Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 2, 2010 at 12:06 AM in reply to: Are Asians more bullish about housing in general… #600130September 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Are Asians more bullish about housing in general… #598999
equalizer
Participant[quote=briansd1]I believe that it’s too easy to dismiss Asians as book smart but uncreative and only good at repetitive technical stuff. Only insecure people do that.
If you look at tech, Acer is a great example.
Acer started supplying parts to American computer makers. They then created their own brand which didn’t really succeed in the 80s and 90s. But the persevered and became focused on contract manufacturing.
And now the Acer brand is dominant… and they bought out Gateway (formerly a San Diego company).
Samsung, HTC, Acer, etc… all very creative Asian businesses.
And if you are an American business and need to source your manufacturing and parts in Asia, who will you need to hire? An educated Asian person.
Ok, so you’re the big shot executive and you run the business. But if you don’t speak the language or understand the culture, you will need to hire an educated Asian person, at least to translate.
Now, if you’re an educated Asian executive with an American university education, you don’t need to hire anyone because you understand both Asian and American cultures. You speak fluent English and the Asian language.
In the long run, all else being equal, which executive will be more profitable to the corporation/shareholders?[/quote]
Acer creative in the USA? What kind of brand recognition do they have here? Where are there fancy gadgets that people crave? Brilliant marketing? But that doesn’t really matter as long as they can produce net profit, which was only $105M last quarter.Samsung on the other hand is more on the bold side, they may even bring in a great Android Tablet this year (better have 10 hr battery life)!
Their Galaxy Sprint phone has great potential with advanced Bluetooth streaming to Samsung TVs and great keyboard.Can someone tell me why all these tech companies with their hundreds of PhDs and design engineers continue to make phone keyboards that average male user deems unusable in 2 minutes??
I had conversation over 6 years ago with a smart 60yr old engineer lamenting dismal prospects for future jobs in USA for the young people. He said don’t worry about, that’s what they said about Japan in the 80’s and they didn’t take over the USA. Well maybe half the T-bond market, but that’s another story.
September 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Are Asians more bullish about housing in general… #599092Participant[quote=briansd1]I believe that it’s too easy to dismiss Asians as book smart but uncreative and only good at repetitive technical stuff. Only insecure people do that.
If you look at tech, Acer is a great example.
Acer started supplying parts to American computer makers. They then created their own brand which didn’t really succeed in the 80s and 90s. But the persevered and became focused on contract manufacturing.
And now the Acer brand is dominant… and they bought out Gateway (formerly a San Diego company).
Samsung, HTC, Acer, etc… all very creative Asian businesses.
And if you are an American business and need to source your manufacturing and parts in Asia, who will you need to hire? An educated Asian person.
Ok, so you’re the big shot executive and you run the business. But if you don’t speak the language or understand the culture, you will need to hire an educated Asian person, at least to translate.
Now, if you’re an educated Asian executive with an American university education, you don’t need to hire anyone because you understand both Asian and American cultures. You speak fluent English and the Asian language.
In the long run, all else being equal, which executive will be more profitable to the corporation/shareholders?[/quote]
Acer creative in the USA? What kind of brand recognition do they have here? Where are there fancy gadgets that people crave? Brilliant marketing? But that doesn’t really matter as long as they can produce net profit, which was only $105M last quarter.Samsung on the other hand is more on the bold side, they may even bring in a great Android Tablet this year (better have 10 hr battery life)!
Their Galaxy Sprint phone has great potential with advanced Bluetooth streaming to Samsung TVs and great keyboard.Can someone tell me why all these tech companies with their hundreds of PhDs and design engineers continue to make phone keyboards that average male user deems unusable in 2 minutes??
I had conversation over 6 years ago with a smart 60yr old engineer lamenting dismal prospects for future jobs in USA for the young people. He said don’t worry about, that’s what they said about Japan in the 80’s and they didn’t take over the USA. Well maybe half the T-bond market, but that’s another story.
September 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Are Asians more bullish about housing in general… #599635Participant[quote=briansd1]I believe that it’s too easy to dismiss Asians as book smart but uncreative and only good at repetitive technical stuff. Only insecure people do that.
If you look at tech, Acer is a great example.
Acer started supplying parts to American computer makers. They then created their own brand which didn’t really succeed in the 80s and 90s. But the persevered and became focused on contract manufacturing.
And now the Acer brand is dominant… and they bought out Gateway (formerly a San Diego company).
