Stupid ass private education bullshit
I guess you’re talking about the US.
Well, everything costs money there: education, health, safety… It’s capitalist dystopia.
It doesn’t. It costs money to skip a lot of the effort and have someone guide you through a curriculum and give you direct guidance and feedback on how to get that knowledge.
I have an Engineering degree, everything I learned there could absolutely be learned by someone curious poking around on the internet for videos, papers, and course slides that you’ll probably need to read alongside a wiki page. They tend to come up pretty quickly once you’re familiar enough with a field to start investigating one level deeper from a basic high school education.
It doesn’t. It costs money to get the diploma that’s proof of your smarts. The Scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz didn’t actually get a brain, he got a diploma.
My son is a committed cinephile, and has systematically watched nearly every movie ever made, in any country, in any era ( it seems). He’s an expert, by anyone’s estimation. He just started back to college for a degree in Film Studies, because while he has the knowledge, in order to get a job teaching film, or working in an archive, etc., he needs the degree.
So you aren’t buying the knowledge, any person who makes a serious commitment can get the knowledge, you are paying for an organization ( a school) to endorse your knowledge. Kind of a Certificate of Authenticity for your intelligence.
Because knowledge is power.
But also it depends. Learn on the job is a thing too in some industries, and in some people can do quite well for themselves here.
It also costs money to make money, if you have a lot of it you can make it work for you and make even more than someone who doesn’t have it. This is why kids of rich ass parents get it so easy.
an important rule of capital is that in order to get it, you must have it
I’d argue it doesn’t, and moreover you cannot buy intelligence.
Sure, you can buy some books with some stuff in it and memorize that stuff, or pay for a class on some stuff and test well, but critical thinking skills seem to either innately exist, or not (depending on the individual in question), within us.
I’ve met people with pieces of paper that proclaim them to be certified smart that are dumb as rocks but were simply able to move through the system well enough to fool people, and people who have no such paper who are more intelligent than the former could ever hope to be. Shit happens.
Getting smarter doesn’t really cost much. Public libraries exist, go read books and get smarter.
University degrees though… Yeah, those are fucked up.
Or you could emigrate to the EU, where higher education is free.
Or you could emigrate to the EU, where higher education is free.
You’re probably not getting into the EU easily without higher education, and they don’t educate non-EU citizens for free. Even if you get EU citizenship you will still probably have to pay until you’ve been resident for X number of years.
Because capitalism
Cause people will pay it
The same reason it costs money for food and water. God created both before man. And yet here we are, paying for things we need to survive. Because capitalism is just super.
You don’t need to pay for either. Collect and treat your own water from a stream. Go hunting or foraging.
At the end of the day you are paying for the convenience to not have to do that.
Let me just go farm on my apartment balcony or hunt in the local park. Not everyone has access to game lands and a yard.
Good lord, you expect everything to just be free? To expect you get basic needs at zero cost is a tad out of touch with reality. I get it, nothing is fair, but you are looking at this all wrong.
Nah. I’m just replying because it’s making you angry and it’s funny at this point.
Weird, I don’t feel angry, if anything you probably got an eye roll out of me lol
You were complaining about paying for things needed to survive. It’s nobodies problem but your own that you love in an apartment. The cost of that type of dwelling. Speaking of, you don’t need to live there either and pay for a mortgage or rent. You have the option to build your own shelter in the woods. But it’s pretty nice to not have to do that right?
Here in Sweden education is free, and the government provides a (small) monthly payout to students.
It’s one of the things I’m most grateful about living in Sweden. I wouldn’t be able to pursue higher education otherwise.
Social infrastructure FTW, a far more respectable way to run the ship. I’ll keep with the boat analogy to use another idiom; “a rising tide lifts all boats” society shows wisdom in encouraging the kinds of conditions where their citizens can succeed without significant barriers, and improve the whole of it afterward (instead of the banking institutions which extend predatory high-interest loans) with their success. Hats off to Sweden.
Here in Sweden education is free
Free at point of service. But it’s 7% of Swedish GDP, with all of that coming from public coffers.
Compare it to the US, which spends only 5.5% of GDP on education, with the majority on the heavily privatized university level.
The math gets worse when you look at student/teacher ratios, administration overhead, building construction, and spending on extracurriculars like sports.
Americans spend less overall than their swedish counterparts, but far more on amenities that have nothing to do with the actual mechanics of education.
According to my American economics education, this proves the American system is actually more efficient. Swedes would do better to adopt our model, if they want to be A#1 Liberty Whiskey Sexy, like we are.
