Corrections are welcome. I'm aware this has probably been mentioned before. I'll post mainly Canadian statistics because I'm Canadian. The same probably applies to the U.S and G.B, and maybe Australia.
The standards for many white-collar jobs has semi-recently risen from a High School Diploma to a Bachelor Degree. This forces many of those who are looking to get into a white-collar job to go to University for 4 years in order to obtain a degree in an often unrelated field[1], spending approximately $24, 000(or more, up to $60, 000 in Canada, $100, 000 in the U.S) PLUS government subsidies. This does not include the other costs(food, shelter, entertainment, etc.) and lost work from the 4 extra years of schooling. While this clearly does not have a beneficial effect on the economy, there is another less obvious negative effect:
children often come out of this education system with no self-sufficiency at all.
There is no way that a teenager will have made enough money from their birth until heading into University to even be able to afford tuition by themselves, let alone the additional costs. This forces these teenagers to be entirely dependant upon their guardians if they hope to get through University at a normal pace. In some cases the teenagers move out of their parents house in order to attend University, learning to shop for their groceries, cook(poorly, but they do learn it), clean after themselves, etc. However, in many cases these children live at home in order to reduce costs or are put in a living situation where almost everything is taken care of for them. "This is great!" many would say. "They get to learn in a stress-free environment, and they can focus solely on their education."
The majority of time spent at University is not actually spent in class[2]. Instead, these children are given free reign to run around for 4 years with little to no responsibility. 4 years of potentially teaching children the basics of responsibility are wasted through sloth. We are left with the products of 4 years of formal education with no self-sufficiency - young adults who think they know much, but are completely unprepared to enter the normal working world.
We are left with people like StateOfReverie, who is under the impression that he is a mature, fully functioning adult, when he is reliant entirely upon his parents supplying him money for his drug habit and material wants(not needs). We are left with people like my brother, who is literally incapable of doing anything to improve his situation, only doing so when my mother's nagging gets to be too much. We are left with people like my room mate, who has never had a job in his life, and is 100% unable to begin to provide for himself.
I think we should change up the work/education dynamics of society. Instead of having to learn general bullshit that will be mostly useless in a chosen career, we should have kids able to start education in a career, when they choose, by actually working in the environments they would be ten-fifteen years down the line in today's society, and being taught by people actually doing the work the career would entail. Let them start working a few hours a week when they turn 13 or something, and progressively let them have more hours as they age up to 16-18.
This way, they will have more financial experience, more work experience, and more educational experience than today's society when they turn 18.
It just means that current civilization is in decline. When the aggregate incompetence becomes too much, there will be a few decades of turmoil, then mankind reverts back to an older time when survival itself depends on a person's hard work. Not that it would comfort anyone living now though
Eh, lifespans are increasing in general, all the stages of life are lengthening a bit at least in the wealthy to semi-wealthy. More dependent on parents/parents money for a few more years. Retirement ages are increasing/going to increase because it's not sustainable as it is now so the workforce time will stretch a bit, and old age is increasing cause people are living longer. The gaps between generations are getting longer (so more time is focused on each kid), and have gotten longer as standard of living has increased since industrialization. And the more countries that get more developed, the more these trends will apply to them too. Lower birth rate is another one that goes with longer generation gaps.
My families been poor enough that I've had a part time job all through college, dunno if that's enough of a taste of the "real" world to make a difference though.
You left out trade schools. We will still need welders, plumbers, and metalworkers for quite a ways into the future, and yet all people talk about is going to a 4 year school and getting a degree. We have plenty of people already who have them, the labor shortages in the future will probably be from manual labor trades. Some high schools are already teaching this but it should be an option for all students. Not everyone wants to have their faces shoved in textbooks all day, they should have more options.
On topic I guess, most people in their younger 20s are more dependant then the previous generation. Back then colleges were more affordable, jobs more plentiful, job benefits better etc. Even if you have a degree nowdays, you still get shafted. You take jobs that require too much and give too little in return.
Mike Rowe from Dirty Jobs actually did a talk about this awhile ago, about how the trade jobs are disappearing.
lol i dont know whether there's some history between you two but calling other users out like that is a really poor move and makes you look like a jerk.
yeah man, i'm 20 years old and my family recently lost all our money forcing me to drop out because i still somehow don't qualify for gov't aid and i prob won't be able to ever afford school
We are left with people like StateOfReverie, who is under the impression that he is a mature, fully functioning adult, when he is reliant entirely upon his parents supplying him money for his drug habit and material wants(not needs). We are left with people like my brother, who is literally incapable of doing anything to improve his situation, only doing so when my mother's nagging gets to be too much. We are left with people like my room mate, who has never had a job in his life, and is 100% unable to begin to provide for himself.
I like how you use my name in reference to your blog about creating "22 year old children". I am 18, so I guess your close enough, legal drinking age in the U.S. is 21 though, but I mean 18-22 year olds are all pretty much the same right?
There is a lot of fundamental values that are no longer taught in American education systems. The whole purpose of the whole education spectrum is to be able to study in a specific area of interest so that you can enter society as a fully functional adult who pays their taxes on times and supports the economy by buying things.
