College Is Not For Everyone

[Susanann]

@msmith537

@Susanann

1. Bringing back the tariffs (which we had from 1776 up to the 1970’s) would bring back all those jobs and all those factories, and would bring about a huge job boom such as we previously experienced for 2 centuries over the 1800’s and most of the 1900’s.
2. Secondly, a huge drop in population of the U.S.A. could easily be had simply by immediately ending “all” immigration and also by deporting all illegals.

The solutions are actually quite easy and simple, and have already been time tested over centuries of history.

Time tested to be completely ineffective.

The great thing about uneducated people is that they just seem to “know” everything without having to be constrained by things like “facts” or “historical precedent” or “academic scrutiny”.

Sorry, but I lived thru the 1940’s, 1950’s, and the 1960’s. Back when America actually made things, good quality things, back when anything stamped: “Made in USA” meant quality and when everyone in the world wanted it.

Back then we had 100 million less immigrants, no trade with communist china at all, no NAFTA, yet, anyone who wanted to work could get good paying jobs, and anyone with a college degree had their pick of dozens of places who wanted them.

YOu can talk “theory” all you want, but I know what America was like when we had a smaller population and back when we had “fair” trade instead of “free” trade, when we had trade tariffs to protect our jobs and our factories, and when virtually anyone could “max out” on their social security taxes way before the end of the year.

BTW, we also had very little debt, less traffic, no Soylent Green, and there was no such thing as road rage in America back in the good the old days.

The saddest part, is that unemployment in America is a choice. The people of America today are “choosing” to be more overpopulated/overcrowded via record immigration, and they are “choosing” to move all of our jobs and all of our factories to china, mexico, canada, etc. Overcrowding and the unemployment that goes with it, is a deliberate and intentional choice that today’s voters are making.

Q: IF you want too many taxes? too many people? too much pollution? too much government intrusion and too much government control? and not enough jobs?..**then keep doing what you are doing!!!
**
Bottom line: I am certain that my world of the 1940’s up thru the 1960’s was MUCH!!! much better, much more prosperous, more secure, much safer, and less crowded, than yours is going to be over the next 30 or 40 years!!!

[alice_in_wonderland]

I’m going to jump in here and admit that I’ve only read the first half of this thread - I will read the rest but I just need to clear up a few points - I apologize if someone else has already made these points further along.

@furt

Manual labor =/= skilled trades.

Skilled tradesmen can indeed make a good living. If they’re any good at it, they can easily pull in 40k a year, which is right about the median.

Thank you furt for pointing this out. To be an electrician in Alberta requires 4 years of education - 3 months per year of school and 9 months of apprenticeship per year. It requires a high school education to be accepted to the program as well as a reasonable amount of smarts. The same is true of plumbing, pipefitting, machinist, etc.

Also, at least in Alberta, a Journeyman electrician can expect to make closer to $90k a year when they finish - not 40k. A Journeyman plumber can expect to make close to $100k. And to be clear - that’s a Journeyman electrician. A gold-seal master electrician can make pretty well whatever they want. Ditto for other skilled trades. Remember - when you call a plumber it typically costs about $200 just to get him to come to your house.

School fees are typically around $300/year with books being another $300.

So, last night my husband and I met with a financial planner to set up an RESP savings account for our new baby. (That’s an education savings plan - I assume the same thing exists in the US but it may be called something different). I made very, very sure that if Junior decides to pursue a trade the funds we save can be used for trade school (they can).

Frankly, I’m a bit mystified by the shit the trades are getting in this thread. They require additional school after high school. They’re lucrative and impossible to outsource. They are a stepping stone to small business ownership. Certainly not something to be ‘settled for’ but ‘those people’ as even sven is suggesting.

Perhaps the issue is that some people have too narrow a view of what a ‘college education’ is. I honestly always assumed that any sort of post-secondary education qualified as a college education when reading articles like the one in the OP.

Really - if the assertion is that someone with a liberal arts degree and $50K in student loans is going to wind up financially ahead of a trade school graduate I’m not buying it.

Finally, because this discussion seems to be coming down to money - I have an uncle with a college education - a masters of teaching, specifically. I suspect he makes about $70K a year. His brother - my other uncle - is a stone mason. FWIW, stone masonry isn’t taught in trade schools - if you want to learn it you go to a stone mason and apprentice for a few years. He makes whatever the hell he likes, because in Canada stonemasons are fairly hard to find and if you want a three story floor to roof stone fireplace there aren’t a lot of people you can phone to do it. I think he charges about $200/hour.

[Susanann]

@alice_in_wonderland

Frankly, I’m a bit mystified by the shit the trades are getting in this thread. They require additional school after high school. They’re lucrative and impossible to outsource. They are a stepping stone to small business ownership.