That link doesn’t work because you can’t add a %27 in a title.
Works for me on both Jerboa and the web interface. Maybe it’s an issue with your client?
I’m using
Voyager(edit: Thunder. I can’t believe I missed that). For some reason, it adds a 25 between the % and the 27.Also using Thunder - same issue here.
25 is hex for % so it somehow url encodes it again
My jerboa fails
yes you can
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding%27 is an url encoded ’
Whatever browser can’t handle that has quite a serious compliance issue.
More efficient for whom? And how? Because this is kind of hard to agree with when the efficient solution is a small amount of people with huge amounts of debt and everyone else not getting an education even if they want it.
I mean, what’s the point of public coffers if they aren’t being spent on public good?
I’m pretty sure you’re missing some sarcasm
More efficient for whom?
That would be the people paying less tax…
You can’t just compare GDP spendings and call it efficiency without accounting for the output.
Does the USA educate the same fraction of their population as Sweden? Otherwise it’s comparing apples to pears.
Not that efficiency is the top priority in my book, but sure, it’s not an unimportant metric by any means.
edit: … am I being Poe’s lawed here?
Does the USA educate the same fraction of their population as Sweden?
I guess that depends on how you value “Business School” as an education model.
I believe New Zealand does this as well?
I got beat for refusing to work in a mall hanging clothing while the “school” took my pay for my education at sped ed. Sweden should think about running things here instead…
Removed by mod
You made negative claims about a vulnerable group of people.
People have been engaging you in good faith and you responded with sarcasm and trolling.
Let’s let things cool off a little.
Learning isn’t a guarantee of a higher income. It might help temporarily, but when all the poor are educated they will still be on the bottom of the economic pyramid, and possibly less complacent about their situation having been educated…
Yeah, it doesn’t solve social mobility, but it certainly doesn’t hurt!
Removed by mod
Above I provided some research into this debate. It didn’t have any information on people “obviously not educating themselves”. Would you be able to cite some research?
You are ignoring the systemic effects: a society were everybody is highly educated is a society were everybody can worked in higher value added areas hence the entire society is actually richer.
Even those who are poor in a highly educated society relatively to others in the same society are still better off compared to people in societies which do not invest in Education - even when that society focuses more on quality of life than wealth production, they live much better because of that society’s higher productive capabilities.
The biggest difference between the US and most of Europe when it comes to Education is that the former looks at it as a way for individuals to become more competitive in the job market versus other individuals (a perspective also displayed in your posts) whilst the latter sees Education as a strategic investment to raise the productivity of the entire country, often beyond the mere “money making” and into quality of life domains.
Sweden invests in Education because it allows the country to more and better host higher return Economic areas this pulling the country up, whilst in the US beyond a certain point it has to be individuals investing themselves in their own Education purely for their own personal good.
Education is a good thing, but in a society where everybody is well educated just having an education doesn’t get you the most desirable real estate…
I think Sweden has actually become more like America in that regard. Young people are not thinking about the country, they want to get rich quick, just like in America.
The culture in Sweden is also highly americanized, if thats a word for it… American tv, American social media, American attitudes.
Everyone realizes that going to work for a corporation as a salary slave is not the way to get rich. Its the same thing in the US with the gen z generation as we have here.
Sweden is like mini America but with enough socialism that companies cant do what they want, and people have access to laws to protect their jobs to a degree, as well as free healthcare, parental leaves and vacations.
Also public transport. But America is better for those super high salaries. They hardly exist here.
I’ve lived in 3 countries in Europe for long periods in the last 3 decades and at least in the last two - Britain and Portugal - also saw the “Americanization” of society.
This was especially glaring in Portugal as there I was returning from 2 decades abroad, which made more visible the changes to an American model that happened in the meanwhile, including in terms of how people’s behaviour has shifted more towards that way of thinking, very similarly to what you’re describing for Sweden.
Even the politics has shifted to American style sleaze talk and even lying - back in the day politicians would resign when caught lying, nowadays that’s just Monday morning.
Personally I find it even more shocking for Portugal since IMHO, Portugal was always culturally more backwards than Northern Europe (specifically in comparison with The Netherlands, were I also lived and hence can compare both countries from personal experience) and American ways are (also IMHO) even more regressive than Portugal in general (at least when it comes to interpersonal relations, where the American way glorifies sociopathic behaviours whilst traditionally the Portuguese way was a lot about taking in account the feelings of others, though also with a big chunk of “what will people think” that moderates acts of screwing up other people directly), though it’s a different kind of regressiveness, and the Americanization of Portugal coincides with what by most metrics (such as PP income, inequality, social mobility, quality of life, violent crime) is the country stopping it’s progress (that had been going one since Fascism was overthrown in 74) and now going back.
