[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1328219792' post='4908868']
[quote name='Madhed' timestamp='1328219216' post='4908865']
You know, learning takes time. What happens if the government subsidizes a field that isn't needed 4 years later? What happens when everyone starts studying those high profile, subsidized courses and you have 4 times as many applicants as there are jobs later?

The government will know how many people are trying to enter a field and can adjust subsidizes based on projections. You're looking at this as if the subsidizes will be static but my point is that they will be dynamic. What we have right now is a static subsidization of education which results in the large class division and it is a huge contributor to our economic deficient.
[/quote]
As with your previous policy suggestions, they revolve around a rather silly view of government.

Does any democratic government have any incentive to implement any such policy? What does it mean to their bottom line? The buying of votes that is?

One would imagine free cash handouts are the more potent instrument there, rather than gizmos such as good long term governance. No amount of proselytizing is going to change that.

If there is such a thing as a solution to the broken incentives in education, it is to get the government out of it altogether. Giving it more knobs to tweak is only going to make matters worse.
[/quote]

Demolishing institutionalized education would work toward the same goal. Cooperations would then be forced to educate their own employees. However, it would put the US at an economic disadvantage since other nations will be training their employees for free. So really it's impractical to simply remove the government from education.

Demolishing institutionalized education would work toward the same goal. Cooperations would then be forced to educate their own employees. However, it would put the US at an economic disadvantage since other nations will be training their employees for free. So really it's impractical to simply remove the government from education.

For free? As in beer? Id like to see that nation that accomplishes that. Did they sell their souls to santaclaus or something?

[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1328225127' post='4908899']
Demolishing institutionalized education would work toward the same goal. Cooperations would then be forced to educate their own employees. However, it would put the US at an economic disadvantage since other nations will be training their employees for free. So really it's impractical to simply remove the government from education.

For free? As in beer? Id like to see that nation that accomplishes that. Did they sell their souls to santaclaus or something?
[/quote]

I mean free to the cooperations. Technically not free since cooperations have to pay taxes but a huge majority of the cost is off boarded to the masses.

In 2009 the government spent 180 billion dollars on financial aid for postsecondary education.

Typing "US military budget" into Google brings up an Wikipedia article that claims your government spent 663 billion dollars in 2010 on "overseas contingency operations"

I'm not an expert in military euphemisms, but "overseas contingency operations" reads to me as "war in far away countries that the majority of US citizens won't find on the map".

The same page gives a figure of 46.9 billion for "homeland security" and 2.7 billion for FBI counter-terrorism. Now again, I'm no expert on governmental euphemisms, but the former sounds a lot like "breaking innocent people's civil rights every day" (this includes, among minor things like eavesdropping personal communications, things such as keeping people who have never done anything wrong on a no-fly list and hijacking innocent people at their breakfast table to waterboard them for some months).
The latter sounds much like "building a fake bomb, and convincing a below-average-intelligence young man with muslim-sounding name that exploding a bomb in a city in Oregon is a good idea, and helping him press the trigger". A cynic would add "... and without ever catching as much as one real terrorist".

one seeking a degree in computer science or engineering[/quote]

These are not in demand, nor are they profitable.

MSc./PhD from elite school will earn ~100k + 30k bonus at a handful of companies (for tech/engineering work). Typical programmer entry-level salary is less or comparable to any other industry. Life-time programmer salary, on average, is probably under minimum wage, due to short length of career.

A ObGyn salary starts at $400k. Anastesiology at $250k-550k. These are the fields in demand. Why? If one were to take all the med students today and put them into these jobs - there aren't enough. That is how bad the shortage is. If they go out looking for these people they cannot find them since there aren't.

In IT? Throw a stone and you'll hit 50.

Look at numbers again - Google alone gets 2 million resumes per year and they hire a few thousand. That is oversupply.

one seeking a degree in computer science or engineering

These are not in demand, nor are they profitable.

MSc./PhD from elite school will earn ~100k + 30k bonus at a handful of companies (for tech/engineering work). Typical programmer entry-level salary is less or comparable to any other industry. Life-time programmer salary, on average, is probably under minimum wage, due to short length of career.

A ObGyn salary starts at $400k. Anastesiology at $250k-550k. These are the fields in demand. Why? If one were to take all the med students today and put them into these jobs - there aren't enough. That is how bad the shortage is. If they go out looking for these people they cannot find them since there aren't.

In IT? Throw a stone and you'll hit 50.

Look at numbers again - Google alone gets 2 million resumes per year and they hire a few thousand. That is oversupply.
[/quote]

An Ob Gyn salary starts at 150k... Besides that your argument only serves to prove why the system I suggested would be a huge improvement over our current system. Some careers are in dire need of trained professionals but they simply don't appeal to many people.

I honestly can't take your opinion seriously if you think the problem is what you say it is.

The problem is rising education costs across the board, not education specific. I also think your analysis is ludicrous. Do you have any friends who are artists? How many of them are from the lower class? They might end up down there because it's a high risk career, but how many do you know that start in the lower class vs otherwise?

An Ob Gyn salary starts at 150k...[/quote]

And in IT, salary starts at $1/hour.

Still - in engineering, $150k is the top you'll see if you get lucky.

Besides that your argument only serves to prove why the system I suggested would be a huge improvement over our current system. Some careers are in dire need of trained professionals but they simply don't appeal to many people.

It's not appeal. There simply aren't enough people. The only way to increase number of doctors would be to lower the standards.

Medicine is the most glamorous profession just about anywhere in the planet. Yet there aren't enough people capable of going through the studies or being able to work in the field afterwards due to demands.

An Ob Gyn salary starts at 150k...

And in IT, salary starts at $1/hour.

Still - in engineering, $150k is the top you'll see if you get lucky.

Besides that your argument only serves to prove why the system I suggested would be a huge improvement over our current system. Some careers are in dire need of trained professionals but they simply don't appeal to many people.

It's not appeal. There simply aren't enough people. The only way to increase number of doctors would be to lower the standards.

Medicine is the most glamorous profession just about anywhere in the planet. Yet there aren't enough people capable of going through the studies or being able to work in the field afterwards due to demands.
[/quote]

I'm just going to ignore you now. I swear to god every time you reply to one of my post you are trolling. Your figures are always inaccurate or over exaggerated, and your opinions are always illogical.

I honestly can't take your opinion seriously if you think the problem is what you say it is.

The problem is rising education costs across the board, not education specific. I also think your analysis is ludicrous. Do you have any friends who are artists? How many of them are from the lower class? They might end up down there because it's a high risk career, but how many do you know that start in the lower class vs otherwise?

Yes, I have many friends who are artist. All of them are unemployed or working in completely non-related jobs.