Should the Government Invest More in Higher Education for Economic Growth?

[MaxManus]

Everyone knows that education is important for economic growth, but does anyone have any ideas how much the government should use to rise the knowledge level(not necessary in dollars but maybe in how much free/cheep education) and if there are educations they should encourage more than others?

 

[EntropicLove]

Increasing the net amount of human capital in a society (ie educational/skill levels) is different than the level of efficiency of an educational system on that same nation. Many systems can be just as effective with a lower cost.

It is also important to point out that just as educational system can spread oppurtunity, it can also segregate it and favor certain groups over others.

 

[Pyrrhus]

There are MANY MANY papers and books written on the links between education and economic growth. In economics, it is referred as technical efficiency. It is an important point of research in Macroeconomics.

You can start by reading "Education and Economic Growth" by Philip Stevens and Martin Weale

 

[edpell]

It is an interesting question. At what point do we reach diminishing returns?

What to teach is also an interesting question. Does art history education make the country richer? Does math education? At what rates? Which gives a higher rate of return?

 

[WhoWee]

Perhaps the best place to start is the relationship between education and unemployment (currently) in the US?

 

[RandomMystery]

It is an interesting question. At what point do we reach diminishing returns?

What to teach is also an interesting question. Does art history education make the country richer? Does math education? At what rates? Which gives a higher rate of return?

On the what to teach, shouldn't practical things such as cooking, car mechanics, and personal accounting be required for a GED?

Specially since these skills don't require high levels of abstract thinking and can be learned through apprenticeship, the skills can be more easy for younger students to in digest. (or I am I wrong?)

Diminishing returns especially happen when, for example, a woman chooses to major in a state college (with state scholarships) only to choose to live off her husband upon completion of the degree. Of course she may have some extra-knowledge, but in the end that money seems to be wasted, unless some scholarship policy demands here to work a minimum amount in her field to offset the scholarship cost.

 

[Evo]

On the what to teach, shouldn't practical things such as cooking, car mechanics, and personal accounting be required for a GED?

Specially since these skills don't require high levels of abstract thinking and can be learned through apprenticeship, the skills can be more easy for younger students to in digest. (or I am I wrong?)

Diminishing returns especially happen when, for example, a woman chooses to major in a state college (with state scholarships) only to choose to live off her husband upon completion of the degree. Of course she may have some extra-knowledge, but in the end that money seems to be wasted, unless some scholarship policy demands here to work a minimum amount in her field to offset the scholarship cost.

Oh, I wasn't aware that women live off of their husbands. Women are such low lifes, I'm amazed that we let them go to college at all since they're just going to live off men. Of course men are never house husbands, no. Are you serious?

 

[WhoWee]

On the what to teach, shouldn't practical things such as cooking, car mechanics, and personal accounting be required for a GED?

Specially since these skills don't require high levels of abstract thinking and can be learned through apprenticeship, the skills can be more easy for younger students to in digest. (or I am I wrong?)

Diminishing returns especially happen when, for example, a woman chooses to major in a state college (with state scholarships) only to choose to live off her husband upon completion of the degree. Of course she may have some extra-knowledge, but in the end that money seems to be wasted, unless some scholarship policy demands here to work a minimum amount in her field to offset the scholarship cost.

If that same woman enhances the education (and moral compass) of her children - there is an absolute value to society that should not be diminished - IMO.

 

[WhoWee]

Oh, I wasn't aware that women live off of their husbands. Women are such low lifes, I'm amazed that we let them go to college at all since they're just going to live off men. Of course men are never house husbands, no. Are you serious?

:rofl:
Evo,

You know I consider myself a good and solid salesman - but for the life of me I can't convince my wife to let me stay at home and support me - how does that work? Maybe you can talk to her for me?:rofl:

 

[Evo]

:rofl:
Evo,

You know I consider myself a good and solid salesman - but for the life of me I can't convince my wife to let me stay at home and support me - how does that work? Maybe you can talk to her for me?:rofl:

Sigh, I always made more than the men in my life. I made a nice 6 figure income with incredible benefits and perks. When I divorced, both times, I had to pay spousal support. My second husband did finally go on to be rich, but I paid for his Ivy League education, paid off all of his debt, and supported us while he was working his way up the corporate ladder. I bought our house, I bought him cars, I bought everything.

 

[WhoWee]

Sigh, I always made more than the men in my life. I made a nice 6 figure income with incredible benefits and perks. When I divorced, both times, I had to pay spousal support. My second husband did finally go on to be rich, but I paid for his Ivy League education, paid off all of his debt, and supported us while he was working his way up the corporate ladder. I bought our house, I bought him cars, I bought everything.

Thanks for sharing Evo! Now - let's all be more respectful of women - please?

Btw - I am now not only married but have 3 daughters - PLEASE be respectful as requested.

 

[russ_watters]

Oh, I wasn't aware that women live off of their husbands. Women are such low lifes, I'm amazed that we let them go to college at all since they're just going to live off men. Of course men are never house husbands, no. Are you serious?

He didn't say all women, Evo, but it does happen. I went to high school with a girl who openly acknowledged that that was her primary reason for going to college.

