4 ms·
No, because we haven’t done nearly enough for the poor guy. It’s not the case that we’ve done everything possible for the poor and they still didn’t improve mu
by vasilipupkin 7y ago
No, because we haven’t done nearly enough for the poor guy. It’s not the case that we’ve done everything possible for the poor and they still didn’t improve much. That’s false.
- mlyle 7y agoWe're measuring the effect of one thing-- getting a poor person to college-- composed with all the other interventions that are spread through the population. We measure the value of this-- getting to college-- as very small and even possibly negative. We also measure interventions and their values / impacts on earnings much higher. Going "la la la but college would be much better and itself a win if we did 50 other supportive things" is all great, but it's fundamentally handwaving in the absence of evidence.
- vasilipupkin 7y agoNo, we don’t measure this. The study in question tries to make college wage premium go away using questionable control variables. Sure, some skilled trades can make more money than liberal arts grads. But very few people want to be plumbers or work on an oil rig and for good reason.