I really just can't understand the "I got mine" mentality of so many right-wingers

What?

I'm a right-wing student who believes he should pay for his own higher education, thus I have a "I got mine" mentality. Maybe it's got nothing to do with the kind of mentalities you want to super-impose on people of a different political persuasion; maybe, just maybe, you arrogant fuck, they have different opinions on the best way to organise the higher ed. system.

And, possibly, my own opinions and those of other right-wingers could be disastrously wrong. But as least do us the fucking courtesy of affording us the virtue of intellectual integrity, as I grant those who disagree with me.

Why is it so bad to create a more equal society?

Given that most of the benefits of higher ed. accrue to those pursuing it, and not society as a whole, funding it via general taxation is emphatically not equitable. Indeed, that's almost our whole point.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 25, 2016, 04:47:28 AM

Quote from: Cindy on February 24, 2016, 08:58:12 PM

I really just can't understand the "I got mine" mentality of so many right-wingers

What?

I'm a right-wing student who believes he should pay for his own higher education, thus I have a "I got mine" mentality. Maybe it's got nothing to do with the kind of mentalities you want to super-impose on people of a different political persuasion; maybe, just maybe, you arrogant fuck, they have different opinions on the best way to organise the higher ed. system.

And, possibly, my own opinions and those of other right-wingers could be disastrously wrong. But as least do us the fucking courtesy of affording us the virtue of intellectual integrity, as I grant those who disagree with me.

Quote

Why is it so bad to create a more equal society?

Given that most of the benefits of higher ed. accrue to those pursuing it, and not society as a whole, funding it via general taxation is emphatically not equitable. Indeed, that's almost our whole point.

Ayyyy

I love how I always get bashed for being "arrogant" and "intolerant" and etc etc but I have yet to get into a dispute with you where I wasn't blatantly insulted

Irony, s'what that is

Because you are.

Quote from: Cindy on February 25, 2016, 06:04:37 AM

but I have yet to get into a dispute with you where I wasn't blatantly insulted

Maybe you should take that as some kind of indicator. Indeed, if you're constantly getting into arguments where people are telling you that you are making arrogant assumptions and casting unfair aspersions, maybe you should consider the possibility that you might be doing exactly that.

Although my attention is more drawn to the fact that you didn't have a rebuttal to either of my points. So, allow me to ask again: why do you keep misrepresenting the views of those you disagree with as coming from some warped mentality you can't understand? And why do you think a higher ed. model financed by general taxation is more equitable than some system involving loans and debt to individual students?

Don't think I need to rephrase exactly what Verb's been saying, fam

Are you forming opinions on an area you don't know enough about, or are you too cowardly to stand up for your beliefs when challenged?

Sure

Assuming everyone COULD and was WILLING to pay for it through taxes, would you still believe college shouldn't be free?

Yes. At the end of the day, I view the system of loans and debt (structured as it is here in Britain) as fairer and more equitable than general taxation.

I think people are forgetting that the primary purpose of a degree is to gear you up for becoming an effective member of society. It isn't for everyone. Not everybody has the mental capacity to do a degree. It's all very nice saying free college 'educates the population', but what's the point in obtaining said education if it's been rendered useless? How are you supposed to stand out if everyone and anyone has a degree?

I think you're confusing free [at point of use] with compulsory. I also think you're ignoring that college admissions would still exist. If you're a retard with a .02 GPA, you're not getting in.

 If you want to pursue a trade, or some other line of work that doesn't require a college degree - go for it. If you don't think you have the skills for college - fine, it's not for you.

In the US, at least, a college degree is virtually required for any job that pays more than minimum wage. There are a few that don't, but the vast majority do. A college degree is worth now what a high school education was 60-80 years ago. Things change and it's time to adapt.

what's the point in obtaining said education if it's been rendered useless? How are you supposed to stand out if everyone and anyone has a degree?

And fuckers are trying to tell me that we're not overpopulated.

If we didn't have 300-some odd million losers in this country, it wouldn't be a problem "flooding" the job market, would it?

Assuming you're right, anyway. That argument is still pretty conjectural. Who is to say that providing the entire country with employment would honestly put too much of a strain on the job market? Where's the evidence?

If the supply for specialized jobs goes down, wouldn't the demand for menial labor go up? And wouldn't people respond to that change? Here's a conjecture: Just because college is free doesn't mean everybody is gonna go to college.

Quote from: Mad Max on February 25, 2016, 10:02:52 AM

In the US, at least, a college degree is virtually required for any job that pays more than minimum wage.

that's absolute horseshit and you know it.

Even being a receptionist or an office clerk requires a college degree. Not sure how much lower on the totem pole you can get in the corporate world.

Quote from: Mad Max on February 25, 2016, 10:42:38 AM

Quote from: DAS B00T 2016 on February 25, 2016, 10:40:52 AM

Quote from: Mad Max on February 25, 2016, 10:02:52 AM

In the US, at least, a college degree is virtually required for any job that pays more than minimum wage.

that's absolute horseshit and you know it.

Even being a receptionist or an office clerk requires a college degree. Not sure how much lower on the totem pole you can get in the corporate world.

But I know lots of secretaries who've never been to college...

..ok? Clearly not every business adheres to this practice. They can choose who they hire.

with compulsory. I also think you're ignoring that college admissions would still exist. If you're a retard with a .02 GPA, you're not getting in.

