moral hazard

[cyrano]

It's amazing. Even countries like China and India, to name a few big ones, understand cheap education is the only way forward.

Repression didn't stop population from increasing in an explosive way. Education did.

The combination of heaps of guns coupled to mediocre or unreachable education won't end well, I think.

 

[boji]

Appreciate the reply Matador. The point was that a hyper-politicized govt will tend to produce short-lived policies.

But if we're to equate policy to that of a trolley problem, realistically we'll need to include a dozen more overriding switchboxes, with the last of the switches positions determined by the emotional capture of voters.

 

[fazer]

Let them file bankruptcy like a banker can. And watch the system fix itself. Collage needs a rethink in the US. Let’s also start with free junior collage. For all the under grad classes.

 

[living sounds]

It's not just the Rs. Some of most damaging things to the working class have been the financial crisis bailouts and the recent covid ppp loans and fed money printing. By and large both parties were complicit in them. It's not a D vs R issue.

Obviously, but it seems that complaining happens when the Democrats are doing it. As seem thread-starting.

Excessive student debt seems to be a specifically US American issue. There's generally more for-profit education and less government funding availible for higher education than in Europe.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

There's plenty of government funding for higher education here. The problem is that far too much is spent on administration and coddling rather than on actual classroom and lab education. Throwing more money at it has only made it worse.

 

[cyrano]

In the United States, education spending falls short of benchmarks set by international organizations such as UNESCO, of which the U.S. is a member. The nation puts 11.6% of public funding toward education, well below the international standard 15.00%.

from:
https://educationdata.org/public-ed...te a total of,funding is equivalent to 3.76%.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

from:
https://educationdata.org/public-ed...te a total of,funding is equivalent to 3.76%.

As though some arbitrary benchmark based on a percentage of public spending is a valid comparison. It says nothing about the widely varying cost of living across this country. Averages over a non-normal distribution are meaningless.

It's great that the article tries to use Luxembourg as an example. It has a population of 650k which is not even close to the population of the average state here. And how does Luxembourg's cost of living compare to most of the USA? Oh, right. Luxembourg is 13th in the world for high CoL while the USA average comes in at 26th.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/cost-of-living-by-country
And finally, even if we took UNESCO's benchmark as valid, it only makes our excessive growth in spending on administrative overhead look worse. It isn't how much money you throw at a problem, but what good (or not) the spending does.

 

[cyrano]

Luxembourg is expensive because of their tax laws, just like Switzerland and Liechtenstein. They attract some wealthy people. Cost of living seems higher because there's less taxation on wages and profits, compared to most other countries in Europe. That's compensated by tax on consumption, via VAT mostly.

But cost of living hasn't got much to do with cost of education. The education system in Luxembourg is comparable to the one in Belgium or France, both in effectiveness and cost.

The fact that the money isn't spent wisely in the US, as you say, only makes it a lot worse. You're spending below average and not effectively, which explains a lot. It helps the top layer of society stay on top. An average working class kid can't get into Harvard, fi, unless he or she is way smarter than average. In that case, he or she is absorbed into the top layer.

The US attracts a lot of brain power from the rest of the world. Makes sense, as most of these immigrant PHDs have studied in a system that doesn't burden them with loans to pay back. But it's not fair at all on Americans, as they are burdoned with debt and have to face competition from everywhere. It's also not fair on the education system in developing countries, as a lot of their PHDs emigrate to countries like the US. I also see it as one of the reasons over one percent of US citizens leave the USA every year.

 

[Matador]

Luxembourg is expensive because of their tax laws, just like Switzerland and Liechtenstein.

And Luxembourg is still significantly cheaper than the high cost-of-living areas of the US like here in San Francisco, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Luxembourg is expensive because of their tax laws, just like Switzerland and Liechtenstein. They attract some wealthy people. Cost of living seems higher because there's less taxation on wages and profits, compared to most other countries in Europe. That's compensated by tax on consumption, via VAT mostly.

The cost of living doesn't "seem higher," it simply IS higher. If these places attract wealthy people, then where do the people who do the actual work (plumbers, mechanics, electricians, construction workers, bartenders, wait staff, etc.) live?

But cost of living hasn't got much to do with cost of education. The education system in Luxembourg is comparable to the one in Belgium or France, both in effectiveness and cost.

Oh, really? Schools must be built on land. Land costs money. Materials for the construction must be purchased with all local costs and taxes incurred. Then the people who design and build the school must be paid enough to live in the country. Finally the teachers, principals, admin staff, maintenance staff, cafeteria staff, etc. must be paid a living wage. All of these things are dependent on the cost of living.

The fact that the money isn't spent wisely in the US, as you say, only makes it a lot worse. You're spending below average and not effectively, which explains a lot. It helps the top layer of society stay on top. An average working class kid can't get into Harvard, fi, unless he or she is way smarter than average. In that case, he or she is absorbed into the top layer.

That's what happens with too much top-down government interference in schools. Various Federal mandates from testing to food, to you name it, must be paid for whether the local district wants it or needs it or not. Elite schools rarely enroll average Americans. A few get in with excellent test scores and scholarships. Most don't need to attend such an expensive school to excel in life if they've got the fire inside. We already discussed that fact. "Absorbed into the top layer" is called social mobility and is a good thing. We don't have a caste system of some fixed class system here. Anyone can rise or fall based on the decisions they make, the risks they take, and their abilities.

The US attracts a lot of brain power from the rest of the world. Makes sense, as most of these immigrant PHDs have studied in a system that doesn't burden them with loans to pay back. But it's not fair at all on Americans, as they are burdoned with debt and have to face competition from everywhere. It's also not fair on the education system in developing countries, as a lot of their PHDs emigrate to countries like the US. I also see it as one of the reasons over one percent of US citizens leave the USA every year.

Yes, we do attract a lot of people from abroad. I'd prefer if we were more careful about apportioning H1B visas, frankly. But many students from abroad come here for graduate school and then elect to stay as citizens. So not everything you outline is accurate.

Finally, there is no way that 1% of US citizens emigrate annually. That would be at least 3.3M people. Estimates of the total ex-pat population range from 5-9M total (and some of those live abroad temporarily or seasonally). Far more immigrate here than emigrate away. Check your figures.

 

[ruairioflaherty]

We don't have a caste system of some fixed class system here. Anyone can rise or fall based on the decisions they make, the risks they take, and their abilities.

Do you feel this is more the case now than say 50 years ago, less the case, or about the same?

 

[scott2000]

Do you feel this is more the case

Feelings are like the weather..fickle little suckers

 

[living sounds]

In theory there is no class system, but the history and reality of it is pretty interesting.

I only listened to the blink (summary) of this book, but will eventually read it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...and-political-history-of-white-trash-america/

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Do you feel this is more the case now than say 50 years ago, less the case, or about the same?

I'm 56. In my experience it is more the case now than it was earlier in my life. Women and minorities in particular have far more opportunities now than in the 60s and 70s. Other than purely physical requirements (jobs that require strength that few females have), there are very few real barriers to career choices today. That leads to the social mobility I mentioned earlier. Note that effort and dedication are still required to "succeed" (where the definition is up to the individual).

 

[JohnRoberts]

In theory there is no class system, but the history and reality of it is pretty interesting.

I only listened to the blink (summary) of this book, but will eventually read it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...and-political-history-of-white-trash-america/

With a title like that how could you not read it....

The term white trash dates back not to the 1950s but to the 1820s. It arises not in Mississippi or Alabama, but in and around Baltimore, Maryland. The best guess is that it was invented not by whites, but by African Americans (both free and enslaved) as a term of abuse—to disparage local poor whites. Some would have been newly arrived Irish immigrants, others semi-skilled workers drawn to jobs in the post-Revolution building boom. Still other trashy types may have been white servants, waged or indentured, working in the homes and estates of area elites. As it does today, the term registered contempt and disgust, and it suggests sharp hostilities between social groups essentially competing for the same resources—the same jobs, the same opportunities, and even the same marriage partners.

for more history (perhaps accurate?). White Trash: The Social Origins of a Stigmatype - The Society Pages There are multiple books listed in the footnotes.

JR

 

[living sounds]

With a title like that how could you not read it....



for more history (perhaps accurate?). White Trash: The Social Origins of a Stigmatype - The Society Pages There are multiple books listed in the footnotes.

JR

Way to go. I point to a book by a reputable historian, you dismiss it because... I recommended it? The title? Because it was reviewed in a "liberal" paper? And then you point to a website explaining the history of the word "White Trash", which is not what the discussion or my post was about.

I do not like the term "class", which over here is viewed as a political (Marxist), so we have long replaced it with "Schicht", meaning sociatal layers.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

In theory there is no class system, but the history and reality of it is pretty interesting.

Having ancestors who came here from Germany (mother's side) in 1752-3, and from Ireland, Scotland, and England (also mostly during the colonial era), I see things differently. I grew up in the southern US. Both sides of my family were farmers until post WWII. Many were successful, but not all. Their progeny were generally much better off and had increasing opportunities after WWII when travel became more accessible and inexpensive.

I currently live near a small town in a small rural county that is not wealthy. I'm surrounded by people who might be called "white trash." I grew up with the same people. Heck, some are in my family.

I only listened to the blink (summary) of this book, but will eventually read it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...and-political-history-of-white-trash-america/

I want to read "Hillbilly Elegy" by J. D. Vance. Might add "White Trash..." to the "find a used copy" list.

I think most authors who did not grow up in the rural south with deep family roots, cultural traditions, and the rest miss the mark when trying to understand southerners. They carry the same negative biases that many have about us and that leads them astray about things like "voting against our own best interests." The mindset is very different from that of the urban elite or even typical suburban soccer mom types. What motivates us is not what motivates a person like Isenberg.

