5 ms·

Finn here (though lived the past 12 years in the UK). In my experience, the one thing that by far works best to enable social mobility, and that I think Nordic

by dharma1 10y ago

Finn here (though lived the past 12 years in the UK). In my experience, the one thing that by far works best to enable social mobility, and that I think Nordic and some central European countries have done quite well, is free, high quality education - from primary school to university. Especially as we move further and further to knowledge based economic growth, this is crucial, not just for social mobility, but well being and success of whole countries. Market forces are great at optimising some things, some not so great. Things that require long term focus - basic research, education, environmental issues - are best handled, and paid for by governments.

nickff 10y ago
There is a great deal of information (in studies and research) that shows post-secondary schooling is a good investment for the individual, but that does not mean that increasing the average amount of schooling is good for the country. A number of people are now making the argument that greater 'educational' achievement is mostly just signalling status, intelligence, socialization, and work ethic, not actually teaching people anything useful. If this view is correct, increasing the amount of education that the average citizen receives is just wasting their time (as most people do not enjoy their time in class), at great expense to them and the average taxpayer.[1] [1] http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/02/why_the_college.html http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/02/why_the_college.... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)
- drabiega 10y ago
  > If this view is correct, increasing the amount of education that the average citizen receives is just wasting their time (as most people do not enjoy their time in class), at great expense to them and the average taxpayer.[1] Even accepting your first premise, this does not follow. Even if degrees are 100% signalling and 0% actual education, it's still the right choice for the individual because that signalling has value. The alternative is that people who have the positive qualities that are signaled but not the money for the degree cannot get the jobs which require those characteristics and have good pay.
  - nickff 10y ago
    Subsidizing a signal serves to make the signal more expensive, and does not increase its utility; all Western governments are subsidizing education, and hurting their citizenries by doing so. Some proponents of the signalling theory have gone as far as to advocate for a tax on education.
- dharma1 10y ago
  I think that is very country specific, and depends on the quality of the education too. Educating scientists and engineers (and other valued professions, like teachers who all have higher education) definitely improved the productivity of Nordic countries - and allowed them to build high tech industries relatively quickly.
cesarbs 10y ago
Curious: how hard is it for people to get access to free university education there? My home country - Brazil - offers free university education, and actually our federal universities are the best in the country. While there are quotas for certain socially disadvantaged groups of people (e.g. racial quotas), the sad reality is that regular seats are taken mostly by rich kids whose parents can afford to pay them prep courses - because the admissions process is incredibly difficult. So our free higher education system ends up doing a poor job in helping upward social mobility, and people who are not well-off end up going to private colleges whose schedules allow them to work and pay for their tuition.
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
  If Finland is like Norway, and I understand the system correctly (I'm an immigrant) that isn't much of an issue. Culture here allows for free time for kids (not much homework), and so long as folks can pass the admission tests and there is space, they can go. The biggest issue might be living expenses - but there is a (too low) stipend and loans. The loans can be grants if you don't have money or can be forgiven in some fields if you move and work up north for a certain amount of time.
- dharma1 10y ago
  Depends on the subject you want to study - as the govt pays for education the policymakers influence the course sizes to funnel students towards subjects they deem beneficial. It can be difficult to get in, sometimes too much so, people try multiple times. But the education and the degrees themselves in return are very high quality - many universities in the UK take in almost everyone and the degrees don't really teach the students that much. There are almost no private colleges in Finland so I haven't seen the phenomenon you describe.

by dharma1 10y ago

nickff 10y ago

There is a great deal of information (in studies and research) that shows post-secondary schooling is a good investment for the individual, but that does not mean that increasing the average amount of schooling is good for the country. A number of people are now making the argument that greater 'educational' achievement is mostly just signalling status, intelligence, socialization, and work ethic, not actually teaching people anything useful. If this view is correct, increasing the amount of education that the average citizen receives is just wasting their time (as most people do not enjoy their time in class), at great expense to them and the average taxpayer.[1] [1] http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/02/why_the_college.html http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/02/why_the_college.... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)

drabiega 10y ago
> If this view is correct, increasing the amount of education that the average citizen receives is just wasting their time (as most people do not enjoy their time in class), at great expense to them and the average taxpayer.[1] Even accepting your first premise, this does not follow. Even if degrees are 100% signalling and 0% actual education, it's still the right choice for the individual because that signalling has value. The alternative is that people who have the positive qualities that are signaled but not the money for the degree cannot get the jobs which require those characteristics and have good pay.
- nickff 10y ago
  Subsidizing a signal serves to make the signal more expensive, and does not increase its utility; all Western governments are subsidizing education, and hurting their citizenries by doing so. Some proponents of the signalling theory have gone as far as to advocate for a tax on education.
dharma1 10y ago
I think that is very country specific, and depends on the quality of the education too. Educating scientists and engineers (and other valued professions, like teachers who all have higher education) definitely improved the productivity of Nordic countries - and allowed them to build high tech industries relatively quickly.

cesarbs 10y ago

Curious: how hard is it for people to get access to free university education there? My home country - Brazil - offers free university education, and actually our federal universities are the best in the country. While there are quotas for certain socially disadvantaged groups of people (e.g. racial quotas), the sad reality is that regular seats are taken mostly by rich kids whose parents can afford to pay them prep courses - because the admissions process is incredibly difficult. So our free higher education system ends up doing a poor job in helping upward social mobility, and people who are not well-off end up going to private colleges whose schedules allow them to work and pay for their tuition.

Broken_Hippo 10y ago
If Finland is like Norway, and I understand the system correctly (I'm an immigrant) that isn't much of an issue. Culture here allows for free time for kids (not much homework), and so long as folks can pass the admission tests and there is space, they can go. The biggest issue might be living expenses - but there is a (too low) stipend and loans. The loans can be grants if you don't have money or can be forgiven in some fields if you move and work up north for a certain amount of time.
dharma1 10y ago
Depends on the subject you want to study - as the govt pays for education the policymakers influence the course sizes to funnel students towards subjects they deem beneficial. It can be difficult to get in, sometimes too much so, people try multiple times. But the education and the degrees themselves in return are very high quality - many universities in the UK take in almost everyone and the degrees don't really teach the students that much. There are almost no private colleges in Finland so I haven't seen the phenomenon you describe.