Regardless, the problem of people going to college for reasons other than to prepare for a career is much broader than that.

 

[russ_watters]

If that same woman enhances the education (and moral compass) of her children - there is an absolute value to society that should not be diminished - IMO.

What makes you think she won't just raise sexist, 1950s children?

 

[RandomMystery]

Sorry, I didn't mean to make anyone mad. It could have easily been a man who lives of his wife, I just stated the traditional scenario.

"If that same woman enhances the education (and moral compass) of her children - there is an absolute value to society that should not be diminished - IMO."

Your right, but it's heard to measure how much a college degree enhances the education and moral compass of her children (if it enhances does at all or even decrease these attributes).

Of course everyone would be better off with a college degree, but if the purpose of the man or woman is to raise children, then I would assume that only degrees that go toward understanding and raising children would be helpful.

Thanks for having my back russ watters

 

[skilgannonau]

He didn't say all women, Evo, but it does happen. I went to high school with a girl who openly acknowledged that that was her primary reason for going to college.

That’s a straw man defence. A point sample to support RandomMystery implicit assertion doesn’t make the statement any less defamatory. Of all the possible examples RandomMystery could use to support his point he choose one which blatantly cast unsupported aspersions about women. The fact he qualifies his statement as an ‘example’ is no defence since the aspersion being made about women in general is clear.

Even if RandomMystery isn’t sexist why use an example clearly slanderous towards women in a public forum. Any social awareness and common sense would caution against writing something people would clearly find offensive.

 

[RandomMystery]

That’s a straw man defence. A point sample to support RandomMystery implicit assertion doesn’t make the statement any less defamatory. Of all the possible examples RandomMystery could use to support his point he choose one which blatantly cast unsupported aspersions about women. The fact he qualifies his statement as an ‘example’ is no defence since the aspersion being made about women in general is clear.

Even if RandomMystery isn’t sexist why use an example clearly slanderous towards women in a public forum. Any social awareness and common sense would caution against writing something people would clearly find offensive.

Okay, is there a better way of stating my example? Is this okay:

Diminishing returns especially happen when, for example, a man chooses to major in a state college (with state scholarships) only to choose to live off his wife upon completion of the degree. Of course he may have some extra-knowledge, but in the end that money seems to be wasted, unless some scholarship policy demands him to work a minimum amount in his field to offset the scholarship cost.

 

[WhoWee]

Okay, is there a better way of stating my example? Is this okay:

Diminishing returns especially happen when, for example, a man chooses to major in a state college (with state scholarships) only to choose to live off his wife upon completion of the degree. Of course he may have some extra-knowledge, but in the end that money seems to be wasted, unless some scholarship policy demands him to work a minimum amount in his field to offset the scholarship cost.

Please clarify a bit - do you consider the degree or the focus of training to be unrealistic when compared to the job market?

I've posted in other threads that a 4 year degree might not be a one size fits all - especially if they under-performed in high school and need to spend a year (on Government subsidy) doing make-up work. IMO - some folks should be encouraged to enroll in a 2 year trades programs. We will always need plumbers, electricians, HVAC repair, motor repair, etc.

 

[Evo]

Okay, is there a better way of stating my example? Is this okay:

Diminishing returns especially happen when, for example, a man chooses to major in a state college (with state scholarships) only to choose to live off his wife upon completion of the degree. Of course he may have some extra-knowledge, but in the end that money seems to be wasted, unless some scholarship policy demands him to work a minimum amount in his field to offset the scholarship cost.

It's best to use gender neutral language, especially where there is a known derogatory stereotype. Unless, of course, you really were aiming at women, in which case, expect to defend your claim.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Okay, is there a better way of stating my example?

How about;

Diminishing returns especially happen when, for example, an individual chooses to major in a state college (with state scholarships) only to choose to live off their partner upon completion of the degree. Of course they may have some extra-knowledge, but in the end that money seems to be wasted, unless some scholarship policy demands them to work a minimum amount in their field to offset the scholarship cost.

That way we can avoid derogatory and heteronormative stereotypes.

On a separate note does this scenario actually count as diminishing returns? Sounds like a type of drop-out to me (in the "leaves the group" meaning of the word as opposed to the "fail" meaning). Diminishing returns could be that increasing graduate numbers in a field leads to a situation where you have far more Xologists than you actually need. Alternatively you could get into a situation where you devalue qualifications.

Personally I think that a better educated society overall would create a better society. Whilst there may be specific examples where it has not helped e.g. specific fields or for specific people a more qualified workforce is on the whole more productive.

 

[Pyrrhus]

One factor that is being ignored in this discussion is quantity. One spouse living off the other one will have almost no impact on economic growth. Half the population of the country living off their spouse is another matter. Thus, it is obvious that labor workforce is important. In addition, heterogeneity of the economic agents at play in both their education, ability, experience, profession... So it's hard to say whether more education beyond bachelors leads to a more productice regime. It is agreed as a mainstream result that more education at least a bachelor leads to economic growth. However, this is assuming the economic agents have access to job opportunities, and firms can compete, and other market considerations.