Maybe it’s time for companies to start valuing work ethic and attitude over degrees
-
-
-
Observing whether the potential employee successfully navigated the process of getting a degree is a very cost-effective (to employers) test of both of those as well. It is of course very expensive to the student, both in money and time, but employers don’t bear that cost.
-
Good point Scott
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Trade jobs are absolutely tolerable & pay more than half of the $100k degrees.
-
Trade jobs are low-status and offer few exit options.
-
A welder makes $20 to $50 an hour. A good CNC machinist the same. A single person can retire by 40 if they've acquired real estate and move to Thailand.
-
That takes care of the exit issue, but low status remains an obstacle.
-
Trades jobs shouldn’t be low status. It takes as much precision to run a CNC machine as many other post-college jobs. Problem is career path/promotion pot3ntial, which is why those with liberal arts degrees tend to make more by mid career and lifetime.
-
Low status? Compared to whom?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Well, IQ tests are banned, so employers need a proxy test. This one costs $100k and 3-4 years to take, but in doing so it tests socioeconomic status too. Its a great bargain for employers.
-
IQ tests don't measure conscientiousness.
-
Good point. You could assess that for a lot less than 100k, but there are coordination problems in starting something like that.
-
Aren't internship programs basically conscientiousness interviews?
-
And compatibility measures.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
will that be on the exam?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'll depart from a long habit of disagreeing with you to say you're right on this. I think academics like
@Noahpinion liked college too much to imagine being forced into it. Of course, I imagine many libertarians have coloured views on education for the opposite reason... -
That said, I do genuinely think that it's better for the government to encourage education through a crappy system than not to encourage education at all. Democracy cannot work without an informed populace, and it's worth subsidizing even if 90% of the money is wasted.
-
When is the last time we had an informed populace? Do you think spending on education is positively or negatively correlated with "informed populace?"
-
"Informed" is not a binary metric, and yes, education on average has gone up with investment. You're probably thinking of societal changes such as contempt for elites and 'everyone is entitled to their opinion', but that's an unrelated problem.
-
If it isn't binary then what did you mean when you said "democracy cannot work without an informed populace?" I'm using your framework not mine. And "education is going up" is not the same as people being more informed about their political decisions. This has been studied.
-
There was a time in history where most of the information came from the news and the news had a vested interest in checking the power of government. In that same time we were still making laws that were for the laymen to read. That time is the time of the informed populace.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.