RSS
Learning is a societal and individual good. American businesses, however, have weaponized higher education into an overcredentialization racket that coerces millions of young people to borrow hundreds of billions of dollars in tuition, room and board, often to study subjects in which they have little interest, for the chance to be hired for a job. To add insult to usury, the diploma for which they sink into high-interest student loan debt reflects an education with no useful application to the position where they land.
It is tempting, from the standpoint of the Left, to dismiss the soaring price of college tuition, usurious student loan interest rates and overcredentialization as a first-world problem afflicting middle-class suburbanites who, after struggling after graduation, will soon enough pay off their debt and enjoy a significantly higher income than workers with high school diplomas. But no society can afford to ignore the plight of its most highly educated ambitious young people who, as Crane Brinton reminded us in “The Anatomy of Revolution,” are an essential catalyst to radical political change. College students are a diverse lot; nearly half are people of color and more than 60% are women. Despite the problems within higher education, America has no bigger engine for upward economic mobility.
The problem is, the college income premium only accrues to those who finish all four years and get their degree, which includes very few poor and working-class people. Fifteen percent of students from the lowest quartile of wage earners make it all the way through, compared to 61% of those in the top quartile.
Too many employers, too lazy to sort job applicants from a broader pool, demand college diplomas even when the job they are hiring for does not require the relevant education and training, as a way of culling the herd. “More than half of Americans who earned college diplomas find themselves working in jobs that don’t require a bachelor’s degree or utilize the skills acquired in obtaining one,” according to CBS News.
Requiring a superfluous college degree brazenly discriminates against poorer people, expanding and prolonging the class divide. Under a Left government, economic disadvantage would become a protected legal class alongside race, age, sex, gender identity, physical handicap and so on. Workers should be able to report job listings that seek overqualified workers to a federal bureau in the Department of Labor, which would have the power to impose substantial penalties, including fines and compensation for applicants who are discriminated against.
“Nearly two-thirds of American workers do not have a four-year college degree. Screening by college degree hits minorities particularly hard, eliminating 76% of Black adults and 83% of Latino adults,” The New York Times reported in 2022. Yet 44% of all U.S. employers required at least a B.A. or B.S. for all their openings.
A 2017 Harvard Business School study found that “60% of employers rejected otherwise qualified candidates in terms of skills or experience simply because they did not have a college diploma.”
Requiring employers to do the right, logical and fair thing, and hire qualified high school graduates, dropouts and GED holders will allow more Americans to avoid college debt traps, incentivize companies to train workers, give working-class families more opportunities and reduce the high-intensity competition for college and university acceptance.
Student loans are a $1.7 trillion for-profit business that gives lenders the ultimate leverage: No matter what they do or how legitimate their inability to pay, distressed borrowers cannot even discharge their college debts in bankruptcy. At this writing, the average interest rate on student loans is 6.9%. The highest rate at which banks borrow money, however, is 5.5% — and the rate for the much longer terms of student loans is lower.
Young scholars are bright, vulnerable citizens with endless potential, not a profit center for transnational lending institutions. If we must have a for-profit system of postsecondary education and student loans to afford it, those loans should be at zero profit to banks or anyone else. And they should be able to be discharged in bankruptcy, just like any other debt.
Because college dropouts do not enjoy the college wage premium, their loans should be forgiven entirely or heavily discounted.
But the duty of leftists is not merely to tinker at the edges to make a troubled system fairer or more efficient. We look at a situation and ask: Do we need a complete overhaul? If we were inventing America’s higher education system from scratch, is what we have now anything close to what we would come up with?
It’s hard to imagine that anyone, regardless of their general political orientation, would say that we have the best possible way to educate young people and prepare them for the future of work and life in general. The average household with student loan debt owes $55,000. Over a 10-year term at 6.9%, the total due including interest is $76,000. That’s the cost of a starter home in many parts of the country, and much more than students and their families spend in virtually any other nation.
Thirty-nine nations, including European powerhouses like France and Germany but also poor ones like Greece and Portugal, as well as developing socialist countries like Cuba and Brazil, currently offer their citizens college for free or for nominal fees.
We can, too.
Students and parents borrowed $95 billion in the 2021-22 academic year. Going forward, then, replacing every penny borrowed as student loans as a free federal grant would cost the government about $100 billion-a tiny portion of the $4.5 trillion a year we’re currently wasting on the military and other misbegotten budgetary priorities.
