My goodness, we have plenty of math and science minds. What we need are more insurance executives and lawyers; can never have enough lawyers. Let the Chinese and Japanese churn out the next Einstein, we need more folks like Celino and Barnes.
Exactly the point Jason. We now put so much emphasis on college education at the loss of vocational training that we are literally flooding the market with people with very expensive degrees and few opportunities to use them.
Based on what I have read, combined with the stuff the fairies in my head shoot out:
- Overall, the U.S. Education system produces enough scientific graduates for most fields;
- There are fields in which we do not produce enough graduates, but for the most part those are in emerging technologies. We do need to make sure we can educate enough people in those areas if they are to grow (and if they are viable);
- Businesses are more than happy to cry "the sky is falling" concerning science and engineering graduates. The more they cry, the more likely Congress is to keep the H-1B Visa program going, letting those companies import workers they pay 1/3 - 2/3 what they would pay an American worker.**
- Education advocates can use the same cry to push for additional education resource allocation.
**Years age I worked for a Giant Entity (we'll call the Giant Entity "GE" for short). This GE had many IT personnel along with many IT contractors. One year, the GE decided that they could contract with Wipro and Tata, conglomerates in India, for their IT contractors. Why? The American contractors the GE used at the time cost $40-45k/year, while they could get the Indian contractors for $25k/year.
There was absolutely no shortage of IT personnel at the time, but with the help of "not enough engineers! we need more H-1B Visas!", they could get the cheaper labor. Of course, it was even better when the GE managers could treat the Indian programmers like indentured servants. Shoot - one IT manager would yell to one Indian contractor "boy! Get in here!" And the African-American IT management trainee that sat outside his office didn't say a goddamned thing about it.
I now understand where you're coming from. I didn't make the connection that "letting the market make the determination" was the opposite of emphasizing college education over vocational training.
My goodness, we have plenty
My goodness, we have plenty of math and science minds. What we need are more insurance executives and lawyers; can never have enough lawyers. Let the Chinese and Japanese churn out the next Einstein, we need more folks like Celino and Barnes.
I was hoping for a "Hell No"
I was hoping for a "Hell No" choice for the poll today!
The market should decide the
The market should decide the need for each occupation. Ask an unemployed engineer if we need more, that should answer the question.
I would think any unemployed
I would think any unemployed (insert profession here) would say we don't need any more (insert profession here).
Exactly the point Jason. We
Exactly the point Jason. We now put so much emphasis on college education at the loss of vocational training that we are literally flooding the market with people with very expensive degrees and few opportunities to use them.
Based on what I have read,
Based on what I have read, combined with the stuff the fairies in my head shoot out:
- Overall, the U.S. Education system produces enough scientific graduates for most fields;
- There are fields in which we do not produce enough graduates, but for the most part those are in emerging technologies. We do need to make sure we can educate enough people in those areas if they are to grow (and if they are viable);
- Businesses are more than happy to cry "the sky is falling" concerning science and engineering graduates. The more they cry, the more likely Congress is to keep the H-1B Visa program going, letting those companies import workers they pay 1/3 - 2/3 what they would pay an American worker.**
- Education advocates can use the same cry to push for additional education resource allocation.
**Years age I worked for a Giant Entity (we'll call the Giant Entity "GE" for short). This GE had many IT personnel along with many IT contractors. One year, the GE decided that they could contract with Wipro and Tata, conglomerates in India, for their IT contractors. Why? The American contractors the GE used at the time cost $40-45k/year, while they could get the Indian contractors for $25k/year.
There was absolutely no shortage of IT personnel at the time, but with the help of "not enough engineers! we need more H-1B Visas!", they could get the cheaper labor. Of course, it was even better when the GE managers could treat the Indian programmers like indentured servants. Shoot - one IT manager would yell to one Indian contractor "boy! Get in here!" And the African-American IT management trainee that sat outside his office didn't say a goddamned thing about it.
I now understand where you're
I now understand where you're coming from. I didn't make the connection that "letting the market make the determination" was the opposite of emphasizing college education over vocational training.
You make a good point.
i'm not smart enough to opine
i'm not smart enough to opine on this question,.......carry on
Here is a great interview
Here is a great interview with Mike Rowe from Dirty Jobs very eloquently explaining the current state of trades vs college
http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/20/diplomas-vs-dirty-jobs