|
Baa?21244 Posts
On May 21 2015 00:00 Ketara wrote:
I cannot overstress my suggestion of spending extended time overseas figuring yourself out if you have that opportunity though, Ghandi. It is, in my opinion, likely even more educating than college is.
Wheres my boy JonGalt to back me up on that one.
Spending time overseas is too romanticized in American culture right now. Though I've no doubt that it's greatly fulfilling to people who like that kind of stuff, it is certainly not for everyone. Ironically, spending time overseas is what the four year degree is painted to be in the current polemic.
|
On May 21 2015 00:01 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2015 23:57 TheYango wrote:On May 20 2015 23:36 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
This superficially plausible stance gets flaunted all the time since it sets up the seemingly reasonable breakdown of sometimes it's worth it to go to college and sometimes it's not, but the reality is, the former scenario is magnitudes more common than the latter scenario. I'd be interested if there were any organized study supporting this. My personal experience is biased by people who went into STEM which overwhelmingly necessitates a college diploma (and often more) to get anywhere professionally so anecdotally, I don't have enough experience to pass judgment. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/02/11/bachelors-degrees-lead-employment-and-more-trainingPossibly a slightly biased source, but it does link to quite a few different studies/reports/etc. that are either tangentially related or directly related to the topic at hand. In any case backlash against "the college scam" and the four-year degree is nothing new, it regularly rears its head but has never led to anything in the past because while a possibly compelling narrative, it is not based in any sort of reality. Of course I could be mistaken here since I have no first-hand experience in most other countries, but it seems like only in America is the validity of college regularly questioned, whereas it's essentially taken for granted everywhere else that a college degree is the correct choice the vast majority of the time.
Only in America do you go into crippling debt to go to college.
Link is interesting and encouraging. I'd like to know what their definition of "degrees with labor market value" is though.
|
I've never heard people here talking about "university scam" or how "a degree doesn't matter". Must be an American thing. You also only ones that have massive student debt so maybe that's related.
|
Baa?21244 Posts
Well, people who make poor decisions and take on student debt as a result are at fault, not the system itself.
I do agree college tuition in the US is rising at absurd rates right now, but there are still a decent amount of reasonable options.
You don't -have- to take on crippling debt to go to college, but too many people would rather spend 200k+ at some no name private school instead of spending well under 100k for a large and respected state school. Not to mention the state school, due to size and reach, would probably accord more opportunities and connections to those who seek them.
|
On May 21 2015 00:07 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2015 00:00 Ketara wrote:
I cannot overstress my suggestion of spending extended time overseas figuring yourself out if you have that opportunity though, Ghandi. It is, in my opinion, likely even more educating than college is.
Wheres my boy JonGalt to back me up on that one. Spending time overseas is too romanticized in American culture right now. Though I've no doubt that it's greatly fulfilling to people who like that kind of stuff, it is certainly not for everyone. Ironically, spending time overseas is what the four year degree is painted to be in the current polemic.
Wtf romanticized by who? O_o. Do we live in the same country? (I guess right now we don't lol)
I would argue it is not romanticized nearly enough. According to some brief googling, only 46% of Americans even own passports. I'd love to see that number approaching 100%.
|
Ah so it's only people that make poor decisions that take on student debt? Lol Cheep what the flying fuck.
|
My big brother was unhappy with his job (pretty stressed out and I assume mild depression), and spending a year in the neighbouring country was an eye-opener for him (more specifically, sight-seeing, the different culture, etc. kept him busier than sitting at home all evening like he used to (worked at a call center during his stay so not "holidays" either), but a bunch of flights to Maghreb and Mediterranean islands are dirt cheap from Spain compared to the rest, and he used his leftover money for that at the end of his stay).
He basically came back, worked 4~6 months to save money (stayed at my parents' since an apartment for such a short time wasn't worth it and a massive dent in saving money), used the money to travel for a year, rinse and repeat.
