Snobbery and Stimulus
5/7/12 07:07This subject is only incidentally related to stimulus and recovery, but it is still related. I like to make connections between different fields of thought. In adolescent psychology, we learn about the history of education, since public education is the defining epoch of development in Western youth psychology. The labor rights movement prevented people from working children to the bone, and forced employers to hire men to do men's work, and pay them a man's wage. This resulted in a bunch of kids without jobs, so we had to do something with them. This "thing" became junior and/or senior high school. Essentially, higher-grade primary education was a warehousing project designed to keep kids in check while waiting to enter the working economy.
Up until then, "high school" or its equivalent was something privileged kids got to attend. Or perhaps one gifted child in your family would stay in education, while the other children went to work. With the uniform enrollment of compulsory education, however, privilege became democratized, in a sense. We learned to look down on working folk in favor of educated folk. Staying in school became the aspiration and the ideal. This isn't wrong-headed per se, but it is a bit... remiss in its remembrance of why we "stayed in school". We didn't stay in school to become better people, or to enhance critical thinking, or to have a "vibrant democracy" (indeed, a "vibrant democracy" needs education at the baccaleureate level like a dogs needs to learn trigonometry to be a good dog.) We stayed in school because people were using child labor against adults and destroying society in the process. Child labor destroyed the family unit, undermined parental authority, and blurred the distinction between "fathers" and "bosses".
Education is important to a democracy, but we shouldn't then just automatically accept the idea that college education is important to a democracy. Remember, when everyone made those glittery quotes about democracy and education, they were making it from a standpoint of an 8th grade (or its equivalent) minimum. That is, people need to be literate, they didn't need to be college grads. We take literacy for granted, but literacy is 90 percent of what is meant by sustaining a democracy.
Whereas child labor did terrible things to people, and to families, institutionalized schooling has its own side effects. Rather than return children to their families, we handed them over to teachers and administrators, which has its own disagreeable bourgeois side-effects; namely the idea that working in an office is the penultimate end of every man, woman and child, and anything less means you're a lesser breed. (I speak of the bourgeois in cultural terms, not economic.)
So now it is the case that we find ourselves ridden with student debt and calls for government subsidy and support to help more people go to college. But going to college isn't a productive thing. We're essentially paying people not to work, or rather borrowing against the future so we don't have to work now. In any case, you're taking on more debt to reduce the productive output/capacity of a population. When you do that, you're not making up ground, you're just losing it.
We must not be deceived by the patronizing "respect" shown to the working class by bourgeois liberals and their ilk, either. Working for a living, rather laboring for a living is "respectable" in the sense that "other people do it and god bless them." Much like welfare, elements of the bourgeois "support" welfare if only because "Oh we'll never need it ourselves." It's something "other people" have to worry about, but you'll never take it, because, well, because you're better than that.
In much the same way, people "support" trades the way they support inter-racial marriage. It's fine, in theory, as long as their kids don't get involved with it. Oh we all respect a carpenter sure, but it's not like we want our kids to be carpenters. We spent all that time and money saving up for college! The only solution to this is once again forced enrollment. High school should end at the age of 16, and we should all be forced into a trade for two-years training time. If you want to go to college fine, but we ain't paying for it. This isn't tyrannical, or at least it isn't any more tyrannical than what we already have: forcing every child into 4 years of college prep for no particular reason other than it sounds good. In reality, we're prepping every child for a lifetime of mortgaged education expenses. Indeed, education debt cannot be bankrupted away. The mortgage is not on a piece of property, it is on your life, your soul, your person.
How will this help the economy? Well, for once it will boost wage receipts and reduce debt load. This helps us spend more money rather than take on more debt. It helps remain freer from the clutches of banks, and maintain some semblance of autonomy from the financial elite (however fleeting). Education is the next bubble, people have already said. Financing college is the new real estate, and we know how that works out.
