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.
The problem isn't that he is a conservative; rather, the problem is that he is an incompetent blowhard with poor judgement, as you have said. According to numerous mainstream news reports he has lost literally millions of dollars gambling in Las Vegas (and probably other places as well), all the while touting his "Book of Virtue."
The study itself is complete rubbish until ROI is controlled for the innate ability of the student body at any particular school. Smart people usually earn a lot of money. Harvard, for example, attracts smart students. That they earn a lot of money after graduating Harvard is to be expected. The same students would earn just about as much if they attended a good but "lower" school.
College is a place and time to grow up, to learn how to learn, to top off your stores of general knowledge and begin setting down stores of a particular knowledge that fascinates you enough that you decide to specialize in it. It is a place and time to lose the provincialism of youth, to expand and broaden your horizons and your consciousness, to meet and explore new and different people and benefit from their insights and experiences along with your own. It is also a place to have a good time so that you'll have plenty of cool stories to tell later on in life.
Wow, really? All of this happened for me when I was in the 5th grade.
Imo, the article is a crock, based on an incredibly dumb premise, an outlandish notion and it certainly has nothing to do with being conservative or otherwise, since there are goofs in each and every corner of politics.
This is not true. Elite universities offer superior placement services to run-of-the-mill universities. It isn't necessarily the placement office, it is the reputation of the universities that put hungry recruiters at Harvard but not at American U.
There is credible evidence that my original statement is indeed correct. See the work of Princeton economist Alan Kreuger and collaborator Stacy Dale regarding exactly this question.
i wonder if the research/article takes into consideration room & board costs vs basic living costs. this is one thing i always wonder about. they include "room and board" when they talk about the cost to go to college, but whether you're in college or not you're going to have to live somewhere and eat.
but anyway the main reason kids at the top schools do better is that they were top students to begin with, not that the school did anything special for them. i do think the name on the paper carries some weight, though. i've been kinda lazy professionally and haven't been interested in much more than a job that is "good enough" and i think having a brand name degree has/will afforded me opportunities within my company and elsewhere that others may not have. some people are impressed by the whole snob appeal thing. if your boss/president is one of them, then it makes a difference of course. there are so many paths and choices in life though that it doesn't carry much weight to look at these stats as a whole.
I agree with him, for the most part. People need to seriously consider what he's saying: If you go to a top-ranked university, then you can major in almost anything you want and get a good return on your investment. But if you don't get into a top-ranked university, then you must major in a high income/high demand field like engineering.
88% of people go to college to get a job - very important information. All of this stuff should be self-evident by now.
Do you really believe this?? Seriously? If someone doesn't go to a top 150 college they have no hopes of getting a job--REALLY???? I can list countless very successful business people that graduated with degrees in business or likewise that did not go to "top 150" colleges. Some people get caught up in the name game, but most do not.
I agree with him, for the most part. People need to seriously consider what he's saying: If you go to a top-ranked university, then you can major in almost anything you want and get a good return on your investment. But if you don't get into a top-ranked university, then you must major in a high income/high demand field like engineering.
88% of people go to college to get a job - very important information. All of this stuff should be self-evident by now.
I agree that certain universities can carry you to a pretty well paying career (at the very least stringing together job after job) and/or catapult you to high paying positions on name alone.
I agree that certain universities can carry you to a pretty well paying career (at the very least stringing together job after job) and/or catapult you to high paying positions on name alone.
But it is a VERY small list.
Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, (maybe) Stanford.
That's about it.
So, only less than 20 colleges are worth the investment from this perspective.
The number 150 is too large when you count elite schools, and too small when you count accredited schools where you can possibly learn something depending on how you make it.
That's why 150 is ridiculous in any sense. Why not 130? or 180? 150 sounds like an arbitrary number to me.
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.
