4 ms·
I wonder why Andreesen doesn’t suggest public funding of higher education, instead of fighting DEI. If education was free for all Americans, it would achieve wh
by dahart 1y ago
I wonder why Andreesen doesn’t suggest public funding of higher education, instead of fighting DEI. If education was free for all Americans, it would achieve what he’s arguing for and it would undermine and make DEI efforts completely moot. As far as I can tell, we can afford to fund university for all entirely on the extra income taxes that people with degrees make above people without degrees, at least according to income data studies I’ve read from the Fed. (I’m honestly curious why our country hasn’t come to this conclusion already - it certainly looks today like funding higher education for all would increase GDP and reduce the tax burden.)
- hollerith 1y agoEven better: college degrees for everyone
- chomp 1y agoThat’s what the parent commenter is saying, if everyone has the same opportunity to go to college and get a degree, then colleges don’t need to pick and choose students. Right now, only people with means can do to college, and so universities wind up balancing the scales.
- dahart 1y agoYes, that’s definitely what I’m suggesting. Did I accidentally imply something else? I feel like taking the whether someone can afford college off the table would just immediately end this DEI argument and give Americans a boost. Why isn’t Adreesen fighting for that?
- rbanffy 1y agoA much needed boost. China has about 200 million STEM graduates, which is the entire US workforce. > Why isn’t Adreesen fighting for that? We can only infer the best interests of the country and its people don’t align with his own plans.
- malcolmgreaves 1y agoMost likely it’s because he doesn’t actually want what he claims. Billionaires become corrupted by their wealth. Like a junkie, they need their fix. And their fix is to see their wealth increase.
- rbanffy 1y agoIt’s not wealth and power that corrupts. It’s the fear of losing them.
- UncleMeat 1y agoHe also writes that the NSF should experience "the bureaucratic death penalty." Andreesen doesn't actually give a shit about the university system whatsoever. He wants people like him to be at the top of society and everybody else to grovel at his feet.
- arp242 1y agoLast year he wrote in his "techno-optimist manifesto" that anyone delaying roll-out of AI is guilty of murder. Andreesen has tons of investment in AI and stands to make loads of money from it. Completely unrelated, I am sure. He also said that growth through AI has no upper bounds. Obviously not mathematically possible. Maybe he's Jack Kennedy too now. He is a deeply unserious person seemingly becoming more unserious by the day.