Really - if the assertion is that someone with a liberal arts degree and $50K in student loans is going to wind up financially ahead of a trade school graduate I’m not buying it.

You are absolutely right. Moreover, most people who learn a trade, as opposed to most college graduates, actually know how to “do” something or how to “make” something.

[Voyager]

@furt

@Voyager

I think we are talking about making not going to college the default instead of going to college being the default (for the middle class, anyhow.) The outliers, the kids who know exactly what they want to do, whether it is majoring in physics or becoming a mechanic, are not at issue. If by aptitude you mean the smarts to go on to college, I’m with you, though I don’t think that population has been the issue.

Yes, they emphatically are. A third of all college students in America require remedial work before they can take college-level classes. Probably another third would need them if what passes for “college-level classes” was not itself a joke at so many schools. 70-90% of those who do remedial work do not graduate, and IME it’s not because they are that much less hardworking.

I meant in this thread, not in real life. But the solution is to improve pre-college education. We need a literate population, whether or not they go to college.

Not at all. A lot of them are, but plenty of them are smart. motivated kids who know what they want, and are entirely ready to begin working on their career goals. How we separate them from the goofoffs is the issue.

There are plenty of smart, hard working kids who don’t have career goals yet. They just may not have found anything they really love yet.

College is expensive. In many cases it is cripplingly, life-alteringly, expensive. There are all sorts of ways for an 18 year old to “explore,” (including inexpensive schools) that don’t have dramatic lifelong consequences. The average college graduate in 2010 will come out owing ~$25,000. That’s the average, and there are plenty who owe much, much more than that. That kind of debt can stick with them for decades, altering their entire life. $200 a month for 20 years is a hell of a price to pay for “exploring.”

I can’t argue that college is expensive. We paid for two - and our kids left with 0 college debt. But lots of people would rather have a Lexus than an educated child. I believe that kids should go to the best school they can get into, so long as it clicks with them. Now if that school is one of those which will accept you two weeks before the term starts so long as the check doesn’t bounce, I agree that maybe no college is a better option. But good private schools have some real advantages in terms of course accessibility and access to professors.
It all boils down to whether you want to bet on the downside (the kid may goof off, so why waste the money) or the upside (the kid may find something wonderful, a life changing experience.) We chose to bet on the upside, and we won 2 out of 2.

Looking at my life, I see lots of choices that seemed right six months or a year after I made them, but don’t seem so good at age 40.

A student who wishes they had gone to a better (and more expensive) school will always have that option. It will be different from going there at 18, yes, but you can still learn and explore at 25 or 30 (or 80). The kid who goes to an expensive school and graduates with $50k in debt and a worthless BA is fucked.

Maybe, but unlikely. At age 30 you probably have responsibilities and a family to worry about, which will be tough to stop supporting for a degree. People who worked for me got degrees of various sorts at night, tuition paid by Bell Labs, and I admired them, because it was a lot harder for them to find the time than it was for me, going to school full time. 90% of the education my youngest got in college was out of the classroom, but it was stuff she’d be unlikely to get if she wasn’t in college.
But I suppose parents who put down eggheads and reading and libraries are going to raise goofballs. No problem here - less competition for my kids.

[Voyager]

@msmith537

That teacher is an idiot.

We knew that, and I am happy to say our kid knew that also. The town we came from in NJ was in the middle of a bunch of research centers, and there were on the average of two or three PhDs per block. if any of the teachers there said that he’d be ridden out of town on a rail. Very different environment here.

It has nothing to do with “saving time” and it isn’t “lazy or stupid”. It has to do with valuing candidates who have demonstrated achievement over those who have not.

Are college standards being lowered? Employers know the difference between a good school and a mediocre one. They also know the difference between hard working, motivated, ambitious students and idiots living off their parents dime so they could have a 4 year party.

Any idiot can go to can go to college. But every idiot cannot graduate with a relevant degree from a highly respected institution.

Hear, hear. As someone who has hired people for several different companies I can testify that you are absolutely correct. I benefited from this myself, as did my older daughter. Not to mention that networking opportunities in the Harvard or MIT Alumni clubs are going to be a lot more useful than those from the Podunk U. club.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Susanann

Sorry, but I lived thru the 1940’s, 1950’s, and the 1960’s. Back when America actually made things, good quality things, back when anything stamped: “Made in USA” meant quality and when everyone in the world wanted it.

Back then we had 100 million less immigrants, no trade with communist china at all, no NAFTA, yet, anyone who wanted to work could get good paying jobs, and anyone with a college degree had their pick of dozens of places who wanted them.

