Do too many people go to college?

[Anti Federalist]

A shameless cross post from another thread, but I think this deserves more exposure.

The "college bubble" WILL burst and it will not be pretty when it does.

Original post here (hat tip to Cowlesy) http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=261175


An interesting take from a medical professor. I have a feeling he is correct in respect to saying we have a bubble in higher education. This bubble has lead to great numbers of families "investing" life-savings-level amounts of money in education that really isn't education.



http://www.alternativeright.com/main...he-iq-allergy/

Tuesday, 14 September 2010
The IQ Allergy
Why Universities Hate the Idea of Heritable Intelligence
By Bruce Charlton

This is the first in a three-part symposium on The Higher Education Bubble -- why the West’s highly leveraged, heavily subsidized university system shall collapse and why that is a good thing.



Modern education is about selection more than enhancement, with educational qualifications mainly serving to “signal” or quantify a person’s hereditary psychological attributes. On average, a modern college or university education enhances neither skills nor behaviors, nor does it inculcate useful knowledge.

In practice, higher education mostly functions as an extremely slow, inefficient, and imprecise form of psychometric testing that measures intelligence and evaluates personality. It would therefore be easy to construct a modern educational system that was both more efficient and more effective than the current one.

Since the modern educational system in general, and higher education in particular, are vastly over-expanded, it is likely that sooner or later this situation will prove unsustainable. Not least because the education system has been, for about a century, based-on the expectation of continual expansion in personnel, resources, years of education, and inflation of qualifications.

Therefore, when the crash comes it will be catastrophic. I would guess the system will shrink to about a tenth of its present size -- back to what it was a century ago.

***

When a full account has been taken of IQ and personality, and when the presumed effects of chance have also been subtracted, then there is not much variation of outcomes left over for educational differences to explain. Educational and career outcomes are mostly a combination of genetic destiny and luck.

Of course, there will be some systemic effect of educational differences, but the effect is likely to be very much smaller than generally assumed, and even the direction of the education effect may be hard to detect when other more powerful factors are operative.

The fact that systematic differences in educational attainment within a society are mostly due to heredity is a stunning conclusion in a contemporary context. The whole educational system in modern societies is operating under false pretences.

Those aspects of modern education that are not psychometric are neglected and misdirected. In particular, the factual content of education is neglected -- yet factual content is probably much more important and makes a much larger long-term difference to life than do variations in educational methods. The information we learn as children may stay with us for the rest of our lives.

If psychometric estimates of IQ and personality were available for each person, then it would be easy to construct a modern educational system that was both more efficient and more effective than the current one. However, any such change would result in a massive downsizing of the educational system -- with substantial and permanent loss of jobs and status for educational professionals of all types including teachers, professors, administrators, managers, and politicians

[nobody's_hero]

Certainly thought-provoking.

As easy as the government is making it for people to go to college, we could be setting ourselves up for an 'education bubble.'

I'm currently in college and I agree that it is more about selection than enhancement. There is also a lot of pressure from the grade-school systems to prepare kids these days for college, even though many of those kids would be able to prosper using their talents outside of a college degree.

I have often joked to a friend of mine that left college and went to technical school that I'll just wait until everyone has a college degree, then I'll go to work as an unskilled worker hauling out their trash for $35 an hour. Because, supply and demand also applies when you're talking about an 'educated' workforce. :D

[low preference guy]

The "college bubble" WILL burst and it will not be pretty when it does.

you're kidding, right? when it happens, i will be so full of joy i might not be able to sleep. i can hardly imagine anything more beautiful.

[CoreyBowen999]

you're kidding, right? when it happens, i will be so full of joy i might not be able to sleep. i can hardly imagine anything more beautiful.

you guys have problems.

[WaltM]

you're kidding, right? when it happens, i will be so full of joy i might not be able to sleep. i can hardly imagine anything more beautiful.

I don't think a college bubble burst is a bad thing.

Overall, yes, too many people go to college.

But the solution is neither 'stop going to college' nor 'make up jobs for these grads'.

Rather, think of a realistic job you'll be doing in 6 years (consider 4 years in college, 2 more job hunting), and from there, how long will the market sustain this job?