 

[living sounds]

Having ancestors who came here from Germany (mother's side) in 1752-3, and from Ireland, Scotland, and England (also mostly during the colonial era), I see things differently. I grew up in the southern US. Both sides of my family were farmers until post WWII. Many were successful, but not all. Their progeny were generally much better off and had increasing opportunities after WWII when travel became more accessible and inexpensive.

I currently live near a small town in a small rural county that is not wealthy. I'm surrounded by people who might be called "white trash." I grew up with the same people. Heck, some are in my family.


I want to read "Hillbilly Elegy" by J. D. Vance. Might add "White Trash..." to the "find a used copy" list.

I think most authors who did not grow up in the rural south with deep family roots, cultural traditions, and the rest miss the mark when trying to understand southerners. They carry the same negative biases that many have about us and that leads them astray about things like "voting against our own best interests." The mindset is very different from that of the urban elite or even typical suburban soccer mom types. What motivates us is not what motivates a person like Isenberg.

I think it is a good idea for everyone to try and take a mental step back from the identity thinking, however hard that may be. Viewing the world in terms of "us vs. them" doesn't do any of us as well as us collectively much good...

Personally, I never cared much for where someone came from as to who they are and where they want to be. I was fortunate to grow up with friends from very different backgrounds and still value friendships with people from very different walks of life, educational backgrounds as well as material status'.

With all the politician bashing I find it kind of interesting that the book on the topic you want to read comes from a politician. I'd suggest to read the book by the historian first, since it may help with understanding the motivations of the politician better.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I think it is a good idea for everyone to try and take a mental step back from the identity thinking, however hard that may be. Viewing the world in terms of "us vs. them" doesn't do any of us as well as us collectively much good...

Sure, but it is also good to know from whence you came, what trials and tribulations your ancestors suffered and overcame, and to learn from that. It has nothing to do with your projecting "us vs. them."

Personally, I never cared much for where someone came from as to who they are and where they want to be. I was fortunate to grow up with friends from very different backgrounds and still value friendships with people from very different walks of life, educational backgrounds as well as material status'.

I also grew up with friends from different cultures. In second grade a new immigrant student from India joined my class. We became fast friends and studied and played together for several years until his father took a job in another state. The next year at middle school I met a Japanese-American classmate (his parents immigrated to Vermont just before he was born). We were best friends until high school when our interests started to diverge. I'm thankful that I was able to reconnect with him a few years ago as he died the next year. I will always treasure those friendships.

In high school, college, and work I've been fortunate to associate with people from all over the world. I've been in many in-person work meetings where I was the only native-born American. My first wife was an immigrant from Hong Kong and my second is from the Philippines.

So kindly stop preaching to me about valuing different cultures.

With all the politician bashing I find it kind of interesting that the book on the topic you want to read comes from a politician. I'd suggest to read the book by the historian first, since it may help with understanding the motivations of the politician better.

I read books from all perspectives. Being an historian doesn't magically confer the ability to erase bias nor to accurately portray reality. Being a politician doesn't automatically infer some manipulative intent. I'll read what I damned well want to in whatever order I choose.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Way to go. I point to a book by a reputable historian, you dismiss it because... I recommended it? The title? Because it was reviewed in a "liberal" paper? And then you point to a website explaining the history of the word "White Trash", which is not what the discussion or my post was about.

I dismissed it because of the pejorative title. Too much divisive racial tension these days. If she is a reputable historian, I have never heard of her. I searched the bibliography of that paper I linked to, that listed several books on the general topic. Her book was not on that short list, but perhaps it is a brand new book.

Coincidentally David McCullough RIP a Pulitzer prize winning historian I like, just died earlier this month.

I do not like the term "class", which over here is viewed as a political (Marxist), so we have long replaced it with "Schicht", meaning sociatal layers.

Sounds almost like another german word that begins with "Schei...." (I can drink in several languages.)

====

I have shared this anecdote before on the general subject of class, and white trash . Back about 15-20 years ago I lived in Georgia for several months. I was staying with a friend who owns 50 acres just east of Atlanta. He sold me one acre that I planned to build on (a beautiful hill side overlooking a waterfall, but thats another story for another time).

It took me a while to figure out what exactly was going on, but something seemed odd about my shopping trips to the local super market and other local stores. It appears that the town was a wealthy suburb of Atlanta populated by a majority of black professionals (doctors, lawyers, and the like). The local white minority were the proverbial "white trash" residents who couldn't afford to move out, or like my friend with enough land for his own air strip and living above the fray. I didn't experience overt discrimination because of my skin color, but there was a definite shift in how my requests for customer service were handled. Once I figured out how to read the room if became obvious from appearances that other white shoppers in the stores were poor and lower class than all the wealthy professionals. After I understood what was going on I adjusted my expectations (for their expectations) and went with the flow. I probably tipped a little more than usual for me (I'm cheap) to go against trend.

I ended up moving back to MS after a few months because of a business disagreement with my friend. We are both alpha dogs and I wasn't willing to be subservient to yet another boss (I sold my land back to him for what I paid ).

I found this experience instructive, not good or evil, but just human nature to self organize based on externalities.

JR