Bad Economics: College degree’s & Income inequality

[Peter8519]

The main purpose of a college degree is to learn the process of higher learning. In that period of 3 - 4 years, one is to have the learning process and make it part of the habit. With the right attitude and mindset, our knowledge will propel us forward. Of course, those with the right aptitude can be successful without college degree. Since most here are traders, most would agree that knowing programming is an advantage in trading. Generally, any degree holder would be better prepared to learning programming than a non degree.

 

[Nine_Ender]

With as many spelling and grammatical mistakes as you make (degree's, its, thats, useleless, economicly) it is apparent that a college education was wasted on you.

I doubt he graduated high school.

 

[newwurldmn]

You can go to college for free in America if you are poor (Pell grants). You can go to a state college for very little money if you are not poor but not rich.

I believe that Americans don’t value education the way the rest of the world does. Rather Americans focus on their kids being well rounded and pursuing interests that make them happy.

At the same time in modern America the new aristocracy is based on the college you go to.

Yes, America is in a dilemma. It's the only modern country in the world that charges a lot of money for its own population's college education. The consequence of which is to regard education as a financial investment with necessary practical returns and thus the comments by the OP. In fact, (only in America!) this is a political argument by Republicans against education. Why waste time and money learning anything when you could become a middle class blue collar worker?
The argument isn't without merit if 1. The cost of education is born by the individual and not the nation 2. The value put on education is strictly conscripted to income generation.

If I may generalize and use stereotypes for a minute, Americans are pragmatic people who take everything down to the lowest common denominator of understanding, which is pretty low in large part because of the general lack of education. In fact, Republicans use the argument without shame... Why "waste" time and money getting educated when you can make good money instead? C'mon, Raptor/babe/beers and drugs... Isn't that good enough for you? Oh, you think you're better than us?... Blah, blah, blah.

In the rest of the modern world, education is paid for by the nation and there are very few (if any) voices within these countries who think they should be more like America. The fundamental agreement is that an educated nation is a better nation. Individuals can choose to become plumbers and electricians or choose to become doctors and lawyers, or choose to get PhD in art and civilization or astro physics. The state will pay (most of) for you to follow your bliss. I know, that's crazy. But what's even more crazy is that people aren't looking for ways to get wealthy, they're looking to have a rich life, simply free of financial insecurities. And the people elect leaders and build nations to provide this life, which limits individual wealth for collective wellbeing. Free education, free healthcare, retirement benefits, 5 weeks vacation, parental leave, excellent infrastructures, etc.
Most Americans have no idea what any of these benefits are. And the typical rebuttal question is, yeah? But how much money do you make? And it makes sense! Because in America, only enough money can buy all of these perks, only the deserving ones, those who work hard, get to have what all these other people have. But why? Because otherwise no one would work!... But the people over there work ..

And the argument goes around and around

 

[VicBee]

At the same time in modern America the new aristocracy is based on the college you go to.

Meh, I think that's always been. But more kids go to college nowadays than in the past so more colleges are promoting themselves.
What is much different today, and repeated around the world, is the cutthroat competition to attract full tuition paying students from foreign countries. These students end up subsidizing the local kids and paying a fair share of the university expenses. It's no surprise that many come from India and China, both countries being very focused on education. Going to a western university is expensive, but pays itself in other ways, like getting a work visa upon graduation, bringing family members or funneling money out of China.
The US has been doing this for many years because universities were private and developed sophisticated marketing plans to make themselves attractive to foreigners. I remember seeing kids in France in the 70s wearing super popular t-shirts with the letters UCLA on the chest. Most had absolutely no idea what that was or meant, they just wanted to look cool.
It took the rest of the world at least 30 years to catch up, although it was a challenging evolution as not all wanted money to become the criteria for entry. It took a long time for private universities to demonstrate their value and to date most nationals have higher regards for their public universities than the private ones, even if internationally the private ones are better recognized.

 

[SunTrader]

College "degree's"?

Multiple other typos/grammatical errors as well.

OP clearly never step foot on a campus unless it was with a broom in their hand.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Multiple other typos/grammatical errors as well.

True. But I thought "college degree's" captured the moment.

 

[Nine_Ender]

True. But I thought "college degree's" captured the moment.

Scary thing is it's his first language. Perhaps we need some immigrants to teach him some language skills.

 

[cesfx]

I think many people who go to college to get degree’s is actually a bad economic decision. I also think income inequality is tied into bad economic policy.
So, going to to college and choosing to get a degree in sociology, communications, art, philosophy, psychology, is just plain stupid and makes no sense economicly. A student may pay 200k for a useless degree and will much more likely get a low paying job if he or she actually finds one pertaining to their degree. Its even worse if the tax payers take care of the students college tuition which is the case many times. They are useleless degree’s.
The income inequality myth: if for instance a study is conducted and its determined that 100 black students make a starting salary thats on average 25k less than 100 whites one will claim “ income inequality “. Peeling away at the onion one will discover most of the black graduates had degrees in communications , sociology, psychology, and other low paying degrees while the white or asian group had mostly engineering and finance degrees. So its really not inequality is it? Its poor choices for a major.
Digging further, one might say both groups had engineering degrees and whites and asians still made more money. Inequality? Not so fast. One group may have had degrees in mechanical and electrical engineering while the other had degrees in lower paying civil engineering. The white group could also choose to get lower paying degrees which we see a lot. One group also may have had more experience because they chose to work as interns during their summer break while the other group chose to have fun during their summer.
I think more people need to get into the trades..
Billions of dollars are wasted by useless college degree’s.

It's (not its) pretty obvious you never finished primary school.

 

[Pekelo]

The main purpose of a college degree is to learn the process of higher learning. .

That is so fucking incorrect that you must have a Harvard degree.

 

[Pekelo]

It's (not its)

The 2000s called, they want their grammar bitching back.

---------------------------

Let's get back on topic. I quote a plumber: "If I have to touch shit, that is an extra 500 bucks. 30% of my job is just unplugging toilettes."