College, just like homeowning, and child bearing, is not for everybody.

[Anti Federalist]

you're kidding, right? when it happens, i will be so full of joy i might not be able to sleep. i can hardly imagine anything more beautiful.

Well, I see tens of thousands finacially ruined with no way to make a living, but maybe I'm all upside down on this.

Explain yourself.

[WaltM]

Well, I see tens of thousands finacially ruined with no way to make a living, but maybe I'm all upside down on this.

Explain yourself.

maybe we're not talking about the same thing.

but are you suggesting that less people going to school means less people being able to make a living?

Or is it that less people being given loans to go to school, means less people in unnecessary debt, they may be shittier jobs, but don't owe the tuition they don't "earn" anyway.

[WaltM]

The IQ Allergy
Why Universities Hate the Idea of Heritable Intelligence

how many people on this board don't even want to acknowledge

a) IQ exists
b) Nurture isn't everything
c) there's a hard to deny correlation between economic prosperity & IQ (contrary to the traditional PC claims that it's dependent on natural resources or economic freedom)

[low preference guy]

Well, I see tens of thousands finacially ruined with no way to make a living, but maybe I'm all upside down on this.

Explain yourself.

dude, i don't have time to list them all. there are at least 10 positives i can easily think of, but let me list two that are really important:

1. money is channeled through universities through subsidies. this implies that alternative methods receive less money than they would've received otherwise. in a few words, subsidies put a barrier of entry to educational entrepreneurs, thus the incredibly ingenuity of Americans and capitalism is not able to develop educational methods that are effective, lasting, useful, and cheap. the quality of education is stagnant or getting worse every year.

what you see in education is what you see in any state-run company anywhere: every year it gets more money, every year it gets worse.

when the college bubble bursts, i suspect you will see within five years a greater development of educational methods than in the last 100 years. (through distance, through video games, thorough home school techniques, memorization techniques, computer programs, etc). the barrier of entry due to the forced funding of the university cartel will disappear.

2. college students don't have a connection to reality or are aware that they need to make a living once they graduate (at least not to the same degree it would've been without college subsidies). when a college receives tuition payments through subsidies, it doesn't care what happens to the students once they graduate. the school already got paid! and upfront! (by government "financial aid")

in the absence of subsidies, students would need to get loans from banks. banks will give students money only if they're able to pay back. if college graduates don't acquire skills to be able to pay back their loans, the banks will cut the funding. thus, universities will have to spend a fraction of the time they use to brainwash students in statist ideology teaching them actual skills useful to make a living. students will have more skills when they graduate, they'll get more money, be happier and more productive.

as now, those idiots college professors (the majority) do nothing productive but receive money taken from taxpayers at the point of a gun, money that they wouldn't have been given voluntarily. they're essentially some sort of noble class and the rest of us are their serfs (we pay their salaries against our will, and hugely inflated salaries. they charge $50k per student per year, this is something that maybe not even one school would be able to charge in a free market). this paragraph alone provides reason enough to celebrate the end of a parasite class when the bubble bursts.

[Anti Federalist]

maybe we're not talking about the same thing.

but are you suggesting that less people going to school means less people being able to make a living?

Or is it that less people being given loans to go to school, means less people in unnecessary debt, they may be shittier jobs, but don't owe the tuition they don't "earn" anyway.

When the bubble pops, schools will collapse, money for tuition presumably lost and no real prospects for the people caught in it to learn a real skill or trade and make a living.

[youngbuck]

The IQ Allergy
Why Universities Hate the Idea of Heritable Intelligence

how many people on this board don't even want to acknowledge

a) IQ exists
b) Nurture isn't everything
c) there's a hard to deny correlation between economic prosperity & IQ (contrary to the traditional PC claims that it's dependent on natural resources or economic freedom)

I'll readily affirm that the majority of my intelligence was inherited by my Dad. Both innate intelligence, and his masterful hand in raising me gives, IMHO, a distinct advantage over those that haven't had the same gift.

