Worthless Degrees

A commenter pointed me to this blog site: Captain Capitalism.  The proprietor is Adam Cleary, who you may remember auditioned on KSTP AM in 2005, his entry being the "Economics Supper Club."  I wasn't especially kind to him in my brief review, but he was an early entry when my bar was probably set too high.

A number of "worthless degrees" and "worst paying jobs" articles have recently appeared as you might expect during graduation season in a down economy.  Cleary has in fact given a speech on it and his blog has a link to an abbreviated YouTube series on it.  This should be required viewing by high school students and especially their parents.  As YouTube does so well in recommending related material, I was soon then watching Charles Murray take apart modern college education until 2 am.  Together, Cleary and Murray put into a few sentences a great deal of profundity on higher education, and by extension, what K-12 education should really be doing.

Murray didn't simply validate my suspicions.  He in fact has me questioning some of my own suppositions, like on International Baccalaureate and Gifted/Talented programs.  And Cleary has some cold water for Ms. Sturdevant, like that her hero U of M President Robert Bruinicks is pulling down $650,000 a year.  One thing is more clear to me than ever: higher education funding needs to be cut far more than 14%.

 

 

Comments

[Laurie]

I thought the Cleary video was boring (I only watched one) but Charles Murray was interesting. In fact, I plan to read his book and (and I may also pick up and reread A Wrinkle in Time, in which the character Charles Murray is a boy genius.)

I didn't hear Murray talk about gifted ed, but he seems likely to favor it. As a parent of children who spent much of their schooling in gifted programs, I have mixed feelings about it.

I guess I don't get what is so outrageous about Bruinick's salary. I bet some U of M coaches make more. The average CEO makes about $10 Million/yr.

[Speed Gibson]

My company's CEO would disagree!

[Laurie]

corrected statistic: The median pay for top executives at 200 major companies was $9.6 million last year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/business/10comp.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

I actually agree that $650,000 is excessive. I was just trying to throw in some perspective. I find it interesting how liberals like me object to private sector excessive pay and conservtives object to much lower levels of pay for public officials. I get that one is tax payer dollars but the differences are beyond extreme.

[Eric]

Laurie,
The issue with government employees is that the source of their pay is taxes taken ultimately by the point of a police officer's gun. However CEO pay comes from funds earned by voluntary exchange between the company and their customers unless they get government contracts or bailouts.

[Hiram]

"The issue with government employees is that the source of their pay is taxes taken ultimately by the point of a police officer's gun."

The taxes we pay are the result of a democratic process in which we all participate. Statements like the one dishonor that process and all those who have served and fought to create and protect it. Including that police officer who puts his life on the line for you every single day of his working life, and who thoroughly deserves a living wage.

[The Big Stink]

What's busting the budget isn't Brunick's salary, but the pensions and benefits of an army of profs and career bureaucrats he holds sway over. The problem, of course, is the more money we throw at them, the more they insist they need to keep the ship afloat. They're correct - when everyone gets a golden parachute there is no end to the need for more gold and more parachutes.