Again, comparing like to like with The Netherlands (which has gone down a route similar to what you describe for Sweden), I think how bad Americanization was for the various countries in Europe very much depends on how advanced they were in terms of both the wealth of their society and popularity of politicies to benefit the many as a group, hence countries like Portugal have so far suffered more than The Netherlands (and, it seems, Sweden) purelly because of having started this period already well behind those countries.
All the poor are obviously not educating themselves
citation needed
Removed by mod
I am a mod here and this comment was reported for Nazi rhetoric.
While I’m certainly sorry to see anti-immigration sentiment I would rather show a realistic perspective of immigration. It’s easy to see that immigration is a positive for the host county and for the world, especially for refugees.
Thankfully Sweden seems to have a generally healthy perspective on welfare and immigration.
Here is an interesting meta study on research into the Swedish immigration debate.
In the most direct measurement, the immigrant populations that take the longest time make net positive tax contribution are refugees.
The low employment rate among refugees in their first years in the host country means that average incomes were low in these years. Although incomes grew steadily as the years passed, it took almost 20 years for the average refugee in Sweden to make a positive annual net contribution to public finances. The simple explanation for this is that a larger proportion of migrants have been active in sectors that are socially necessary but low paid, in service occupations such as healthcare, transport, restaurants, and so on (Frödin & Kjellberg, Citation2018).
I hope Swedish people feel pride in the refugees they are able to host. It’s impressive that despite refugees working a lot of jobs that are needed for society to function (letting other high tax payers have nice lives) but are low pay, they are still able to become net contributors to public finances in 20 years.
The paper points out how integrating immigrants into the workforce quickly is important but that can be challenging because refugees often come in influxes.
And education is a big part of finding work:
And in conclusion it says:
With this as a central point of departure, an aging population is considered by far the most important motivation for increasing immigration. From this perspective, migration can be justified both from a short-term perspective, as its net contribution to the public finances can be crucial for the financing of welfare, and from a long-term perspective, as it can have clearly positive effects on the supply of labour. This is mainly for demographic reasons as the vast majority of migrants are of young working age. Among migrant groups, two categories are clearly favourable to government finances: highly educated migrants and labour migrants. Objections are often raised to the third category – refugee immigrants – who are argued to have high introduction costs, mainly in the initial years of residence.
A one-sided focus on the average cost burden of refugee migrants that only compares their costs during the years of stay in Sweden with the costs of the native population during the same period is highly misleading. Such a comparison ignores the extensive costs to which comprehensive welfare systems are exposed. For the Swedish welfare system, with its generous benefits and welfare services, life cycle welfare expenditure includes a social safety net during childhood and adolescence. This provides a more comparable picture of migrants’ actual burden on welfare programmes in relation to citizens covered by social protection from ‘the cradle to the grave’. The significant number of refugees who migrate as adults imposes no costs at all on the public finances of the host country during these years. Thus, if their costs to the welfare system are related to their age, the average total cost burden on the welfare system will be significantly lower than that of the native population.
In sum, and as Scocco and Andersson (Citation2015) and Ruist (Citation2019) note, the effects of immigration on the economy are exaggerated in the political debate. The growing opposition to immigration can be explained by the failure of the political establishment to implement the rapid inclusion of newly arrived migrants into the labour market. The literature on the impacts of migration does not find any trends that could seriously threaten the sustainability of welfare states. Modern welfare states do not experience any dramatic economic problems due to immigration. In economic terms, immigration can affect central government finances by a few percentage points, plus or minus, depending on the success of the employment policy and whether the labour market succeeds in quickly absorbing new migrants, but can by no means be considered a threat to financial stability.
Removed by mod
very valuable to know that immigration is actually amazing for sweden. We should celebrate
Yes, you could (should) have stopped there
Removed by mod
It doesn’t benefit the ruling class if too many of the wrong people access education; they may get ideas.
may start voting to the wrong politicians
also competing with the rich for high paying jobs too. thats why its gatekept. like AMA, AND MANY graduate level jobs.
