Quote:
Victus wrote
It should.
|
Don't judge us Bro!
Quote:
Victus wrote
Allegedly, the whole reason that we're supposed to be concerned about the relative differences in STEM graduates is that said individuals are the drivers of innovation (people, of course, forget that innovation doesn't stop at national borders). How much innovation do we get from an unemployed engineer, or an engineer employed as a waiter because there's no (additional) demand for his skill-set?
|
Maybe we just want it. It's not your place to tell us how to spend our money. If we want to have the most basket weavers, clearly communicate that desire and pay to have the most basket weavers, we have a legitimate gripe if we don't get them. Educators engaged in false advertising. They violated a contract and should be dealt with accordingly!
Quote:
Victus wrote
In absolute terms, performance wasn't higher. It's just that the rest of the world caught up.
|
The desire was to have more than everyone else. We don't care about genius, we just want to be the one eyed king.
Quote:
Victus wrote
Except that it's not the case that people are being frozen out of tertiary education -
|
The chart was about employment, not number of graduates and it demonstrated that during certain period it was a statistical disadvantage to be the most qualified. That means some criteria other than ability is being used in the evaluation of candidates for hire, and any expression of personal prejudice on the part of business owners is a sign of market inefficiency. Market inefficiency equals social immobility.