Blake <blake at kingdomrpg.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:40:27 -0800, Tim Rowledge <tim at sumeru.stanford.edu>  
> wrote:
> 
> > [1] Of course in any truly civilised nation education doesn't come with
> > a price tag to the educatee. Since everyone benefits from an educated
> > populace in ways including educated and successful people paying more
> > taxes, it is obvious that as many people as possible should be given a
> > shot at extensive education. I've noticed that a large fraction of
> > people that disapprove of this idea seem to be the people who wouldn't
> > likely have made much use of a full education.
> 
> I disapprove of the idea. The ability and freedom to exchange is a concept  
> fundamental to human dignity. Children who are not allowed to exchange  
> grow into disgruntled teenagers. Adults who are not allowed to exchange  
> become disgruntled citizens. And typically they focus their anger on the  
> source of their largesse. Indeed, not =demanding= exchange from people is  
> one of the worst things you can ever do to them.
Do note that I said 'no price tag' not 'no cost'. The effort to make
good use of your time at scholl/college/university/apprentice school is
a definite cost. I treated my seven years at three colleges as a
fulltime job, paid by the generousity of tax payers. The taxes you pay
in later life is a cost - and if you've been fortunate to make effective
career choices you'll be earning more and paying higher taxes, which in
turn help others get educational chances. I think that is a wise and
reasonable way to obtain your exchange, to find your level and to
return the benefit to your civilisation. Some people of course will
find that they can't cope - or can't be bothered - or that their chosen
course provides little monetary payback. They won't end up paying as
much in taxes and honestly, they wouldn't be able to repay student
loans either.
Should people really only be able to get educational chances when
they're able to pay for it in advance? Or if their parents are? Where
is the investment in the future by society at large?

> 
> Since I was educated in the American system, I can't claim to have a  
> "full" education or even to know what it is. Twenty-one years in said  
> system--along with a far above average propensity for reading and  
> acquiring knowledge outside of school--should've yielded better results
Well, I can hardly speak to that - the fact that you're involved in
Squeak and politely debating is a sign that you made pretty good use of
your opportunities but outside that I don't know you well enough.

> but unfortunately I'm required to scramble to keep up with my own  
> children's desire for knowledge. So it's hard for me to imagine I wouldn't  
> have made use of it--be making use of it as we speak--had I received it.
Good! Not only have you made good use but you're able to produce kids
that are continuing. Please keep it up, for all our sakes.
 
> 
> And, of course, plenty of people with extensive education can't make use  
> of it either. Indeed, there used to be a strong and healthy prejudice  
> against Comp Sci PhDs in the marketplace.
With good reason in a number of cases of which I have personal
experience. Advanced study is a great thing but it doesn't always
provide a great basis for being immediately useful in a workforce. (Not
to mention that Computer Science is still barely less an oxymoron than
Social Science. Both have a _long_ way to go.) Advanced study
_shouldn't_ mean immediate usefulness in a workforce, or we end up with
colleges being mere vocational training. Which I've noticed is
something that employers always seem to want until circumstances change
when they want all their trained staff to retrospectively mutate into
educated staff. 

But we shouldn't go on too long about all this or we'll fail to get
something actually interesting done!

tim
--
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error.  - Weisert