There is also an argument for nationalizing public and/or private institutions of higher education. A college education, after all, will remain essential for a significant segment of the population even if we abolish employers’ current obsession with overcredentialization. Goods and services that are essential for contemporary human existence are, by definition, too important to be left to the fickle whims of a boom-and-bust marketplace. A college education surely qualifies. Higher education is too expensive a cost for cities and states to absorb. For the feds, however, it’s not that big a deal. Moving to federal control would create economies of scale and countless efficiencies, such as the ability to negotiate discounted prices for textbooks and equipment, plus the ability to transfer professors and personnel throughout the system in accordance with educators’ desires and regional needs.
Next: What should a Left foreign policy look like?
Ted Rall (Twitter: @tedrall), the political cartoonist, columnist and graphic novelist, co-hosts the left-vs-right DMZ America podcast with fellow cartoonist Scott Stantis.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Father Guido Sarducci explains his concept for a “five-minute university” in this classic vintage, short video clip. The $20 tuition covers learning the basics, cap & gown rental, a graduation photograph, and a diploma. The main point that he makes during the video has a lot of truth to it, and is in accord with the essay. In case you have never seen it, there is a link. It is very engaging.
Video Link
Total federal control, again, Mr. Rall? And federal investigation of any complaint that a company required a college degree unnecessarily?–that oughta be good for a few hundred thousand new federal jobs, and a bonanza for hordes of lawyers.
The feds already control or greatly influence many aspects of higher education, wasting enormous sums on functional illiterates who oughta be learning a trade. Those European countries you mention test for aptitude and ability from an early age, doing far more in ten years of school than the U.S. does in twelve, then funnel students into degree programs or trades. This is frowned upon in the U.S., where “feelings” are more important than intellectual capacity, along with the fiction that “you can be whatever you want to be.”
College would be a helluva lot cheaper and more productive if the staggering overload of administrators and bureaucrats gumming up the works got the axe.
Employers are in a bind, strapped with providing large numbers of DEI welfare jobs in order to avoid lawsuits and fines. Companies become infested with DEI hirelings and rot from within.
Brazil is a capitalist country. I live there, so I should know. The president of Brazil is a center-left former union-leader. The state governors are from all parties, including very rightwing ones. Congress leans conservative currently.
Brazil is a very unequal country. We have several policies which aim at reducing inequality, but we are far from achieving a satisfactory result. Anyone who goes out in the street will witness homelessness and mendicancy in general. In great cities, petty theft is rampant (especially of phones). Organized crime, mainly fueled by drug dealing, is very powerful.
So, not socialist. As a leftist person, you should be better informed. It’s not enough to know who the president is and have a very vague notion of his ideological leanings.
I’m sick and tired of financing other people’s education.
What’s Left 8: Health Care Is a Human Right
And not a word about health care. Obviously, someone screwed up. Mr. Rall, what happened to cause this discrepancy and who should be reported to the federal Fair Hiring and Firing Commission to determine if their position should be terminated?
Or would it just be better to admit you made a mistake and didn’t update your post? But, then, you can always use the excuse that you were too busy pointing out other people’s blatant errors to notice your own.
How can health care be a “human right” when health care is the product of someone else’s labor?
Do I have an inherent right to demand someone else’s labor, regardless of whether or not they wish to provide it to me or whether I can pay or not? Is Ted making an argument for slavery?
If I have an inherent human right to demand that someone else care for me, does that also mean sex is a human right? Are women denying me my human rights if they turn me down sexually? Can I have them arrested for this?
Well, well …
Thanks to Brown vs. Education and the Teachers´Unions (who should
in all fairness be declared terrorist organizations) we now have “high” skoo
graduates at the level of what used to be a better kindergarten, and
Griggs vs. Duke Power forced employers to demand college degrees as a proxy
for the ability to read and write.
The unpopular truth is no society needs more than 20% university graduates
(given economics of size, it´s more like 10-15%).
The even less popular truth is no one expects all those joggers and twats with
orchid studies degrees to ever contribute anything useful – if someone qualified
is needed zey can always be imported (this has been going on for quite some time,
putting strain on others´educational systems and slowing down their development,
but the dynamics seem to have changed – the overproduced entitled “elites” will be
the proximate cause of the next revolution but not quite in the way Rall imagines).