Obviously, but the prospect of free college devalues the point of getting one. I know from experience in Scotland because I see lazy fuckers all the time coasting on the idea of obtaining a degree because they can, wasting tax payer money, and flooding more of the job market with it.

In the US, at least, a college degree is virtually required for any job that pays more than minimum wage.

Can we please stop this conjectural meme already? I want to see evidence that the labour market is so fucked that employers refuse to hire anyone that doesn't have a bachelors.

There are a few that don't, but the vast majority do. A college degree is worth now what a high school education was 60-80 years ago. Things change and it's time to adapt.

Absolute hogwash. What about skill based work? Plumbers, electricians and construction workers are just as important to the facilitation of the economy as uni grads are, and sometimes pay more in some instances. I almost never see emphasis placed on those types of professions.

Quote from: Mad Max on February 25, 2016, 10:02:52 AM

with compulsory. I also think you're ignoring that college admissions would still exist. If you're a retard with a .02 GPA, you're not getting in.

Obviously, but the prospect of free college devalues the point of getting one. I know from experience in Scotland because I see lazy fuckers all the time coasting on the idea of obtaining a degree because they can, wasting tax payer money, and flooding more of the job market with it.

College isn't the kind of thing you can coast through. Maybe 100-level classes, but as soon as you make it into your third and fourth years, taking upper division classes, that takes actual work.

Quote

In the US, at least, a college degree is virtually required for any job that pays more than minimum wage.

Can we please stop this conjectural meme already? I want to see evidence that the labour market is so fucked that employers refuse to hire anyone that doesn't have a bachelors.

Obviously there are some positions that don't require a degree, and even if the job requirements list a degree, a business can hire whoever they want if they think they have the qualifications. One of my coworkers doesn't have a degree, but has a shit-ton of relevant experience. But that's far from the norm.

My sister is job hunting right now, and she's still in college, and nearly every low-level job she applies to has a degree requirement. That's just how things are here.

Quote

There are a few that don't, but the vast majority do. A college degree is worth now what a high school education was 60-80 years ago. Things change and it's time to adapt.

Absolute hogwash. What about skill based work? Plumbers, electricians and construction workers are just as important to the facilitation of the economy as uni grads are, and sometimes pay more in some instances. I almost never see emphasis placed on those types of professions.

I literally mentioned trades in the post you're quoting...which you conveniently omitted.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 25, 2016, 06:57:44 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on February 25, 2016, 06:54:36 AM

Assuming everyone COULD and was WILLING to pay for it through taxes, would you still believe college shouldn't be free?

Yes. At the end of the day, I view the system of loans and debt (structured as it is here in Britain) as fairer and more equitable than general taxation.

I asked you a few questions regarding that earlier, and never received a response.

Care to repeat them?

No morals or buzzwords eh? Gee, you're really trying to phase out reasonable arguments there aren't ya?

Well, I'll be honest. You got me there. Without appealing to morals or writing up something lest I be called your new favorite buzzword, I can't come up with a reasonable answer.

But I can ask you a question.

Why should knowledge have an imaginary, meaningless, and completely fictitious price put on it?

Also, no moral arguments please. We're looking at it in cold logic here. Knowledge and the capability of being able to perform something physical and tangible with said knowledge. Essentially being hidden behind an imaginary number wall that has no real meaning or value.

Think of it as the number 0 standing in the way of the number 1. Now, why should that be allowed to exist?

Think carefully now, lest I call you my favorite buzzword, a capitalist shill.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 25, 2016, 11:52:15 AM

Care to repeat them?

They were actually in a separate thread, but it's the same topic.

The income level required here is Β£21,000/pa. If you never earn above that, the debt is wiped.

And what I meant was that the revenue you'd need to raise in order to finance the national higher education system would be larger on a given worker's pay packet than the benefit to that worker from that extra college educated individual being in the labour market. And yes, while there are positive externalities to higher education, it's still far and away the case that those in low-skilled labour markets are being left behind.

College graduates reap almost all of the benefits of their education when they move into a high-paying field which requires more complex skills than found in the lower income deciles. Those who don't have a college education, yet are still being taxed for it, may see some minor benefit but they themselves are still without substantial skils, and so will be left behind as technological change takes its course. It makes no sense to tax people to give some other people substantial benefits, when we could be making much more important structural and fiscal changes within the welfare system to help those at the bottom.

College isn't the kind of thing you can coast through. Maybe 100-level classes, but as soon as you make it into your third and fourth years, taking upper division classes, that takes actual work.

If you want a decent degree, sure, but can probably scrape by with a sub par degree if you put the bare minimum in.

Obviously there are some positions that don't require a degree, and even if the job requirements list a degree, a business can hire whoever they want if they think they have the qualifications. One of my coworkers doesn't have a degree, but has a shit-ton of relevant experience. But that's far from the norm.

Explain how it's 'far from the norm' then. Not everyone lives in California.

My sister is job hunting right now, and she's still in college, and nearly every low-level job she applies to has a degree requirement. That's just how things are here.

Again, sounds more like a locational issue as opposed to the labour market in general.

I literally mentioned trades in the post you're quoting...which you conveniently omitted.

So why are you positing the notion that you can't sustain yourself without a degree when you quite obviously can? You drill people in with that mindset and of course they're going to end up with a shitty career.