6 ms·

> The "inefficiencies" in the US political system aren't actually inefficiencies in the long run I agree, and I could argue the same thing for maintaining manu

by DevX101 16y ago

> The "inefficiencies" in the US political system aren't actually inefficiencies in the long run I agree, and I could argue the same thing for maintaining manufacturing/vocational jobs. As I said in my first post, giving reasonable wages to the lower/middle class means they have more disposable income and consume more. I think this is a net positive economic effect. If a high net-worth person makes 10x the average wage, that doesn't mean she will buy 10 times as many televisions, ipods, or cars. She may purchase HIGHER QUALITY goods/services, but overall consumption from 10 workers making 40k per year and 1 high net worth person making 400k per year are not equivalent. This consumer demand from the lower-middle class ultimately creates markets and creates long-term efficiencies. >However, indefinitely preventing technology from advancing civilization is the exact opposite I don't want to cling to the past. But as our society progresses we must find ways to integrate hard working people that aren't the type to sit in a office all day. I think Germany is a good model. In high school, students are separated into a vocational track or an academic track. Because of this, Germany has a very highly skilled manufacturing workforce today. >I don't believe that there needs to be "a viable option for 'hands-on' people to earn a livable wage I disagree very strongly with this statement. There are more 'hands-on' people than 'intellectual' people in this country. If those 'hands-on' people can earn $25 per hour, then you can make your apps and devices and they will have enough money to buy it.

w1ntermute 16y ago
Your entire argument is predicated on the belief that people cannot adapt to their circumstances. History has demonstrated time and time again that people are able to do so when they are forced to. > There are more 'hands-on' people than 'intellectual' people in this country. And once upon a time, there were more artisans than 'hands-on' people. When the Industrial Revolution occurred and a lot of artisan jobs were replaced by factory jobs, people made arguments similar to yours. But people have somehow managed to adapt, haven't they? > I think Germany is a good model. In high school, students are separated into a vocational track or an academic track. Because of this, Germany has a very highly skilled manufacturing workforce today. But because of their specialized training, the German workforce is relatively inflexible and has failed large portions of the population. There was an article in this week's Economist about this[0]: > Even so, the system has flaws. Some worry, for example, that a stronger general education is needed to equip young Germans to change trades should demand for their specific expertise dry up. > A bigger concern is that early selection fails children from poor and immigrant families, who are likeliest to attend the least academic schools and to miss out on apprenticeships. Partly for this reason, there is a large group of students at the bottom of the rankings—which explains why the German average is still below par. “It is a schooling system that has left a large fraction of students behind,” says Andreas Schleicher of the OECD. 0: http://www.economist.com/node/18061710 http://www.economist.com/node/18061710

by DevX101 16y ago

w1ntermute 16y ago

Your entire argument is predicated on the belief that people cannot adapt to their circumstances. History has demonstrated time and time again that people are able to do so when they are forced to. > There are more 'hands-on' people than 'intellectual' people in this country. And once upon a time, there were more artisans than 'hands-on' people. When the Industrial Revolution occurred and a lot of artisan jobs were replaced by factory jobs, people made arguments similar to yours. But people have somehow managed to adapt, haven't they? > I think Germany is a good model. In high school, students are separated into a vocational track or an academic track. Because of this, Germany has a very highly skilled manufacturing workforce today. But because of their specialized training, the German workforce is relatively inflexible and has failed large portions of the population. There was an article in this week's Economist about this[0]: > Even so, the system has flaws. Some worry, for example, that a stronger general education is needed to equip young Germans to change trades should demand for their specific expertise dry up. > A bigger concern is that early selection fails children from poor and immigrant families, who are likeliest to attend the least academic schools and to miss out on apprenticeships. Partly for this reason, there is a large group of students at the bottom of the rankings—which explains why the German average is still below par. “It is a schooling system that has left a large fraction of students behind,” says Andreas Schleicher of the OECD. 0: http://www.economist.com/node/18061710 http://www.economist.com/node/18061710