Now he doesn't have something he wants to do, but he's happy to have done all that, and he's got something he finds potentially interesting that motivates him to go back and study a bit, which is better than losing his soul at his previous job.
It's different from soul-searching for a year when you're 20 though.
|
United States47024 Posts
The only concern I have is that the data presented is that the most extreme difference only really manifests in STEM-related professions, which largely require a college degree and tend to pay quite aggressive salaries relative to other professions, especially in particular fields. Someone who has no interest in those fields are not going to see the kind of difference that picture paints.
In fact, 25-32, the age range chosen in the graphic, also would encompass the earnings of people who have completed additional schooling beyond college (e.g. medicine, law), who will have very high annual incomes, but due to having not been in the workforce for longer and having EVEN MORE student debt, will not actually have made more money.
|
Baa?21244 Posts
On May 21 2015 00:11 Numy wrote:
Ah so it's only people that make poor decisions that take on student debt? Lol Cheep what the flying fuck.
I elaborated, but I think many people have unrealistic expectations on what they can spend on college and what they can expect to recover, which is no inherent fault of the college degree itself.
|
On May 21 2015 00:05 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2015 23:54 Lord Tolkien wrote:On May 20 2015 20:26 Numy wrote:On May 20 2015 15:12 Lord Tolkien wrote:On May 20 2015 14:21 sung_moon wrote:On May 20 2015 11:15 Frolossus wrote:
emperor thaurissan is a good card Haven't played in a long time, but to me, he doesn't seem good enough to run over other legendarys. I can see him being worth in like Grim Patron Warrior and Oil Rogue. Burst Shaman, or even Malygos Shaman looks cool though. Looks like reverse Loatheb, but he comes down a turn earlier, and is just way more back-breaking. These new Dragopaladin decks look like a ton of fun however. Also, anybody playing Witcher? What. Every 2 card you have in hand is essentially a free innervate that doesn't cost card advantage. If you have like 6 cards in hand when you play it, thats 3 innervates worth of tempo. And innervate is one of the best cards in the game (infinite value). Opponent has to kill him immediately, or else. Also, you only sometimes play Loatheb on turn 5. That's a bit of a fallacy though. A lot of the time in a control deck that cost reduction doesn't enable you to do something else. You just land up with unspent mana. Sure in the best case situations it can be really amazing but is it worth playing over a bigger board threat? In decks that rely on combo it's really amazing as it enables more stuff. It's a good card but I think people are going a bit crazy with him. Nonsense. Free executes and shield slams, and Thaurissan must always be removed, because if he's on the board for longer than 1 turn, it's usually GG. Thus, Thaurissan by his very nature is an extremely high board threat. Beyond which he has very little competition in the 6-slot department. Outside of Slyvanas, the only really good, non-tech 6-drops are class specific, Hunter (Highmane), Shield-Maiden (Warrior), Priest (Cabal), and Shaman (Fire Ele). One of those decks don't run Thaurissan (Hunter), the other sucks, but still runs it (Shaman), one class 6-drop is entirely tech (Priest) and still will run Thaurissan because -1 mana enables so much for priest, and warriors one runs it, because 0-mana shield slams and executes and -1 mana for other cards enables quite a lot of plays with a decent-sized hand, even in Control (in Patron he's vital). What situations do free executes/slams matter? Sure it's nice having them being free but most of the time I find it doesn't matter if they free. All that happens is you are left over with unspent mana. The 6 mana slot isn't something warrior needs to fill with Slyv/shieldmadien. Throwing in a Emp means you have to cut something else out of the deck .Everything you run is a huge threat so you have to decide if your other threats are worth cutting for Emp. I don't think that's as easy as choice as you and others are making it seem. It sounds amazing "free mana!" but in practical terms most of the time it's just unspent mana.
