Tag: college

Sorry Hippies: Welders do make more money than Philosophers

In the 4th debate for the Republican nomination to be the contender for President that faces off against the Democrat (see: “Hillary Clinton“) in the 2016 election, a question was posed about about whether the government should force employers to pay their least important and profitable employees a higher amount (instead of allowing the labor market to dictate pay based on the value and demand of the work a position holds). Amidst the candidates comments supporting freedom of choice over government meddling in the private decisions workers and businesses make for their own lives, Florida senator Marco Rubio cut to one of the causes of the question by noting the useless degrees many students choose to go into debt over more prudent vocational education.

“Here’s the best way to raise wages: Make America the best place in the world to start a business or expand an existing business, tax reform and regulatory reform, bring our debt under control, fully utilize our energy resources … repeal and replace ObamaCare, and make higher education faster and easier to access.”

He added:  “For the life of me, I don’t know why we have stigmatized vocational education. Welders make more money than philosophers. We need more welders and less philosophers.”

His closer of “You’re going to make people more expensive than a machine. We need more welders and less philosophers” was noted that proper grammar in such a context is “fewer philosophers”, not “less”. Others had more aggressive criticism of the comment in what seems to me to be merely a transparent attempt at finding something to attack more than anything resembling an actual legitimate point of contention.

While the points that people shouldn’t make themselves less valuable to employers than machines and that they should instead should go to school for an actual reason and not just to burn money and waste valuable years on completely non-beneficial titles for fields they don’t get employed in seems pretty unassailable – it was heavily assailed non-the-less. The reasons why are obvious, even though the point itself is an obvious one: aside from the academic industry not wanting dilution of its brand, there are a lot of people who have already wasted their time and money on useless degrees and want to feel better about that waste by continuing to laud them, not to mention opportunists who are merely looking for an excuse to take down Rubio’s rising star.

Evidently, Rubio was so sterling in his debate performance that this Welders vs Philosopher salary thing was the biggest trending story of the whole debate in articles and social media afterward.

The refrain in most of the reaction was in claiming that Rubio’s statement is wrong and that Philosophers actually make much more than welders.

Except they don’t, and here is how Rubio’s critics are making the false attack:

TEACHERS ARE NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH DOERS
CNN notes that “Most critics cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which lists the median annual salary for welders at $37,420. For philosophy teachers, the wage is significantly higher: $63,630.” The obvious answer to this should be a resounding “so what?” as this means nothing.

A welding teacher is not necessarily a welder so why would anyone accept the bogus premise that a philosophy teacher is a philosopher? This is a fallacy of changing the goal posts since it is using imbalanced criteria to make a point. You either compare welding teachers to philosophy teachers (i.e: teachers compared to teachers) or you compare welders to philosophers (i.e: people gainfully employed doing the act of welding vs people who philosophize as their profession) but you can’t claim to un-make Rubio’s accurate point by keeping only half of his statement and changing the other half.

LEARNING IS NOT THE SAME AS WORKING
The other dubious debunking of Rubio’s claim rests on changing the context of his comment. The Washington Post headlined “Sorry Rubio. Philosophy majors actually make more than welders”. But why would Rubio a “sorry, but…” statement about yet another irrelevancy to his point? Again, the criticism requires changing the comments of the criticized, which in turn doesn’t go on to debunk a point but rather just goes into an irrelevant tangent that uses some of the same words in the original point.

Someone with a degree in Philosophy is just “someone with a degree in Philosophy”. You don’t become a lawyer by studying law in college – you become a lawyer by becoming a lawyer. Likewise, you don’t become a welder by studying welding – you study welding to become a welder.

Rubio didn’t say “those who study Philosophy” in his comparison, so what are his critics so afraid of that they can’t just respond to what he actually said? Probably because the context of his remarks make it clear that he was just using shorthand for “useless liberal arts major” in the context of minimum wage workers and as I noted earlier – that is impossible to argue against. But his critics couldn’t just let him go and make such an obvious and accurate point like that without appearing to counter it, so they engage in all this nonsense to obfuscate the truth.

But even playing the game of literalness these critics are using, the numbers and logic just don’t support the claims against the comment. To accurately fact check the legitimacy of Rubio’s point about “welders making more than philosophers”, one has to look at the number of people who studied philosophy and used that study to become employed as a philosopher vs those who learned welding and made a living from being a welder. Sorry, Philip Bump, who wrote that WashPo article, but what you study isn’t the same as what you do for a living. By Bumps metric, he’s conceivably including the hypothetical person who majors in philosophy in college and then went on to become a welder. But replace “welder” with anything and you’ve got the same non-point. A doctor, lawyer, scientist, politician, entrepreneur or other business professional might very well have majored in philosophy but they’re not “Philosophers” and it ain’t their philosophizing that earns them a higher salary than a welder.

