Liberals tend to get Worthless College Degrees that require little Math or Science

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 15th, 2014

Week in Review

There’s a lot of talk about income inequality these days.  As President Obama wants to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour.  Which would raise the earnings from an entry-level, unskilled job to just about what some college graduates earn after taking out huge student loans.  For those college graduates who can find a job, that is.  For it’s pretty bad out there.  Especially for some college majors.  Here are some worthless degrees based on starting salaries and current unemployment rates for these fields (see College Majors That Won’t Land You a Job posted on ChaCha).

Fine Arts

Whoever coined the phrase starving artist must have majored in Fine Arts. Recent graduates of the degree face an unemployment rate of 12.6% and low salaries of around $30,000 when they finally do find a job. Doesn’t sound very fine to me!

Drama and Theater

People who major in Drama and/or Theater generally have dreams of being an actor and that is notoriously hard to do. Recent grads will face an unemployment rate of 8.8% and paltry salaries of $26,000 if they actually do land a bit part in anything. In reality, many people majoring in theater never end up becoming actors of any sort at all and instead find themselves in completely unrelated careers, having wasted a lot of money on college.

English

Those who major in English tend to want to do one of two things, teach or write. Unfortunately this still ends up with about 9.2% of recent grads struggling to find any kind of job. Salaries in this career tend to always be lower than the national average, even if you finally manage to get yourself established with a job for a while.

Anthropology and Archaeology

Do you fancy yourself the next Indiana Jones? Or digging up dinosaur bones like on Jurassic Park? Well, as fun as that might sound, the reality of the situation is that over 10% of graduates can’t find jobs digging anything up and those that do don’t get paid very well, less than $30,000 a year. If you want to increase your chances of getting a job and getting paid better, you’ll probably have to count on getting a graduate degree.

Liberal Arts

Who even knows what a Liberal Arts degree is? Certainly not most employers, probably leading to a 9.2% unemployment rate and an almost 2 times greater than the national average likelihood of working in retail instead of your chosen career. Most people who do end up sucessful in this major, 3 out of 4, go to graduate school as well as a 4 year school, so keep that in mind if you still want to pick it as a degree.

Journalism

With more and more of our news coming from online sources, the need for journalists is actually dropping. About 6 percent of journalism jobs are expected to be cut from the work force by 2020. Currently they already face a fairly higher than average unemployment rate of 7.7 percent.

Notice a pattern?  These are not difficult majors.  You won’t be doing much calculus or quantum mechanics in these majors.  No.  These degrees don’t include much math and science.  But they allow a student to really enjoy his or her time at college.  As the lighter workload allows more time for fun.  It’s sad that colleges sell kids these worthless degrees.  Promising them a higher earning potential with their higher education.  But the colleges really don’t care.  They just want these kids to get student loans.  Because colleges just want the money.

Some of the most vocal opponents of free market capitalism have been college students.  Especially those with degrees in programs like these.  They’re angry and bitter and are more than willing to join in an Occupy Wall Street movement (it’s not like they have a job to go to thanks to their worthless degrees).  To protest against income inequality.  Especially when their worthless degrees have given them very little income.  And large amounts of debt.  But whose fault is this?  One thing for sure it isn’t the taxpayers.  Which is why the taxpayers shouldn’t pay for this outstanding student loan debt.

If the universities and colleges are providing worthless degrees perhaps they should refund that tuition.  At the least they should stop attacking free market capitalism and turning their students into Democrat voters.  For if we had robust economic activity created from low tax rates and less onerous regulation there would be so many jobs that businesses would be hiring even those with worthless degrees.  And the median family income would be rising, not falling.  As it has been during the Obama years.  Because when there are more jobs than people to fill them employers bid up salaries and wages.  As they try to get people to work for them instead of someplace else.  Something else they don’t teach in these worthless degrees.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

The Federal Government’s entry into the Student Loan Market eliminates Market Forces

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 7th, 2013

Week in Review

A sound banking system is a requirement for any advanced economy.  Because you need capital to make an advanced economy.  And how do you do that?  By people responsibly saving for their retirement.  Putting away a few dollars of every paycheck.  A small amount of money that can’t buy much of anything.  But when hundreds of thousands of people save a few dollars from every paycheck those small amounts become capital.  Large sums of money banks can lend out to investors who want to build factories.  Responsible bankers loaned their customers’ deposits to investors.  Investors paid the bankers interest on these loans.  And the bankers paid interest to their depositors.  The economy grew.  And people saved for their retirement.  The system worked well.  And grew the US economy into the world’s number one economy.  But now we’re in danger of dropping from that number one spot.  Because the government destroyed our banking system (see Exclusive – JPMorgan to stop making student loans by Reuters posted 9/5/2013 on Yahoo! Finance).

