Peter Theil's partner in the debate was Charles Murray. He was actually advocating for a new system of education that emulates the vocational/trade idea for pre

Peter Theil's partner in the debate was Charles Murray. He was actually advocating for a new system of education that emulates the vocational/trade idea for pretty much all subjects. He says that every topic and subject you learn should be learned through post-secondary education (2 years instead of 4 years) and then followed by a certification exam. Lastly and perhaps most importantly would be an apprenticeship to actually perfect the craft in the field with someone more knowledgeable. My personal issue with this whole debate is which are we referring to. Potentially college-bound students who are HN readers and have the capacity to understand how to be didactic/resourceful AND know which field to enter, are probably the ones who will probably not benefit as much from college as other students. This group is less than 1% of college-bound students. Yet all these debates and discussions are focused on them. Thiel with his 20 under 20 and Bienen at Northwestern are catering to the top few. What about the rest? Those who are not sure what they want to do. Those who need some formal education to actually learn something. College is for this majority. Yes, an improved, affordable college that focuses more on career skills would be better. But whatever state it's in, these students need to be there to escape low-paying jobs when they themselves are ready to pursue more knowledge-based careers. /rant P.S. It really was an exciting debate to see in person, especially the part where Vivek Wadhwa got excited and challenged Thiel on the spot.