The government decides to try to increase the middle class by subsidizing things that middle class people have: If middle-class people go to college and own homes, then surely if more people go to college and own homes, we’ll have more middle-class people. But homeownership and college aren’t causes of middle-class status, they’re markers for possessing the kinds of traits — self-discipline, the ability to defer gratification, etc. — that let you enter, and stay, in the middle class. Subsidizing the markers doesn’t produce the traits; if anything, it undermines them.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Exactly
Glen Reynolds making a point that should be carved in every bureaucrat's forehead (with added emphasis by me):
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
He might be right, but in the US it does not follow that going to college means one will ever own a home. Its a complex issue, made worse by the way guaranteed student loan programs were "restructured" under Clinton to benefit the banks and Sallie Mae. This began to be rectified by the Congress that was elected in 2006, and more extensive reform has been implemented under the current Administration and Education Secretary Arne Duncan. This has helped millions of graduates--myself included--who earned essentially worthless degrees from a job market perspective, but were saddled with a mountain of debt far in excess of the cost of the education.
ReplyDeleteBut long before that, the guaranteed student loan programs that went into effect in the mid-'60s meant that everyone who was academically qualified could go to college regardless of financial circumstances, ostensibly a good thing. However, the net result was that the job market was flooded with college graduates, and employers began to demand a college degree for low-level jobs that heretofore only required a high school diploma. So then people thought that a graduate or professional degree would do the trick, but then in the '80s the market was flooded with MBAs, which lowered the market value of the degree. Now, I've been reading articles the last year or two and have met some men and women who earned JDs and are working at Home Depot because there are no lawyer jobs out there. And this pre-dates the recession of '08.
I know, we would all like to believe what we were taught, that self-discipline and deferred gratification would bring rewards, but I got over that a long time ago. Most of the people I know who have done well have neither, and they succeeded for reasons which have nothing to do with either. Maybe things are different in Canada.
Coincidentally, this article appeared in this morning's Hartford Courant. What they describe long pre-dates the current Governor, and happens in every State agency. Between 10 and 15 yrs ago, in response to job postings, I took several of the same type of exams they describe, scored in the high 90s on most with a low of 85 on only one, and never got called for an interview, despite several follow-up calls. I just stopped applying to postings.
ReplyDeleteThe complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-lender-column-agriculture-hiring-020100926,0,1864905.column