Samsung, HTC, Acer, etc… all very creative Asian businesses.
And if you are an American business and need to source your manufacturing and parts in Asia, who will you need to hire? An educated Asian person.
Ok, so you’re the big shot executive and you run the business. But if you don’t speak the language or understand the culture, you will need to hire an educated Asian person, at least to translate.
Now, if you’re an educated Asian executive with an American university education, you don’t need to hire anyone because you understand both Asian and American cultures. You speak fluent English and the Asian language.
In the long run, all else being equal, which executive will be more profitable to the corporation/shareholders?[/quote]
Acer creative in the USA? What kind of brand recognition do they have here? Where are there fancy gadgets that people crave? Brilliant marketing? But that doesn’t really matter as long as they can produce net profit, which was only $105M last quarter.Samsung on the other hand is more on the bold side, they may even bring in a great Android Tablet this year (better have 10 hr battery life)!
Their Galaxy Sprint phone has great potential with advanced Bluetooth streaming to Samsung TVs and great keyboard.Can someone tell me why all these tech companies with their hundreds of PhDs and design engineers continue to make phone keyboards that average male user deems unusable in 2 minutes??
I had conversation over 6 years ago with a smart 60yr old engineer lamenting dismal prospects for future jobs in USA for the young people. He said don’t worry about, that’s what they said about Japan in the 80’s and they didn’t take over the USA. Well maybe half the T-bond market, but that’s another story.
September 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Are Asians more bullish about housing in general… #599742Participant[quote=briansd1]I believe that it’s too easy to dismiss Asians as book smart but uncreative and only good at repetitive technical stuff. Only insecure people do that.
If you look at tech, Acer is a great example.
Acer started supplying parts to American computer makers. They then created their own brand which didn’t really succeed in the 80s and 90s. But the persevered and became focused on contract manufacturing.
And now the Acer brand is dominant… and they bought out Gateway (formerly a San Diego company).
Samsung, HTC, Acer, etc… all very creative Asian businesses.
And if you are an American business and need to source your manufacturing and parts in Asia, who will you need to hire? An educated Asian person.
Ok, so you’re the big shot executive and you run the business. But if you don’t speak the language or understand the culture, you will need to hire an educated Asian person, at least to translate.
Now, if you’re an educated Asian executive with an American university education, you don’t need to hire anyone because you understand both Asian and American cultures. You speak fluent English and the Asian language.
In the long run, all else being equal, which executive will be more profitable to the corporation/shareholders?[/quote]
Acer creative in the USA? What kind of brand recognition do they have here? Where are there fancy gadgets that people crave? Brilliant marketing? But that doesn’t really matter as long as they can produce net profit, which was only $105M last quarter.Samsung on the other hand is more on the bold side, they may even bring in a great Android Tablet this year (better have 10 hr battery life)!
Their Galaxy Sprint phone has great potential with advanced Bluetooth streaming to Samsung TVs and great keyboard.Can someone tell me why all these tech companies with their hundreds of PhDs and design engineers continue to make phone keyboards that average male user deems unusable in 2 minutes??
I had conversation over 6 years ago with a smart 60yr old engineer lamenting dismal prospects for future jobs in USA for the young people. He said don’t worry about, that’s what they said about Japan in the 80’s and they didn’t take over the USA. Well maybe half the T-bond market, but that’s another story.
September 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Are Asians more bullish about housing in general… #600060Participant[quote=briansd1]I believe that it’s too easy to dismiss Asians as book smart but uncreative and only good at repetitive technical stuff. Only insecure people do that.
If you look at tech, Acer is a great example.
Acer started supplying parts to American computer makers. They then created their own brand which didn’t really succeed in the 80s and 90s. But the persevered and became focused on contract manufacturing.
And now the Acer brand is dominant… and they bought out Gateway (formerly a San Diego company).
Samsung, HTC, Acer, etc… all very creative Asian businesses.
And if you are an American business and need to source your manufacturing and parts in Asia, who will you need to hire? An educated Asian person.
Ok, so you’re the big shot executive and you run the business. But if you don’t speak the language or understand the culture, you will need to hire an educated Asian person, at least to translate.
Now, if you’re an educated Asian executive with an American university education, you don’t need to hire anyone because you understand both Asian and American cultures. You speak fluent English and the Asian language.
