Dumbest Protest Signs

[guizonde]

Yeah but think of who is actually holding up those signs.  Giving a few hundred thousand liberal arts and gender studies majors free tuition is not something that is going to pay for itself through future income taxes.

There are only so many spaces in liberal newspapers for feminist columns complaining about how inanimate objects are sexist.

uh, actually it can. just because great britain has semi-costly tuition doesn't mean it's mandatory. in france, universities are "free", as in if you're well-off, you'll pay a fee of roughly 400€ for the year. if you're under a certain payroll, you'll get a scholarship that makes the tuition cost vanish. the state pays for it. granted, we pay more income tax, but hey. that's the point of a welfare-state. i wish i could speak for scandinavia, but i don't know any details about it, but they're the most welfare-state of them all, and everything seems to be working out for them.

[TheContrarian]

Ey, not everyone can be software developers or engineers.  The world needs janitors and Starbucks barristas as much as it needs STEM majors.

That was kind of my point.  If you get hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of government paid tuition that qualifies you for nothing more than a minimum wage job, the government has basically thrown that money away.

[Sigmaleph]

Yeah but think of who is actually holding up those signs.  Giving a few hundred thousand liberal arts and gender studies majors free tuition is not something that is going to pay for itself through future income taxes.

There are only so many spaces in liberal newspapers for feminist columns complaining about how inanimate objects are sexist.

I don't necessarily agree with their demands, but literally the only argument the pic makes is "Look at people nowadays, wanting things! This sort of thing didn't happen before!". It's a) false and b) a fully general counter-argument to any political position at all.

(in the interest of full disclosure, I am the beneficiary of a free university system. Not a gender studies major, pretty sure there's no such thing at UBA)

[mellenORL]

Free or nearly free tuition does not equal a loss. Education is a primary capital investment for a nation. The graduates who choose fields of study that aren't in demand in the job market will still get other jobs, and still pay taxes. The cost of tuition, related expenses and student loan debt for university here has gone up five fold in thirty years; it's complete and utter bullshit.

[pyro]

Free or nearly free tuition does not equal a loss. Education is a primary capital investment for a nation. The graduates who choose fields of study that aren't in demand in the job market will still get other jobs, and still pay taxes. The cost of tuition, related expenses and student loan debt for university here has gone up five fold in thirty years; it's complete and utter bullshit.

I don't actually follow you. The argument is "if the point of government-funded education is a trained workplace, then there's no point in funding education if the student ends up getting exactly the same job they would've gotten without." How is that a counterargument?

[RavynousHunter]

Because they still end up paying taxes, just that those with better jobs end up paying more.  That, and education is basically a country's chief principal investment, as Mellen stated.  Being cheap about it would be like skimping on the quality of concrete used for the foundation of your home.  Sure, you could use gravel, and it might even be cheaper, but your house is going to fucking collapse, eventually.  Invest in a quality foundation, and your house doesn't sink into the hungry, yawning chasm of economic ruination.  I think my metaphor or whatever got fucked.  Don't know, don't care, too tired.

[mellenORL]

You have me confused, Pyro. The argument is that why should we fund education if SOME people are going to "waste" it. STEM is great. We also need non-STEM, like writers and actors and artists and lawyers and teachers and CPA's. The percentage of graduates overall who never get a job in their field, or a decent paying job in another area, is actually pretty low. Conty's snide and empty post is tossing the baby out with the bath water. The reason college education costs have gone up over 500% and much more (at top private universities) is because Congress and State Legislatures have aggressively defunded higher education since the Reagan era. And now the US is second rate because of it. It's bullshit. It's about the one percent who own our politicians, to whom college tuition is pocket change not wanting to give anything back.

[TheContrarian]

Free or nearly free tuition does not equal a loss. Education is a primary capital investment for a nation. The graduates who choose fields of study that aren't in demand in the job market will still get other jobs, and still pay taxes. The cost of tuition, related expenses and student loan debt for university here has gone up five fold in thirty years; it's complete and utter bullshit.

So if the government is paying or at least subsidising the tuition it magically stops costing a ridiculous sum?

Bull.

Unless you want the government to dictate to universities how much they're going to pay for the service.  Authoritarian bullshit by any other name.

In reality, the government underwriting the cost of expensive tuition fees just ends up including a requirement that candidates get qualified in fields that will actually stand a chance of earning enough through taxes to pay back the initial outlay.

If you want to squander my taxes getting a degree in "Professional victimhood studies with a minor in needlework" just to enter the plebby end of the workforce with no hope of ever paying me back then you can just piss off.

[guizonde]

Free or nearly free tuition does not equal a loss. Education is a primary capital investment for a nation. The graduates who choose fields of study that aren't in demand in the job market will still get other jobs, and still pay taxes. The cost of tuition, related expenses and student loan debt for university here has gone up five fold in thirty years; it's complete and utter bullshit.

So if the government is paying or at least subsidising the tuition it magically stops costing a ridiculous sum?

Bull.

Unless you want the government to dictate to universities how much they're going to pay for the service.  Authoritarian bullshit by any other name.

In reality, the government underwriting the cost of expensive tuition fees just ends up including a requirement that candidates get qualified in fields that will actually stand a chance of earning enough through taxes to pay back the initial outlay.

