So, this whole thing is an attempt do argue against Bernie Sanders proposed universal free college tuition by comparing it to a country that offers free college tuition and is used as an example of a better system by the author?
Against Tulip Subsidies
11–20 of 89 posts
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#12The author was doing great right up until the last paragraph. His proposed solution is silly because it makes no distinction between jobs for which a university education is essential and those for which it is irrelevant. Then there is also the large grey area in between, in which a university education in certain fields might be useful but not essential. What he would do is abolish the right of those professions in…
I also think that there is no practical way his solution could work, at least not with the laws the way they are. How would you ask people to explain gaps in their work history? Are you no longer allowed to consider why someone was unemployed for 4 or 5 consecutive years? Additionally, I don't think you can easily do general intelligence testing for a job. You have to be able to show that every question relates to job performance and that it does not cause a disproportionate impact on the hiring of people from protected classes.
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#13Yeah, no thanks. I prefer doctors and lawyers that have gone to school rather than watching MOOC videos on a bus.
You missed the point. Doctors in the US take 4 years of generally medically-unrelated undergraduate schooling before they're allowed into medical school. Why not just allow them into medical school?
Actually the author forgets to mention that you can have any major to get in to medical school but many medical schools still require quite a few core courses you are expected to complete while in undergrad including two years of Chemistry, a year of math, physics and writing.
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#14So, this whole thing is an attempt do argue against Bernie Sanders proposed universal free college tuition by comparing it to a country that offers free college tuition and is used as an example of a better system by the author?
Yeah and his analogy is plain wrong. Bernie Sanders is saying to make the tulips free, not to give everybody enough money to buy them..
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#15I take a more classical view on University: It never should be "job training". It should be about general life enrichment, beyond-industry research, philosophy about the world and its workings, and broadening horizons. Sure, people who went through that (ie, independently interested in, was recommended in or could afford it, and succeeded) tended to be more capable people. Let's roughly compare it to becoming an Eagl…
One problem with this approach is that most people consider "life enrichment" to be courses that are biased towards their own political viewpoint. Conservatives want students to have a basis in the history, literature and philosophy of Western Civilization. Liberals want to teach students to think "critically", i.e. to view Western Civilization through the lens of oppression and racism (and all other ism's).
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#16So, this whole thing is an attempt do argue against Bernie Sanders proposed universal free college tuition by comparing it to a country that offers free college tuition and is used as an example of a better system by the author?
Yeah and his analogy is plain wrong. Bernie Sanders is saying to make the tulips free, not to give everybody enough money to buy them..
It's not wrong. Making something free means paying for it in a transparent fashion.
Bernie Sanders is not talking about changing the institutional structure of college such that it somehow has no cost to provide. He is talking about the government paying that cost on behalf of students.
I agree with free education, by the way. We currently spend our budgets on much less useful things. But let's be honest about what it means and how it works.
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#17I take a more classical view on University: It never should be "job training". It should be about general life enrichment, beyond-industry research, philosophy about the world and its workings, and broadening horizons. Sure, people who went through that (ie, independently interested in, was recommended in or could afford it, and succeeded) tended to be more capable people. Let's roughly compare it to becoming an Eagl…
> It should be about general life enrichment
This is a view that rich people can afford to hold. Poor or middle class people cannot reasonably afford to pay four years of opportunity cost, plus tuition, for "general life enrichment."
The Ireland control serves well here too. Are Irish medical doctors, and indeed all European doctors, less "enriched" than American ones? I'm very skeptical of this idea, but if you could propose some metric that would allow us to evaluate the question, that might be helpful.
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#18So, this whole thing is an attempt do argue against Bernie Sanders proposed universal free college tuition by comparing it to a country that offers free college tuition and is used as an example of a better system by the author?
Yeah and his analogy is plain wrong. Bernie Sanders is saying to make the tulips free, not to give everybody enough money to buy them..
"Making college free" is identical in every meaningful way to giving everyone who wants to buy it enough money to buy it.
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#19[deleted]
Re: Against Tulip Subsidies
#20[deleted]
[deleted]