What I don't understand is why the education system doesn't address successful money management. If this were such an important concept, then why hasn't the U.S. government implemented new changes? It mainly has to do with how there is not really a national "standard" apart from SAT tests as a basis of measuring progress in different school systems across the country. It is harder to macro manage such a large system and there is no doubt that we have a flawed educational system, it is just still unclear how it will be solved with budget cuts and national debt ever so increasing.
You obviously state the large problem at hand in a very simplified view. Let's bring up what self-sufficient really means.
"Self-sufficiency is the state of not requiring any aid, support, or interaction, for survival; it is therefore a type of personal or collective autonomy"
that's wikipedia definition of self-sufficiency. If someone doesn't go to university, the obvious benefits are that they can immediately start working and start managing their money from a small scale with little responsibilities. As you make more money (attain a higher position), you gain more responsibilities hence is how the corporate ladder works.
The benefits of me living in a college-dorm settings are pretty numerous
-exposure to a large amount of people
-living by myself (yes I do all my cleaning and laundry)
- cooking. I don't need to know how to cook now, but when I am a junior/senior I will learn how to cook. And I am not going to be a mediocre cook, contrary to popular belief that doing something new makes you automatically bad at it.
-Money management - I only rely on my parents for living expenses such as laundry, food, and cleaning supplies. I think you fail to realize that you can be a successful pothead. I get this all the time, people saying negative things about this, but WHERE DO YOU GET THE RIGHT TO JUDGE SOMEONE?
Do you treat people differently because they are gay, or because they do drugs? Also, if you wanted to fix this problem, just put everyone in the ghetto and make them become hustlers. Do you know why so many poor people do it? Because it's a good paying job that lets them STAY ALIVE and have access to a life otherwise not available from other means.
whos "we" too? Is that just referring to all the "people who live in the real world"? That's a pretty derrogative term, referring to you and whoever "we" represents as the inner group
On December 03 2012 14:14 WarSame wrote: Corrections are welcome. I'm aware this has probably been mentioned before. I'll post mainly Canadian statistics because I'm Canadian. The same probably applies to the U.S and G.B, and maybe Australia.
I'm not going to say this is a correction, as I am obviously not a responsible adult, or even an adult for the most part, but I kind of find it humorous that you mention Canada, the U.S., G.B., and Australia.
Unemployment rate in the "real world" like Spain was almost at 25% in general, and a lot higher numbers for young people similar to this age bracket. That is almost an entire generation of people that are affected by a major economic crisis. If "we" are creating 22 year old children in the states you mentioned, what the fuck is going on in places like Spain and Greece? I guess we can just call them "little spartans" or something instead of children because they are going through a "real world experience" right? right?
Also, I am just going to go out on a limb here and say that you are not really aware of how the economy works if you can say
On December 03 2012 14:14 WarSame wrote: Corrections are welcome. I'm aware this has probably been mentioned before. I'll post mainly Canadian statistics because I'm Canadian. The same probably applies to the U.S and G.B, and maybe Australia.
The standards for many white-collar jobs has semi-recently risen from a High School Diploma to a Bachelor Degree. This forces many of those who are looking to get into a white-collar job to go to University for 4 years in order to obtain a degree in an often unrelated field[1], spending approximately $24, 000(or more, up to $60, 000 in Canada, $100, 000 in the U.S) PLUS government subsidies. This does not include the other costs(food, shelter, entertainment, etc.) and lost work from the 4 extra years of schooling. While this clearly does not have a beneficial effect on the economy, there is another less obvious negative effect:
children often come out of this education system with no self-sufficiency at all.
WHAT? WHAT? CLEARLY DOES NOT HAVE A BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON THE ECONOMY? I had to use all caps there because I have to emphasize what a terribly mis use of words, I guess someone was not introduced macro economics. (I think it falls under that category, I wouldn't know because I don't know anything really though
another edit: also approximately 24,000 over 4 years? You aren't really clear here because some colleges and universities tuition can be more than 24,000 a year but there are also places that will only cost you 24,000 over 4 years because of how inexpensive they are
WHAT? WHAT? CLEARLY DOES NOT HAVE A BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON THE ECONOMY? I had to use all caps there because I have to emphasize what a terribly mis use of words, I guess someone was not introduced macro economics. (I think it falls under that category, I wouldn't know because I don't know anything really though
From my limited economic experience, I was under the impression that money moving around the system (full time work) was better for the economy than low income students...
WHAT? WHAT? CLEARLY DOES NOT HAVE A BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON THE ECONOMY? I had to use all caps there because I have to emphasize what a terribly mis use of words, I guess someone was not introduced macro economics. (I think it falls under that category, I wouldn't know because I don't know anything really though
From my limited economic experience, I was under the impression that money moving around the system (full time work) was better for the economy than low income students...
there are so many things that influence a teenagers quality of life during their period in college/university. The majority of things that are bought for this period of life effects the economy in a positive way. The upper middle-class and the upper class based students are also accustomed to a higher quality of life, thereby using a higher amount of money to sustain that higher quality of life.
also full time work is a very broad definition. there are low income full-time workers all the way up to the 8 figures for full-time workers. Also when you say "the system", what are you referring to that as? and what aspects of the economy?
