4 ms·

I couldn't bring myself to be indebted at such a young age so I skipped college then. But this is america, not europe things are different. For better or worse

by _8j50 3y ago

I couldn't bring myself to be indebted at such a young age so I skipped college then. But this is america, not europe things are different. For better or worse, indebting people at a young age is how the "college educated worker" pipeline works and the class system functions and controls upward mobility. Not to mention military service. If you are ok with mandatory military service and more stringent and competitive college entry exams as well as the government telling you based on your score what degrees you can pursue for free, now all you have to do is convince this union of 50 different states to agree with you and it is doable. Even though college is paid, you can still get plenty of well paying jobs without college or work your way up by gaining experience to compensate for lack of college. This is only possible in America. It doesn't matter how much skills or experience I have, no one will hire me in the EU or Asia based on lack of degree alone for example, but even if it is 10+ years, I can make up for it in America. I am just saying it isn't as simple as they're making it sound.

em-bee 3y ago
the government telling you based on your score what degrees you can pursue for free in germany this is solved by allocating a number of slots for each degree. those slots are then filled with the best students first, until all slots are allocated. the score that you needed to get in was effectively the lowest score of any student that did get in. this means that in one year it could be that you needed an A to get into eg physics and in another year a C was enough. so it's very much supply and demand, and better grades give you more choices.
- _8j50 3y ago
  That's a very level headed approach. But I wonder if the US would be more like India where kids kill themselves over college admission scores because since college is free, everything you can do in life depends on it. Personally, I like free college but only for very specific degrees where is demand and having a degree makes sense. Like IT shouldn't be free but medicine or law should, because you can learn IT on the job and it is more close to a trade you can apprentice in. Where apprenticing or learning on the job makes sense, degrees should not be subsidized and pursuits like philosophy where there isn't any economic demand for the degree should be paid by the student.
  - em-bee 3y ago
    i'd like to refer to this discussion why learning on the job can be a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37718230 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37718230 especially for IT which can easily be learned in a school setting unlike some other professions where learning on the job is necessary. learning on the job in IT would work if it is a formalized apprenticeship so that trainees are motivated to stay for the full three years that this usually takes and don't have an opportunity to run away for a higher paying job after the first year. for your last point i pretty much agree with you here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37743011 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37743011
    - _8j50 3y ago
      If you mean being trapped in a job, that's not an issue often because the pay is bad. The company training you risks your leaving too soon but they also pay you like $30k at most where a college grad would be 3x that. In my experience, college educated IT people pretty much have the same if not harsher time to productivity, mostly because you simply can't teach very specific products and most of IT is experiential, what you learn in college is googleable, it's the rest that you can't that has value. The only advantage of a degree in IT is it makes the employee a better long term bet because it would be easier to promote them up the ladder and have them stay longer.
      - em-bee 3y ago
        If you mean being trapped in a job, that's not an issue often because the pay is bad no i mean the risk for the employer spending money on training and then loosing the employee before they can recoup the investment.
        _8j50 3y ago
        Every investment has a risk. Lower the cost by paying less during training and try to get them to stay by allocating as much to promotion an advancement opportunities in the budget as is allocated for new hires and treating them well. I have had jobs where I took 50% less than others (even more) and stayed very long at jobs despite much better paying roles because I was treated ok and the pains of adapting to a new company felt too much. They say losing a job or changing jobs is as impactful as divorce or death in the family emotionally. Another way to look at it is it looks bad on one's resume when you job hop. But also, if training people was the norm, the abundant supply would make it difficult for people to change jobs often.

by _8j50 3y ago

em-bee 3y ago

the government telling you based on your score what degrees you can pursue for free in germany this is solved by allocating a number of slots for each degree. those slots are then filled with the best students first, until all slots are allocated. the score that you needed to get in was effectively the lowest score of any student that did get in. this means that in one year it could be that you needed an A to get into eg physics and in another year a C was enough. so it's very much supply and demand, and better grades give you more choices.

_8j50 3y ago
That's a very level headed approach. But I wonder if the US would be more like India where kids kill themselves over college admission scores because since college is free, everything you can do in life depends on it. Personally, I like free college but only for very specific degrees where is demand and having a degree makes sense. Like IT shouldn't be free but medicine or law should, because you can learn IT on the job and it is more close to a trade you can apprentice in. Where apprenticing or learning on the job makes sense, degrees should not be subsidized and pursuits like philosophy where there isn't any economic demand for the degree should be paid by the student.
- em-bee 3y ago
  i'd like to refer to this discussion why learning on the job can be a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37718230 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37718230 especially for IT which can easily be learned in a school setting unlike some other professions where learning on the job is necessary. learning on the job in IT would work if it is a formalized apprenticeship so that trainees are motivated to stay for the full three years that this usually takes and don't have an opportunity to run away for a higher paying job after the first year. for your last point i pretty much agree with you here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37743011 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37743011
  - _8j50 3y ago
    If you mean being trapped in a job, that's not an issue often because the pay is bad. The company training you risks your leaving too soon but they also pay you like $30k at most where a college grad would be 3x that. In my experience, college educated IT people pretty much have the same if not harsher time to productivity, mostly because you simply can't teach very specific products and most of IT is experiential, what you learn in college is googleable, it's the rest that you can't that has value. The only advantage of a degree in IT is it makes the employee a better long term bet because it would be easier to promote them up the ladder and have them stay longer.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      If you mean being trapped in a job, that's not an issue often because the pay is bad no i mean the risk for the employer spending money on training and then loosing the employee before they can recoup the investment.
      - _8j50 3y ago
        Every investment has a risk. Lower the cost by paying less during training and try to get them to stay by allocating as much to promotion an advancement opportunities in the budget as is allocated for new hires and treating them well. I have had jobs where I took 50% less than others (even more) and stayed very long at jobs despite much better paying roles because I was treated ok and the pains of adapting to a new company felt too much. They say losing a job or changing jobs is as impactful as divorce or death in the family emotionally. Another way to look at it is it looks bad on one's resume when you job hop. But also, if training people was the norm, the abundant supply would make it difficult for people to change jobs often.