4 ms·

"Able to pay", but where is the "Want to pay?" I feel you also need to argue: "18 year olds don't realize they are being ripped off", or "college is actually w

"Able to pay", but where is the "Want to pay?" I feel you also need to argue: "18 year olds don't realize they are being ripped off", or "college is actually worth that much". It's probably a different answer for different students.

mrguyorama 3y ago
Society is better off as a whole with a well educated populace. We shouldn't optimize for college only for kids who can learn to program or whatever. Most other developed nations manage to send every smart kid to college for ten thousand dollars per kid or less. Once again, it is only the US that thinks it is a special butterfly that can't somehow manage to give kids college. Sure, most European colleges don't spend one billion tax dollars on a football stadium, but that is also a good thing. And no, those sports complexes largely DON'T pay their own way. A significant amount of college sports don't make much money, and don't give it back to the campus as a whole, and that's WITH literal free labor of NCAA athletes.
- SoftTalker 3y ago
  The education needed for a functioning society should be delivered by the end of high school. A few generations ago it was delivered by the end of 8th grade. And yes, college sports on the whole does pay for itself. Those stadiums are built by donated money, and revenue from ticket sales. Yes taken in isolation there are a lot of sports that don't make money, but they are subsidized by those that do (chiefly football and basketball). Sports stadiums are not the reason tuition has inflated by 700%. They are two separate pools of money. If you got rid of sports entirely it would not affect the finances of the academic side of the university at all.
  - janalsncm 3y ago
    It’s a question of what kind of “functioning society” you want to have. Those 8th grade education jobs still exist, but they’re in China, Bangladesh and other developing economies. And no offense to those people either. A lot of manufacturing depends on them. Those are certainly “functioning societies” but their economies are much less advanced than in the US. It’s not realistic to say that an advanced economy can get by with education ending at age 18.
- ecshafer 3y ago
  Define well educated populace. Does this mean ability to read, write, and do arithmetic? Does this mean the ability to speak and read Latin with an understanding of the classics and the Bible? The ability to fix a car and build an engine? Program a computer? One could argue that a university does very little to make a populace more educated, since they can already read, write and do basic math (or should be able to) to get into school. Is taking psychology making one better educated? Maybe? Maybe not.
  - Broken_Hippo 3y ago
    Well educated isn't so clearly defined: In general, though, it is having been exposed to a varying number of subjects, be able to read a varying amount of things, have enough general knowledge that they can understand the reason there are "chemicals" in food and the reasons not to mix some household chemicals together. In addition, the person has been able to dive into a particular subject more deeply than the other ones, and understand that other folks have different specialties. While doing this, you are generally exposed to an array of people and if your institutions are fair, they come from mixed backgrounds. Realistically, the basic information will be similar (basic science, health, reading, history, and so on) but we'll have different areas of interest and skill, so the exact subjects will be individualized to an extent and will definitely change over time as the world changes. You can't say for certain that psychology will make you better educated, but an introduction to the basic field might open someone's mind to being educated in that field, which helps society at large. Other things will be more esoteric: Go to art school, work in retail, and happily make art doesn't have the same sort of immediate payback - but chances are, they are more likely to be a bit compassionate just by having the education.
    - kajaktum 3y ago
      I am not sure if university is an effective place to do this. I think tricking the younger minds at primary/secondary school to be more curious and well-rounded person is much better. Once you get the ball rolling, they will hopefully keep being that way into their adulthood. For example, how do you teach a young adult to be kind when they aren't? Teaching them about kindness via multiple sessions of lectures ain't gonna cut it. You would have to "trick" and "manipulate" them into being so to bypass ego/whatever else which is much harder to do for adults.
- nsvd 3y ago
  That's a popular opinion, but how do you quantitatively prove it? While the formal education of a population may correlate with wealth, I think it would be harder to prove a causal link.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    It's about what is necessary for DEMOCRACY to work well. I don't care what provides a higher ROI to some rich owner-class people, I care about a society that represents its people.
    - janalsncm 3y ago
      It really depends on what you mean by that. Plenty of people get bachelor’s degrees with little to no civics or history education included. And historically, college degrees were rare. Only 28% of the Silent Generation had any college. Now, 67% of Millennials do. Did democracy not function before? https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2019/02/14/millennial-life-how-young-adulthood-today-compares-with-prior-generations-2/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2019/02/14/millenn... However, to the extent that education enables better income opportunities I agree. Education can reduce economic inequality which is a huge barrier to social cohesion and civic trust. However education isn’t the only path to better wealth distribution.
      - notTooFarGone 3y ago
        Democracy gets harder the more technologically advanced the world is. In the decades of newspapers and limited information it was much easier to control information, placing the burden of information flow on a limited set of journalists. Now that burden is put on each and everyone of us with social media and other alternative media. People from the Silent Generation are drowning in todays information age.
- Baader-Meinhof 3y ago
  City and community colleges exist, and are mostly free. But for most people, colleges are more than just an education. College is about signaling their aptitude. And so people keep trying to pile into expensive private school for the prestige.
  - brightlancer 3y ago
    > City and community colleges exist, and are mostly free. Tuition, usually. Books, maybe. Room and board, ha! As an anecdote, it cost less for one of my kids to go out of state to a private college than in-state to a public university; tuition at the public university would've been free, but the private college offered scholarships and financial aid that fully covered tuition and most of on-campus room and board. Sure, my kid could've gone to a community college and lived at home, but the education would have been far worse, food isn't free, and it's harder to build a community when folks have to leave in the evening to travel 30-60 minutes in any direction.
    - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
      > private college offered scholarships and financial aid That's the thing that people don't understand about private universities' tuition prices: They're not real. The really rich kids are paying more, through donations and the like, and most students are being offered substantial discounts through both need and merit based scholarships. The inflated tuitions are all about A) signalling prestige and B) redistributing money from the rich and dumb to the smart and less wealthy.

mrguyorama 3y ago

Society is better off as a whole with a well educated populace. We shouldn't optimize for college only for kids who can learn to program or whatever. Most other developed nations manage to send every smart kid to college for ten thousand dollars per kid or less. Once again, it is only the US that thinks it is a special butterfly that can't somehow manage to give kids college. Sure, most European colleges don't spend one billion tax dollars on a football stadium, but that is also a good thing. And no, those sports complexes largely DON'T pay their own way. A significant amount of college sports don't make much money, and don't give it back to the campus as a whole, and that's WITH literal free labor of NCAA athletes.

