3 ms·

A persuite of knowledge is not 'subsidizing their hobbies'. Its a captialsm valuation nothing more. What are we as humans if we don't have the resources to ed

A persuite of knowledge is not 'subsidizing their hobbies'. Its a captialsm valuation nothing more. What are we as humans if we don't have the resources to educate and learn and be curious? I really hope the current AI and Robot wave will lead us all to a more 'free' society

drawnwren 2y ago
It’s strange to me that you can’t see the correlation between free markets and their products while simultaneously looking forward to more production from those same markets.
- Hellolearning 2y ago
  Get rid of all unnecessary things and overhead in our society and we do not have a resource issue. Focus on automatisation and we don't have a production issue. Its a man made problem, not some kind of magic rule.
  - drawnwren 2y ago
    I think this is one of those wordcel arguments that sounds nice but probably has no bearing on actual reality. If we live in a world where human effort has no marginal utility, we also live in a world where human life has no value. If we don't, you're in a world where you're competing with other humans for some set of resources. Regardless of whether you believe that you are competing with them, others are competing with you. I think competition is perhaps one of the most basic rules of reality.
    - Hellolearning 2y ago
      [dead]
mytailorisrich 2y ago
We are free to be curious and to "find ourselves". But why should we expect society to pay for it beyond a certain point? At some point it is indeed "subsidizing hobbies". As long as things cost something, and a course costs something to create and deliver, the question of valuation in some way is valid. It's not a capitalist issue, it's an allocation of resources issue, which is something universal as long as resources are limited. Where it works, the free market is great because it transparently shows how people actually value something. That is, it shows how we actually are and what we actually want, not what would be nice in some utopian world.
- knallfrosch 2y ago
  It's interesting how abstract these discussions are. Countries with free – free for the student, at least – tertiary education do exist and you can use them for comparison.
  - mytailorisrich 2y ago
    Yes they do exist. On the one hand this is great but on the other hand it also also generates waste, both in terms of resources and time. I went to university in France when it was both free (still basically is) with no selection for entry and the amount of waste was huge for no benefit to anyone... well except for official stats because "I'm not unemployed, I'm a student"...
    - em-bee 2y ago
      please elaborate on the waste you saw. i studied in germany and austria and i didn't notice waste. on the contrary, requiring payment would have excluded many of the good students. (entry is limited to qualified students however, so there is some selection. does that make all the difference? i doubt it.)
      - mytailorisrich 2y ago
        > on the contrary, requiring payment would have excluded many of the good students How? Surely people/families in Germany/Austria, some of the richest countries in the world, can afford to pay something towards education costs... And in fact they do through their taxes, which are needed to pay for this "free" university. [obviously poor families can benefit from bursaries so this is not a relevant argument] The waste is students picking courses just to do something or just because they are vaguely interested in them (and then they get all the benefits afforded to students, including housing subsidies). And then they give up, or they fail, or once they graduate they realise that it gets them exactly 0 job. So huge waste of resources and time and, as mentioned, sometimes a way to hide youth unemployment.
oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]

drawnwren 2y ago

It’s strange to me that you can’t see the correlation between free markets and their products while simultaneously looking forward to more production from those same markets.

Hellolearning 2y ago
Get rid of all unnecessary things and overhead in our society and we do not have a resource issue. Focus on automatisation and we don't have a production issue. Its a man made problem, not some kind of magic rule.
- drawnwren 2y ago
  I think this is one of those wordcel arguments that sounds nice but probably has no bearing on actual reality. If we live in a world where human effort has no marginal utility, we also live in a world where human life has no value. If we don't, you're in a world where you're competing with other humans for some set of resources. Regardless of whether you believe that you are competing with them, others are competing with you. I think competition is perhaps one of the most basic rules of reality.
  - Hellolearning 2y ago
    [dead]

mytailorisrich 2y ago

We are free to be curious and to "find ourselves". But why should we expect society to pay for it beyond a certain point? At some point it is indeed "subsidizing hobbies". As long as things cost something, and a course costs something to create and deliver, the question of valuation in some way is valid. It's not a capitalist issue, it's an allocation of resources issue, which is something universal as long as resources are limited. Where it works, the free market is great because it transparently shows how people actually value something. That is, it shows how we actually are and what we actually want, not what would be nice in some utopian world.

knallfrosch 2y ago
It's interesting how abstract these discussions are. Countries with free – free for the student, at least – tertiary education do exist and you can use them for comparison.
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  Yes they do exist. On the one hand this is great but on the other hand it also also generates waste, both in terms of resources and time. I went to university in France when it was both free (still basically is) with no selection for entry and the amount of waste was huge for no benefit to anyone... well except for official stats because "I'm not unemployed, I'm a student"...
  - em-bee 2y ago
    please elaborate on the waste you saw. i studied in germany and austria and i didn't notice waste. on the contrary, requiring payment would have excluded many of the good students. (entry is limited to qualified students however, so there is some selection. does that make all the difference? i doubt it.)
    - mytailorisrich 2y ago
      > on the contrary, requiring payment would have excluded many of the good students How? Surely people/families in Germany/Austria, some of the richest countries in the world, can afford to pay something towards education costs... And in fact they do through their taxes, which are needed to pay for this "free" university. [obviously poor families can benefit from bursaries so this is not a relevant argument] The waste is students picking courses just to do something or just because they are vaguely interested in them (and then they get all the benefits afforded to students, including housing subsidies). And then they give up, or they fail, or once they graduate they realise that it gets them exactly 0 job. So huge waste of resources and time and, as mentioned, sometimes a way to hide youth unemployment.

oldpersonintx 2y ago

[dead]