JPMorgan Chase & Co (NYS:JPM) will stop making student loans in October, according to a document reviewed by Reuters on Thursday, after the biggest U.S. bank concluded that competition from federal government programs limits its ability to expand the business.

When the government runs a deficit they sell bonds to finance it.  Pulling capital out of the private sector.  Raising borrowing costs.  The government then tries to lower borrowing costs by printing money.  Expanding the money supply.  And by making more money available to lend interest rates fall.  But it also does something else.  It encourages bad investments.  Malinvestments.  People who look at those artificially low interest rates and think they should borrow money when the borrowing is good.  Even when they don’t have a good investment opportunity.

They may expand their business now because money is cheap now.  Even though they don’t really need the additional capacity now.  And then if the government raises interest rates to cool the overheated economy thanks to those artificially low interest rates these same investors see their revenues fall as they took on additional expenses by expanding their business.  Just because interest rates were low.  Now their costs are higher just when their revenues have fallen.  Pushing the business towards bankruptcy.  Which would never have happened if the government didn’t encourage them to borrow money they didn’t need by keeping interest rates artificially low.

But getting people to borrow money when they don’t need it is the government’s only economic policy.  Which they took to another level in the housing market.  With pressure from the Clinton Justice Department on lenders to qualify the unqualified for loans.  Exploding the use of risky subprime lending.  And then using Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy these risky subprime loans from these lenders.  Removing all risks from these lenders and passing them on to the taxpayers.  To encourage these lenders to lower their lending standards.  So they would keep making risky loans.  Which they were more than willing to do if they incurred no risk in making these loans.  Which Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did for them.  Thus further destroying the banking system.

And now the government has taken over student loans.  Where they will do to student loans what they did to home mortgages.  Where lending decisions will be made for political reasons instead of objective lending standards.  Guaranteeing more subprime mortgage crises in the future.  A further destruction of the banking system.  And the destruction of one of the pillars of an advanced economy.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Students in the US and the UK enroll in the Easy Degree Programs instead of Math and Science to have more Fun at University

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 8th, 2012

Week in Review

The liberal Democrats want to provide a college degree for everyone.  They want cheap student loans.  And more money spent on grants.  Anything and everything to increase the number of kids going on to college.  There is only one problem.  They are going to college.  But few are learning anything worthwhile (see We must shift science out of the geek ghetto by Liz Truss posted 9/3/2012 on The Telegraph).

Planes and trains will help deliver prosperity, but brains are the trump card…

Scientific and technical skills top the global league; maths graduates command the highest salaries, closely followed by engineers and computer scientists. But in Britain the message isn’t getting through – especially at school, where scientific expertise is seen as specialist and difficult. The vast majority of children drop any study of science at 16.

This contrasts with emerging economies such as India, where science is a mass aspiration… Young Indians don’t aspire to be pop singers or football stars, but computer engineers or technicians…

One of the underlying problems is that students in the US and UK often do not persevere in science. In the US, 40 per cent of students taking science and engineering switch their major or drop out, recognising that students achieve higher grades in arts subjects for less work. In the UK, students drop science even earlier. Evidence suggests that the level required in science and maths A-levels has been up to two grades tougher than in communication studies or sociology. Why risk doing a harder subject and getting a worse mark..?

In Japan, 85 per cent of students achieve the equivalent of maths A-level…

Indian students study maths and science for twice as long each week at high school as their British or American counterparts. It is not surprising that this hard work builds up the appetite to take science to a higher level…

Germany managed to transform its approach in 10 years…

Standards were yanked up and it was understood that teachers and students would have to work longer and harder. Instead of ending school at lunchtime, German children often stay from 7am until 4pm or 5pm. By 2009, results had improved significantly and overtaken the UK, which was ominously described by Pisa as having “stagnated at best”.

