Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They have a lot of fancy graphs, but I would be interested to see some of the descriptive statistics of each of the groups. For example, let's control for tenure. What if those with bachelor's degrees happen to have a longer tenure with the company.
You could also control for performance. Let's not kid ourselves...a college degree will not make you a more skilled plumber or cashier.
I would assume that it is the actual performance that causes them to earn more at labor type jobs, and they would have been driven to perform just as well as a plumber or a cashier regardless of a college education or not.
I think college is a good thing for those that truly want to learn. But to try to sell college to kids like this is dishonest. You are selling them an outcome (more earnings) that does not really exist. People don't pay you more just because you have a diploma, they pay you more because you are more skilled than other workers..and college degrees do not make you a more skill plumber or cashier in and of itself.
Sure those that end up with college degrees are usually more driven in every aspect of their lives (notice usually, I am not diminishing the drive of everyone that decided not to pursue higher education, many have an excellent work ethic and drive and decide paying for higher education is not a sound economic investment for them). Essentially this report is adding value to something (a college degree) that needs to be attributed to a third variable/confound (performance).
"Skeptics say college is overrated, but those with degrees make more even when their jobs don't require higher education."
Perhaps the fact that they make more money is beyond dispute, but income alone doesn't tell the whole story. A guy making $45,000 and little or no debt is probably better off financially than the guy who makes $60,000 and has to pay several hundred dollars each month in tuition loan repayments. Or at the very least, they're 'even Steven'.
I think a college education is a great thing. I just think that the costs ought to be factored into an individual's decision to go or not, and I also think schools and the government should look for ways to control the ever-rising costs of education. I was lucky in that my parents had a college fund paid for by the time I was ready to go, so that helped control my undergrad finances. However, I doubt they could afford to do that today. College tuition has risen so much.
I speak as someone who's been through college and earned a master's degree. I believe that school is a great thing. Education is a great thing. More people ought to be critical thinkers. But I definitely agree with the critiques of everyone marching off to State U like clockwork right after high school. People argue that college is where you grow up, but I disagree. College insulates people from the real world and real-world expectations. The skills that you need in order to be a successful student are not necessarily the same skills that you need in order to be a successful entrepreneur or whatever it is you want to be. I think it's better to go out there into the real-world and hump it for a few years, gain some maturity in the process, earn some bank, save some coin, and take a few entry-level courses to see what college is like and more importantly, to see what interests you as an individual. It would be even better if your employer can pay the course costs, but that's rare.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57728
Once you have a good job, the student loan payments are not much of an issue. The biggest problem is that people expect a degree to be a guarantee of a great career. You have to choose the major carefully, and hope that the area you go into is still in need of employees by the time you graduate in 4 years. Unfortunately there is not a lot of need for people with degrees in English Literature, Art History or even the popular communications.
Others like social service, child and family studies, and elementary education may result in jobs but don't pay enough to provide a decent living and still pay off student loan debt.
These days even those degrees in biggest demand like high tech, engineering and finance can't provide a job when there are so many others with that degree and lots of experience competing. Should the economy get better, those people be ready for it.
Choosing not to go to college now, means that in a few years when the economy gets better you will be able to find work, but it will probably be minimum wage unskilled labor.
These days even those degrees in biggest demand like high tech, engineering and finance can't provide a job when there are so many others with that degree and lots of experience competing. Should the economy get better, those people be ready for it.
The ultimate kick in the gut to the middle class has been the outsourcing of even the high tech 'brainy' jobs like those found in IT. The tech boom of the late 1980s and into the 1990s basically gave college grads an opportunity to avoid the pain of America's lost manufacturing sector. Not anymore, though.
That's why the college 'investment' doesn't make as much sense as it used to. The rising costs of college, coupled with the fact that there are fewer and fewer middle class jobs waiting for them upon graduation. Again, education is great, but to spend tens of thousands of dollars on it against future income is an entirely different matter altogether. It's a situation people need to think carefully about before taking on those kinds of financial commitments.
I think the situation will eventually turn itself around, but not overnight. What we need is another technological revolution that will have an enormous economic impact. Industry did that at first, then computers...I'm wondering if maybe the next big thing will occur in medicine and/or sustainable living technology. I see those being big areas for development in the future. But it could be some time before college grads become a part of that economic growth cycle.
Sorry, I'm not a fan of the NY Times. They're the equivilant of Ben Bernanke...i.e., there's "no inflation", economic growth will be maintained, we aim to have "price stability"....this detached elitism from what's happening on the ground.
1st - FACT. There have been no jobs created since 2000! Why do these articles always light over this fact or miss it? It's too painful and it blows a hole in this college myth. It also blows a hole in the myth that what's happened in the past will happen now. I.e., after recessions, hiring always picks up. Or, this always happens.