YOu can talk “theory” all you want, but I know what America was like when we had a smaller population and back when we had “fair” trade instead of “free” trade, when we had trade tariffs to protect our jobs and our factories, and when virtually anyone could “max out” on their social security taxes way before the end of the year.

BTW, we also had very little debt, less traffic, no Soylent Green, and there was no such thing as road rage in America back in the good the old days.

The saddest part, is that unemployment in America is a choice. The people of America today are “choosing” to be more overpopulated/overcrowded via record immigration, and they are “choosing” to move all of our jobs and all of our factories to china, mexico, canada, etc. Overcrowding and the unemployment that goes with it, is a deliberate and intentional choice that today’s voters are making.

Q: IF you want too many taxes? too many people? too much pollution? too much government intrusion and too much government control? and not enough jobs?..**then keep doing what you are doing!!!
**
Bottom line: I am certain that my world of the 1940’s up thru the 1960’s was MUCH!!! much better, much more prosperous, more secure, much safer, and less crowded, than yours is going to be over the next 30 or 40 years!!!

Quite apart from the fact that you think correlation equals causation, or that your personal recollections of things which happened (or, more accurately, didn’t happen) 60 years ago are suspect, all I can say is… Soylent Green?

[msmith537]

@Susanann

You are absolutely right. Moreover, most people who learn a trade, as opposed to most college graduates, actually know how to “do” something or how to “make” something.

So what? What good is knowing how to build a roof if the housing market is in the crapper?

And what is the value of knowing how to “do something” compared to having the creativity, innovation, and leadership to come up with stuff to do or make? Would you rather be a builder or an architect?

The issue isn’t a shortage of people who know how to “do something” or “make shit”. We can make all the crap we ever need. The question is whether a modern economy can exist as a mostly “service economy”. Regardless if they are low-end services like Walmart greeter or other McJobs or high end professional services like lawyers, bankers and consultants.

[Broomstick]

@msmith537

So what? What good is knowing how to build a roof if the housing market is in the crapper?

There are always roofs that are already built that need repairing.

And what is the value of knowing how to “do something” compared to having the creativity, innovation, and leadership to come up with stuff to do or make? Would you rather be a builder or an architect?

Either one would make me happy. Why do you see being a builder as being less than an architect?

[Voyager]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Quite apart from the fact that you think correlation equals causation, or that your personal recollections of things which happened (or, more accurately, didn’t happen) 60 years ago are suspect, all I can say is… Soylent Green?

Hey, if we could just convince much of the rest of the world to blow themselves up again, we’d be in excellent shape!

[furt]

@Voyager

@furt

Yes, they emphatically are. A third of all college students in America require remedial work before they can take college-level classes. Probably another third would need them if what passes for “college-level classes” was not itself a joke at so many schools. 70-90% of those who do remedial work do not graduate, and IME it’s not because they are that much less hardworking.

I meant in this thread, not in real life.

In both. That’s one of the problems we’re discussing: kids who get told that everyone should go to college, and then do, despite not really being able to do college-level work. And colleges taking them, in part because there’s money in it.

But the solution is to improve pre-college education. We need a literate population, whether or not they go to college.

Sure. I want a pony, too.

There are plenty of smart, hard working kids who don’t have career goals yet. They just may not have found anything they really love yet.

Sure; and if they are lucky enough to have parents who can/will foot the bill, that’s fine. Nowadays, though that’s unusual. Most students aren’t so lucky to have you as a parent. (I’m being quite sincere)

Now if that school is one of those which will accept you two weeks before the term starts so long as the check doesn’t bounce, I agree that maybe no college is a better option.

You’ve just described roughly half of the undergraduate institutions in America.

In thinking of what “college” is, keep in mind that way, way, WAY more kids are enrolled in for-profit career colleges than in the Ivy League. And that most every state has at least one state school that is open enrollment or nearly so. If you have a pulse and a GED, Crappy State U will be happy to help you borrow ten grand a year.

Maybe, but unlikely. At age 30 you probably have responsibilities and a family to worry about, which will be tough to stop supporting for a degree. People who worked for me got degrees of various sorts at night, tuition paid by Bell Labs, and I admired them, because it was a lot harder for them to find the time than it was for me, going to school full time. 90% of the education my youngest got in college was out of the classroom, but it was stuff she’d be unlikely to get if she wasn’t in college.

In 2010, 27 is about average age for first childbirth among women; first time fathers are a bit higher. Both are higher if we’re talking middle-class. So whether they have a family or not, is about even money. But in any event, 40% of undergrads today are over 25; so it’s not uncommon.