Double Shield Maiden into shield slams. Alex and BGH the same turn, etc. There's quite alot he enables, and in the current meta you mainly just cut Geddon.
|
United States47024 Posts
On May 21 2015 00:13 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2015 00:11 Numy wrote:
Ah so it's only people that make poor decisions that take on student debt? Lol Cheep what the flying fuck. I elaborated, but I think many people have unrealistic expectations on what they can spend on college and what they can expect to recover, which is no inherent fault of the college degree itself.
Sure, but if they're not studying a field in college that can pay out an $80,000+ starting salary, "what they can expect to recover" changes a lot.
How much you're making out of college is really biased by what you actually study in college.
|
On May 21 2015 00:13 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2015 00:11 Numy wrote:
Ah so it's only people that make poor decisions that take on student debt? Lol Cheep what the flying fuck. I elaborated, but I think many people have unrealistic expectations on what they can spend on college and what they can expect to recover, which is no inherent fault of the college degree itself.
I think your average socialist would argue that this sort of system, which turns education into a business/financial decision, is exactly the problem.
And I would super agree with them.
And yeah I agree with Yango, the wording of that article made it sound like they were focusing on degrees that make money and ignoring ones that don't rather than using data based on all degrees.
|
Baa?21244 Posts
On May 21 2015 00:15 TheYango wrote:
How much you're making out of college is really biased by what you actually study in college.
Yea of course, but that's a separate issue entirely.
|
Baa?21244 Posts
On May 21 2015 00:16 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2015 00:13 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On May 21 2015 00:11 Numy wrote:
Ah so it's only people that make poor decisions that take on student debt? Lol Cheep what the flying fuck. I elaborated, but I think many people have unrealistic expectations on what they can spend on college and what they can expect to recover, which is no inherent fault of the college degree itself. I think your average socialist would argue that this sort of system, which turns education into a business/financial decision, is exactly the problem. And I would super agree with them.
That treads into the theoretical and philosophical discussion on the role and purpose of education, which is beyond the scope of my original point, which was the idea that a four year degree is not necessary is pretty silly, even though ti's getting considerable traction in certain parts of American society (again) right now.
|
On May 21 2015 00:13 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2015 00:05 Numy wrote:On May 20 2015 23:54 Lord Tolkien wrote:On May 20 2015 20:26 Numy wrote:On May 20 2015 15:12 Lord Tolkien wrote:On May 20 2015 14:21 sung_moon wrote:On May 20 2015 11:15 Frolossus wrote:
emperor thaurissan is a good card Haven't played in a long time, but to me, he doesn't seem good enough to run over other legendarys. I can see him being worth in like Grim Patron Warrior and Oil Rogue. Burst Shaman, or even Malygos Shaman looks cool though. Looks like reverse Loatheb, but he comes down a turn earlier, and is just way more back-breaking. These new Dragopaladin decks look like a ton of fun however. Also, anybody playing Witcher? What. Every 2 card you have in hand is essentially a free innervate that doesn't cost card advantage. If you have like 6 cards in hand when you play it, thats 3 innervates worth of tempo. And innervate is one of the best cards in the game (infinite value). Opponent has to kill him immediately, or else. Also, you only sometimes play Loatheb on turn 5. That's a bit of a fallacy though. A lot of the time in a control deck that cost reduction doesn't enable you to do something else. You just land up with unspent mana. Sure in the best case situations it can be really amazing but is it worth playing over a bigger board threat? In decks that rely on combo it's really amazing as it enables more stuff. It's a good card but I think people are going a bit crazy with him. Nonsense. Free executes and shield slams, and Thaurissan must always be removed, because if he's on the board for longer than 1 turn, it's usually GG. Thus, Thaurissan by his very nature is an extremely high board threat. Beyond which he has very little competition in the 6-slot department. Outside of Slyvanas, the only really good, non-tech 6-drops are class specific, Hunter (Highmane), Shield-Maiden (Warrior), Priest (Cabal), and Shaman (Fire Ele). One of those decks don't run Thaurissan (Hunter), the other sucks, but still runs it (Shaman), one class 6-drop is entirely tech (Priest) and still will run Thaurissan because -1 mana enables so much for priest, and warriors one runs it, because 0-mana shield slams and executes and -1 mana for other cards enables quite a lot of plays with a decent-sized hand, even in Control (in Patron he's vital). What situations do free executes/slams matter? Sure it's nice having them being free but most of the time I find it doesn't matter if they free. All that happens is you are left over with unspent mana. The 6 mana slot isn't something warrior needs to fill with Slyv/shieldmadien. Throwing in a Emp means you have to cut something else out of the deck .Everything you run is a huge threat so you have to decide if your other threats are worth cutting for Emp. I don't think that's as easy as choice as you and others are making it seem. It sounds amazing "free mana!" but in practical terms most of the time it's just unspent mana. Double Shield Maiden into shield slams. Alex and BGH the same turn, etc. There's quite alot he enables, and in the current meta you mainly just cut Geddon.
