rayiner 3 days ago

No, the benefits of university are from smart people who can earn enough during summers to pay reasonable tuition if schools weren't set up as four-year vacations with lavish amenities. When I went to Georgia Tech, in-state tuition was about $2,400 per semester, or about $20,000 over four years (in 2024 dollars). It was a spartan, 1970's experience--like European universities often are today--but it was quite affordable for students who could earn that much at summer internships. And it's not just for engineers. My wife put herself through the University of Iowa, studying business and german literature, in 5 semesters by nannying.

  • secabeen 3 days ago

    And do you know who is responsible for the increase in tuition at Georgia Tech? The legislature and governor of the state of Georgia. State appropriations for higher ed and the tuition rates at Georgia Tech are set exclusively by the state government and its appointees on the Board of Regents for the State University System, not by university administrators in any way.

    https://www.usg.edu/regents/

K0balt 3 days ago

It’s unpopular to say, but a disproportionate amount of value is of course derived from people who are both educated and have immediate access to resources to fully exploit that education as well as the risk tolerance to innovate in the process, and the social status to build strong trust and social bonds with other similarly prepared people…so although it pains me to say it, yes?

It is certainly plausible that the most benefit to society comes from people that are both educated and empowered.

Whether the cost of that empowerment > the burden outsourced to society, well, that is another discussion.

Perhaps more on point, because I definitely think we can find examples of this in practice, it’s perhaps more truthy and also more actionable to say that college provides its optimal outcomes when it serves people who have intrinsic gifts that are empowered by knowledge. Sometimes these gifts are resources, but often these gifts are cognitive brilliance. Either one is like oxidiser for the fuel of knowledge, but especially brilliance when given resources.

I’m pretty sure that for the majority of college graduates, aside from its social signalling value, the amount of their secondary education that directly benefits them in their life could fit in a couple of years of summer school or a year of community college.

A quarter million dollars in debt is a tragic price to pay for a couple thousand dollars of educational utility. A system that requires a social signal 100x more costly than the value it represents is externalising that cost onto everyone, and the only benefits flow to financiers and the moneyed class.

Aside from educational titles (as opposed to capabilities) society is generally sensible regarding the cost of symbols vs the reality they facade.

We recognise the ridiculousness of people owing $90,000 for a truck when they live in a dilapidated trailer on a rented lot. We understand that a man who lives hand to mouth but wears a half of kilogram of gold around his neck is probably not making the best life decisions. We ridicule the faux-intellectual with their ridiculously stilted props. But somehow, we are convinced to dress up our children like heirs to the crown and send them to finishing school for their jobs in retail. It’s a profound mis-investment.

It’s also worth noting that it is way more expensive to provide an education to the intellectual proles than it is to educate brilliant and hungry minds. We are shovelling money (distilled human effort) into a furnace of misery in the service of vanity.

  • rayiner 3 days ago

    > We recognise the ridiculousness of people owing $90,000 for a truck when they live in a dilapidated trailer on a rented lot. We understand that a man who lives hand to mouth but wears a half of kilogram of gold around his neck is probably not making the best life decisions. We ridicule the faux-intellectual with their ridiculously stilted props. But somehow, we are convinced to dress up our children like heirs to the crown and send them to finishing school for their jobs in retail. It’s a profound mis-investment. It’s also worth noting that it is way more expensive to provide an education to the intellectual proles than it is to educate brilliant and hungry minds. We are shovelling money (distilled human effort) into a furnace of misery in the service of vanity.

    This is a fantastic analysis.

    • K0balt 3 days ago

      All of that said, if we don’t provide a solid foundational high school education that covers basic science, math through fundamental calculus, a decent overview of world history, literature, art and culture, then we are not only wasting the precious time of our children, we are also doomed to be an ignorant and brutish people.

      As it is, high school education in the USA today only assures what used to be the 8th grade level when I was in school.

      It’s ridiculous that we have bacslid to the point where we waste 4 years catering to the lowest common denominator.

      Solid vocational education should be offered as an alternative to high school from grade 9 forward. We need to understand that for every professor there’s someone that will never be able to manage anything beyond rudimentary tasks. For every banker there will be someone who drives a broom.

      We do those that are less gifted a disservice by failing to give them useful tools for their future too.