Up until then, "high school" or its equivalent was something privileged kids got to attend. Or perhaps one gifted child in your family would stay in education, while the other children went to work. With the uniform enrollment of compulsory education, however, privilege became democratized, in a sense. We learned to look down on working folk in favor of educated folk. Staying in school became the aspiration and the ideal. This isn't wrong-headed per se, but it is a bit... remiss in its remembrance of why we "stayed in school". We didn't stay in school to become better people, or to enhance critical thinking, or to have a "vibrant democracy" (indeed, a "vibrant democracy" needs education at the baccaleureate level like a dogs needs to learn trigonometry to be a good dog.) We stayed in school because people were using child labor against adults and destroying society in the process. Child labor destroyed the family unit, undermined parental authority, and blurred the distinction between "fathers" and "bosses".
Education is important to a democracy, but we shouldn't then just automatically accept the idea that college education is important to a democracy. Remember, when everyone made those glittery quotes about democracy and education, they were making it from a standpoint of an 8th grade (or its equivalent) minimum. That is, people need to be literate, they didn't need to be college grads. We take literacy for granted, but literacy is 90 percent of what is meant by sustaining a democracy.
Whereas child labor did terrible things to people, and to families, institutionalized schooling has its own side effects. Rather than return children to their families, we handed them over to teachers and administrators, which has its own disagreeable bourgeois side-effects; namely the idea that working in an office is the penultimate end of every man, woman and child, and anything less means you're a lesser breed. (I speak of the bourgeois in cultural terms, not economic.)
So now it is the case that we find ourselves ridden with student debt and calls for government subsidy and support to help more people go to college. But going to college isn't a productive thing. We're essentially paying people not to work, or rather borrowing against the future so we don't have to work now. In any case, you're taking on more debt to reduce the productive output/capacity of a population. When you do that, you're not making up ground, you're just losing it.
We must not be deceived by the patronizing "respect" shown to the working class by bourgeois liberals and their ilk, either. Working for a living, rather laboring for a living is "respectable" in the sense that "other people do it and god bless them." Much like welfare, elements of the bourgeois "support" welfare if only because "Oh we'll never need it ourselves." It's something "other people" have to worry about, but you'll never take it, because, well, because you're better than that.
In much the same way, people "support" trades the way they support inter-racial marriage. It's fine, in theory, as long as their kids don't get involved with it. Oh we all respect a carpenter sure, but it's not like we want our kids to be carpenters. We spent all that time and money saving up for college! The only solution to this is once again forced enrollment. High school should end at the age of 16, and we should all be forced into a trade for two-years training time. If you want to go to college fine, but we ain't paying for it. This isn't tyrannical, or at least it isn't any more tyrannical than what we already have: forcing every child into 4 years of college prep for no particular reason other than it sounds good. In reality, we're prepping every child for a lifetime of mortgaged education expenses. Indeed, education debt cannot be bankrupted away. The mortgage is not on a piece of property, it is on your life, your soul, your person.
How will this help the economy? Well, for once it will boost wage receipts and reduce debt load. This helps us spend more money rather than take on more debt. It helps remain freer from the clutches of banks, and maintain some semblance of autonomy from the financial elite (however fleeting). Education is the next bubble, people have already said. Financing college is the new real estate, and we know how that works out.
(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 13:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 13:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 14:20 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 13:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 16:43 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 13:58 (UTC)We don't do that though. We vote for the leaders who agree with what our particular echo chamber tells our ignorant asses we want.
(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 14:00 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 14:02 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 14:19 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 15:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 16:41 (UTC)What I find disconcerting is the notion that everyone deserves an ivory tower education. If everyone was indoctrinated into the fabrication of lies, there would be nobody left to manage the Internet infrastructure.
(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 17:03 (UTC)College isn't for everyone.
(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 18:52 (UTC)In view of this it is irrelevant whether we think everyone should go to college or not- if you will not go to college and obtain specialized knowledge, you will be out of work. This is a simple reality of it. Today most jobs in the US are either in service, or in protected industry, which survives because of government regulation. But even services become more and more outsourced. Technology will make most of these jobs obsolete within 50 years, maybe less. Then you will need college degree for entry level position.
