Selfish Ungrateful People

[worm]

Clearly so. My point is that a degree wont get you a graduate level job in the majority of cases, if for no other reason than there are more graduates than graduate jobs. Thus graduates take jobs that were once reserved for those without degrees, thus squeezing out those without a degree.

[eFestivals]

Are you arguing that people shouldn't be educated because it gives the uneducated less chance of getting a job? Because surely educating them would be the best way of going about it.

that's something which only works if the number of jobs for educated people matches the number of educated people.

But essentially, I'm with you and not Phil - it seems rather dumb to not educate people only on the basis that they'd then be over-educated for the opportunities available to them, because the ones who'll lose out in the main will be those of lower classes/backgrounds. Ultimately it's something which cements the status quo in place, while removing the opportunities for those (of any class/background) who deserve who deserve to progress on merit.

Jobs aside, it's my belief that education is always worthwhile just for education's sake. We can't moan about the stupid decisions made by society as a whole and then also insist that we keep society stupid.

[worm]

that's something which only works if the number of jobs for educated people matches the number of educated people.

[eFestivals]

No, it means that the uneducated that you're referring to would be educated.

But aside from the personal benefit of that education, it gets them further away from an 'educated' job on a proportional basis.

[worm]

But aside from the personal benefit of that education, it gets them further away from an 'educated' job on a proportional basis.

[dakyras]

But essentially, I'm with you and not Phil

[eFestivals]

We're talking about people who would be going into uneducated roles.

Exactly - so from that angle (alone) it's pointless.

I suspect that those people, if offered the choice, would rather have the costs of their educating tipped into their monthly pay packets rather than wasted (on an economic basis) on an education that (on an economic basis) brings them nothing.

[worm]

Exactly - so from that angle (alone) it's pointless.

I suspect that those people, if offered the choice, would rather have the costs of their educating tipped into their monthly pay packets rather than wasted (on an economic basis) on an education that (on an economic basis) brings them nothing.

[eFestivals]

It's not about employment and economics. It's about people being educated before going into a job.

In which case, that education is only worth something for what it brings to the job. It is measured on an economic basis only.

And the simple fact is that we have a situation now where graduates are taking jobs which don't (on a skills basis) need graduates to fill them, because there's too few jobs which have proper need of graduates.

The benefits regarding an educated society and an educated individual are of vast significance. I'm talking here about being more knowledgable of where and how to pursue your own interests, having a better sense of self and well being, knowing better about the way in which the world turns, being more empowered and such like.

That's something I agree with 100%, but it's something aside from education's usefulness to a job.

The sad fact is that when education is made an economic choice - as fees initially, and now higher fees, have caused it to be - then people will give a higher weighting to the economic benefits (or no economic benefits) than they will the other benefits. By nature, that will reduce the numbers from the poorest that decide to do higher education, and that will reduce social mobility.

But that's always been the driving reason behind fees, because the rich don't like the thought that their often thick kids won't land themselves a cushy and well-paid gig in the city because it's been taken by some oik on merit. They might be fooling others about this, but they're not fooling me.

[worm]

That's something I agree with 100%, but it's something aside from education's usefulness to a job.

[eFestivals]

And my point is that education across all levels of economic strtification benefits both society and the individuals that make a society.

Yeah, I know - but you'll never convince a govt of that when they know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Phil came back suggesting that it made less opportunities for uneducated people as granduates are now taking their jobs. I pointed out that the graduates he's talking about are the same people, only they've now got themselves an education.

yep, i agree.

So my argument in relation to your point here is that education's usefulness is not to their job, but to the person's life of which employment is only one aspect.

But if you asked those people if they'd rather have an extra £100 in their pay packet each month across their working life - because that's close-ish to what a degree works out as now - it's not so difficult to guess which they'd choose, is it? And who are we to tell them "education is good for you" if they're seeing that money as better for them?