[Cowlesy]

The IQ Allergy
Why Universities Hate the Idea of Heritable Intelligence

how many people on this board don't even want to acknowledge

a) IQ exists
b) Nurture isn't everything
c) there's a hard to deny correlation between economic prosperity & IQ (contrary to the traditional PC claims that it's dependent on natural resources or economic freedom)

I am sure some find it uncomfortable as it goes against programmed notions of equality, but I feel like I can tell when I speak to someone who is naturally more intelligent than me. After such a conversation I sit and think, "Would my brain have come up with those brilliant ideas or arrived at X/Y or Z conclusion like that person did, or are they simply more intelligent?"

It happens too often :P

[low preference guy]

I am sure some find it uncomfortable as it goes against programmed notions of equality, but I feel like I can tell when I speak to someone who is naturally more intelligent than me. After such a conversation I sit and think, "Would my brain have come up with those brilliant ideas or arrived at X/Y or Z conclusion like that person did, or are they simply more intelligent?"

It happens too often :P

there is a lot of training involved. i do think success and even intelligence have a lot to do with hard work (with the right method).

[Anti Federalist]

I am sure some find it uncomfortable as it goes against programmed notions of equality, but I feel like I can tell when I speak to someone who is naturally more intelligent than me. After such a conversation I sit and think, "Would my brain have come up with those brilliant ideas or arrived at X/Y or Z conclusion like that person did, or are they simply more intelligent?"

It happens too often :P

Maybe "IQ", as a metric, has it flaws, but I can't believe that there are still people in this world that refuse to acknowledge that some folks are smarter than others.

[TastyWheat]

I was thinking the exact same thing earlier today. I used to think we were on our wet to inflating a "green" bubble, but the green energy sector just hasn't taken off yet. Education is one of those things the government can't cut (see: political suicide) and is undeniably important (according to conventional wisdom). From firsthand experience I know education isn't nearly as important as experience, not to mention "education" and actually learningare not one in the same.

[WaltM]

I am sure some find it uncomfortable as it goes against programmed notions of equality


And even libertarians, conservatives, are only willing to go against "equality" if it's not group based.



, but I feel like I can tell when I speak to someone who is naturally more intelligent than me. After such a conversation I sit and think, "Would my brain have come up with those brilliant ideas or arrived at X/Y or Z conclusion like that person did, or are they simply more intelligent?"

It happens too often :P

yes it does.

And some are not willing to admit that SOME GROUPS, SOME COUNTRIES have on average more people who are as such, than other groups, other countries, explainable by no other data than inherited intelligence.

[MN Patriot]

When the bubble pops, schools will collapse, money for tuition presumably lost and no real prospects for the people caught in it to learn a real skill or trade and make a living.

And a perfect excuse for more government involvement, bailouts, subsidies, tax hikes, etc. As if nobody really learned anything, except we need government to save us from calamities.

Those people who oppose the education collapse bailout will be labeled as "promoters of ignorance", "anti-education", "children haters", and anything else the smear masters can come up with.

[Cowlesy]

And even libertarians, conservatives, are only willing to go against "equality" if it's not group based.



yes it does.

And some are not willing to admit that SOME GROUPS, SOME COUNTRIES have on average more people who are as such, than other groups, other countries, explainable by no other data than inherited intelligence.

Fine, but the topic at hand is "Are too many people going to college?" and let's keep it there and not jump the tracks.

[WaltM]

Maybe "IQ", as a metric, has it flaws,


I grant that, but what's a better alternative?

If none, is there any measure of anything pertaining to a person's quality?

How about health? Wealth? Education?



but I can't believe that there are still people in this world that refuse to acknowledge that some folks are smarter than others.

I can't believe that those who DO recognize that, refuse to see that on a group scale. As if grouping is always bad, always wrong.

[WaltM]

Fine, but the topic at hand is "Are too many people going to college?" and let's keep it there and not jump the tracks.

fair enough, but this same item will likely come up again when talking about homeschooling, public schooling, economic prosperity, ...etc.

[WaltM]

And a perfect excuse for more government involvement


this is where I draw the line.