(INTENTIONALLY?) MISSING THE POINT
The most bizarre criticism is from the people butthurt about an alleged attack on Philosophizing as a profession. You would think someone learned in the art of using logic and reason to understand reality would… do any of that… and then realize that making an obvious statement regarding advice about career trajectories is not an attack or statement that having a skill used in that career is useless.

I’m regarded as pretty self absorbed and I can’t imagine feeling similarly about such an obvious statement on the fields that apply to me. I’m an improvisational actor and would agree with a candidate saying we need more welders than improv performers. I also think improv should be taught in high schools, business schools, and elsewhere because of its inherent skill while at the same time telling everyone who will listen to absolutely not count on it as a career and instead learn an actual skill that actually builds things. Pretty simple to see the non-competition within those points, if you ask me, but others had trouble with Rubio’s comment as if he made some kind of condemnation on knowing anything about philosophy.

BY THE (SUPER OBVIOUS) NUMBERS
By using the intellectually dishonest metrics of “philosophy teachers” and “philosophy majors” to be synonymous with what a “philosopher” is, Rubio’s point is ignored, not fact-checked or even rebutted.

To revisit: Rubio’s point was about the responsibility of government and the individual. He said the responsibility of government is to make America the best place to start or grow business and that the responsibility of individuals is to train themselves for preparation in such a business climate by learning necessary skills for their career goals. He didn’t say anything against majoring in philosophy, one assumes (if they are to honestly appraise the argument he’s making) for a reason: such a major could very well fit into a larger career goal. His comment made an observation about preparation for success in the workplace and it was accurate: On average – welders earn more money than philosophers, so choose your education spending wisely and with a plan in mind.

There are a lot of welding jobs and there are very few philosopher jobs. There are essentially no philosophy jobs outside of entrepreneurially creating your own business or website, advice column, book, or becoming a thought leader that can command hefty speaking fees.

But even going off of the pre-mentioned fallacy about Philosophy teachers being “Philosophers” instead of what they actually are (“teachers”), the numbers don’t add up since the number of people who have risen to the title of tenured professors in philosophy is far smaller than the number of employed welders. Likewise, majoring in philosophy (or any other liberal art) that is not a requirement or aid to your intended profession is a waste, even if such major holders go on to make a good living outside of the field they majored in.

There is just no possible honest angle that makes Rubio’s comment incorrect.

Sorry Hippies, but the fact remains that most liberal arts majors made bad decisions with that choice and their inability to use those majors in the workforce illustrates it.

Just a quick reminder that you wasted your time and money in college

Those of you not enjoying the daily spoils of a job specific to the skills and knowledge you spent all that time and money in a university to acquire are not alone.

Conan O’brien – New study reveals that up to 41% of college graduates are working in jobs that don’t require a degree. By the way – I’m one of them.

College is a scam for many

High schools teach useless bullshit and colleges are expensive scams on top of scams. The following online documentary College Conspiracy walks you through step by step how and why the rise of college tuition has happened and why its a propaganda laden scam.

Whenever the government subsidizes anything the price of those goods and services rise dramatically. Why? Take the case of higher education and teachers Unions. The Unions know that since the tax payer is going to be guaranteeing the student loans they can keep raising the fees as high as they want. Everything in America has suffered in regards to wage and profit increases except for higher education which is exceeding all measurements of inflation.

It is a destructive collusion between the Public Teachers Union and Big Government that enables the cost of education to rise.

Big Government’s goal is to control as much of education as possible so as to indoctrinate our children into the moral relativism of their culture of death. Have you ever wondered why 90% of all Public School Teachers are Liberal Democrats?

Is college worth the 400% markup? The average student loan is $25,000.

Students graduating from college last year walked away with more than a diploma, they also left with a record level of student loan debt.

College seniors who took out loans to fund their college education owed an average of $25,250, 5% more than the class of 2009 owed, according to a report from the Institute for College Access & Success’ Project on Student Debt.

Thanks to rising tuition and the weak economy, students were forced to rely more heavily on loans to pay for their college education. If it weren’t for a significant increase in federal grant aid, however, the increase in student loan debt could have been even higher, the Project on Student Debt said.

“Most students in the Class of 2010 started college before the recent economic downturn, but the economy soured while they were still in school, widening the gap between rising college costs and what students and their parents could afford,” the report stated.

Graham Crackers are Racist

This week in Texas Christian University news: A student government candidate named Graham was told by school admins that his nickname was racist and couldn’t be used, forcing him to put tape over his campaign signs. Who knew that running for Vice President of external affairs would get so…um…racial.