I have no problem with smart kids who aren’t incurring debt futzing around at State U before getting serious. I don’t think anyone does.

The problem is that “everyone should go to college” rhetoric (and loan policy) is fueling a lot of malinvestment, both of taxpayer funds and more sadly, of people’s lives. Everybody should have the opportunity … but not everyone should. How we reconcile those two is tricky indeed.

[alice_in_wonderland]

[quote=“msmith537, post:127, topic:554801”]

@Susanann

You are absolutely right. Moreover, most people who learn a trade, as opposed to most college graduates, actually know how to “do” something or how to “make” something.

So what? What good is knowing how to build a roof if the housing market is in the crapper?[\quote]

About the same as having a Liberal Arts degree, $50k in student loan debt and a $12/hour job at Walmart -not much.

And what is the value of knowing how to “do something” compared to having the creativity, innovation, and leadership to come up with stuff to do or make? Would you rather be a builder or an architect?[\quote]

I would rather do neither as I don’t suspect I would be very good at either. I also don’t think one is better than the other. My aforementioned uncle the stonemason, is a true artist in what he does no posh degree required.

The issue isn’t a shortage of people who know how to “do something” or “make shit”. We can make all the crap we ever need. The question is whether a modern economy can exist as a mostly “service economy”. Regardless if they are low-end services like Walmart greeter or other McJobs or high end professional services like lawyers, bankers and consultants.

[msmith537]

@Broomstick

@msmith537

So what? What good is knowing how to build a roof if the housing market is in the crapper?

There are always roofs that are already built that need repairing.

Not if there are a million roofers in your town.

@Broomstick

And what is the value of knowing how to “do something” compared to having the creativity, innovation, and leadership to come up with stuff to do or make? Would you rather be a builder or an architect?

Either one would make me happy. Why do you see being a builder as being less than an architect?

Because architecture requires tallent, creativity and intellect while a builder just needs a strong back. I’m speaking more in general terms. I’m not interested in a pedantic discussion of the job descriptions for either profession.

The point is while there is a need for people to build things and “do stuff”, the true benefits to society comes from the people who create and innovate. The hope is that by sending people to college, they will learn the tools to come up with better ideas for better products and services, not just crank existing ones out in a factory somewhere.

[Susanann]

@msmith537

The question is whether a modern economy can exist as a mostly “service economy”. .

“Service economy” = “third world country”

.

[Broomstick]

@msmith537

@Broomstick

Either one would make me happy. Why do you see being a builder as being less than an architect?

Because architecture requires tallent, creativity and intellect while a builder just needs a strong back. I’m speaking more in general terms. I’m not interested in a pedantic discussion of the job descriptions for either profession.

The point is while there is a need for people to build things and “do stuff”, the true benefits to society comes from the people who create and innovate. The hope is that by sending people to college, they will learn the tools to come up with better ideas for better products and services, not just crank existing ones out in a factory somewhere.

It doesn’t do any good to design a new, wonderful building if there aren’t people with the actual skills to BUILD it. Architects need builders, builders need architects. You can’t have everyone go to school to be just one or just the other, you really do need both.

If someone wants to be a builder sending them to architect school is a waste of time and money. Yes, we need creative, innovative people but not everyone has to be one of those people. For too long we have sold kids on the illusion that the only careers worth pursuing are those requiring a master’s or a Ph.D. gained after years of post-high school study.

If every kid has the opportunity to go to college they should have an equal opportunity to go to trade school or pursue some other form of higher education as well. Why? Because some people really would be happiest being auto mechanics or bricklayers rather than a doctor or lawyer, and we need auto mechanics and bricklayers just as we need doctors (and arguably more than we need lawyers).

[Omar_Little]

It’s a wonder, how society gets people into the right positions (skilled, trade, creative design, builder, architect, etc.) without some government master plan. I’m sure that there is currently some shortages or overages in these various groups. Maybe the current administration could work on getting the right people in the right positions.

[guizot]

@Susanann

“Service economy” = “third world country”

And perhaps more to the point, “service economy” = “fungible labor”.

[Le_Jacquelope]

@Susanann

@Le_Jacquelope

At some point we are going to escalate to such a ridiculously point that you’re going to see Wal Mart requiring PhD’s for greeters.

This is the symptom of a greater problem: the employer’s market effect which will persist forever. It is impossible to stop an employer’s market without a huge drop in population: and the Baby Boomers growing old and dying do not represent enough of a drop to cover that. The other alternative, a huge job boom? You’ll never see that happen again in your or your kids’ lifetime. You can count on that.

1. Bringing back the tariffs (which we had from 1776 up to the 1970’s) would bring back all those jobs and all those factories, and would bring about a huge job boom such as we previously experienced for 2 centuries over the 1800’s and most of the 1900’s.