I don't believe government involvement is always bad. (if I did, I'd be an anarchist)



, bailouts, subsidies, tax hikes, etc.


if that's bad on its own, or in given circumstances, the solution is to reform and fix, not abolish



As if nobody really learned anything, except we need government to save us from calamities.


again, not always true, not always false/



Those people who oppose the education collapse bailout will be labeled as "promoters of ignorance", "anti-education", "children haters"


which is partially true and not entirely negative, not insulting at all to me.



, and anything else the smear masters can come up with.

[Anti Federalist]

dude...

Understood, the old system has to be swept away for the new to take it's place.

[low preference guy]

Understood, the old system has to be swept away for the new to take it's place.

you understood the details right? did you read the point that the current system of subsidies encourages universities to not care about teaching students skills to earn a living in comparison to an environment without tuition subsidies?

that's why if you are young, it will be easy for you to find graduates of top colleges who are changing sheets in hotel rooms.

[WaltM]

When the bubble pops, schools will collapse, money for tuition presumably lost and no real prospects for the people caught in it to learn a real skill or trade and make a living.

I agree to a good extent, but only that.

This is a rare case where I argue for market anarchy.

We both know, not all schools are equal.

Some schools, majors, teachers, DESERVE TO STARVE.

Some forms of education, are WORTHY AND INVALUABLE. (Doctors, social workers, architects, just to name a few, I'll leave out chemists, lawyers, science teachers to prevent defending my own)

Being a research scientist in the past, I know that a sad truth is, LOTS OF SCIENCE IS ECONOMICALLY USELESS AND THE MARKET WOULD NEVER FUND AN UNPAYING INVESTMENT. That is where I actually support government grants to waste money, because knowledge is invaluable in the long run.

But with that said, education has it's own long term investment. (only insofar as , we can't be a society without some of each kind) I naively hope, that a crash in the college market will force the "less desirable, less necessary, less valuable" schools, teachers, departments out of business. Or, that in my ideal world, a government or media has an interest in promoting jobs, training, education which CONFORM AND COMPLEMENT the market demand (in short, promoting education for the better of society).

[Cowlesy]

Well if you wanted a society of debt slaves, you'd have an education system so expensive that everyone had to go to the government to get the loans, and then make those loans unable to be discharged in bankruptcy.

Oh wait, Government took over the student loan industry this summer, and you can't discharge a student loan in bankruptcy.

*snaps fingers*

We're doomed.

[WaltM]

Well if you wanted a society of debt slaves, you'd have an education system so expensive that everyone had to go to the government to get the loans, and then make those loans unable to be discharged in bankruptcy.


there's easier ways to do that, unless you really wanted to make it look legitimate and unintentional.

I don't believe education was racketed to create debt slaves, I do believe a lot of education has been abused for profit , but nobody who wants to make profit would want to create debt slaves if there was an alternative.

By the way, I actually believe that education is ONLY expensive BECAUSE loans are allowed. (not vice versa). Find me a country where education and housing is "cheaper" and you'll likely find one where loans are less available.



Oh wait, Government took over the student loan industry this summer, and you can't discharge a student loan in bankruptcy.
*snaps fingers*
We're doomed.

that's not a bad idea, considering
a) nobody forced you to go to college
b) you can't repo the education you paid for

[djdellisanti4]

dear god. I do not want to know about this... My college tuition is soo expensive. Fortunately only one fourth of it is being paid by a grant. The rest out of my parent's pocket book (which makes me feel bad), but no loans.

[WaltM]

dear god. I do not want to know about this... My college tuition is soo expensive. Fortunately only one fourth of it is being paid by a grant. The rest out of my parent's pocket book (which makes me feel bad), but no loans.

what do you study?

[MikeStanart]

I would argue that there will be a college loan bubble first. In this economy, many graduates simply won't be able to pay off their loans.

[WaltM]

I would argue that there will be a college loan bubble first. In this economy, many graduates simply won't be able to pay off their loans.

wait, what else were people talking about bursting, if not tuition loans?

[Anti Federalist]

you understood the details right? did you read the point that the current system of subsidies encourages universities to not care about teaching students skills to earn a living in comparison to an environment without tuition subsidies?

that's why if you are young, it will be easy for you to find graduates of top colleges who are changing sheets in hotel rooms.

I did, I'm just up to my eyeballs in end of day/week/month paperwork and didn't have time to reply at length.