SoftTalker 3y ago
The education needed for a functioning society should be delivered by the end of high school. A few generations ago it was delivered by the end of 8th grade. And yes, college sports on the whole does pay for itself. Those stadiums are built by donated money, and revenue from ticket sales. Yes taken in isolation there are a lot of sports that don't make money, but they are subsidized by those that do (chiefly football and basketball). Sports stadiums are not the reason tuition has inflated by 700%. They are two separate pools of money. If you got rid of sports entirely it would not affect the finances of the academic side of the university at all.
- janalsncm 3y ago
  It’s a question of what kind of “functioning society” you want to have. Those 8th grade education jobs still exist, but they’re in China, Bangladesh and other developing economies. And no offense to those people either. A lot of manufacturing depends on them. Those are certainly “functioning societies” but their economies are much less advanced than in the US. It’s not realistic to say that an advanced economy can get by with education ending at age 18.
ecshafer 3y ago
Define well educated populace. Does this mean ability to read, write, and do arithmetic? Does this mean the ability to speak and read Latin with an understanding of the classics and the Bible? The ability to fix a car and build an engine? Program a computer? One could argue that a university does very little to make a populace more educated, since they can already read, write and do basic math (or should be able to) to get into school. Is taking psychology making one better educated? Maybe? Maybe not.
- Broken_Hippo 3y ago
  Well educated isn't so clearly defined: In general, though, it is having been exposed to a varying number of subjects, be able to read a varying amount of things, have enough general knowledge that they can understand the reason there are "chemicals" in food and the reasons not to mix some household chemicals together. In addition, the person has been able to dive into a particular subject more deeply than the other ones, and understand that other folks have different specialties. While doing this, you are generally exposed to an array of people and if your institutions are fair, they come from mixed backgrounds. Realistically, the basic information will be similar (basic science, health, reading, history, and so on) but we'll have different areas of interest and skill, so the exact subjects will be individualized to an extent and will definitely change over time as the world changes. You can't say for certain that psychology will make you better educated, but an introduction to the basic field might open someone's mind to being educated in that field, which helps society at large. Other things will be more esoteric: Go to art school, work in retail, and happily make art doesn't have the same sort of immediate payback - but chances are, they are more likely to be a bit compassionate just by having the education.
  - kajaktum 3y ago
    I am not sure if university is an effective place to do this. I think tricking the younger minds at primary/secondary school to be more curious and well-rounded person is much better. Once you get the ball rolling, they will hopefully keep being that way into their adulthood. For example, how do you teach a young adult to be kind when they aren't? Teaching them about kindness via multiple sessions of lectures ain't gonna cut it. You would have to "trick" and "manipulate" them into being so to bypass ego/whatever else which is much harder to do for adults.
nsvd 3y ago
That's a popular opinion, but how do you quantitatively prove it? While the formal education of a population may correlate with wealth, I think it would be harder to prove a causal link.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  It's about what is necessary for DEMOCRACY to work well. I don't care what provides a higher ROI to some rich owner-class people, I care about a society that represents its people.
  - janalsncm 3y ago
    It really depends on what you mean by that. Plenty of people get bachelor’s degrees with little to no civics or history education included. And historically, college degrees were rare. Only 28% of the Silent Generation had any college. Now, 67% of Millennials do. Did democracy not function before? https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2019/02/14/millennial-life-how-young-adulthood-today-compares-with-prior-generations-2/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2019/02/14/millenn... However, to the extent that education enables better income opportunities I agree. Education can reduce economic inequality which is a huge barrier to social cohesion and civic trust. However education isn’t the only path to better wealth distribution.
    - notTooFarGone 3y ago
      Democracy gets harder the more technologically advanced the world is. In the decades of newspapers and limited information it was much easier to control information, placing the burden of information flow on a limited set of journalists. Now that burden is put on each and everyone of us with social media and other alternative media. People from the Silent Generation are drowning in todays information age.
Baader-Meinhof 3y ago
City and community colleges exist, and are mostly free. But for most people, colleges are more than just an education. College is about signaling their aptitude. And so people keep trying to pile into expensive private school for the prestige.
- brightlancer 3y ago
  > City and community colleges exist, and are mostly free. Tuition, usually. Books, maybe. Room and board, ha! As an anecdote, it cost less for one of my kids to go out of state to a private college than in-state to a public university; tuition at the public university would've been free, but the private college offered scholarships and financial aid that fully covered tuition and most of on-campus room and board. Sure, my kid could've gone to a community college and lived at home, but the education would have been far worse, food isn't free, and it's harder to build a community when folks have to leave in the evening to travel 30-60 minutes in any direction.
  - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
    > private college offered scholarships and financial aid That's the thing that people don't understand about private universities' tuition prices: They're not real. The really rich kids are paying more, through donations and the like, and most students are being offered substantial discounts through both need and merit based scholarships. The inflated tuitions are all about A) signalling prestige and B) redistributing money from the rich and dumb to the smart and less wealthy.