– As he mentions Germany they have a thing called numerus clausus i.e. the number
of slots is capped and every year the top say 200k nationwide get a shot; it also means
the cutoff is yearly recalculated so grade inflation won´t help you out – go ahead and
try that in the US 🤣🙄😣
(Thanks to the EU those who cannot hack it clog up the Austrian system)
– The basic idea that education is a public investment is sound –
make state universities free or near free, cap the number and do away with all “studies”
(oh, and kill all the lawyers) and let the rest compete – Stanford and MIT might still
be salvageable.
What did this article have to do with healthcare?
What about the plight of Gerbils and Hamsters? Not only do we deny them the opportunity to study K-12 and then college and deny them their right to healthcare, we treat them like slaves and put them in cages for no reason at all. With proper health care and an end to their slavery, we could greatly increase their appalling lifespans of 2-3 years. It’s about time we end this plantation mindset that justifies slavery, liberate them, pay them reparations for all the damage we’ve done to their ancestors, and finally change admissions and school standards to “equitably” level the playing field. By offering math and science courses, we humiliate the Gerbils and Hamsters. To support any education for all animals and people other than how to properly use a treadmill and drinking tube is fascist and racist, and shows no compassion for the humiliation these poor creatures suffer.
Everything is a product of someone else’s labor. That’s what a society is. Food is produced by farmers. We pay them for their labor. Healthcare workers are paid for their labor. Presumable, they perform this labor because they choose to and because they are paid for it.
The mistake people make in talking about universal healthcare or healthcare as a human right is that it will be “free.” Nothing in this world is free. We all will pay for it. We don’t have a right to other people’s labor but we do have a right to buy it.
So the debate over healthcare is how to pay for the labor of healthcare workers. Right now in the US, payment is managed by for-profit corporations. We pay them and they pay healthcare workers, hospitals, drug suppliers. They take a substantial cut as middle-men. They don’t insure poor people because poor people can’t pay them. We could organize the payments socially, along the lines of Medicare. That would be more cost effective.
Loans for college are a complete mess. These loans are the new home mortgages what were commoditized and sold on the stock market until they collapsed in 2008. This happened because of the greed of Wall Street and its desire to find new commodities to sell on the speculation markets and because of stupid regulations by congress and the federal government regulatory agencies. This should never have been allowed.
I went to college with student loans. The interest rates were fixed at 2%. There was no compounding or variable interest rates. It worked well. I repaid my loans. But back then the purpose of student loans were to help students go to college. Now the purpose of student loans is to make banks richer. Students can be damned. This is the fault of Congress. It can fix this problem if it wants to. But members of Congress — especially Pelosi — have been so bought off by banks that they just won’t do it
This won’t work. Government are not capable of running any kind of institution. Just look at what they run now — Pentagon, Post Office, Highways. Congress is a mess. The Executive Branch is much worse. The Judiciary is dysfunctional.
Like many things, small is better. The big mega-universities like Penn State with nearly 100,000 students become just diploma mills or factories. Students are just mass produced. They are corporate in nature. It is fine for universities to be public, but they should be run independently by their own administrations. They would rise and fall on the quality of the education they provide. Many are this way and they are cost effective.
There are so many things wrong with the reasoning in this article, it is hard to know where to start. Let’s focus on this.
Whether he is aware of it or not, Ted Rall has hit dead center. Leftists, especially the more extreme ones, are not satisfied to “tinker at the edges”. Instead, they prefer overhauling the system, scrapping it and replacing it with something different, something better, by radically changing what they perceive to be flawed. At least in their own eyes, it will be better.
This “overhauling” is nothing more than Karl Marx advocated–continuous, comprehensive revolution, what Gary North called “Marx’s Religion of Revolution” (1989), which you can download free–https://www.garynorth.com/freebooks/sidefrm2.htm Marxism calls for ongoing, never-ending destruction of the existing system and its replacement with something different which will correct the flaws and improve the lives of those who embrace it.
Supposedly, through these upheavals and chaos, the State will become less and less important until it “withers away” and everyone who survives the struggle lives in a utopian jungle where everything is right and proper. Ironically, those who purport to “better” society through revolution always call on the State to back them up, creating incentive for more government, not less.