[low preference guy]

wait, what else were people talking about bursting, if not tuition loans?

that's the first step. but i think people talk about massive layoffs in universities and collapse in tuition prices when they talk about the bubble bursting.

[Pericles]

Maybe "IQ", as a metric, has it flaws, but I can't believe that there are still people in this world that refuse to acknowledge that some folks are smarter than others.

As I spent the weekend at a family reunion, and after careful study of IQ distribution among my relatives, you and the board, have my positive assurance that this supposition is correct.

[WaltM]

that's the first step. but i think people talk about massive layoffs in universities and collapse in tuition prices when they talk about the bubble bursting.

sadly, those who are laid off aren't always those who deserve it first, but that's inherent in a capitalist system, managers who work less, pay more, do less, don't get fired first.

[low preference guy]

sadly, those who are laid off aren't always those who deserve it first, but that's inherent in a capitalist system, managers who work less, pay more, do less, don't get fired first.

how can you refer to the current educational system as "capitalist" with a straight face?

[WaltM]

As I spent the weekend at a family reunion, and after careful study of IQ distribution among my relatives, you and the board, have my positive assurance that this supposition is correct.

I don't know anybody who believes IQ, or any study is near perfect or flawless.

But do you have a better alternative?

If not, what's there to measure ANYTHING of a person's quality?

Wealth? Health? Strength? Education? Expereince?

[WaltM]

how can you refer to the current educational system as "capitalist" with a straight face?

no, wasn't saying that, but the fact our education EXISTS WITHIN A greater a society, which is more capitalist than socialist.

and can you deny, that many opportunists have hijacked to educational system to make some of it capitalist in their favor?

[low preference guy]

no, wasn't saying that, but the fact our education EXISTS WITHIN A greater a society, which is more capitalist than socialist.

and can you deny, that many opportunists have hijacked to educational system to make some of it capitalist in their favor?

in capitalism those who deserve to be rewarded are rewarded more often and better than in any other system. that's why your post was either false or misleading.

[Anti Federalist]

As I spent the weekend at a family reunion, and after careful study of IQ distribution among my relatives, you and the board, have my positive assurance that this supposition is correct.

Imma ROFLing now.

:D

[WaltM]

in capitalism those who deserve to be rewarded are rewarded more often and better than in any other system.


over the long run, in the big picture, yes.

However, corporations are not as such.

Managers and supervisors have no incentive of being effective, efficient, responsible, unless it's to their advantage, sometimes far removed from the company as a whole.

While the alternative to prevent this isn't easy, and may be worse, the wasteful and lazy manager isn't representative of capitalism, it's the inevitable cost, there will always be exploiters and abusers.



that's why your post was either false or misleading.

have you not read Dilbert?

watch it on hulu.com sometime.

[nate895]

It is absolutely true that college is way overrated these days. In the past, university was meant for three purposes: Entering a profession (doctor, lawyer, etc.), becoming a scholar, or becoming a more proper gentleman/lady. The role of universities has legitimately expanded beyond its relatively small portion of the population because of the proliferation of professional careers (computer scientist, for instance). However, still, the vast majority of jobs that require degrees simply do not require them. I have seen job postings for simple data entry that require a Bachelor's. No one needs a degree to type numbers into a computer.

Oftentimes, this downgrades the importance of the degree, particularly in scholarly fields. Often, students take what is seemingly an "easy" route and get a degree in obscure topics such as "Women's Studies" in order to have a degree to show to a potential employer. The problem is that these types of degree are not intended to land you a job at a Fortune 500 company. They are meant to take onto a graduate school and eventually get you a teaching career, or merely to demonstrate that you are an educated individual in social circles.

In summary, if universities stuck by their original purpose, then more people would attend college than in the past because of the need for more professionals (and since there is a need for more professionals, you need more scholars to teach them). However, the importance of the degree has been downgraded by its overuse and widespread proliferation. This overuse needs to be addressed if society is going to address the overwhelming anti-intellectualism that pervades the landscape.