A man I respect quite a lot used to say that college should pay a full-time wage to the students. It should be challenging, it should be a real education (which a lot of modern college is not), and in exchange for that, if you are improving your understanding of the world and your ability to contribute to society, that should be something that society pays you a pretty decent wage for, because it’s a fucking valuable activity.
It really should be a challenge. The saying at my kids college/university was “A ‘C’ gets a degree”. And while “haha that’s funny” there were many in that group that took that literally and put in the least effort possible.
For work, my team and I work with engineer types, and its been a 10 years span of helping them. The newer graduates are a mixed bag: some are bright and innovative, and some are coasters.
We’ve had young guys asking for help on a problem, and as you help they start replying to text messages on social media, missing the entire “help” session you provide.
We’ve had grads struggle with simple counting / talling.
We have done step by step troubleshooting documentation. Then field a call from somebody saying the steps don’t work. OK let’s see your system and go through the steps. Let’s check Step 1.
Them: oh I didn’t do step one, because it said I didn’t have system permission. So I just did step 2 onward.I could go on, but I should end this rant LOL.
Yeah. I was really blessed in terms of my upbringing that my family deeply valued education and taught me what was education and what was a stupid waste of time (which, some but not all of the public school US education I got was) and why the education was a vital human sacred thing. And so when I got to college I really wanted the real education part. It really alarmed me when people would be happy about the easy bullshit classes or upset about the difficult classes. Like bro… why the fuck are you even here? Learn HVAC instead, you’ll save some money on loans and you can probably make more than you would as a data analyst or whatever the fuck.
The saying at my kids college/university was “A ‘C’ gets a degree”. And while “haha that’s funny” there were many in that group that took that literally and put in the least effort possible.
I’ve been in classes when I could ace the class in my sleep and classes where I busted ass to pass.
Grades tend to be highly subjective, not just by subject or material but by the course instructor and the school’s attitude towards GPA. Sort of a joke that getting an “A” in colleges like Harvard and Yale is easier than Boston College or Ruetgers. You’re de facto assumed smart if you’re in the Ivy League. But you have to prove yourself against the field in these more accessible schools.
Sort of a joke that getting an “A” in colleges like Harvard and Yale is easier than Boston College or Ruetgers.
I’ve taken classes at a few different schools including Harvard. This is absolutely not true. You don’t really have to be smart to do well at Harvard, although it helps, but you absolutely do have to bust your ass (in a way you do not at other top-tier schools as long you have some familiarity with the subject going into it.)
When people say that higher grades don’t make you successful, many don’t realize that that probably means students who sacrificed their performance on school assessments to challenge themselves, work on personal projects and gain experience rather than trying to get a perfect assessment score in school. A portfolio is more important than grades when it comes to applying for jobs.
Which also means there should be rigorous standards to continue; similar accountability to any other job.
You shouldn’t be able to collect a hefty check and be like my college friend. He who failed out of our college 4 times because he was just there to go to bars do his own thing (which was not going to class or doing homework or really anything else).
I taught 3rd year humanities students in a communication related course who could not string words together into a coherent sentence. All their writing was education gore and I could only get through it by briefly pretending it was avant garde. We collectively let them get that far with core incompetencies. Shame.
There would have to be limitations on how many people could get paid for some degree types. It doesn’t do society much good to foot the bill for degrees that don’t have actual related job opportunities. It could maybe work where just heavily needed jobs get wages paid, while other degrees are only offered under the current system.
Another thing here is that this would be another form of taxes used to directly benefit businesses. If taxes pay to educate a lot more employees for a job market, the companies in that market would directly benefit by being able to pay lower wages. I wonder if we could do a different system where companies could offer sponsorships for specific degrees in exchange for employment, similar to how ROTC works.
I’m not talking just about “heavily needed jobs.” I am saying that having an educated populace, one that can tell up from down as far as making sense of the factual world and world events, is incalculably valuable. They can be truck drivers for all I care, but if they can watch Fox News and realize they’re being lied to, the whole country will be in a better place.
It’ll also be nice if you have people skilled at engineering and things, the “job qualification” part is also important, but the Germany in the 1930s had plenty of people super-skilled at chemistry and engineering, and look where it got them.
A quality education teaches how yo learn which applies to absolutely every single job that exists. Yes, even the simple ones like basic labor.
It was free until some time in the 1960s when black people started getting involved in higher education, then the republicans got big mad about that and changed the rules because they’re racist pieces of shit. They would rather make everyone suffer if it hurts one person who isn’t a white christian republican.
There’s more detail but that’s the short version.
