6 ms·

> It’s self-evident that if those college graduates who are underemployed had chosen different courses, then the problem would look quite different. Not only i

by qntty 7y ago

> It’s self-evident that if those college graduates who are underemployed had chosen different courses, then the problem would look quite different. Not only is this not self-evident, it defies common sense and economics. If more people take professional degrees then the supply of those degrees increases and salaries decrease (and we're back where we started). That is, if there are enough professional jobs to go around which there aren't. You seem to think there are lots of professional jobs to go around, but I went to school with many engineers who struggled to find jobs after graduation. It seems like we're above the point of saturation in many professions.

AmericanChopper 7y ago
Your anecdata doesn’t add much to the conversation, and you seem to be relying on a particularly extreme interpretation of what I said. It’s a fact that there are many skilled professions where we have labor shortages. If more people (I never said all people) had chosen to study in those fields, then they likely would not be facing underemployment. Unless you want to disputed the existence of skilled labor shortages, then this is a perfectly self evident conclusion. If you’d like to claim that there simply aren’t enough skilled employment opportunities in the entire economy to provide all of the skilled professionals with employment (which it seems you’re hinting at), then I’d suggest you produce some evidence to support that position.
- qntty 7y ago
  There is no doubt some salary gains to be made by a small percentage of people choosing to go into professional programs (as I said above), but it's really besides the point. The main issue is that there will still be a large number of students who can't benefit from this strategy.
  - AmericanChopper 7y ago
    For that to be true, there has to be too few skilled employment opportunities available in the entire economy to provide employment for college graduates. A position neither you nor the author of the article have provided any evidence to support.
    - qntty 7y ago
      I guess I assumed that it's self-evident ;)

by qntty 7y ago

AmericanChopper 7y ago

Your anecdata doesn’t add much to the conversation, and you seem to be relying on a particularly extreme interpretation of what I said. It’s a fact that there are many skilled professions where we have labor shortages. If more people (I never said all people) had chosen to study in those fields, then they likely would not be facing underemployment. Unless you want to disputed the existence of skilled labor shortages, then this is a perfectly self evident conclusion. If you’d like to claim that there simply aren’t enough skilled employment opportunities in the entire economy to provide all of the skilled professionals with employment (which it seems you’re hinting at), then I’d suggest you produce some evidence to support that position.

qntty 7y ago
There is no doubt some salary gains to be made by a small percentage of people choosing to go into professional programs (as I said above), but it's really besides the point. The main issue is that there will still be a large number of students who can't benefit from this strategy.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  For that to be true, there has to be too few skilled employment opportunities available in the entire economy to provide employment for college graduates. A position neither you nor the author of the article have provided any evidence to support.
  - qntty 7y ago
    I guess I assumed that it's self-evident ;)