Random Politics & Religion #00

The key is finding the right balance as to not diminish the value of current degrees, or at least compensate them somehow.

and you don't know what you're getting yourself into. Which I think is evident by the amount of major changes you see among year 1-3 university students.

Yeah, I added that to my post as you were typing that. I have had this problem too, honestly.

I have to agree on the trade school part. If we ever have to front the costs for some form of "free" college education, I'd much rather see it go to degrees that provide easy entry into the work force instead of watching the costs pave the way for Johnny to play the tuba for four years.

College isn't solely about learning things related to your degree. It's more about transitioning from that immature post-HS life in an environment dedicated to learning and expanding one's horizons - if you so choose. A place where you can travel abroad, meet new people, learn new things or just loaf about and do ***. It's the sample platter that you don't even know is a sample platter.

-Elective classes
-Internships
-Clubs
-Study Abroad

What separates the college graduate from the typical HS grad is the exposure to things outside your comfort zone, things that are supposed to influence the rest of your life. Be it moving out of your small town to mingle with people outside of your circles to being skewered in a class by a professor that upends your beliefs or simply learning to balance work/life in a place surrounded by others in similar situations.

People who go full-time straight out of HS often have neither the time nor incentive to push themselves in such directions. Before you know it, you've got big responsibilities and little time to do much else.

To distill it all down to money is to miss the purpose of what college is supposed to be about, creating more well-rounded person. And I do agree that college isn't for everyone but really that's a decision that a person has to make similar to going the military route.

Hey, it's the attack the arts argument. Never seen this one before, nope. Because music isn't a skill, valuable or in any way applicable to a career. *rolls eyes*

I was just going to let it go. You can't win this one on the internet. Or IRL.

Or while you're alive, really.

The only way to get appreciated as an artist is to be dead.

Fact.

The value of current degrees is already near zero for many. Sure, some fields require degrees and certification, like medical or law, but most only favor them. Even moreso in trades, where apprenticeships are viewed as superior because trades just aren't able to be taught well in a classroom setting. Of the jobs I've had experience with that required a degree, they rarely even required it be in the same field or related field, they just required mid-level managers to have a bachelor's in anything.

There are tons of well respected living artists...

Yeah that's true in regards to many degrees losing most of their value quickly.

I see it as part of the problem, and less as how it works though.

Why should taxpayers fund Johnny playing the tuba? If he wants to, awesome. But government spending is supposed to be about improving society, whether that's making higher-paying careers more available, taking care of the old/infirm/disabled, public health initiatives to reduce later medical costs/disease spread, road maintenance, rocket launchers for police, etc.

No one's saying Johnny can't play the tuba, or that he shouldn't. They're saying they don't want to foot the bill for that, because four year degree programs don't provide as much bang for the taxpayer buck as more concrete training.

Why should taxpayers fund Johnny playing the tuba? If he wants to, awesome. But government spending is supposed to be about improving society, whether that's making higher-paying careers more available, taking care of the old/infirm/disabled, public health initiatives to reduce later medical costs/disease spread, road maintenance, rocket launchers for police, etc.

No one's saying Johnny can't play the tuba, or that he shouldn't. They're saying they don't want to foot the bill for that, because four year degree programs don't provide as much bang for the taxpayer buck as more concrete training.

Why should taxpayers fund Johnny playing the tuba?

Short answer is they shouldn't any more than they should fund Sally and her women's studies or Larry and his business degree. Public funding should be reserved for trades and general education. Even liberal arts degrees require Math, English, Social Sciences, etc.

Also tuba is a terrible choice and Johnny will be virgin forever.

Why should taxpayers fund Johnny playing the tuba? If he wants to, awesome. But government spending is supposed to be about improving society, whether that's making higher-paying careers more available, taking care of the old/infirm/disabled, public health initiatives to reduce later medical costs/disease spread, road maintenance, rocket launchers for police, etc.

No one's saying Johnny can't play the tuba, or that he shouldn't. They're saying they don't want to foot the bill for that, because four year degree programs don't provide as much bang for the taxpayer buck as more concrete training.

look at all the good that does for the countless peeps out there with law, accounting, engineering and other 'instant jerbs!' degrees.

There are tons of well respected living artists...

Also tuba is a terrible choice and Johnny will be virgin forever.

Further, pushing people into 'winning' degrees (you must do business!) does little more than create a bubble that will pop resulting in the degree / skills being worth ***

Amusing. But you have to remember that colleges have marching bands full of students as beered up and horned up (pun intended) as the rest of the college. More so in some cases.

And low brass is only one rung below the drummers in terms of raw sexual energy.

Taxpayers are already funding endless welfare and more affordable housing schemes than you could shake a stick as corporate welfare and community college comes off as a 'bad investment'?

Further, pushing people into 'winning' degrees (you must do business!) does little more than create a bubble that will pop resulting in the degree / skills being worth ***. Spread people out, provide a baseline by which people can at least gain 2 years of college experience (the new HS diploma) and send them to the races.

The degree in communication science in a town in Italy last year created a class that was called "The science of selfies". Now if I ever had to say while leaving my house "I have to go take an exam in science of selfies", I probably wouldn't even want to come back home ever.