In the long run, all else being equal, which executive will be more profitable to the corporation/shareholders?[/quote]
Acer creative in the USA? What kind of brand recognition do they have here? Where are there fancy gadgets that people crave? Brilliant marketing? But that doesn’t really matter as long as they can produce net profit, which was only $105M last quarter.Samsung on the other hand is more on the bold side, they may even bring in a great Android Tablet this year (better have 10 hr battery life)!
Their Galaxy Sprint phone has great potential with advanced Bluetooth streaming to Samsung TVs and great keyboard.Can someone tell me why all these tech companies with their hundreds of PhDs and design engineers continue to make phone keyboards that average male user deems unusable in 2 minutes??
I had conversation over 6 years ago with a smart 60yr old engineer lamenting dismal prospects for future jobs in USA for the young people. He said don’t worry about, that’s what they said about Japan in the 80’s and they didn’t take over the USA. Well maybe half the T-bond market, but that’s another story.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]The further this goes, the happier I am that I stayed away from participating in this thread.[/quote]
I grew up with Imus and Stern so I’ll blame them for all my non-PC observations.Walking down my street I rarely see Asians outside. Asked Asian neighbor about kids and parents said its so bad once kids they turn 7 because they have to take them to piano lessons, soccer practice, study lessons, volunteer clinics at homeless and women’s abuse shelters, etc. I think I can hear parents screaming at the kids, probably for missing the C(4) note 13 minutes into the Piano Concerto No.24 in C minor. Another Asian down the block got 23xx/2400 on SAT. And the happy white kids are playing baseball, hockey and basketball in the street. Could be that the white kids are talented creative geniuses with photographic memories and don’t need to study 12 hours a day (in grade school) to be succesful like Jobs and Gates?
Most really smart people I knew in college barely did any home work in high school, let alone grade school. Ask all the rich people you know how much they studied in grade school – high school and you’ll find that they were playing wiffle ball, not reading Encylopedia Brown and Evelyn Wood books (Yeah flu, Wood, not Lin)
Anyway, all that studying/college prepping is way overrated because smarter people (managers) hire those hard working nerds from around the world (read commodity) for technical output while they create oompanies and/or move up corporate ladder making important deals at La Costa.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]The further this goes, the happier I am that I stayed away from participating in this thread.[/quote]
I grew up with Imus and Stern so I’ll blame them for all my non-PC observations.Walking down my street I rarely see Asians outside. Asked Asian neighbor about kids and parents said its so bad once kids they turn 7 because they have to take them to piano lessons, soccer practice, study lessons, volunteer clinics at homeless and women’s abuse shelters, etc. I think I can hear parents screaming at the kids, probably for missing the C(4) note 13 minutes into the Piano Concerto No.24 in C minor. Another Asian down the block got 23xx/2400 on SAT. And the happy white kids are playing baseball, hockey and basketball in the street. Could be that the white kids are talented creative geniuses with photographic memories and don’t need to study 12 hours a day (in grade school) to be succesful like Jobs and Gates?
Most really smart people I knew in college barely did any home work in high school, let alone grade school. Ask all the rich people you know how much they studied in grade school – high school and you’ll find that they were playing wiffle ball, not reading Encylopedia Brown and Evelyn Wood books (Yeah flu, Wood, not Lin)
Anyway, all that studying/college prepping is way overrated because smarter people (managers) hire those hard working nerds from around the world (read commodity) for technical output while they create oompanies and/or move up corporate ladder making important deals at La Costa.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]The further this goes, the happier I am that I stayed away from participating in this thread.[/quote]
I grew up with Imus and Stern so I’ll blame them for all my non-PC observations.Walking down my street I rarely see Asians outside. Asked Asian neighbor about kids and parents said its so bad once kids they turn 7 because they have to take them to piano lessons, soccer practice, study lessons, volunteer clinics at homeless and women’s abuse shelters, etc. I think I can hear parents screaming at the kids, probably for missing the C(4) note 13 minutes into the Piano Concerto No.24 in C minor. Another Asian down the block got 23xx/2400 on SAT. And the happy white kids are playing baseball, hockey and basketball in the street. Could be that the white kids are talented creative geniuses with photographic memories and don’t need to study 12 hours a day (in grade school) to be succesful like Jobs and Gates?
Most really smart people I knew in college barely did any home work in high school, let alone grade school. Ask all the rich people you know how much they studied in grade school – high school and you’ll find that they were playing wiffle ball, not reading Encylopedia Brown and Evelyn Wood books (Yeah flu, Wood, not Lin)
Anyway, all that studying/college prepping is way overrated because smarter people (managers) hire those hard working nerds from around the world (read commodity) for technical output while they create oompanies and/or move up corporate ladder making important deals at La Costa.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]The further this goes, the happier I am that I stayed away from participating in this thread.[/quote]
I grew up with Imus and Stern so I’ll blame them for all my non-PC observations.Walking down my street I rarely see Asians outside. Asked Asian neighbor about kids and parents said its so bad once kids they turn 7 because they have to take them to piano lessons, soccer practice, study lessons, volunteer clinics at homeless and women’s abuse shelters, etc. I think I can hear parents screaming at the kids, probably for missing the C(4) note 13 minutes into the Piano Concerto No.24 in C minor. Another Asian down the block got 23xx/2400 on SAT. And the happy white kids are playing baseball, hockey and basketball in the street. Could be that the white kids are talented creative geniuses with photographic memories and don’t need to study 12 hours a day (in grade school) to be succesful like Jobs and Gates?
Most really smart people I knew in college barely did any home work in high school, let alone grade school. Ask all the rich people you know how much they studied in grade school – high school and you’ll find that they were playing wiffle ball, not reading Encylopedia Brown and Evelyn Wood books (Yeah flu, Wood, not Lin)
Anyway, all that studying/college prepping is way overrated because smarter people (managers) hire those hard working nerds from around the world (read commodity) for technical output while they create oompanies and/or move up corporate ladder making important deals at La Costa.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]The further this goes, the happier I am that I stayed away from participating in this thread.[/quote]
I grew up with Imus and Stern so I’ll blame them for all my non-PC observations.Walking down my street I rarely see Asians outside. Asked Asian neighbor about kids and parents said its so bad once kids they turn 7 because they have to take them to piano lessons, soccer practice, study lessons, volunteer clinics at homeless and women’s abuse shelters, etc. I think I can hear parents screaming at the kids, probably for missing the C(4) note 13 minutes into the Piano Concerto No.24 in C minor. Another Asian down the block got 23xx/2400 on SAT. And the happy white kids are playing baseball, hockey and basketball in the street. Could be that the white kids are talented creative geniuses with photographic memories and don’t need to study 12 hours a day (in grade school) to be succesful like Jobs and Gates?
Most really smart people I knew in college barely did any home work in high school, let alone grade school. Ask all the rich people you know how much they studied in grade school – high school and you’ll find that they were playing wiffle ball, not reading Encylopedia Brown and Evelyn Wood books (Yeah flu, Wood, not Lin)
Anyway, all that studying/college prepping is way overrated because smarter people (managers) hire those hard working nerds from around the world (read commodity) for technical output while they create oompanies and/or move up corporate ladder making important deals at La Costa.
Participant[quote=EconProf]Debate about the military-industrial complex will soon be replaced by talk about the education-industrial complex. Higher education is grossly oversold by a cabal of educrats, professors, politicians, lenders, and other vested interests. The rate of return on college degrees is wildly overstated for several reasons:
1. The lifetime ROR data are for past years and decades, and do not take into account the current experience of recent college graduates in today’s job market–which is not likely to improve much in the near future.
2. The ROR studies do not consider the personal characteristics that differentiate college-bound HS graduates from the non-college-bound. The former generally are already somewhat smarter, more ambitious, better spoken, better connected, have more family wealth, etc., on average. Accordingly, their lifetime earnings would be expected to be higher regardless of college. How much of their higher income can be attributed solely to going to college? That is the question never posed to those overselling college degrees.
3. The type of degree granted matters hugely. My daughter graduated from the afore-mentioned Harvey Mudd College in 2003 and has made little money because her major was English (some coursework taken at adjoining Scripps College). Is now starting on a master’s degree in Accountancy to remedy the earnings problem.
In short, college has been hugely oversold by vested interests, and the victims are the indebted-for-life graduates struggling with dashed job hopes.
If there is one thing to be learned from this experience, it is that incentives matter. In the same way that the housing bubble became so big for so long was because the participants all had the incentives in front of them to keep it going (lenders, buyers, RE professionals, Fannie/Freddie, politicians), so also the education industry has grown due to incentives. Professors’ work loads have fallen over the years and their compensation (especially on a per-hour basis) usually exceeds what they could make in the private sector. College administrative staffs have exploded in number and compensation. Campus facilities and dorms are towers of excess. The students and their parents see college not as an intellectual pursuit but as a consumption item (social life, status, etc), with the degree devalued since “everybody has one”…
As a nation, our pursuit of credentials has left us overeducated in the formal sense of having degrees, but without knowledge and introspection in a broader sense. We are now awakening to this and college enrollements will have a much-needed downward adjustment.[/quote]
Here is Mish stating same thing while back:“As long as government is willing to “help out” with student loans, universities and colleges will keep raising prices, and the total cost of an education will keep soaring until one day it blows sky high, just as happened with mortgages.
Note that the loans are guaranteed by the government. Also note that student loans are not discharged in bankruptcy. Those two facts are all you need to understand why the financial industry as a whole consistently champions the promise of postsecondary education and its value to American society. No one really gives a damn about the students. Worse yet, were funding cut off, there would be student outrage over it when stopping funding is exactly what is needed to bring costs down.”
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/remarkable-comparison-affordable.html
Participant[quote=EconProf]Debate about the military-industrial complex will soon be replaced by talk about the education-industrial complex. Higher education is grossly oversold by a cabal of educrats, professors, politicians, lenders, and other vested interests. The rate of return on college degrees is wildly overstated for several reasons:
1. The lifetime ROR data are for past years and decades, and do not take into account the current experience of recent college graduates in today’s job market–which is not likely to improve much in the near future.
2. The ROR studies do not consider the personal characteristics that differentiate college-bound HS graduates from the non-college-bound. The former generally are already somewhat smarter, more ambitious, better spoken, better connected, have more family wealth, etc., on average. Accordingly, their lifetime earnings would be expected to be higher regardless of college. How much of their higher income can be attributed solely to going to college? That is the question never posed to those overselling college degrees.
3. The type of degree granted matters hugely. My daughter graduated from the afore-mentioned Harvey Mudd College in 2003 and has made little money because her major was English (some coursework taken at adjoining Scripps College). Is now starting on a master’s degree in Accountancy to remedy the earnings problem.
In short, college has been hugely oversold by vested interests, and the victims are the indebted-for-life graduates struggling with dashed job hopes.
If there is one thing to be learned from this experience, it is that incentives matter. In the same way that the housing bubble became so big for so long was because the participants all had the incentives in front of them to keep it going (lenders, buyers, RE professionals, Fannie/Freddie, politicians), so also the education industry has grown due to incentives. Professors’ work loads have fallen over the years and their compensation (especially on a per-hour basis) usually exceeds what they could make in the private sector. College administrative staffs have exploded in number and compensation. Campus facilities and dorms are towers of excess. The students and their parents see college not as an intellectual pursuit but as a consumption item (social life, status, etc), with the degree devalued since “everybody has one”…
As a nation, our pursuit of credentials has left us overeducated in the formal sense of having degrees, but without knowledge and introspection in a broader sense. We are now awakening to this and college enrollements will have a much-needed downward adjustment.[/quote]
Here is Mish stating same thing while back:“As long as government is willing to “help out” with student loans, universities and colleges will keep raising prices, and the total cost of an education will keep soaring until one day it blows sky high, just as happened with mortgages.
Note that the loans are guaranteed by the government. Also note that student loans are not discharged in bankruptcy. Those two facts are all you need to understand why the financial industry as a whole consistently champions the promise of postsecondary education and its value to American society. No one really gives a damn about the students. Worse yet, were funding cut off, there would be student outrage over it when stopping funding is exactly what is needed to bring costs down.”
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/remarkable-comparison-affordable.html
Participant[quote=EconProf]Debate about the military-industrial complex will soon be replaced by talk about the education-industrial complex. Higher education is grossly oversold by a cabal of educrats, professors, politicians, lenders, and other vested interests. The rate of return on college degrees is wildly overstated for several reasons:
1. The lifetime ROR data are for past years and decades, and do not take into account the current experience of recent college graduates in today’s job market–which is not likely to improve much in the near future.
2. The ROR studies do not consider the personal characteristics that differentiate college-bound HS graduates from the non-college-bound. The former generally are already somewhat smarter, more ambitious, better spoken, better connected, have more family wealth, etc., on average. Accordingly, their lifetime earnings would be expected to be higher regardless of college. How much of their higher income can be attributed solely to going to college? That is the question never posed to those overselling college degrees.
3. The type of degree granted matters hugely. My daughter graduated from the afore-mentioned Harvey Mudd College in 2003 and has made little money because her major was English (some coursework taken at adjoining Scripps College). Is now starting on a master’s degree in Accountancy to remedy the earnings problem.
In short, college has been hugely oversold by vested interests, and the victims are the indebted-for-life graduates struggling with dashed job hopes.
If there is one thing to be learned from this experience, it is that incentives matter. In the same way that the housing bubble became so big for so long was because the participants all had the incentives in front of them to keep it going (lenders, buyers, RE professionals, Fannie/Freddie, politicians), so also the education industry has grown due to incentives. Professors’ work loads have fallen over the years and their compensation (especially on a per-hour basis) usually exceeds what they could make in the private sector. College administrative staffs have exploded in number and compensation. Campus facilities and dorms are towers of excess. The students and their parents see college not as an intellectual pursuit but as a consumption item (social life, status, etc), with the degree devalued since “everybody has one”…
As a nation, our pursuit of credentials has left us overeducated in the formal sense of having degrees, but without knowledge and introspection in a broader sense. We are now awakening to this and college enrollements will have a much-needed downward adjustment.[/quote]
Here is Mish stating same thing while back:“As long as government is willing to “help out” with student loans, universities and colleges will keep raising prices, and the total cost of an education will keep soaring until one day it blows sky high, just as happened with mortgages.
Note that the loans are guaranteed by the government. Also note that student loans are not discharged in bankruptcy. Those two facts are all you need to understand why the financial industry as a whole consistently champions the promise of postsecondary education and its value to American society. No one really gives a damn about the students. Worse yet, were funding cut off, there would be student outrage over it when stopping funding is exactly what is needed to bring costs down.”
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/remarkable-comparison-affordable.html
Participant[quote=EconProf]Debate about the military-industrial complex will soon be replaced by talk about the education-industrial complex. Higher education is grossly oversold by a cabal of educrats, professors, politicians, lenders, and other vested interests. The rate of return on college degrees is wildly overstated for several reasons:
1. The lifetime ROR data are for past years and decades, and do not take into account the current experience of recent college graduates in today’s job market–which is not likely to improve much in the near future.
2. The ROR studies do not consider the personal characteristics that differentiate college-bound HS graduates from the non-college-bound. The former generally are already somewhat smarter, more ambitious, better spoken, better connected, have more family wealth, etc., on average. Accordingly, their lifetime earnings would be expected to be higher regardless of college. How much of their higher income can be attributed solely to going to college? That is the question never posed to those overselling college degrees.
3. The type of degree granted matters hugely. My daughter graduated from the afore-mentioned Harvey Mudd College in 2003 and has made little money because her major was English (some coursework taken at adjoining Scripps College). Is now starting on a master’s degree in Accountancy to remedy the earnings problem.
In short, college has been hugely oversold by vested interests, and the victims are the indebted-for-life graduates struggling with dashed job hopes.
If there is one thing to be learned from this experience, it is that incentives matter. In the same way that the housing bubble became so big for so long was because the participants all had the incentives in front of them to keep it going (lenders, buyers, RE professionals, Fannie/Freddie, politicians), so also the education industry has grown due to incentives. Professors’ work loads have fallen over the years and their compensation (especially on a per-hour basis) usually exceeds what they could make in the private sector. College administrative staffs have exploded in number and compensation. Campus facilities and dorms are towers of excess. The students and their parents see college not as an intellectual pursuit but as a consumption item (social life, status, etc), with the degree devalued since “everybody has one”…
As a nation, our pursuit of credentials has left us overeducated in the formal sense of having degrees, but without knowledge and introspection in a broader sense. We are now awakening to this and college enrollements will have a much-needed downward adjustment.[/quote]
Here is Mish stating same thing while back:“As long as government is willing to “help out” with student loans, universities and colleges will keep raising prices, and the total cost of an education will keep soaring until one day it blows sky high, just as happened with mortgages.
Note that the loans are guaranteed by the government. Also note that student loans are not discharged in bankruptcy. Those two facts are all you need to understand why the financial industry as a whole consistently champions the promise of postsecondary education and its value to American society. No one really gives a damn about the students. Worse yet, were funding cut off, there would be student outrage over it when stopping funding is exactly what is needed to bring costs down.”
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/remarkable-comparison-affordable.html
-
AuthorPosts