Now as to what you are suggesting - sorry to disappoint, but having more people in the labor force will not "boost wage receipts". On the contrary, you will get more people competing for jobs, higher unemployment, and lower wages. As for the education debt - there is a very simple solution which is practiced in most European countries already - free college education. Money spent on education is investment into the future and therefore in everyone's interest. Reducing education will not solve the problem, it will make it more severe.
(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 18:59 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 19:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/7/12 13:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 20:03 (UTC)I agree with almost all comments to this post!
*stars align, planets smack into each other, world ends in 2012 as predicted*
To actually add to the conversation here, as an unschooling advocate I'm also supportive of UnCollege (http://www.uncollege.org/) as a social movement.
(no subject)
Date: 5/7/12 20:26 (UTC)I agree that college can be overemphasized and that it simply isn't for everyone, but I don't think that undervaluing a good education is a good idea, either. Saying college is completely unnecessary for most people is.. well, false. The fact is, college teaches things that high school can't (because high school curriculum is largely decided by conservative, old, white men in Texas who dictate what the textbooks teach, up to and including rewriting history to erase important figures and events) or won't (because they will lose funding or be shut down if they teach, say, how birth control works). Basic college courses like history, writing composition, basic sociology, gender studies, and in an increasing number of schools, diversity studies, and that sort of thing enrich a person's life as well as adding basic knowledge which everyone should know. Further, higher education reduces crime and poverty levels (this has actually been proven -- the higher education level a person reaches, the less likely they are to commit crime, especially violent or property crimes).
I feel that the answer doesn't lie one way or the other. I think we should eliminate the rule that you can't get rid of student loan debt via bankruptcy. I think we should further subsidize and lower the cost of college for people who want to attend. I think we should present trade schools and colleges as equally viable options -- and they should actually be equally viable options.
(no subject)
Date: 6/7/12 13:34 (UTC)Trades largely consist of general theoretical practices which transfer from place to place. When you're working a blue-collar life, learning how to mill metals is a pretty universal need. Or learning how to manipulate materials, or developing the feel and memory for dextrous work. The concepts behind maintenance, or troubleshooting, or fabrication are highly generalizable.
The US used to be full of manual labor opportunities, but that simply isn't true anymore -- in this country, anything that CAN be outsourced, will be, because the profit margin of a corporation is considered more important than the lives and livelihood of the American people.
Depends on how you look at it. We have different kinds of manual labor. We have lots of immigrant labor, for example. Logistics, transportation, etc. etc.
I think we should further subsidize and lower the cost of college for people who want to attend. I think we should present trade schools and colleges as equally viable options -- and they should actually be equally viable options.
Sure. Problem is, there is no guarantee that CLA majors are going to have the jobs they train for either. In fact, that's the whole problem we're facing this very moment.
(no subject)
Date: 6/7/12 13:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/7/12 04:51 (UTC)That's fundamentally incorrect.
(no subject)
Date: 6/7/12 06:14 (UTC)Still, well done.
(no subject)
Date: 6/7/12 12:54 (UTC)I believe the necessity of a college degree was largely a cultural fad that already is fading in the US. Many people go to trade schools to learn specific skills. Some of these used to be taught in union training programs, but most are new skills for the 21st century. Looking at the economics of the situation this makes perfect sense. The risk of course is that in the future a particular skill may not be in demand so the individual has to be prepared for retraining, whereas the college grad normally has a wider skill set and can recover faster.
That being said, the population of highly educated people needs to be kept at a certain level. IMO college should be highly subsidized like public school, but ONLY for those students who can pass objective standards; everyone else can pay. How we determine objective standards is the subject of another debate, but I believe it is possible to set this up and improve it over time.
(no subject)
Date: 6/7/12 13:26 (UTC)(no subject)
From: