On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Jerry Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:
> > If a state is running in the black and wants to use it excess to fund > education, it should. Should it stress fields where the graduates can > actually contribute after graduation. In my opinion yes. > > Naw. I mean, *I* personally would stress such, especially as a parent, but naw, i don't think the state should. Oh, and if the state is running in the RED, and as such can't fund education for their citizens like they would like, they need to cut some other shit and get education in there. Because I guarantee that it's more important than stuff they are currently funding. > Then the state can raise taxes on the newly graduated Engineers, doctors, > and so on in order to help pay welfare for the chronically unemployed > people who majored in the liberal arts fields. > > Having a degree does not guarantee a job, especially if it's in a field > that there is no demand for. An employed poet is still unemployed (though > hard times would probably give him great angst to drive creativity) even if > the his college degree is proudly hung on the wall. > Of course not, there are NO guarantees. But education gives you a much better shot at leading a good life. > I don't have the link unfortunately, but I read an article recently that > basically stated the worst workers are those coming from Ivy league > schools. They have a sense of entitlement, are lazy, and under educated > (they aren't actually taught anything). It said the best bang for your > buck if you are going to hire someone is from a technical school. These > usually have co-op programs and more classes designed to teach skills. > What > a person majors in matters. > Dunno if that's true or not, but I work with several people at my current company who are graduates of tech schools, and they are PHENOMENAL workers. I've only known a few ivy leaguers, and they were good workers too. Probably depends more on the person. I've said it many times before, a person who works hard can get a good education at a bad school, and a lazy ass can get a shitty education at a good school. Anyway, what I am saying about picking majors is coming. A California > state senator or representative recently proposed a plan where students > could go to college for "free" if they sign up to pay a percentage of their > salary after college for a set number of years. If something like this is > implemented, do you think the state would let them major in something that > doesn't pay? > Well....that does pose an interesting point. I mean, if they are helping pay for something, then perhaps they SHOULD have some say in it. My parents paid for my college education, and while they didn't tell me what I could or could not major in....if htey HAD, i would not have been in a position to argue with them. I would have had to either do what they wanted, or drop out. I don't like the idea of the state getting into this business....for lots of reasons, but mostly because i'm just not convinced that education dollars are "wasted" on so called weak majors, or majors that don't offer much in the way of jobs. Also, i might argue that if such majors really are pointless, then really the university should be the one to do away with them. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:347771 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