WHAT? WHAT? CLEARLY DOES NOT HAVE A BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON THE ECONOMY? I had to use all caps there because I have to emphasize what a terribly mis use of words, I guess someone was not introduced macro economics. (I think it falls under that category, I wouldn't know because I don't know anything really though
From my limited economic experience, I was under the impression that money moving around the system (full time work) was better for the economy than low income students...
there are so many things that influence a teenagers quality of life during their period in college/university. The majority of things that are bought for this period of life effects the economy in a positive way. The upper middle-class and the upper class based students are also accustomed to a higher quality of life, thereby using a higher amount of money to sustain that higher quality of life.
also full time work is a very broad definition. there are low income full-time workers all the way up to the 8 figures for full-time workers. Also when you say "the system", what are you referring to that as? and what aspects of the economy?
I'm confused, WarSame made a point that we are effectively creating humans that spend 4 years doing very little because we have made it harder to get white collar jobs. I'm not from the US but I interpret white collar jobs to be management positions and office work.
Believe it or not I am one of those people, I went to university for 3 years and during that time, didnt pay much tax at all. During this time I was still doing what normal students do, using doctors, free public transport, libraries etc without paying a penny.
Fast forward a few years and now I pay near enough £1000 a month in tax. I think what WarSame was getting at is that we are creating this artifical stopgap where people could be working and putting money back into 'the system' (see link) but instead, we are effectively forcing people to dick around for 3 years.
It's quite clear that someone who earns very little (students) also pay very little tax is a drain on the system, not even considering the bursaries and government spending to support low income families *edit* I meant low income families that send their children to university, which is effectively paid for by the people in the UK.
I live in New Zealand, so the situation is probably somewhat different, and my upbringing was not entirely standard. With that in mind, my parents aren't paying for my education. While there is a significant government subsidy (which I will end up paying for through taxes later on in life), I have had to raise the money myself over the last two years to be able to go to university. And these two years have changed me from a child into a man. I entirely agree with you that parents spoil their children. I think the schooling system affects it a lot as well. Most children are taught by teachers who are largely female, and don't have to deal with grumpy old men. They aren't forced to grow up nearly as quickly as you are when you're in the work force, where all your bosses are likely to be grumpy old men who demand perfection, and all the managers are the same. And you don't have to deal with authority the way you do in the real world. So yeah, in conclusion, the education system as a whole is like an entirely separate world from what really goes on, and people often remain children mentally until they leave the education system.
WHAT? WHAT? CLEARLY DOES NOT HAVE A BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON THE ECONOMY? I had to use all caps there because I have to emphasize what a terribly mis use of words, I guess someone was not introduced macro economics. (I think it falls under that category, I wouldn't know because I don't know anything really though
From my limited economic experience, I was under the impression that money moving around the system (full time work) was better for the economy than low income students...
there are so many things that influence a teenagers quality of life during their period in college/university. The majority of things that are bought for this period of life effects the economy in a positive way. The upper middle-class and the upper class based students are also accustomed to a higher quality of life, thereby using a higher amount of money to sustain that higher quality of life.
also full time work is a very broad definition. there are low income full-time workers all the way up to the 8 figures for full-time workers. Also when you say "the system", what are you referring to that as? and what aspects of the economy?
I'm confused, WarSame made a point that we are effectively creating humans that spend 4 years doing very little because we have made it harder to get white collar jobs. I'm not from the US but I interpret white collar jobs to be management positions and office work.
Believe it or not I am one of those people, I went to university for 3 years and during that time, didnt pay much tax at all. During this time I was still doing what normal students do, using doctors, free public transport, libraries etc without paying a penny.
Fast forward a few years and now I pay near enough £1000 a month in tax. I think what WarSame was getting at is that we are creating this artifical stopgap where people could be working and putting money back into 'the system' (see link) but instead, we are effectively forcing people to dick around for 3 years.
It's quite clear that someone who earns very little (students) also pay very little tax is a drain on the system, not even considering the bursaries and government spending to support low income families *edit* I meant low income families that send their children to university, which is effectively paid for by the people in the UK.
The amount of students who are in this position accounts for less than 5% of the entire workforce, all of which contribute to the economy.
So than you are saying, after your 3 years at a university, you essentially wasted your time there?
My point is, that 5% should probably more like 2%, we have inflated the need for a degree.
What i learned in 3 years at uni, i could have learned in about 6 months of doing the job i went to uni to get. I went in as an immature know it all 18 year old and came out an immature know it all 22 year old. Then i learned how to do a job and my maturity increased tenfold. Imho, we should support more vocational training instead of encouraging degrees.
I got a good degree too, the majority of my friends didnt complete degrees and spent the whole time smoking weed, sound familiar? I didnt waste my time beacuse of my own laziness, i wasted my time because i had to do the three years to get where i wanted to be when it should be encouraged for people to work earlier.
Full time education is by no means challenging or time consuming.
EPT