TCU Calls Graham Cracker Signs Offensive: MyFoxDFW.com

“Hi my name is Graham, like the cracker,” he said.
That’s how McMillan has been introducing himself since high school. It’s even how his friends know him.
“And he was like, ‘I’m Graham, like the cracker, McMillan.’ And he did it so people would remember his name. That’s how I remember him,” said Taylor Slack.
After McMillan put the catchy addition to his name on his campaign posters he got a call from his student advisor.
“That it could be deemed derogatory and had been derogatory. And, I just taped it over,” he said. “TCU provided me with some blue tape so I could cover it up, which was very nice. And, I ran out so I thought why not spice this up a little bit and make it a little more pop. I got some yellow tape in there and found some flames and decided to put that on there too.”
Other students on campus said they understand the word cracker can sometimes have negative racial connotations, but in this case it doesn’t seem harmful.
“I thought since his first name was Graham it really wasn’t a problem, you know,” said Emma Altgelt.
Some of the signs no longer have tape on them. McMillan said that’s because some students have told him they’ve taken it upon themselves to remove it.
He said he’ll likely continue using his favorite catch phrase for introductions with friends.

Read more on myFOXdfw.com: http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/110111-tcu-calls-graham-cracker-signs-offensive#ixzz1ctcTCj3u

Study: College graduates driving increase in bankruptcy filings

“We’re told that if you do go and get advanced education, you’re going to be almost guaranteed this economic success,” said Leslie Linfield, the group’s executive director. But the recession proved that “higher education was no guarantee that you weren’t going to be at risk.”

Prediction: It will do no use showing this to my dad and the next time I display an inability to immediately access knowledge on anything from how to change a wagon wheel to how to fix the nations debt crisis, he will tell me I would know “If I went to college” just as consistently as ever. Still, however:

But Linfield said the recent increase in the number of bankruptcy filings is driven largely by wealthier, more-educated households. The percentage of debtors with bachelor’s degrees peaked in 2009 and then inched down in 2010. Those with graduate degrees jumped from 4.9 percent in 2006 to 6.7 percent last year. And the share earning more than $60,000 rose from 5.5 to 9.2 percent.

Linfield said she is also concerned about the age of debtors. Over the past five years, the number of consumers filing for bankruptcy between ages 18 and 34 has fallen 31 percent, her group’s study found. Meanwhile, the number of people 55 and older, who have less time to recover financially, has jumped 25 percent.

Scott Adams on Gettin Educated

The drinking age in those days was 18, and the entire compensation package for the managers of The Coffee House was free beer. That goes a long way toward explaining why the accounting system consisted of seven students trying to remember where all the money went. I thought we could do better.

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert has an interesting article up containing the following advice points:

Combine Skills. The first thing you should learn in a course on entrepreneurship is how to make yourself valuable. It’s unlikely that any average student can develop a world-class skill in one particular area. But it’s easy to learn how to do several different things fairly well. I succeeded as a cartoonist with negligible art talent, some basic writing skills, an ordinary sense of humor and a bit of experience in the business world. The “Dilbert” comic is a combination of all four skills. The world has plenty of better artists, smarter writers, funnier humorists and more experienced business people. The rare part is that each of those modest skills is collected in one person. That’s how value is created.

Fail Forward. If you’re taking risks, and you probably should, you can find yourself failing 90% of the time. The trick is to get paid while you’re doing the failing and to use the experience to gain skills that will be useful later. I failed at my first career in banking. I failed at my second career with the phone company. But you’d be surprised at how many of the skills I learned in those careers can be applied to almost any field, including cartooning. Students should be taught that failure is a process, not an obstacle.

Find the Action. In my senior year of college I asked my adviser how I should pursue my goal of being a banker. He told me to figure out where the most innovation in banking was happening and to move there. And so I did. Banking didn’t work out for me, but the advice still holds: Move to where the action is. Distance is your enemy.

Read the other 4 and the rest of the article here: How to get a real education

Muslim student admits she wants another Holocaust

This gave me the chills. It starts out with a Muslim Student Association member making an awkward opening to a question posed to David Horowitz at a campus speaking engagement and it starts to look like she has a point. Evidently Horowitz made a connection between the Muslim Student Association and Muslim terrorists, which the student found silly, given her sarcastic tone on how the connection isn’t exactly “clear”. Horowitz then asks her to condemn a terrorist organization and the tone quickly changes when you’re the viewer trying to figure out whats going on here… things suddenly get dark when you’re like “wait.. what? why aren’t you just saying they’re terrorist scum and have nothing to do with me or my group who are peace loving Muslims and howDAREyousir blah blah blah”?? She explains that to openly say she supports this terrorist organization (Hamas) would be to martyr herself (an ironic choice of euphemism) because Homeland Security would catch wind and then investigate her since, they kinda frown on terrorist supporters here (not exactly parallel to being crucified, but no one ever claimed this chick was smart). Horowitz then asks the question a different way: he notes that Hamas wants the Jews collected into Israel so they are easier to slaughter and asks “for it or against it?”. Even after she had expressed support for the terror group, my inclination was to believe that she was going to go down a route claiming that Hamas was just a misunderstood organization that “needed” to use terror tactics and murder innocent people because of the plight of their noble cause, and so on and so forth.. but no… the bitch just comes out and admits it… its a chiller.