If you want to squander my taxes getting a degree in "Professional victimhood studies with a minor in needlework" just to enter the plebby end of the workforce with no hope of ever paying me back then you can just piss off.

um, turns out that tuition need not cost so much. american and england aside, where i know that tuition can go from anywhere between the low 10k's to nearly 60k a year, most universities are way lower. a madrid law degree will set you back 900€ a year for a bachelor's, and 1500 for a master's. and we're talking in a field where you are paid ungodly amounts of money. hell, even working part-time, it's totally doable, and if you're savings-savvy, you can just work for the summer and use those savings all year-round.

you did raise an interesting point, though. that is the place the government has in schools. i know my university semi-privatized itself in order to lower tuition costs while renovation of the campus is being done. now, there are a couple of sponsored courses. not cool. buuuuut, our tuition comes to around maximum 500€ a year. so, multiply that by 20 to 30 thousand students, and you still get quite a bit of funding. add to that research grants, scholarships, and annual budgets, and you get a very high level of education for a sum that anyone can fork over.

now, sure, my uni is specialized in social sciences (linguistics, psychology, history, geography...), so we're not talking stem or whatever. there is a need for paper-pushers and teachers, and psychologists, and linguists...

you can be against paying for someone else's degree. that's your opinion. but know that means that someone else has the obligation to pay for yours. it goes both ways. and you know what? i don't mind having higher taxes if it means some kid gets a scholarship. education is the best weapon of them all.

[mellenORL]

Conty. Economies are like a circulatory system. It's not like the govt. sets your tax money on fire - it sends it back out into the economy in myriad purchases of goods and services from the private sector, and govt. employees are also consumers in the market, and they pay income tax, too.

Your pre-occupation with a small percentage of students is disingenuous. That, or you should "stop tarding".

A taxpayer has an average adult earning lifetime of 30 to 45 years to pay income taxes, besides all the unavoidable consumer taxes. Even sad gits who work off the grid cleaning houses, buskering, begging, selling drugs, selling art for cash pay all the tax other than income tax in VAT, retail, tolls, vehicle tags, etc. The money that went toward a wasted education does in fact get recouped over time. And with normal folk, the return is very much faster.

Would you also do away with free schooling for ages 5 through 18? Are we to turn back the clock and assure the return of feudal culture? That would save your precious posh fucks a bit of money, but I hope they enjoy living in a fortress and hiring a team of body guards to avoid all the starving, the desperate, and the savage uneducated and disenfranchised hordes. Oh, yes, that already happens in all the places that have no middle class and a bought government. Some of the few good job sectors in those places include manufacturing bullet proof cars, piloting private helicopters, building hidden safe room enclosures in mansions and training attack dogs.

[TheContrarian]

Conty. Economies are like a circulatory system. It's not like the govt. sets your tax money on fire - it sends it back out into the economy in myriad purchases of goods and services from the private sector, and govt. employees are also consumers in the market, and they pay income tax, too.

Your pre-occupation with a small percentage of students is disingenuous. That, or you should "stop tarding".

I am of the opinion that the government should seek to get the best return possible from whatever it invests taxpayers money into.  I mean, government programs where they provide scholarships for specific qualifications leading to occupations where we have an identified shortfall would be fantastic.

On the other hand, paying for someone to take a course that teaches you how to hold a placard, parrot left-wing buzzwords and blog isn't going to lead anywhere except you getting a job you could have got just as easily by leaving school at 16 and entering the workforce.

If the net outcome of 5 years and thousands of pounds/dollars/local equivalent is exactly the same as doing fuck all then it's a simple waste of money.

Would you also do away with free schooling for ages 5 through 18? Are we to turn back the clock and assure the return of feudal culture? That would save your precious posh fucks a bit of money, but I hope they enjoy living in a fortress and hiring a team of body guards to avoid all the starving, the desperate, and the savage uneducated and disenfranchised hordes. Oh, yes, that already happens in all the places that have no middle class and a bought government. Some of the few good job sectors in those places include manufacturing bullet proof cars, piloting private helicopters, building hidden safe room enclosures in mansions and training attack dogs.

Well that certainly came out of left-field.  So not wanting to foot the bill for hippies to take bullshit nonsense degrees that don't lead anywhere is the same as wanting to get rid of public education altogether?  That's a bit of a stretch...

As long as the government mandates that all kids have to remain in education to 18, it's only right that they underwrite the cost of it.

[R. U. Sirius]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/01/08/the_most_entitled_generation_isnt_millennials_its_baby_boomers_125184.html

I'll just leave this here.

[Askold]

Actually I have heard a very good proposal for government "burning" tax money. The idea was that any money that is paid in taxes is gone, destroyed, taken out of circulation. Meanwhile any money the government needs is created because that is already something governments can do by printing money.

This would make several things easier and since most of the money used is actually just digital it would not cause much problems, at least in technical sense.

And at least it was a novel idea.

[TheContrarian]

Actually I have heard a very good proposal for government "burning" tax money. The idea was that any money that is paid in taxes is gone, destroyed, taken out of circulation. Meanwhile any money the government needs is created because that is already something governments can do by printing money.

This would make several things easier and since most of the money used is actually just digital it would not cause much problems, at least in technical sense.

And at least it was a novel idea.

Venezuela called, they want their fiscal policy back.

[rookie]

So out of curiosity, Contrarian, what percentage of degrees being awarded do you see being professional victimhood? Do you think that nobody will want to be doctors or lawyers or architects or teachers once they find out they can be a Transgender Studies major?