteful loonie toons dick measuring contests.

...until 20th july 1969 when their dick had grown and werher von braun lit the blue touch paper - the US diverted a huge chunk of their economy to bounce in the moon dust. They could have achieved UHC 60 years early - but oh no its all war and prestige come first and to heck with the people...




.

[Someneck]

I should rephrase what I said. I didn't mean we should reduce the number of overall graduates of higher education. I'm saying we should reduce the number of graduates from traditional 4 year colleges, but also increase the graduates from trade/tech/vocational schools.

We certainly need plumbers - but those who are employees will be forever low paid and will have to work with broken bodies to age 67

The Mexicans who are given amnesty can fill those places

[Tigerlily]

I have a Canadian student loan. I owe about $17 000 right now. I'm not worried at all. Almost everyone my age has student loan debt. And when the bubble bursts, what can they do to me? There's no house they can take away from me, like with the mortgage crisis. Are they going to garnish the income of millions of young adults all at once? I highly doubt it.

The student loan system was a bad idea. The value of a Bachelor's degree has become inflated. Bachelor degrees are worth squat when every single person has one. Soon it'll be the Masters level. What happens when everyone gets a PhD (in English, History, Economics, Basket Weaving, Business, PoliSci, Music Theory, Chemistry, etc)? Are supermarket nametags going to have "Dr." in front of every name? But my thoughts on the matter belong more in the Conspiracies subforum than here.

[Gletkin]

No, it's not "conspiracy". It's simple supply and demand.

As others mentioned, perhaps governments should be a bit more discerning with which majors they offer aid to.
Yes, some will bitch and scream about being "undervalued" and creating a "materialist philistine society" or whatever but one can't please everyone, especially if the government's cash-strapped. It's perhaps better to support only the "practical" and "necessary" fields....afterall there's also the option of no student financial aid, period.

[Rancid]

Bachelor degrees are worth squat when every single person has one.

Only in your shitty degree program. An engineering bachelors is still worth a lot.

[Gletkin]

Only in your shitty degree program. An engineering bachelors is still worth a lot.

Theoretically, this could happen in any field.
Although it hasn't happened yet, if everyone got a bachelor's in engineering, or computer science, or accounting, or "pre-med", etc., etc. their value will be diminished too.
Although I suppose if everyone was truly highly educated in the STEM fields, the socialist dream can probably be re-vitalized as we'll then have a proletariat that actually knows how to do everything.

[Rancid]

Theoretically, this could happen in any field.

Theoretically, what about practically? Likely not. When in the history of of man, has engineering or STEMS as a formally taught discipline been worthless or not useful?

[Rainbow Crow]

Tigerlily is correct though, there was a time when even an English BA was worth something.

Since a college degree used to almost guarantee personal success, the democratic system brought in politicians who want everyone to go to college, but it was... hubris!

Something good may come of it though once people start to realize that overall prosperity isn't as simple as sending everyone to college. I hold out hope that they will start to think bigger than this snake oil that is still being peddled by the Democrats and other left-leaning parties even as the student loan debt piles up.

I suspect that blue-collar jobs used to pay almost as much as college-level jobs without the years of "training."

[Gletkin]

Theoretically, what about practically? Likely not. When in the history of of man, has engineering or STEMS as a formally taught discipline been worthless or not useful?

I thought it was pretty clear I was talking about situations regarding glutted labor markets.
If everyone has a Bachelor's in a STEM field, then that degree in and of itself won't add up to much when you go job hunting as all other competing candidates will have that same qualification.
Conversely, if there's a sudden demand for underwater basket weavers and it's a field that not very many people have studied, then degrees in underwater basket weaving will be "useful".

But since you went off the deep end and said "history of man"....well, if someone with a, say, computer engineering degree ends up a castaway without any modern accoutrements whatsoever amongst a forager society that doesn't even have a written language....it'd be very hard to put that specific formal education into direct practice.
His primitive hosts' society would be such that several generations of development would first have to be attained before they reach anywhere near what his specialty is. But until then, in such a society, his particular advanced education would actually be largely useless.

[Siberian Fox]

Moderation note: This topic has been moved from Today's News to North America because the OP does not contain a link to the article.

[Rancid]

I thought it was pretty clear I was talking about situations regarding glutted labor markets.
If everyone has a Bachelor's in a STEM field, then that degree in and of itself won't add up to much when you go job hunting as all other competing candidates will have that same qualification.
Conversely, if there's a sudden demand for underwater basket weavers and it's a field that not very many people have studied, then degrees in underwater basket weaving will be "useful".

