3 ms·

I don’t see anything wrong with that but then tax payers shouldn’t need to subsidize your particular goals in life. No one is stopping you from getting that art

by pb7 6y ago

I don’t see anything wrong with that but then tax payers shouldn’t need to subsidize your particular goals in life. No one is stopping you from getting that arts degree, it’s still there for you.

tacomonstrous 6y ago
If I'm not mistaken this comment misses the main point the parent is making: if the goal of society is to ensure that everyone gets to live a good, fulfilling life, then this is precisely the kind of thing taxpayers should subsidize.
- pb7 6y ago
  I imagine they’re only taking action because they’re currently heading down the wrong path. But even still, it’s hard for me to agree that society should subsidize things that it democratically decided it doesn’t need as much of. Will someone pay me to watch TV all day because I’m really into movies? Probably not. You have to draw the line somewhere. I would be fully onboard your side of thinking if they were planning on getting rid of the arts in schools altogether but coincidentally, it’s more favorable for the schools to fund those fields because they get more money from the few that choose to pursue them. Let’s also not forget that formal education is not the only or even the best way to explore your interests in these things.
NamTaf 6y ago
As an Aussie, I'm pretty happy to subsidise any of my fellow citizens getting higher education if they want to, because I believe the pursuit of life goals and in particular life goals in education leads to a societal betterment overall. Written differently, if someone wants to go and study philosophy even if they don't believe they'll ever work in the field, I'm happy that my tax helps to support that because I think that the process of higher education in itself is a valuable learning experience that helps produce better citizens within their communities. Higher education - even without directly leading to a career - can be a very powerful way of lifting people out of generational poverty traps. You say that no one is stopping someone getting said degree, however often without subsidy/support it can be prohibitively expensive and that stops them. No one person may be stopping them, but systems doing so are no better. Naturally, that comes with limits, since we are not yet able to function in a fully automated society where scarcity is abolished. Hence why the Aussie system caps the subsidised loans you may receive. edit to add: I also support reducing the societal pressure that a university degree is the only path to success. I'd like to see much more support and emphasis placed on practical tertiary education, such as trades and the like. I think it's all too often an option that people dismiss because they're sold the lie that university guarantees success.
- wink 6y ago
  I actually think it's kind of a step back. In former times only rich people could afford to do anything with the arts, this is the first step that only rich people's kids can study the arts. I don't personally get why anyone would ever do that, I always hated anything with art and music in school, but I don't want to stop them going for it. They need to live with the fact anyway that they might get a lower-paying job in the end and work in a field that's not related to their degree. But it's their choice.

by pb7 6y ago

tacomonstrous 6y ago

If I'm not mistaken this comment misses the main point the parent is making: if the goal of society is to ensure that everyone gets to live a good, fulfilling life, then this is precisely the kind of thing taxpayers should subsidize.

pb7 6y ago
I imagine they’re only taking action because they’re currently heading down the wrong path. But even still, it’s hard for me to agree that society should subsidize things that it democratically decided it doesn’t need as much of. Will someone pay me to watch TV all day because I’m really into movies? Probably not. You have to draw the line somewhere. I would be fully onboard your side of thinking if they were planning on getting rid of the arts in schools altogether but coincidentally, it’s more favorable for the schools to fund those fields because they get more money from the few that choose to pursue them. Let’s also not forget that formal education is not the only or even the best way to explore your interests in these things.

NamTaf 6y ago

As an Aussie, I'm pretty happy to subsidise any of my fellow citizens getting higher education if they want to, because I believe the pursuit of life goals and in particular life goals in education leads to a societal betterment overall. Written differently, if someone wants to go and study philosophy even if they don't believe they'll ever work in the field, I'm happy that my tax helps to support that because I think that the process of higher education in itself is a valuable learning experience that helps produce better citizens within their communities. Higher education - even without directly leading to a career - can be a very powerful way of lifting people out of generational poverty traps. You say that no one is stopping someone getting said degree, however often without subsidy/support it can be prohibitively expensive and that stops them. No one person may be stopping them, but systems doing so are no better. Naturally, that comes with limits, since we are not yet able to function in a fully automated society where scarcity is abolished. Hence why the Aussie system caps the subsidised loans you may receive. edit to add: I also support reducing the societal pressure that a university degree is the only path to success. I'd like to see much more support and emphasis placed on practical tertiary education, such as trades and the like. I think it's all too often an option that people dismiss because they're sold the lie that university guarantees success.

wink 6y ago
I actually think it's kind of a step back. In former times only rich people could afford to do anything with the arts, this is the first step that only rich people's kids can study the arts. I don't personally get why anyone would ever do that, I always hated anything with art and music in school, but I don't want to stop them going for it. They need to live with the fact anyway that they might get a lower-paying job in the end and work in a field that's not related to their degree. But it's their choice.