Rall is confessing his desire to overthrow the system of education currently dominant. Unfortunately, his preferred format would greatly increase and enhance the power of government, not diminish it. Businesses are to blame; they must be regulated and punished. No, no, it is the banks which lend $1.7 trillion to ignorant kids so large amounts of interest can be gained; they must be brought to heel. And on, and on, and on.
The answer to this problem is not larger, more intrusive government, but a return to reasonable expectations for young people, many of whom should be trained in a vocation, a trade, a skill which is highly desired by society and which will allow them to earn a decent wage for themselves and their families.
You could have near-universal health care at less than half the cost
(look at Europe) but it would cut into (((donors´))) profits meaning it
will nevah happen; as a (European) doctor friend explained it to me
“85% of patients are adequately treated with Aspirin or a solid backhand,
or a combination thereof”, meaning it would be easy to set up a paramedic service;
instead you have bums and wetbacks clogging up the emergency rooms –
a very expensive commodity! -, thus bankrupting hospitals because
Sibbyl Rites.
To a degree class-based medicine will be inevitable, but the current state of
affairs is national-economic harakiri.
If anything, it’s access to affordable health care that might be deemed a “human right” in this society. We “the people” don’t have affordable health care for the same reason that we don’t have affordable education for example, and for the same reason that the U.S. “government” can’t get cost effective weapon systems (with which to beat the independent world into submission): corruption and greed have destroyed this country. The Satanists have successfully destroyed their way to the top and now they rule over the ruins.
Looking forward to you telling the jogger it is too goddamned stupid
for anything above shovelling dirt, and better get used to it 😂
I see your point (dimly through the standard phrases) but far from being “free”
US public education is a Gordian gaggle of band-aids and perverse incentives
so bad it would be an improvement to let the Mullahs run it; it´s gotten so that
the really smart ones become plumbers and the dipshits go to college.
Say what you will against the “Marxists”, at least they have a Plan (not this one though)
– The purpose of education is to teach, and there is a vested public interest.
– If the keedz is not learning, stop paying the teachers.
– It is pointless to waste public resources on those neither willing nor able to learn;
most Blacks! lose the ability to learn at around 14 – send them to vocational
school; I do not, mind you, advocate segregation by melanin per se, only concede that
it will look like that.
– Start selecting after primary school; three or so separate strands are normal across
Europe so most reach their potential, helped by peers and not holding back
(and hating) their betters.
– Let private schools do whatever they please as long as they pass standardized testing;
if they don´t, stop subsidizing them.
– A reasonable university (lower cutoff IQ 115) will be about 3 per mil Black!
It is here where Rall goes astray – “Social Justice” is the Uprising against Reality;
it is Bio-Leninism pure and simple – no society can survive educational “equality”
at the lowest common denominator.
Rall is right that the chainsaw must be put to the System – more expensive lipstick
on the DMV ladies won´t hack it (This will require the recognition that the 14th
is null and void – and with it whatever attendant Sibbyl Rite).
As for the loans, making them dischargeable would probably be the most consequential
single measure possible; the banks would stop financing useless “studies”
yesterday if not earlier.
Define affordable.
One person’s affordable is another person’s out of my pay grade. The problem with determining what is affordable is that it is always subjective, always set by someone who brings personal bias into the decision. Who sets the price is far more important than what the price is. Whoever pays the piper calls the tune and there will always be someone who doesn’t like the music.
This brings up the question then. Who will set the price? In our world, as you have alluded, the price is determined by those in power who can force everyone below them to conform to a preset standard. Whether those who are forced to comply can afford the cost or not is irrelevant. They must conform, even against their will. This is wrong and it is a primary reason why the price keeps going higher and higher. The few at the top calling the shots (pardon the pun) benefit greatly from those at the bottom aligning themselves with the system. In this, you are right. Greed and corruption have destroyed us.
Who, then, should set the price? This is the true crux of the argument. The person receiving the care? The person administering it? A charity? A health care consortium? Government officials? The WHO? In the end, boiled all the way down, it is always an individual who makes the choice. Once we have decided who will determine the price, the price can be determined.
Unfortunately, we cannot come to an agreement about this and probably never will.