But since you went off the deep end and said "history of man"....well, if someone with a, say, computer engineering degree ends up a castaway without any modern accoutrements whatsoever amongst a forager society that doesn't even have a written language....it'd be very hard to put that specific formal education into direct practice.
His primitive hosts' society would be such that several generations of development would first have to be attained before they reach anywhere near what his specialty is. But until then, in such a society, his particular advanced education would actually be largely useless.

Hell yea I went of the deep end. In America this isn't possible, because America hates STEM.

[Joe Liberty]

As others mentioned, perhaps governments should be a bit more discerning with which majors they offer aid to.

See, that's exactly the wrong direction to go, to centrally plan college educations. But it's the inevitable direction when government gets the least bit involved in anything. Here's how it works: Throw money at the problem, the problem gets worse, throw more money at it, the problem still gets worse, blame the free market, government takeover.

....afterall there's also the option of no student financial aid, period.

Which would lower the cost of an education.

[Gletkin]

See, that's exactly the wrong direction to go

Reducing the number of majors eligible is "the wrong direction"?
Not a believer in half-a-loaf(reduction in govt. aid)-is-better-than-none(no change in the status-quo whatsoever) then?

[Kman]

Here's how it works: Throw money at the problem, the problem gets worse, throw more money at it, the problem still gets worse, blame the free market, government takeover.

The story of statism right there.

[Joe Liberty]

Reducing the number of majors eligible is "the wrong direction"?
Not a believer in half-a-loaf(reduction in govt. aid)-is-better-than-none(no change in the status-quo whatsoever) then?

Allowing government bureaucrats to centrally plan how many doctors or lawyers or architects or beauty salon professionals we have sounds like a bad idea, yeah. That as much of an interference in the supply and demand of college education as we have now. Subsidies are the problem, because they untether supply and demand. Favoring some majors with subsidies will only artificially inflate the supply of those majors.

I think those subsidies are the problem to begin with, that's why people are (for example) borrowing five figures for liberal arts degrees and then wondering why they can't find work that pays them enough to pay back their loans. So no, I don't believe anything that merely tweaks the status quo is going to help.

[Baff]

If as a taxpayer, I hand out 50k to a student and they pay 1 mill in tax over their lifetime, I would see that as a good investment

If I was a taxpayee, I would too.
But as a taxpayer, I expect to see no return from anyone elses tax contributions at all. Therefore this is not an "investment" for me. It's a subsidy only.

[Tachyon]

I thought it was pretty clear I was talking about situations regarding glutted labor markets.
If everyone has a Bachelor's in a STEM field, then that degree in and of itself won't add up to much when you go job hunting as all other competing candidates will have that same qualification.
Conversely, if there's a sudden demand for underwater basket weavers and it's a field that not very many people have studied, then degrees in underwater basket weaving will be "useful".

You are missing one key point though. Given the nature of STEM degrees, most people are not intelligent enough to get one (based on my college experience). So, by definition, STEM will always be in demand and worth more especially considering the increasing reliance on these fields in modern life. It is highly improbable that STEM fields will become saturated with graduates.

[Gletkin]

Not really.
My point was "supply and demand". If it's likely that most people won't achieve a STEM degree, then that's great for those that do. I don't see how that really contradicts what I said though.

Anyway, I'm not sure if helping to pay tuition in and of itself "untethers" supply from demand. Again, I'm only talking about helping pay tuition, not "lowering standards" in the quality of academic work to fulfill "quotas" or whatever.
Schoolmates have told me that they had to maintain minimum grades to continue receiving financial aid.

Also I had mentioned being more discerning with the types of majors (as well as the types of students) that receive student aid. If it's a high-demand major and the student proves ability to do the work, then they get the aid...as long as academic standards are met.

[Tachyon]

Not really.
My point was "supply and demand". If it's likely that most people won't achieve a STEM degree, then that's great for those that do. I don't see how that really contradicts what I said though.

Because the discussion was about flooding the market with useless degrees simply because of a push to produce more people with degrees, regardless of whether or not it would be beneficial or not. Supply and demand would apply to those degrees because of the large number of people earning them, and the little actual demand for them. My point is that STEM degrees will not get to that point because there is always a high demand for those degrees and relatively few people capable of earning them. Hence the higher average starting salary for those degrees.

Schoolmates have told me that they had to maintain minimum grades to continue receiving financial aid.

I think this is usually the case, i know it was true for me.

Also I had mentioned being more discerning with the types of majors (as well as the types of students) that receive student aid. If it's a high-demand major and the student proves ability to do the work, then they get the aid...as long as academic standards are met.

I agree, this would make more sense than the current way we are doing it. If you cant cut it, and dont want to pay your way through college, then maybe financial aid for trade school is the way to go.