4 ms·

College for the masses

27 points by Futurebot 12y ago

stegosaurus 12y ago
Writing from a UK perspective here - the idea of a 'ticket to the middle class' is wrong on so many levels. Fundamentally I have trouble with the idea of making college the battleground. First of all, the actual pool of bona fide middle class jobs is quite small as far as I can see. Being able to shop at Waitrose is not interesting. If you have no net worth and your parents have no net worth you are not middle class. A mortgage in London on a 1BR flat with the maximum reasonable commute requires a 50K annual income. Outside of the capital; similar situation but with the numbers scaled down. There are jobs that exist paying this well, yes, but they are certainly not common. That is to say that graduating is not necessarily good enough. It might be a good result, or good internships, or talent, or prestige (e.g. an elite university). Income inequality is not the issue; wealth inequality is (specifically, the middle class now sits on levels of wealth that look intergenerational from where I stand). College should not be pulled in to this. College should be about education. About helping people to appreciate and understand this world we have around us. About making adults out of children. The capitalist economy is broken for youth today. Sending them to college won't fix that except for a tiny privileged few.
- interesting_att 12y ago
  You make a great point. A lot of this "ticket to the middle class" sounds like delaying the issue of wealth inequality. One of the biggest predictor of financial success is who you are born to, something you have no control over. When we drive millions more poor people to college, the average value of a college degree will go down. Then we will come up with some new institution that is the "ticket to the middle class," like getting a masters degree. Back in the 1970s, you could get a job with a high school diploma. Now, you have to go to college, work a few unpaid internships, hope you can get an OK job.
  - stegosaurus 12y ago
    'Delaying the issue' is a great way to put it. Social mobility is a distraction. It's not a real solution. It's political language; it assumes the underlying system. A system that cycles people around from being poor to rich based on merit is not a good system, because merit is essentially arbitrary (beyond deliberate antisocial behaviour). I have a talent, my friend does not, I get to live the good life, he gets a lifetime of insecure rental accomodation or homelessness. (True story.) It just does not work. It's based on an outdated idea of work ethic, it assumes people have more control over their faculties than they actually do. I can live with a system that has people competing for sports cars, yachts and jets. Those things don't matter. But having people fight to put a roof over their head is just nonsensical in wealthy countries like the UK/USA. It's a holdover from the Industrial Revolution and the wealthy's desire to force people to labour.
    - NTDF9 12y ago
      It's the same old story again. A nobility is born and serfdom becomes the norm. Here's the kicker! Everyone thinks that the current form of capitalism is good. Right from childhood (at least in the US) the American system of capitalism is drilled into children's minds as the best thing there can be (perhaps even God's chosen system of similar bullcrap)
      - mikerichards 12y ago
        Right from childhood (at least in the US) the American system of capitalism is drilled into children's minds as the best thing there can be (perhaps even God's chosen system of similar bullcrap) And then when they get to college, they're indoctrinated into the exact opposite ideology by marxist/socialist professors into your line of thinking.
        NTDF9 12y ago
        Because we soon realize that real life is not what it was all made up to be in textbooks and propaganda based literature. Personally, I want reality to be presented the way it is instead of constant self-glorification.
- eellpp 12y ago