“And the beat goes on. The beat goes on.” — Sonny and Cher
I am in agreement with this. The System we have today is unsustainable and must be replaced. It will be replaced–with something different. It is not a question of if, but when, and what takes its place will be imperfect, causing debate about how to fix it. Someone is always going to be dissatisfied. Someone is always going to miss out. Regardless of how much we try to create a perfect solution, there will always be a flaw in it and there will always be those who try to correct the flaw in some manner.
Which is why Utopia can never be reached.
You can’t be serious; you’re just kidding, right?
But for the sake of lurkers who might take you seriously, there’s always Google results, for a start.
“The United States spends significantly more on healthcare compared to other nations but does not have better healthcare outcomes. What’s more, rising healthcare spending is a key driver of America’s unsustainable national debt, and high healthcare costs also make it harder to respond to public health crises like the COVID-19 pandemic. Below is a look at the increasing healthcare costs in the United States, what is causing that rapid growth, and why it matters for public health and our fiscal outlook.
HOW MUCH DOES THE UNITED STATES SPEND ON HEALTHCARE?
The United States has one of the highest costs of healthcare in the world. In 2022, U.S. healthcare spending reached $4.5 trillion, which averages to $13,493 per person. By comparison, the average cost of healthcare per person in other wealthy countries is less than half as much. While the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the trend in rising healthcare costs, such spending has been increasing long before COVID-19 began. Relative to the size of the economy, healthcare costs have increased over the past few decades, from 5 percent of GDP in 1962 to 17 percent in 2022.
https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2024/01/why-are-americans-paying-more-for-healthcare
#######################################
There are several reasons things that may factor into higher health care costs in the U.S., from high drug costs to extensive administrative fees. The fact remains that The United States spends at least 40% more on health care per person than any other country in the world.
The top 10 countries with the highest health care costs are:
United States $12,555
Switzerland $8,049
Germany $8,011
Norway $7,898
Netherlands $7,358
Austria $7,275
Belgium $6,600
Australia $6,597
France $6,517
Sweden $6,438
###########################################
The most expensive health care system in the world
The U.S. spends more on health care than all the other wealthy democracies in the world. But in spite of all that spending, life expectancy in the U.S lags behind that of its peer countries. And many Americans struggle to pay for health care.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/the-most-expensive-health-care-system-in-the-world/
##########################################
Health care unaffordable even for insured Americans: survey
https://www.axios.com/2023/10/26/health-care-unaffordable-insurance
##########################################
The U.S. Has the Most Expensive Healthcare in the World
HEALTH CARE
by
Katharina Buchholz,
Feb 7, 2023
How much more expensive is the U.S. healthcare system compared to other developed countries? There are many ways of approaching that question, but when comparing per-capita healthcare spending in different OECD nations, the answer is: a lot more expensive. As our chart illustrates, U.S. per-capita healthcare spending (including public and private as well as compulsory and voluntary spending) is higher than anywhere else in the world, with second-placed Germany trailing quite far behind.
On average, healthcare costs in the U.S. amounted up to $12,318 per person in 2021. In Germany that number stood at $7,383 – 40 percent lower. Yet, the U.S. lags behind other nations in several aspects such as life expectancy and health insurance coverage.
https://www.statista.com/chart/8658/health-spending-per-capita/
######################################################
More than 13% of Americans – about 34 million people – say a friend or family member recently passed away in the last five years after being unable to afford treatment for a condition, according to a new poll from Gallup and West Health.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/12/health/us-cant-afford-health-care-trnd/index.html
#####################################################
Health care spending, both per person and as a share of GDP, continues to be far higher in the United States than in other high-income countries. Yet the U.S. is the only country that doesn’t have universal health coverage.
The U.S. has the lowest life expectancy at birth, the highest death rates for avoidable or treatable conditions, the highest maternal and infant mortality, and among the highest suicide rates.
The U.S. has the highest rate of people with multiple chronic conditions and an obesity rate nearly twice the OECD average.
Americans see physicians less often than people in most other countries and have among the lowest rate of practicing physicians and hospital beds per 1,000 population
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2023/jan/us-health-care-global-perspective-2022
And on and on ad infinitum.
All very well and good, but you did not define “affordable”. And, no, I’m not kidding.
You spent a lot of time showing that health care is unaffordable in the US…from your point of view, which only proves my point–it is all subjective to the individual. Yet, I did not see one single word from your screed which tried to present a solution.
