6 ms·

The whole endeavor is lousy. With regards to 'success', for most people the education you get in college is secondary. What's of primary importance is network

by roc 14y ago

The whole endeavor is lousy. With regards to 'success', for most people the education you get in college is secondary. What's of primary importance is networking and having that degree on your resume to get you in the door. [1] But networking and having something on your resume that gets you in the door is provided automatically (and arguably in more effective doses) by rubbing elbows with Thiel and likeminded millionaires and billionaires and being featured in news articles. So the 'success' of the participants should be expected to be equivalent-to-better than if they went to college just due the design of this stunt. And it will prove nothing about whether college is useful or not in the general case. Because you can't scale "hang out with Peter Thiel and likeminded movers-and-shakers" beyond a tiny class each year. [1] Which isn't to say that what you learn isn't important. It absolutely is. It just doesn't have much bearing on your business/monetary-axis 'success'.

randomdata 14y ago
To be fair, it is not exactly clear if college scales either. Around 25% of the working population have a college degree and about 50% have post-secondary training of some kind. Only 5% of the working population earn more than $90,000 per year and the top 25% start earning at only $45,000 per year or so. It's a livable income in many places, but that is not what we generally consider successful in business.
- potatolicious 14y ago
  This disappointment is based on an ancient view of the world - that those with post-secondary educations are abnormally high achievers, and thus one would expect greater than average compensation. This hasn't been true for at least 3 decades. Post-secondary training of some sort, whether in a skilled trade or a degree program, is critical even if your ambitions do not stray further than "strictly middle class". Instead of wondering why those with post secondary education aren't rich off their asses, I'm much more concerned about why 50% of the population doesn't have any post-secondary education whatsoever, and how in the hell we expect to keep this population employed and competitive with that foundation.
  - randomdata 14y ago
    In my case, I simply was not allowed to study in any post-secondary school. I applied to many, but was rejected from them all. Higher education is not accessible to a large number of people. I have never found it to be limiting to my career though. In fact, I feel I am in a much better position because I was able to use those four+ years more effectively doing my own thing which has made me more marketable than a typical college grad.
- ippisl 14y ago
  According to [1], 93% of small business owners earn roughly less than $200,000. and 74% earn less than 100K. Business owners are 10% of the working population, so only 2.6% percent of the working population earn more than $100,000 by owning a business. And considering the fact that many wealthy business owners do have a degree(lawyers, dentists, etc.), college seems the more scalable way to wealth. And even if you consider high end of earners , many of the high earners(ceo's, tech entrepreneurs, medical and legal professionals) do have a college degree. [1]www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42043.pdf pg-8
  - randomdata 14y ago
    Business owners, like the general working population, are a mixed pool of those with degrees and those without. Given how many business owners earn less than $100K, including those with degrees, it further highlights my point that having a degree doesn't really give an advantage to finding financial success. > (lawyers, dentists, etc.), college seems the more scalable way to wealth. Less than 1% of the population have professional degrees. Those with them may have an advantage due to the artificial supply limits created through legislation, but the fact their numbers are so low demonstrates again that it really doesn't scale.
    - carterschonwald 14y ago
      False. There's a glut of lawyers. For the good paying legal jobs, it's insanely competitive. By that I mean "oh crap, you better be at least borderline brilliant and incredibly hard working"
    - carterschonwald 14y ago
      False. There's a glut of lawyers. For the good paying legal jobs, it's insanely competitive. By that I mean "oh crap, you better be at least borderline brilliant and incredibly hard working"

by roc 14y ago

randomdata 14y ago

To be fair, it is not exactly clear if college scales either. Around 25% of the working population have a college degree and about 50% have post-secondary training of some kind. Only 5% of the working population earn more than $90,000 per year and the top 25% start earning at only $45,000 per year or so. It's a livable income in many places, but that is not what we generally consider successful in business.

potatolicious 14y ago
This disappointment is based on an ancient view of the world - that those with post-secondary educations are abnormally high achievers, and thus one would expect greater than average compensation. This hasn't been true for at least 3 decades. Post-secondary training of some sort, whether in a skilled trade or a degree program, is critical even if your ambitions do not stray further than "strictly middle class". Instead of wondering why those with post secondary education aren't rich off their asses, I'm much more concerned about why 50% of the population doesn't have any post-secondary education whatsoever, and how in the hell we expect to keep this population employed and competitive with that foundation.
- randomdata 14y ago
  In my case, I simply was not allowed to study in any post-secondary school. I applied to many, but was rejected from them all. Higher education is not accessible to a large number of people. I have never found it to be limiting to my career though. In fact, I feel I am in a much better position because I was able to use those four+ years more effectively doing my own thing which has made me more marketable than a typical college grad.
ippisl 14y ago
According to [1], 93% of small business owners earn roughly less than $200,000. and 74% earn less than 100K. Business owners are 10% of the working population, so only 2.6% percent of the working population earn more than $100,000 by owning a business. And considering the fact that many wealthy business owners do have a degree(lawyers, dentists, etc.), college seems the more scalable way to wealth. And even if you consider high end of earners , many of the high earners(ceo's, tech entrepreneurs, medical and legal professionals) do have a college degree. [1]www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42043.pdf pg-8
- randomdata 14y ago
  Business owners, like the general working population, are a mixed pool of those with degrees and those without. Given how many business owners earn less than $100K, including those with degrees, it further highlights my point that having a degree doesn't really give an advantage to finding financial success. > (lawyers, dentists, etc.), college seems the more scalable way to wealth. Less than 1% of the population have professional degrees. Those with them may have an advantage due to the artificial supply limits created through legislation, but the fact their numbers are so low demonstrates again that it really doesn't scale.
  - carterschonwald 14y ago
    False. There's a glut of lawyers. For the good paying legal jobs, it's insanely competitive. By that I mean "oh crap, you better be at least borderline brilliant and incredibly hard working"
  - carterschonwald 14y ago
    False. There's a glut of lawyers. For the good paying legal jobs, it's insanely competitive. By that I mean "oh crap, you better be at least borderline brilliant and incredibly hard working"