If she was a neo-Nazi, this would have been news. but since the media hates reporting that tired old “Muslims trying to murder people” story line, i had to see this online instead of the nightly news. pathetic.

the unbelievable unsettling transcript of what you just watched:

MSA member: Good evening, I just wanted to say thank you for coming to campus tonight and presenting your point of view, its always important to have to sets of, ah, views going on at the same time. Um, very useful. My name is Jumanah Imad Albahri and I’m a student here at UCSD. Ah I was reading your literature, I found that much more interesting than your talk, and I found some interesting things about the MSA, which is an organization that is very active on campus and is hosting our annual “Hitler Youth” week, you should come out to those events. Um, if you could clarify the connection between the MSA and Jihad terrorist networks, because last time I checked, we had to do our own fundraising, and we never get help from anyone. So if you could clarify the connection between UCSD’s MSA or if you don’t have such information, if you could connect other MSA’s on UC’s, because the connection wasn’t to clear in the pamphlet, just if you could clarify.

Horowitz: Okay. Will you condemn Hamas, here and now?

MSA member: I’m sorry, what?

Horowitz: Will you condemn Hamas?

MSA member: Would I condemn Hamas?

Horowitz: As a terrorist organization. Genocidal organization.

MSA member: Are you asking me to put myself on a cross?

Horowitz: So you won’t. I have actually had this experience many times. You didn’t actually read the pamphlet, because the pamphlet is chapter and verse. The main connection is that the MSA is part of the Muslim Brotherhood Network as revealed…

MSA member: I don’t think you understood what I meant by that. I meant if I say something, I am sure that I will be arrested, for reasons of homeland security. So if you could please just answer my question.

Horowitz: If you condemn Hamas, Homeland Security will arrest you?

MSA member: If I support Hamas, because your question forces me to condemn Hamas. If I support Hamas, I look really bad.

Horowitz: If you don’t condemn Hamas, obviously you support it. Case closed. I have had this experience at UC Santa Barbara, where there were 50 members of the Muslim Students Association sitting right in the rows there. And throughout my hour talk I kept asking them, will you condemn Hizbollah and Hamas. And none of them would. And then when the question period came, the president of the Muslim Students Association was the first person to ask a question. And I said, ‘Before you start, will you condemn Hizbollah?’ And he said, ‘Well, that question is too complicated for a yes or no answer.’ So I said, ‘Okay, I’ll put it to you this way. I am a Jew. The head of Hizbollah has said that he hopes that we will gather in Israel so he doesn’t have to hunt us down globally. For or Against it?

MSA member: For it.

Horowitz: Thank you for coming and showing everybody what’s here.

UPDATE: David Horowitz talked about this with Sean Hannity on the radio and explains the connection between the MSA (Muslim Student Association) and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Evolution of the College Dorm

Time mag has this interesting photo essay that covers college campuseses (campi?) from the cinder block 30’s where the male dorm would communicate with the segregate chicks through light flashing morse code to the campus of today that features Coldstone Creameries, 7/11’s and rock climbing…
Here are the 3 best from the 15 picture slideshow:

The 1950s and 60s saw a surge in political and civil rights debates in America, with the college campus taking center stage in the debate over equality. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson outlined his plans for affirmative action during a graduation speech at the historically all-black Howard University, above. Meanwhile, massive state and federal spending sparked a boom in dorm construction, as minorities and disadvantaged students began flocking to campuses nationwide. In 1958, the University of California’s nine campuses could house only 2,900 students; by 1970, they had residential space for nearly 20,000.

campus pool

Though La Vista del Campo Norte seems at first glance more like a hotel than a dorm, Bill Bayless, CEO of American Campus Communities, says these buildings aren’t just real estate opportunities: “Our properties are not Animal House. There are no kegs out by the pool.” Nowadays, students demand privacy, technology and the same amenities they grew up with, he says. “It’s what the student expects when they leave Mom and Dad’s.”

farm campus

Not everyone agrees with the luxury-dorm fad. At Berea College in Kentucky, school administrators have adopted a unique approach to the problem of strangled budgets and coddled kids: Dorms are furnished by the college crafts workshops, cafeteria food is provided by the school’s farm, and students are required to work 10 hours a week in various campus jobs. “It’s about identity and the culture you want to develop,” says Gus Gerassimides, the college’s assistant vice president for student life. “Ultimately every community has choices to make. It’s who you choose to be.”