  Ideally college education is about providing economic freedom by opening up many possibilities for the young mind. It provides a basic knowhow to get started in a field of choice or having the confidence that a skill to get started on anything can achieved by following a learning process. Even if the person takes up a job, does a startup or even do nothing, it is a choice left upon him (which may not be there before acquiring that knowledge). The society as whole benefits from this progressive outlook of its people. It seems instead of looking through this perspective, the whole endeavour is viewed as making an investment and reaping monetary gains thereafter. Of-course then the service providers and lenders want their piece of pie. Currently the system is designed for goal that does not match its true objective. Its broken in that sense. One idea often mentioned is to maintain the current model by limiting the college education to select few who really deserve it. Instead of this regressive view, the economic aspect of college education needs to be addressed.
interesting_att 12y ago
One quote really struck out to me: "College graduates are also healthier, happier, more likely to remain married, more likely to be engaged parents and more likely to vote, research has found." Much of discourse surrounding college has been the economics. Arguably, it is hard to justify the cost of $200k price tag + $200k opportunity cost for a top-tier university, and come out with a $40-60k/year job. But college isn't just about crafting yourself to a job market. You get to truly explore who you are with a diverse group of people (race, genders, sexualities, culture, political leanings, economic backgrounds, drug habits) near your age, all while having access to all the knowledge of the world (be it religion, history, art, economics, etc). Is the SJW culture of thought police hurting what makes college awesome? Yes. Is there a huge bloat of administrators that drives up the cost of college education? Yes. Are certain humanities departments misleading students into thinking that they can get a job with their degree? Yes. Do less-social students get less out of college? Yes. But is college completely worthless? Of course not.
- stegosaurus 12y ago
  Right. I don't think it's particularly off the wall to say that some things just don't have a price or a monetary reward. Capitalism is a fun game that we play that works in some areas and doesn't in others; it's not the meaning of life. Should I read Shakespeare in my free time or work on a side project? Should I paint or look out of the window at the wildlife or should I move further from work and spend that time commuting? Capitalism makes sense for producing widgets at low cost. For apportioning scarce luxury objects. Etc. But we don't win by trying to make everything profitable. We just make everything more competitive, more stressful, less... human.
  - bmelton 12y ago
    > Capitalism makes sense for producing widgets at low cost. For apportioning scarce luxury objects. Etc. But we don't win by trying to make everything profitable. We just make everything more competitive, more stressful, less... human. But Capitalism also allows people a great degree more freedom to do the things they want. Are there constraints? Sure. Is it perfect? Clearly not. But there are many who justify themselves by the works they produce. I don't ordinarily think of myself as that, but when I was an electrician, I used to construct things, build things. I still get a sense of pride whenever I'm home and can look at the light poles that I jackhammered the foundations from, directed the concrete pouring of, wired to main, erected with a crane and bolted into place. There's an odd sense of pride that I have every time I see them. That's something I did. And yeah, it's pretty trivial, but I get value from it. In a capitalist system, not only can I prioritize how much I choose to work, but I also have the luxury of choosing what I do, where I can contribute the most value. I can't say that I've studied it very much, but compared to assigned work for whatever the normal amount of pay is, I very much prefer the freedom of working more for more money, or working less for less money, in a field of my choosing. I can then allocate that money to the items I prioritize most dearly to me. I never have as new a phone as my peers seem to, but in their stead, I have some very nice guitars that I gain great enjoyment from. I'm not yet convinced that there a non-capitalist system exists that affords me such choices. Without incentivizing at least some people to go out and get work done, it seems unlikely to me that there is wealth enough to sustain our collective frivolities. And sure, looking out the window doesn't cost a whole lot, but guitars do, and so do canvases and paints.
acconrad 12y ago
I just find it a hard pill to swallow when they claim that college for the masses is a good thing when all of the research they're pointing out comes from people at Harvard, Princeton and MIT. Feels very much like an Ivory Tower view on things.

