Well, my original point was that an increased supply of educated people doesn't devalue the education like an increased supply of sugar or some other commodity.
It's true that forcing degrees on people because you refuse to hire someone that doesn't have a piece of paper is bad, but there is actually some value behind what they went through to get that paper. College degrees aren't *only* required more often these days because of increased supply, but also because we're moving to a more global economy. Education is more important today for producing valuable goods than it was 50 years ago.
Of course if everyone had a degree then they would be worthless, so rather than limit student numbers with the cost of entry, the universities in Oz limit numbers on ability alone.
This is not true. If everyone had a degree society would be much more efficient and productive. There is never a downside to more education (except maybe the cost). I have a feeling "Oz" is limiting student numbers due to cost as well.
I have a feeling most of the upset people are renters. The property owners are all too glad for the influx of rich tenants. It sucks for the renters of course because rent goes up, but their income doesn't. They're being pushed out of their home while they see a private bus full of yuppies drive by. It's an easy target.
Quite obviously, an influx of wealth to a particular area can be a good thing, but city planners have to make the most of it. This seems to be a case of stagnant development at a time when they need it most.
As a matter of fact, the FAFSA and University grants were both in excess of my tuition and books costs by about $1,500 every semester, so I effectively got paid to go to school. Most of my peers however are taking out loans...why they do this is beyond me
Uh, maybe not everyone can get those kind of grants?
The only reason not to outsource is: Our local talent is better. The outsourcing problem is entirely wage-based: $50,000/year for American programmers versus $15,000/year for Indian programmers. If the Indian programmers are essentially on parity with Americans, or at least close enough, then you're better off working at McDonalds because you won't have college debt. If businesses want to hire American programmers at above-McDonalds wages, then
Can you try to not argue against what is exactly in front of you?
I'm not even sure what point you're trying to put in front of me. I would agree that apprenticeship style training is a positive thing. I just wouldn't agree that we should scrap investment in public education on the expectation of businesses to train everyone apprenticeship style. I think a good education system is what keeps our talent generally better than the code farms in India.