The most ironic thing about this whole situation is that many of the so-called "intellectuals" of our time are actually anti-intellectual in their outlooks. You can see this by the lack of debate. Debates held between scholars of differing viewpoints used to be part of going to college. Now, you can skate by going to college without ever hearing about one. Of course, this is because of the radicalism of the professors, which fundamentally denies the need for debate (a topic I want to address in a post I am pondering).

[silverhandorder]

It is really daunting but I have to agree that the system can not be sustained. It is hard on me especially because knowing all this I will still be pushing toward med school which means another 4 years for me at the least.

I do want to disagree with IQ being the big decider. I heard from an interview with a neurologist that they now think genes are responsible for 20% of development and the lion share belongs to nurture. From my life experience I would tend to agree. This does not mean that I am defending our school system. I also find it disgusting how they turned to selection model.

[nate895]

It is really daunting but I have to agree that the system can not be sustained. It is hard on me especially because knowing all this I will still be pushing toward med school which means another 4 years for me at the least.

That, however, is a legitimate reason to go to university. It is a profession that requires higher education in order to be successful at it.

BTW, speaking of medicine, you can go to the Smithsonian Museum of American History, and in the hall on the lower floor, to the right of the back entrance, there is a small exhibit that says that some doctors still advocate the use of leeches. I kid you not, I am telling the truth. I did not believe it myself. I had to read this incredible statement no less than a half a dozen times before I convinced myself that my eyes were not deceiving me.

[MelissaWV]

Yes.

[Fredom101]

A shameless cross post from another thread, but I think this deserves more exposure.

The "college bubble" WILL burst and it will not be pretty when it does.

Original post here (hat tip to Cowlesy) http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=261175

I've been thinking this same thing for a few years! I used to live by a major university and would drive by the mobs of kids lined up to take the shuttle to class, and everyday I just thought, "this is all just a fantasy. most of them are just wasting 4-5 years of their life, and their parents' money. Even the ones that are actually getting an education could probably do it in half the time and much less cost online or in other ways."

I know for sure I did not learn much of anything in college, and my parents money went towards me having a good time and getting a piece of paper after I was done.

[MelissaWV]

I've been thinking this same thing for a few years! I used to live by a major university and would drive by the mobs of kids lined up to take the shuttle to class, and everyday I just thought, "this is all just a fantasy. most of them are just wasting 4-5 years of their life, and their parents' money. Even the ones that are actually getting an education could probably do it in half the time and much less cost online or in other ways."

I know for sure I did not learn much of anything in college, and my parents money went towards me having a good time and getting a piece of paper after I was done.

Most of them aren't wasting their parents' money anymore. Loans, loans, loans... the bigger the better, and please don't get a job or two (that would distract from your studies!). No, take out a loan, study, and get around to paying it back later. What could possibly get in the way of your paying it back later? You're going to be free and making oodles of money once you graduate!

*sighs*

[Fredom101]

Most of them aren't wasting their parents' money anymore. Loans, loans, loans... the bigger the better, and please don't get a job or two (that would distract from your studies!). No, take out a loan, study, and get around to paying it back later. What could possibly get in the way of your paying it back later? You're going to be free and making oodles of money once you graduate!

*sighs*

True! It took me until I graduated from college to realize that my liberal arts degree didn't mean crap in the real world. You're right about the loans. In the near future it will be even more about loans as fewer families can afford to send their kids to college, and it will create a big disaster ahead.

If/when I have kids, I will not force them into college. It will be strictly up to them, but I certainly am not going to assume college is for everyone. I wish more would realize that now!

[Anti Federalist]

True! It took me until I graduated from college to realize that my liberal arts degree didn't mean crap in the real world. You're right about the loans. In the near future it will be even more about loans as fewer families can afford to send their kids to college, and it will create a big disaster ahead.

If/when I have kids, I will not force them into college. It will be strictly up to them, but I certainly am not going to assume college is for everyone. I wish more would realize that now!

I do have kids, and if they have any college desires, it will be their doing, not mine.

I've been earning a productive living since I was 16 years old.

There used to be opportunities to do that.

Sadly, most of them are gone now.

[Danke]

I do have kids, and if they have any college desires, it will be their doing, not mine.


Actually it might be your doings...


:D:p