Occupy Wall Street was full of people with college degrees that couldn’t find work.  They incurred a lot of student loan debt because people told them that a college degree was a guarantee to a better and more well-paid future.  Only no one told them that it made a difference what that college degree was in.  Universities gave out a lot of expensive albeit worthless liberal arts and social science degrees.  Those easy ones with few math and science requirements.  Because it was easier to admit students for the easier degrees.  And colleges need students to pay their faculty those generous pay and benefits.  As well as all those campus workers.  So they count on large government subsidies.  And cheap student loans to bury students in debt to get a degree that few businesses will hire them for.  Because the key to those cushy jobs in our colleges is filling those classrooms.  It doesn’t matter what they learn they just have to pay to sit in those classrooms.

Of course everything people told these kids was wrong.  But do they care?  They just go after the next batch of graduating high school seniors.  Who are eager to go to college.  But often times more for the fun than the learning.  And our educators don’t care about the lives they may destroy by giving these kids the kind of debt their degrees can’t repay.  And the Left’s answer to this?  More federal jobs.  Which people joke are jobs for the unemployable.  Like those graduating with those worthless degrees.  So a lot of new government jobs help to feed the system.  When there is enough economic activity in the private sector to pay the taxes to support these bloated public sector bureaucracies, that is.

So is there a method to this madness?  Worthless jobs for worthless degrees?  Of course there is.  It helps to expand the growth of government.  When young graduates with worthless degrees get cushy federal jobs they of course vote Democrat.  Which is the ultimate goal of the federal government-public university relationship.  You scratch my back and I’ll scratch your back.  So the universities teach students about the evils of capitalism and the urgency of global warming.  And the government hires these people.  To fill the jobs of the expanding federal government.  That interferes ever further into the private sector.  The universities and the government each get what they want.  When there is enough economic activity in the private sector to pay the taxes to support these bloated public sector bureaucracies, that is.  When there isn’t they occupy Wall Street and complain about the corporations that won’t hire them.  Instead of the education system that ripped them off.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Mainstream Media and their Owners are biased in Favor of Government Largess, not Objectivity

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 10th, 2011

The Mainstream Media is Biased after All

Problems with a for-profit education dependent on federal student loans beset The Washington Post.  Reveals a clear and present bias.  And threatens the venerable masthead (see The Washington Post’s dependence on the government it covers by Glenn Greenwald posted 4/10/2011 on Salon).

“The fate of The Post Co. has become inextricably linked with that of Kaplan, where revenue climbed to $2.9 billion in 2010, 61 percent of The Post Co.’s total,” the article detailed; “the company is more dependent than ever on a single business,’ [CEO Donald] Graham wrote in last year’s annual report, adding that the newspaper had never accounted for as large a share of overall company revenue as Kaplan does today.”

And that single business is an educational one.  A network of for-profit universities aimed at those who can’t afford a traditional college education.  These ‘poor’ people often pay for this education with federal loans.  And, of course, education is highly regulated by the federal government.  So this puts this The Post Co. into a bit of a sticky wicket.

Put another way, the company that owns The Washington Post is almost entirely at the mercy of the Federal Government and the Obama administration — the entities which its newspaper ostensibly checks and holds accountable.

Which is another way of saying there is a conflict of interest.  Which may taint their objectivity.  At times.  Not necessarily.  But possibly.  Which may explain the dominance of FOX NEWS.  Who may be beholden to corporate interests, too.  But it is clear that they are not beholden to the Obama Administration.  No, the current administration doesn’t much care for FOX.  Which can’t help but to lend an air of objectivity.

Beyond being reliant on federal money and not alienating federal regulators, the Post Co. desperately needs favorable treatment from members of Congress, and has been willing to use its newspaper to obtain it…

The Post is hardly alone among major media outlets in being owned by an entity which relies on the Federal Government for its continued profitability. NBC News and MSNBC were long owned by GE, and now by Comcast, both of which desperately need good relations with government officials for their profits. The same is true of CBS (owned by Viacom), ABC (owned by Disney), and CNN (owned by TimeWarner). For each of these large corporations, alienating federal government officials is about the worst possible move it could make — something of which all of its employees, including its media division employees, are well aware.