I mean I can keep trying it out but my experience is it isn't as amazing as initially thought. Maybe I'm too shit at this game to see how good it is.
|
United States47024 Posts
On May 21 2015 00:16 Ketara wrote:
And yeah I agree with Tango, the wording of that article made it sound like they were focusing on degrees that make money and ignoring ones that don't rather than using data based on all degrees.
I mean it probably is taking the median over all degrees, but that's still heavily skewed upward by certain fields.
If you *really* don't know what you want to do, and aren't ruling those professions out, I think not going to college is still too large a risk in terms of the doors you're closing by not going to college. But if you're decidedly never going to enter a STEM-related field (which by and large encompasses many of the major fields that require a college degree to get anywhere), then maybe the choice isn't as easy. Again, though, my own anecdotal experience is heavily biased.
|
How do I tell my manager that I've only been working with for 3 months that I'm quitting for a new job even though in the interview I made it very clear I didn't want to job hop?
|
Baa?21244 Posts
FWIW I agree with the idealized view of education serving a more transcendent and elevated role beyond business/financial decisions, but that's simply impossible right now (and I would argue, has always been impossible for the majority of the population).
The very term "liberal arts education" gives a hint to its status as something reserved for the privileged. LIBERAL, deriving from the Latin "liber" meaning "free," education is something that is only available to the free man - in the old sense, meaning someone from the privileged upper class who is relatively unencumbered from both societal and financial obligations. The ability to pursue higher education has always been dependent on your financial situation.
I would argue (I think pretty unopposed) that we have actually made great strides to improving the accessibility of education to the wider population, but we are still not at the point when anyone can study whatever they like however they like and still be reasonably cared for. We may never reach that point, and we have certainly never had that state in all of human history to date, so it's a bit silly to expect education to be completely free from financial considerations.
|
On May 21 2015 00:18 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2015 00:16 Ketara wrote:On May 21 2015 00:13 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On May 21 2015 00:11 Numy wrote:
Ah so it's only people that make poor decisions that take on student debt? Lol Cheep what the flying fuck. I elaborated, but I think many people have unrealistic expectations on what they can spend on college and what they can expect to recover, which is no inherent fault of the college degree itself. I think your average socialist would argue that this sort of system, which turns education into a business/financial decision, is exactly the problem. And I would super agree with them. That treads into the theoretical and philosophical discussion on the role and purpose of education, which is beyond the scope of my original point, which was the idea that a four year degree is not necessary is pretty silly, even though ti's getting considerable traction in certain parts of American society (again) right now.
I don't think anybody was saying its not necessary as a blanket statement, more that it can be at least potentially not worth the cost, which you seem to agree with. That wasn't really true in american society until recently.
I just don't like the insinuation that there's nothing wrong with the system of paying for education in america and people just need to make smarter life choices. There is absolutely something wrong with the system.
But it is two different arguments, don't need to discuss them both.
I'm so boooooooored though. At least this train is nice.
|
Ghandi: get a part time job and go to community college for a year or two taking gen eds. It's cheap and then when you get an idea of what you like you can transfer the credits to a real college.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