Here in Aus it was free up until the 90’s. When one of my coworkers told me that I actually nearly started the revolution then and there lmao. All this talk about how hecs is a good system from all these privileged ass old people when they didn’t have to pay a dollar >:(
Something something bootstraps avocado toast. 🙄
For what its worth, you can sit in on most if not all lectures, without paying. Tutorials, exams and the fancy robe and paper cost, but to sit and listen to the lectures is free at all unis. Some caveats apply regarding crowding, but generally you can acquire knowledge for free.
The boomers, goat generation of pulling the ladder up behind them!
So that’s why the USA is the primary source of monetised knowledge. Fwiw I fully support pirating educational media, because if many countries of the world can access a significant amount of education for free, everyone should have the same chance, regardless of how the government of the locale wants to rule and restrict it.
I support fair wages for those who deliver publicly available services at material cost only or lower, so I support taxation that finances it and minimum wage regulation. Even though I believe the current minimum wage in the West isn’t sufficiently regulated. It needs to triple in order to catch up to the ‘inflation’, or the perceived monetary value of everything.
It was free until some time in the 1960s when black people started getting involved
Black students, Jewish students, East Asian students… Anyone who wasn’t a WASP with wealthy parents.
George Bush Jr famously had to make Yale his safety school because he couldn’t qualify for UTexas.
Can you elaborate? I’ve never heard this before, and for most of the 1960s it was the Democrats who were the racist pieces of shit (to the extent it was even partisan).
Not saying you’re wrong; I have a vague notion that Reagan mostly was the one who ruined higher education but I don’t actually know that much about it. Is there something I can read about this though?
Yeah, so it was Reagan. It doesn’t sound really racial, it sounds like it was a reaction against the antiwar and student activism movement (which was definitely not exclusively a black thing). Sounds like it was Republicans, yes, but more than racism it was just part and parcel of them hating things that make America successful or enable us to compete (because that makes them feel weak, because they can’t.)
I might argue the Vietnam War was what really changed things. Once college became a means of draft dodging, universities filled up with blue collar kids looking for deferment.
Colleges responded by tightening enrollment standards and setting up new barriers to entry, some of which were financial.
Disclaimer: I 100% support “free” healthcare and “free” education.
Being a teacher is a job. Being a college professor is a job. Being a nurse is a job. Being a janitor for a college campus is a job. People need money and benefits to do jobs. We’ve not yet achieved a post-scarcity economy where people can work without being reimbursed for their efforts.
Anyone who labels the goal of providing publicly-funded education or publicly-funded healthcare as “free” is either arguing in bad faith or too naive to understand what the goal should be. As a society we should provide public services, such as education and healthcare, to all humans who ask for it. For the good of all humans. But it’s something we all have to collectively fund.
Free to the user… Are you just trying to muddy this water?
Not at all.
By calling for education and healthcare to be free, you’re voluntarily giving ammunition to politicians that they can use to sway low-information voters.
If every person who supported public education and public healthcare stopped calling it free right now, the people against these public services would still call them free. Because they want it to sound like people are trying to get something for nothing. They like it when we call it free.
Calling something free just conforms to the narrative that education and healthcare are something you would have to pay for in the first place. Why would you ever have to pay for a basic human right?
Idno man, that’s sounds like a very America brained argument. When people say free healthcare they don’t mean we should have self sustaining health slaves colony to heal us up for no money. Obviously it’s going to cost tax money if it’s not directly billing the consumer.
Public healthcare also doesn’t mean free healthcare. In Iceland it’s subsidised 90% with a wax payment of like $200 monthly or something so it’s not free, but it is public. You can also have free but private
It doesn’t.
It takes time and effort to gain more knowledge. It has never been cheaper or more accessible to acquire knowledge than it is today.
To increase your intelligence, is another matter all together.
I would also add that damn near all of human information is free to be had on the internet for the low, low price of a monthly broadband bill. The real expense comes when you want a piece of paper that says you know all this that other people will take seriously.
While absolutely true. I would say it’s much harder to find today than ten years ago. The Internet as an information source is being degraded on a daily basis. The amount of misinformation, ads disguised as information, and AI slop is destroying your ability to find that information.
Textbooks on any subject are easily retrievable for free. You could previously go to a library, but the internet makes it much easier to retrieve that kind of information.
It’s true for infotaiment stuff but for boring knowladge not so much. If you seek textbooks and recordings of lectures, there is still a lot of great stuff out there. It’s boring as ditch water but boring is good.