I’m with ya on that. It works for China, it would and did work for us.

2. Secondly, a huge drop in population of the U.S.A. could easily be had simply by immediately ending “all” immigration and also by deporting all illegals.

Ending all immigration? Man, that’s an arrogant concept. Conceived by the descendants of people who immigrated here and displaced the original peoples from this land by means of genocide, ethnic cleansing and rape. No offense but the incongruity of such an idea in the face of history just up and defied my efforts NOT to post it out of fear of alienating someone…

[Susanann]

[quote=“Le_Jacquelope, post:137, topic:554801”]

@Susanann

2. Secondly, a huge drop in population of the U.S.A. could easily be had simply by immediately ending “all” immigration and also by deporting all illegals.

Ending all immigration? Man, that’s an arrogant concept. Conceived by the descendants of people who immigrated here and displaced the original peoples from this land by means of genocide, ethnic cleansing and rape. No offense but the incongruity of such an idea in the face of history just up and defied my efforts NOT to post it out of fear of alienating someone…

Immigration is simply a government tool that a country uses when it has too few people, too few job seekers, and NEEDS to bring much more people into its country.

Just answer the simple question: **“Do we need lots more people and lots more job seekers to come into the United States”? **

IF not, then we dont need any more immigration.

Who is going to pay for all the tens of millions, hundreds of millions more immigrants coming into this country? Who is going to give them all jobs?

2 million additional new immigrants will come into the United States this in 2010, and another 2 million in 2011, etc. who today has 4 million unfilled job openings?

[Voyager]

[quote=“Susanann, post:138, topic:554801”]

@Le_Jacquelope

Immigration is simply a government tool that a country uses when it has too few people, too few job seekers, and NEEDS to bring much more people into its country.

Just answer the simple question: **“Do we need lots more people and lots more job seekers to come into the United States”? **

IF not, then we dont need any more immigration.

Who is going to pay for all the tens of millions, hundreds of millions more immigrants coming into this country? Who is going to give them all jobs?

2 million additional new immigrants will come into the United States this in 2010, and another 2 million in 2011, etc. who today has 4 million unfilled job openings?

Are you aware that Andy Grove, one of the founders of Intel, is an immigrant? That not all immigrants are of the unwashed masses trying to steal our jobs? That I know of several who have founded companies here giving jobs to lots and lots of people. Exclude them, or make them feel unwelcome, and they will open up companies at home and we will suffer a net job loss.

[Susanann]

[quote=“Voyager, post:139, topic:554801”]

Originally Posted bySusanann
Immigration is simply a government tool that a country uses when it has too few people, too few job seekers, and NEEDS to bring much more people into its country.

Just answer the simple question: **“Do we need lots more people and lots more job seekers to come into the United States”?**IF not, then we dont need any more immigration.

Who is going to pay for all the tens of millions, hundreds of millions more immigrants coming into this country? Who is going to give them all jobs?
2 million additional new immigrants will come into the United States this in 2010, and another 2 million in 2011, etc. who today has 4 million unfilled job openings?

@Voyager

Are you aware that Andy Grove, one of the founders of Intel, is an immigrant? That not all immigrants are of the unwashed masses trying to steal our jobs? That I know of several who have founded companies here giving jobs to lots and lots of people. Exclude them, or make them feel unwelcome, and they will open up companies at home and we will suffer a net job loss.

Of course, you failed to answer the question of: " where are the extra 4 million unfilled jobs that 4 million immigrants this year and next year are going to need?..RIGHT NOW???

Obviously, you dont have any jobs for all the millions of immigrants coming here, and you also dont have any money to pay(food, foodstamps, housing, clothing,schooling,healthcare,etc) for 4 million immigrants either.

OK, fine!

It is no skin off my nose, I dont care if you and everyone else want to live in overpopulated poverty for the next 30, 40, 50, 100+ years. I am old enough to check out anyways, and I dont want to be in your overpopulated unemployed country much longer.

I dont want your Soylent Green!

I lived back when we had 100 million less people, and back when we had so many jobs that it was a pain for so many potential employers to keep calling us all the time for us to quit and go to work for them. Yes. It really happened, all the time, week after week, year after year, other companies, and headhunters were always trying to hire people away from their current jobs by offering them more money, more benefits, etc. We just had too many job openings but not enough people.

I am merely pointing out that living in the future in overpopulated poverty with high unemployment and high taxes is a: **“choice” **, and that there is a VERY easy alternative to return to the prosperity that we used to have.

It is sooooooooooooo simple to get back to high paying full employment in the USA.