During the 1990s and 2000s, sometimes it seemed like Republicans thought tax cuts were the answer to everything, and Democrats thought more college education was.
They both seem to just be bandaids for rising inequality. Tax cuts made people feel like they had more money, but in the long run made social mobility harder.
Giving everyone a college education seemed to let everybody into the middle class, except that it saddled them with a lot of debt, and a lot were not ready for college, so it just devalued a college degree while also making it required for practically any white collar job.So in practice it just established a kind of toll tax for white collar jobs.
It also provided a way to deflect criticism from govât trade policy. âAll those manufacturing jobs going to China, because the elite think that will âliberalizeâ Chinese culture/politics? That wouldnât be a problem for you if you got off your butt and got a college degree.â
I might quibble with the plumber and electrician one. You do need to be certified, but you become certified by on the job training (provided by a union youâre forced to join which is another topic altogether) instead of a traditional education process.
Yes and even a toll tax just for the chance of white collar jobs. There seem to be a lot of really poor decisions from young adults with respect to student loans, which isnât terribly surprising. Itâs also not surprising that Democrats would support more degrees given the association between academia, college degrees and party affiliation. Republicans of course love their tax cuts, especially for businesses and the wealthy.
As Indy notes, both seem to have been somewhat self-interested distractions from bipartisan personal financial interests in globalization, particularly outsourcing. In the charitable interpretation that these policies genuinely intended to offset the impacts, they still failed.
This is especially important for a Democratic president seeming to abandon unions and the working class for free trade, as Clinton was accused of doing, and actually did to at least some extent.
Most apprenticeship programs Iâm familiar with (plumbers & carpenters) donât do âtheoryâ. They do: Here's how you do it; if you don't do it this way, you won't make journeyman.
And for electricians, you wonât see any âtheoryâ until youâre working to be a master electrician.
You wonât make journeyman if you donât pass the licensure exam either. That isnât just black is hot and white is neutral. You might be able to sit down and read a book and pass that. I wouldnât be able to. Iâd need someone to teach me.
Probably not much to do about the intelligence distribution. There might still be something to be done to improve education to wake up some dormant intelligence, but weâve proven to be pretty bad at that.
Reducing the impact of that distribution on inequality could be helpful. I like that the cream can rise, but I donât see why some of it has to hover several feet above the bottleâŚ
Thatâs mainly because thereâs a pilot shortage. When thereâs not a pilot shortage theyâll add it back so as to have fewer resumes to sift through.
The pilot shortage may have been a factor in why they decided not to continue to be the last holdout, but I think the degree requirement is likely gone for good.
Possibly as a stated requirement. But when they are again in the position of having 498 applications for 12 openings, the apps of the pilots without degrees will be the first to go in the round file.
And honestly, theyâll probably just reinstate the requirement at that time as it will mean theyâll only get 346 applications instead of 498 which means less work for HR.
Delta is one of the highest paying airlines in the world. Under normal circumstances they can afford to be as choosy as they want.