27 points by Futurebot 12y ago

Writing from a UK perspective here - the idea of a 'ticket to the middle class' is wrong on so many levels. Fundamentally I have trouble with the idea of making college the battleground. First of all, the actual pool of bona fide middle class jobs is quite small as far as I can see. Being able to shop at Waitrose is not interesting. If you have no net worth and your parents have no net worth you are not middle class. A mortgage in London on a 1BR flat with the maximum reasonable commute requires a 50K annual income. Outside of the capital; similar situation but with the numbers scaled down. There are jobs that exist paying this well, yes, but they are certainly not common. That is to say that graduating is not necessarily good enough. It might be a good result, or good internships, or talent, or prestige (e.g. an elite university). Income inequality is not the issue; wealth inequality is (specifically, the middle class now sits on levels of wealth that look intergenerational from where I stand). College should not be pulled in to this. College should be about education. About helping people to appreciate and understand this world we have around us. About making adults out of children. The capitalist economy is broken for youth today. Sending them to college won't fix that except for a tiny privileged few.

interesting_att 12y ago
You make a great point. A lot of this "ticket to the middle class" sounds like delaying the issue of wealth inequality. One of the biggest predictor of financial success is who you are born to, something you have no control over. When we drive millions more poor people to college, the average value of a college degree will go down. Then we will come up with some new institution that is the "ticket to the middle class," like getting a masters degree. Back in the 1970s, you could get a job with a high school diploma. Now, you have to go to college, work a few unpaid internships, hope you can get an OK job.
- stegosaurus 12y ago
  'Delaying the issue' is a great way to put it. Social mobility is a distraction. It's not a real solution. It's political language; it assumes the underlying system. A system that cycles people around from being poor to rich based on merit is not a good system, because merit is essentially arbitrary (beyond deliberate antisocial behaviour). I have a talent, my friend does not, I get to live the good life, he gets a lifetime of insecure rental accomodation or homelessness. (True story.) It just does not work. It's based on an outdated idea of work ethic, it assumes people have more control over their faculties than they actually do. I can live with a system that has people competing for sports cars, yachts and jets. Those things don't matter. But having people fight to put a roof over their head is just nonsensical in wealthy countries like the UK/USA. It's a holdover from the Industrial Revolution and the wealthy's desire to force people to labour.
  - NTDF9 12y ago
    It's the same old story again. A nobility is born and serfdom becomes the norm. Here's the kicker! Everyone thinks that the current form of capitalism is good. Right from childhood (at least in the US) the American system of capitalism is drilled into children's minds as the best thing there can be (perhaps even God's chosen system of similar bullcrap)
    - mikerichards 12y ago
      Right from childhood (at least in the US) the American system of capitalism is drilled into children's minds as the best thing there can be (perhaps even God's chosen system of similar bullcrap) And then when they get to college, they're indoctrinated into the exact opposite ideology by marxist/socialist professors into your line of thinking.
      - NTDF9 12y ago
        Because we soon realize that real life is not what it was all made up to be in textbooks and propaganda based literature. Personally, I want reality to be presented the way it is instead of constant self-glorification.
eellpp 12y ago
Ideally college education is about providing economic freedom by opening up many possibilities for the young mind. It provides a basic knowhow to get started in a field of choice or having the confidence that a skill to get started on anything can achieved by following a learning process. Even if the person takes up a job, does a startup or even do nothing, it is a choice left upon him (which may not be there before acquiring that knowledge). The society as whole benefits from this progressive outlook of its people. It seems instead of looking through this perspective, the whole endeavour is viewed as making an investment and reaping monetary gains thereafter. Of-course then the service providers and lenders want their piece of pie. Currently the system is designed for goal that does not match its true objective. Its broken in that sense. One idea often mentioned is to maintain the current model by limiting the college education to select few who really deserve it. Instead of this regressive view, the economic aspect of college education needs to be addressed.

interesting_att 12y ago

One quote really struck out to me: "College graduates are also healthier, happier, more likely to remain married, more likely to be engaged parents and more likely to vote, research has found." Much of discourse surrounding college has been the economics. Arguably, it is hard to justify the cost of $200k price tag + $200k opportunity cost for a top-tier university, and come out with a $40-60k/year job. But college isn't just about crafting yourself to a job market. You get to truly explore who you are with a diverse group of people (race, genders, sexualities, culture, political leanings, economic backgrounds, drug habits) near your age, all while having access to all the knowledge of the world (be it religion, history, art, economics, etc). Is the SJW culture of thought police hurting what makes college awesome? Yes. Is there a huge bloat of administrators that drives up the cost of college education? Yes. Are certain humanities departments misleading students into thinking that they can get a job with their degree? Yes. Do less-social students get less out of college? Yes. But is college completely worthless? Of course not.

stegosaurus 12y ago
Right. I don't think it's particularly off the wall to say that some things just don't have a price or a monetary reward. Capitalism is a fun game that we play that works in some areas and doesn't in others; it's not the meaning of life. Should I read Shakespeare in my free time or work on a side project? Should I paint or look out of the window at the wildlife or should I move further from work and spend that time commuting? Capitalism makes sense for producing widgets at low cost. For apportioning scarce luxury objects. Etc. But we don't win by trying to make everything profitable. We just make everything more competitive, more stressful, less... human.
- bmelton 12y ago
  > Capitalism makes sense for producing widgets at low cost. For apportioning scarce luxury objects. Etc. But we don't win by trying to make everything profitable. We just make everything more competitive, more stressful, less... human. But Capitalism also allows people a great degree more freedom to do the things they want. Are there constraints? Sure. Is it perfect? Clearly not. But there are many who justify themselves by the works they produce. I don't ordinarily think of myself as that, but when I was an electrician, I used to construct things, build things. I still get a sense of pride whenever I'm home and can look at the light poles that I jackhammered the foundations from, directed the concrete pouring of, wired to main, erected with a crane and bolted into place. There's an odd sense of pride that I have every time I see them. That's something I did. And yeah, it's pretty trivial, but I get value from it. In a capitalist system, not only can I prioritize how much I choose to work, but I also have the luxury of choosing what I do, where I can contribute the most value. I can't say that I've studied it very much, but compared to assigned work for whatever the normal amount of pay is, I very much prefer the freedom of working more for more money, or working less for less money, in a field of my choosing. I can then allocate that money to the items I prioritize most dearly to me. I never have as new a phone as my peers seem to, but in their stead, I have some very nice guitars that I gain great enjoyment from. I'm not yet convinced that there a non-capitalist system exists that affords me such choices. Without incentivizing at least some people to go out and get work done, it seems unlikely to me that there is wealth enough to sustain our collective frivolities. And sure, looking out the window doesn't cost a whole lot, but guitars do, and so do canvases and paints.

acconrad 12y ago

I just find it a hard pill to swallow when they claim that college for the masses is a good thing when all of the research they're pointing out comes from people at Harvard, Princeton and MIT. Feels very much like an Ivory Tower view on things.