Ultimately, the only solution to get a balance is for there to be enough graduate jobs, but that's an impossibility. So there needs to be clear facts about what Uni will and won't do for anyone considering going, and from that people should be left to make up their own minds. Anything else is just patronising.

[worm]

Yeah, I know - but you'll never convince a govt of that when they know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

[eFestivals]

People have their own reasons for going to university and the financial implications of their own personal education cannot be compared to people without an education.

Hmmmm ..... I reckon it's measured by most people on the supposed financial benefit, with perhaps a little of rite-of-passage mixed in.

I don't think that "more knowledgable of where and how to pursue your own interests, having a better sense of self and well being, knowing better about the way in which the world turns, being more empowered and such like" comes into anyone's consideration, except perhaps the idle rich.

Anyway, unless I'm getting you wrong, I see you go for the patronising bollox. Changed my mind, I'm more with Phil.

[worm]

Hmmmm ..... I reckon it's measured by most people on the supposed financial benefit, with perhaps a little of rite-of-passage mixed in.

Edited January 18, 2011 by worm

[eFestivals]

What are you going on about? I'm not talking about how to advertise university, I'm on about the personal benefits from getting an education.

and I'm pointing out that most people don't see those personal benefits as enough of a benefit, not by themselves, not when they're having to pay the highest uni fees in the world directly from their own pocket.

(The govt and others can point out as many times as they like that 'it doesn't have to be paid back till you're earning well' - that doesn't alter it's status as a debt you owe).

And surely it's the very essence of patronising to generalise about why people choose what they want to do.

It's never wrong to state the situation as it is.

It's certainly less patronising than telling people who aren't much interested in those personal benefits that they should go to university because of them, particularly when they're not benefits that are unique to universities.

[worm]

and I'm pointing out that most people don't see those personal benefits as enough of a benefit

[llcoolphil]

Are you arguing that people shouldn't be educated because it gives the uneducated less chance of getting a job? Because surely educating them would be the best way of going about it.

[Greeny_Musicchild]

Apprenticeships?

If they were subsidised then that would be a perfect place for those who are not naturally academically minded or just plain don't want to go to university. They are applicable across a lot of disciplines and could probably cover even more skills if the employers could get tax breaks or something for having them. My friend just qualified as an electrician, 6 years after starting his apprenticeship. His employer couldn't afford to pay him for 2 years of that so he only just managed to get it done. If they had some (or better, i don't know if it's already given) subsidies for having them it could be more viable?

I don't know, that's what most people I went to school with did if they didn't carry on in education but most have had troubles along the way. It seems to me if the system was better it could be a clearly defined alternative route to skilled work from secondary school.

[worm]

It's the essential downfall of my argument I have to accept

Im all for education just for education's sake - but it remains a quandry what we do to help people without a strong formal education.

[worm]

Apprenticeships?

[Greeny_Musicchild]

They're still uneducated. Skilled, but not educated.

It's a bit of a myth about having to be academically minded to do a degree. You become acedemically minded after attending an academy. It's kinda the whole point really. It's a structured way of thinking, researching and formulating ideas independently. If you were this way inclined to begin with then you probably wouldn't need an education, unless you wanted to become an academic professional.

Edited January 19, 2011 by Greeny_Musicchild

[harderfaster]

And my point is that education across all levels of economic strtification benefits both society and the individuals that make a society.

[worm]

Not if this education is not put to good use? For example, an arts graduate working at a supermarket?

[worm]

But you're wrong.

You are only in the position to say that education has been beneficial to you. You are not in any place to say that education for the purpose only of education would be beneficial for everyone - that's for them to decide, and not you.

Edited January 19, 2011 by worm

[Greeny_Musicchild]

I'm not suggesting you push people towards apprenticeships, you need to provide an alternative to university. It's all very well saying that people who work in any job would do it better with a degree but the fact is not everyone in this world has either the aptitude or the desire to have one.