2nd - Costs have risen much faster than inflation for decades. Bringing up financial aid.....and saying, oh, it doesn't cost very much...that's like saying, this popcorn is $4.50. Here's a coupon for $2 off. So now you're paying $2.50. But your parents (baby boomers) paid 35 cents. And it costs 25 cents to make.
3rd - There's been massive dilution. Remedial classes, dumbing down of highschool, etc.
4th - The spigot has been opened worldwide in the last 20 years. More global competition.
5th - "The educated American masses helped create the American century". Not really. Maybe up until 1970. But after that, what's kept America afloat...the US Dollar standard, the kindness of strangers (foreigners lending money), credit, changes in cpi, employment, etc to keep the illusion of prosperity afloat, the rise of two income families, home equity lines of credit, etc.
6th- There was a much harder dividing line 30 or 40 years ago. You had highschool dropouts. Highschool grads. And "motivated" college students. The equivilant of the steps at the Olympic ceremonies...i.e., bronze is here, silver is a step up, gold is a step up. but now everyone is at the same level. If college is such a great payoff, then why do so many workers have to compete with so many people of varying income and education backgrounds?
7th- Ask anyone age 50-70 if they would get the same degree now, as they got 30 years ago. And ask them if they think the payoff prospects would be the same. This would be the real test. In many cases, the answer would be no.
I read the article and question it. Nobody in their right mind goes to college to get a degree to become a cashier. Really??? Really!!!! The writer actually went there? Becoming a cashier, working as a waiter, or working as a janitor are the last things on people's minds when they go to college. They don't want to become those things, and they're going to be bummed out and depressed if they have to take one of those jobs especially if they have student loans to pay back. They can't afford to live on their own if they're making 8 dollars an hour at Target as a cashier, nor will they be happy either. This article is bullsh**.
College is a gamble, eveyone knows that, and it's costing too much money for the average family. What you need in this country is jobs that people can live off of, not more college graduates who are either unemployed or underemployed. This country isn't creating jobs fast enough for people to take and live off of. You're not going to improve the economy when people are talking jobs as cashiers. They're not going to be able to spend their money on anything other than food, clothing, and shelter.
Nice try New York Times, but your article smells worse than what I leave in the toilet.
I think everyone has made some very valuable points.
However this statement-
Quote:
Originally Posted by John23
1st - FACT. There have been no jobs created since 2000!
is just ignorant. Of course new jobs have been created. Jobs are essentially created every day in many different markets. The number hasn't yet surpassed how many jobs have been eliminated over the years, but it's definitely a start.
I think everyone has made some very valuable points.
However this statement-
is just ignorant. Of course new jobs have been created. Jobs are essentially created every day in many different markets. The number hasn't yet surpassed how many jobs have been eliminated over the years, but it's definitely a start.
That NY Times article is so off base, it needs another rebuttal.
1st - In the first paragraph, it compares the Unites States to Europe. A century ago, the US made highschool universal, Europe didn't.
"Not everybody, European intellectuals argued, should go to high school."
Then implying that the educated American masses helped create the American century. No!Europe was devastated by 2 world wars during the 20th century!
Don't you think that has anything to do with it? The US and Europe during the 20th century were like two sprinters side by side. Europe fell down a few times. If Europe is so weak, then why do we buy so many of their products? Or think their products are superior...i.e., German cars. The US basically went unscathed during the 20th century. That has something to do with our economic lead.
2nd - What about trade or technical schools? The real question should be, what training do kids need after highschool in order to best compete in the world? College would be one part of that.
Why is there a bias against cost effective trade or technical schools by big media? Why don't those schools get as much recognition as the fancy ivy league schools get in US News and World Report? This bias contributes to everyone being brainwashed....I've got to get into XZY, or my life is ruined. And XYZ gets to charge a lot of money.
3rd - The income gap between college grads and highschool grads isn't because college is so brilliant....in part its because blue collar work has declined. Manufacturing being lost. The decline in the power of unions and organized labor. Cheap, unskilled labor from south of the border. Highschool grads have been weakened over the past 40 years, (effectively pushed to a corner) and they have a lot more competition.
The college numbers are probably inflated by a few industries like law, finance, engineering, etc. They should break the numbers apart by industry. They should look at these politically correct degrees like womens studies, latino studies, etc.
4th - At the end of the article,
" For instance, when researchers asked low-income teenagers how much more college graduates made than non-graduates, the teenagers made excellent estimates. And in a national survey, 94 percent of parents said they expected their child to go to college."
They're probably thinking about the image of college from the fancy brochures. Are kids thinking about image or reality? I.e., the lawyer making $80,000 or finance making $60 k. But half the kids are going to major in english lit, psychology, sociology, art history, etc. Everyone idealizes that they'll be in the top 20%. But the reality is most will be in the 40-60% range. Why are costs going up so much for the middle 50%? Is college part of a general middle class squeeze in this country?
5th - The rise of for profits, like university of phoenix. Should they be in the same category?
6th - What about the business schools, law schools? Where the big money is involved. Hard numbers should be seen here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