Of course, they left off two other entities that depend on not alienating the federal government.  PBS.  And NPR.  They have no corporate middlemen.  They get their funding directly from the federal government.  So they’ll be even more careful not to bite the hand that’s feeding them.

It would appear that journalism somehow went awry.  They will still criticize corporate fat cats.  Just not the corporate fat cats that sign their checks.  Or the government that signs the corporate fat cats’ checks.

The whole point of the First Amendment’s free press guarantee is that adversarial journalism is possible only if journalists are independent of political power. Yet the U.S. now has exactly the opposite dynamic: most major media outlets are owned by corporations that are anything but independent of government: they are quite dependent upon political officials for their profit in countless ways. We have anything but an independent press, which is another way of saying we have anything but a free press.

It is interesting that many attack the Republicans for being in the hip pocket of the big corporations.  And some of their loudest critics are themselves in the hip pocket of big corporations.  But claims of media bias are laughed off by those in the hip pocket of big corporations.  Meanwhile, they attack FOX NEWS for not being a legitimate news organization.  When many of these attackers are themselves far from legitimate.  So are these people inherently immoral?  Amoral?  Or are they just human?

Currying favor with political officials is how they secure scoops, leaks and access. Because media stars are now as wealthy and celebrated as the politically powerful whom they cover, they identify on socioeconomic and cultural grounds with these political officials; media stars are far more integrated into the halls of political power than they are outside of them.

They’re just human.  Craving attention.  Fame.  Wealth.  The good life.  And more fame.  They all want to be Walter Cronkite.  To become a legend.  By achieving greatness just for reporting the greatness of others.  That’s why reality television is so successful.  People watch rank amateurs achieve celebrity without any real talent.  And they say, hey, that could be me.  And so it is with many of today’s journalists.

FOX NEWS Dares to say the King Isn’t Wearing any Clothes

So how biased is today’s media?  Perhaps not that biased.  Here’s a newspaper story pretty critical of President Obama (see O meets the fog of war posted 4/10/2011 on New York Post).

Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded US military forces in Libya until control of the operation was handed over to NATO, told a Senate hearing Thursday that “there might be some consideration” of sending US ground troops to Libya to aid the anti-Khadafy rebels.

But President Obama said there would be no boots on the ground.  That we were only there on a humanitarian mission to protect Libyan civilians.  That we would be in and out in days, not weeks.  That there would be no mission-creep.  But this sounds like mission-creep.  A lot like in Vietnam.  We were only advisors at first.  To help an outmatched military force.  Then the mission crept.  And the next thing we knew we had hundreds of thousands of boots on the ground.  Could history be repeating?

The point being that situations, both on the ground and in the air, tend to change in unpredictable ways.

Gen. Ham surely knows this. Indeed, brand new second lieutenants know it.

But there’s no indication that President Obama and his defense team understand it — which probably explains why he doesn’t hesitate before making sweeping promises about the length and nature of America’s military commitments.

Perhaps.  While another Democrat president bungles us into another long-term military commitment in a land far from home that never attacked us.

Now that’s a pretty critical, objective news report on the Obama administration.  Perhaps the news media can maintain objectivity in the face of their corporate overlords dependent on the federal government for their profits.  Wait a tic.  The New York PostRupert Murdoch owns this, doesn’t he?  The same Rupert Murdoch who owns FOX NEWS?  Why, yes.  He does.  No wonder the New York Post isn’t afraid to say the king isn’t wearing any clothes.  Their income isn’t dependent on pleasing the king.

I guess a good rule of thumb for objective journalism is this.  Does Rupert Murdoch own the media outlet?  If so, it’s not an Obama administration toady.  And most likely objective.

A Detailed and Objective Mea Culpa

If you want to read more about the problems besetting The Washington Post thanks to its Kaplan division you can read a pretty detailed and objective accounting of it in The Washington Post (see The trials of Kaplan Higher Ed and the education of The Washington Post Co. by Steven Mufson and Jia Lynn Yang posted 4/9/2011 on The Washington Post).  It’s a fascinating read.  And quite the mea culpa.

Yes, they may be biased.  But they don’t like the position they’re in.  And that says something about the organization.  Besides, Charles Krauthammer is a columnist over there.  Not exactly a friend of the Obama administration.  And any paper that has Krauthammer as a columnist is all right by me.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,