Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: CPWILL

Others in this thread have, for example, pointed out to our need to expand Trade School offerings, which certainly don't produce ignorant and unskilled untrained kids, but rather young adults with marketable skills they can immediately begin applying, but with a minimum of time lost and student debt.

I think you may be missing the point, for the simple reason that you tend to view all talk of this in terms of mortarboard wearing sociologists and whiny kids who earned degrees in Pre-Columbian Feminism, etc.
At the very least, it kinda SOUNDS that way.

I think, respectfully, you may be hearing what you are listening for, then.

I do think that our colleges produce a large number of people whose degrees will not translate into work force success. This phenomenon can be easily stereotyped by Pre-Columbian Feminism (or Underwater Basketweaving, or whatever you want to use). However, if you are going to - as has been recommended, and as I was responding to - argue that we need to pay for the college of anyone who gets good grades, then you need to be prepared to defend taxing the general public beaucoup monies so that we can indeed pay for people who don't know what bathroom to use to spend 5-6 years studying Pre-Columbian Feminism seen through the context of Radical Trans Protest Poetry.

I'm not against someone learning for the sake of learning - I have one Master's Degree that directly applies to my work, and one that is only tangentially beneficial, but which was more fun. I have plans to get at least one more Masters which will be completely for personal reasons. But I'm not in favor of a massive wealth redistribution effort to take resources from those who tend to congregate among the bottom 80% to benefit those who tend to congregate among the top 20% in order to achieve that learning-for-learning's sake.

If you want to limit public support to those degree's deemed "needed" or "beneficial", then you run up against another problem - Government is terrible at identifying what is actually needed or beneficial now, and even worse at anticipating what will be needed or beneficial in the future.

College, university, trade schools...ALL OF IT.

But you're also going to have to face some unintended consequences even then, because at some point, we will wind up with a GLUT of tradesmen too. We're going to need people with all kinds of skills, all kinds of degrees, all kinds of abilities.
If we ever want to revitalize our manufacturing, for example, we are going to need millions of kids who know AI and robotics.

Just as we can't all be CEO's and day traders, we also all can't be plumbers either.

Gosh. If only there was some kind of extremely-efficient mechanism for sorting resources to where they can be most productive, which incorporated price signals in order to ensure rapid feedback and readjustment, but which also maximizes human freedom. wink

This isn't the kind of thing that can be top-down planned, man. The cumulative knowledge of everyone is going to be many, many, orders of magnitude greater than the knowledge of any panel of experts trying to figure out how many Plumbers we need v how many Locksmiths v how many Software Engineers.

If it walks and talk and it can be trained, educated, or otherwise outfitted, equipped or otherwise provisioned for a useful and decent paying career, then WE NEED TO EXTEND A HAND to those who cannot afford the cost of that but who otherwise demonstrate the ability and ambition.

For such people, hands are already extended. Why extend one that is a trap, or extend one that knocks all the other hands away - especially if that hand has the additional impact of doing immense harm - both to others and those it purports to "help".

Please stop thinking in terms of "whiny leftists" who want to attend Stanford to study useless froo-froo curriculum while practicing being offended at everything.

1. Those people exist. Pretending they don't won't make your argument stronger, and, any policy proposal that results in "we need to take away from others to give more to those people" needs to be able to explain and justify itself.

2. I am, however, not addressing them specifically.

Nowadays there's a trade school or training institute for damn near everything, but most of them couldn't care less if they actually train you properly, and their job placement is a joke.
I know this FIRSTHAND thanks to my daughter's experience.
Marinello Schools of Beauty closes all campuses

frown I'm sorry your daughter had that fall out from under her.

But... this:

...Department of Education officials added that Marinello was knowingly requesting federal aid for students based on invalid high school diplomas, charging students for excessive overtime and engaging in other acts of misrepresentation....

This sounds exactly like what we have come to expect as a matter of course from government programs, and what we should expect more of the more we expand them.

-> Measures wherein colleges are forced to provide greater transparency regarding student debt levels, graduation rates, and average incomes for graduates per major are excellent, and should be expanded. Give the consumer more and better information.

Sounds awesome, why would you think anyone would be against that?

Because it makes it harder to justify things like Pre Columbian Feminist Protest Poetry and Latynx Studies – making transparency both Sexist and Racist.

Of course, that's "regulation" so many on the Far Right will accuse YOU of being a Leftist for "getting in the way of business with regulations".

OTC, that which increases transparency within the system in order to better align incentives and resources is entirely in keeping with a market.

-> We should also cease giving out federally-insured student loans. If they are so terrible that they need to be forgiven, well, let's stop saddling rising student bodies with them. I think this could be a compromise point if we pair this with forgiveness measures, as we've discussed earlier.

See above about Marinello Beauty School.
There are way more "marinellos" because of the rising drumbeat that whines and cries about regulation. We should be regulating the living shyte out of these diploma mills.

You being angry at diploma mills doesn’t exactly answer the question. If Student Loans are so bad – why are we still saddling rising student bodies with them? If they are so hurtful, let’s stop giving them to people.

Loans....pfffttt...if Mums and Daddums are making six figures a year, they pay the freight.

A nice-sounding slogan, but 100K in San Francisco or New York is very different than 100K in Nashville or Topeka.

Why not instead bring down the price of college?

If the parents are only bringing in forty grand a year but junior is a proven whiz kid...help junior out so he doesn't wind up being on WELFARE.
Don't help Junior out, then you just lost another future taxpayer, simple as that

Sadly, this is not an accurate representation. Roughly half of those who go to college drop out, and of that half who graduate, about 40% wind up in jobs that don’t require college degrees. So, if you “Help Junior Out” by giving him the money, there is about a 70% chance that you just wasted it. If you “Help Junior Out” by giving him a loan, there is a 70% chance the money is wasted, and a 100% chance that you just helped crush down Junior’s future by starting him off saddled with debt.

Lost kids making fifteen to twenty grand a year will drag the economy further and further down. That's a fact.

Someone making 15K is working part time, and someone making 20K is making less than $10 an hour, which is to say, less than the starting wage at Wal Mart. If someone does not have the work ethic, mental capacity, or soft skills to get and maintain a job at Wal Mart, I submit, they are exceedingly unlikely to be able to benefit much from having us take money from their parents and neighbors in order to use it to send them to College.

However, if you are worried about the generational impacts of poverty – welcome! I’ve spent some time reading in that area as well. Unfortunately, the biggest driver there isn’t whether or not your college is paid for by someone else – it’s whether or not your parents were married.

-> Shift our over-reliance on Training Pipelines to a greater reliance on Testing, like the Bar Exam. If someone has already mastered the material, there is no reason to force them to dish out ridiculous sums of money to sit in a class where they can review it.

It's called CLEP, and for the last 25 years it has existed as a shell of its original self. You may find this hard to believe but you have a better chance of "clepping" your way to a law degree if you're a prison inmate. Free citizens...not so much.

Color me completely unsurprised – but I’m not just talking about CLEP for college students. As you point out – ALL OF IT. Why should your daughter have to go through a long schooling program to learn how to cut hair if she can take an exam indicating she is aware of all the necessary public hygiene and safety measures, and can appropriately apply them? Why are people who arrange flowers allowed to keep the poor from competing with them via expensive and difficult licensing schemes?

If you want to expand CLEP, you're not going to find many friends on the Right in favor of that, but I'll be your friend where CLEP is concerned. smile

smile You may be pleasantly surprised laugh

Edited by CPWILL (03/18/20 03:14 AM)
Winter Is Coming