All facts, no answers. Which tells me that you don’t have any. You know beyond a shadow of doubt that healthcare in the US is unaffordable, but you don’t know why and you don’t know how to fix it. Work on that for a while.
Sorry. How silly of me. Here you go:
I hope that helps you out.
I don’t know why Rall bothers with this “human right” stuff. Clearly the US doesn’t care one bit about human rights. Maybe we’d be able to have affordable health care if we weren’t spending billions every year to fund Israel’s apartheid, genocidal state. It’s expensive to bomb and starve children to death, you know. And that’s so much more important than fixing any of the problems that face Americans.
We Americans are the slaves to Israel. We are the tax base they leech off of. Until we rid ourselves of that parasite, there won’t be any money to do any of these sorts of things. Do you think a man like Biden who can support what Israel is doing right now has any capacity to care about “human rights”? He certainly doesn’t give a damn about what his base wants. He’s not the “lesser evil”.
Nope. I’m voting Trump in the next election. Not because he’ll fix anything but just on the sheer hope that he turns out to be the fascist nazi who will destroy America they keep claiming he is. Oh no! He’ll destroy Democracy if we don’t vote Biden! Well, how is that Democracy working out for us now? Honestly, he can’t be worse than Biden. At worst, Trump will be equally as bad as Biden. But at least there is some chance that it could be better. Vote for Biden and there’s no hope. And at least Trump will slow down the transgender nonsense that Biden keeps shoving in our face. Nothing like making women center the feelings of mentally ill men and sacrifice their rights and safety so these men don’t feel bad about themselves. Such feminism! Much empowerment! And don’t worry ladies, if you lose your athletic scholarship to a troon, you can always do Only Fans. Sex work is empowering, too, don’t ya know.
Well of course it’s “subjective,” i.e. some people would prefer to not be made homeless and/or to not starve to death, for example, rather than pay thousands of dollars in copayments for the many imaging studies, tests, office visits with multiple specialists, etc., seeking a diagnosis for their difficult to diagnose and/or treat disease or condition; or for the physical therapy or expensive drugs they need – to stay healthy or just to stay alive – on top of the $600 to $700 dollar monthly health insurance premiums they have to pay. There’s nothing more “subjective” than that, is there?
Yet, I did not see one single word from your screed which tried to present a solution.
Perhaps because you didn’t ask me for a solution.
Either that or I just didn’t offer any unsolicited solution.
Or so you baselessly speculate. On the contrary, I very likely know far more about the situation than you do.
I don’t take orders from you.
As I see it, the fundamental problem with the health care system in the U.S. is that it’s corrupt and rotten to the core just like everything else in this society. It’s become an end in itself; it’s no longer about “health” but all about money changing hands. And because of this, the health care field in the U.S. attracts too many people who aren’t actually interested in the subject matter but rather in making money. In essence what we have here in the U.S. is an extortion racket masquerading as a health care system.
And all of it is presided over by the Satanic U.S. “government,” which not only refuses to do anything to reign in the outrageous costs for example (costs that are literally killing people by the tens of thousands every year), but it seems to be doing its part to make people sick and kill them. For example, by the FDA’s unreasonable refusal to ban the use of the dangerously toxic and carcinogenic chemical titanium dioxide, a cumulative poison that’s used a colorant/opacifier in various food, nutritional, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products, the “government” is an accessory to mass murder.
Books could be written about the problem of health care in the U.S.
OK, so I’m asking for your solution. How do we fix this?
Correct. I apologize. That was uncalled for.
Pure speculation. You have no idea what I know about this.
Seriously, though, I am interested in knowing what you might propose as a solution to correct the problem.
I agree that it’s not about “health” anymore, but about money and that the system is an extortion racket masquerading as health care. That being said, will anything fundamentally change until or unless money is no longer the focus? Will that happen until or unless the dollar becomes either totally worthless or extremely scarce? If money is at the heart of the problem, what will it take to convince people that genuine, caring service to others (in any capacity) is worth more than getting rich off someone else’s misery or misfortune?
Have you written a book about this? I would read it.
Employers require college degrees because it is basically illegal for them to give intelligence tests. Why? Because those test have “disparate impact” on minority groups. Getting a college degree is a sort of very crude proxy for an IQ test, because if you can get a degree, it is assumed likely that you have an IQ of at least 100.
Although that last, is even debatable in today’s world.