Very true indeed.  Thus Peter Thiel's Fellowship:  http://www.thielfellowship.org

It is unfortunate that a traditional university degree doesn't translate into guaranteed earnings.  I have a few friends in their 30s that are STILL paying off loans from 4 year undergraduate programs, AND they aren't making much money.  But like you say Butters, financial gain isn't the only reason to further your education.  It's like playing music for the sole purpose of becoming a rock star.  There should be intrinsic motivation aside from financial / material gain.  But, at the same time, I'm not criticizing anyone that uses an education as a means to an end of career success and financial stability, or even great wealth.  Good for them.  The best thing for a young person to do in this day in age is come up with an idea for a clever Pear Shaped app, and just sell it.  Don't go to school.  Just create apps that can be sold for a dollar.

Ok.  I shouldn't have used the term "guarantee."  I agree with what you're saying.  But, take my dad's generation for instance.  He was a boomer, and for him and his peers, an undergraduate degree was an ALMOST guarantee that they would get a decent paying job.  That's not the case anymore.

And the part about the uneducated kids selling widgets was tongue-in-cheek.  I know my sense of humor doesn't often come across online.  Well, or in person for that matter. 

^
True.  But I think that's part of why they bought "the lie" so easily.  It worked for them, and so they uphold the idea that it will, or should, work for their children.  Plus you have colleges, universities, and hiring corporations constantly proclaiming the INCREASED importance of having a college education in the modern world.

And I've spoken about the inflation of the degree on here before.  I equate a modern undergraduate degree with what the high school diploma was prior to maybe 15 - 20 - 30 years ago.  I'm also wary of the "degree shops" and accelerated online programs that seemingly pump out degrees in exchange for some money and a little time.  There just doesn't seem to be any rigor in getting a degree at this point.  And job seekers are now met with positions that don't necessitate much more than a high school education now "requiring" a masters degree.  Why should a customer service position in a company "require" applicants to have a 4 year degree?  Or a receptionist at a veterinary hospital?  I know often they're just trying to be selective.  But the model seems to be: stay in school longer, spend more money on school, learn less, and then do less in your field, if you're actually lucky enough to work in your field.  I'd guess if I took a random sample of 10 acquaintances of mine that have college degrees, maybe 5 of them are working in their chosen field of study.  This is why I frequently see a van driving around for a company called "Over-educated Painters".  Haha

Last edited by Worried Man (2014-05-12 08:30:44)

My girlfriend just opined:  "they are creating a generation of debt slaves."  A bit over the top but effectively there's some truth in it; and, as you say, sad.

My friend works at a Mercedes dealership, they have three charming young ladies there who are receptionists. They greet customers, answer the phone and determine whether people want to buy a car or get their car fixed, then point them towards someone who can help them. They get to wear a nice uniform and meet a reasonable class of people, or at least people with money (as the two do not always go together). and they earn slightly more than they would working in a supermarket.

All three of these girls have got degrees, a couple of them quite reasonable sounding ones.

I think he's just speaking on the difference between a vocational or technical program, which teaches you very specific skills to perform a very specific task, like welding or being an air conditioning repair man.  Yes, you are getting an education, but it's specifically to gain SKILLS to teach you a certain TASK.  On the other hand, a regular undergraduate program, take a degree in say history or economics, is only imparting knowledge.  You can learn the required knowledge, but you're not learning any particular skill set.  I guess a simple distinction would be with one you learn a trade, with the other you just learn.  Say the difference between a person attending culinary school and a person getting a bachelor's degree in art history.  Or someone studying to be a dental hygienist and a person studying political science.  Of course they are both an education.  But I'd argue a good undergraduate university degree program should develop the ability to manage tasks and workload and critical thinking skills. 

And I guess another difference is that, taking plenty of people I know as examples, those that proceeded down vocational / technical paths were more likely to actually get a job in their chosen field, whereas plenty of people I know with undergraduate degrees from universities - history, sociology, biology, economics, poli. sci., etc. - are less likely to be currently working in that field.  Seems that's even more the case for those that attended strong liberal arts colleges.  But I think a few of those would argue that they feel they actually received a better education.

Last edited by Worried Man (2014-05-13 09:28:13)

Last edited by formby (2014-05-13 12:14:33)

Last edited by Worried Man (2014-05-13 12:24:06)