Healthcare being private is great as you are entitled to medical care, but not someone else to pay for your bills.

However, when unis are run like businesses they do two things that a lot of multi-product companies do:

- They churn out products (courses) that do the same thing but are made to look quite different.

- The courses have better copy-writing marketing ploys than a veggie supplement snake oil.


This results in paradoxes of choices, anxiety and lack of purpose. Ambitious boys and gals shouldn't spend time worrying about what course to do, be bombarded with 50 flavours of engineering and then where is best to do an MBA. Instead, they can try to build software or other products that solve problems.

Also, this results in fluff courses that are useless. And this is not me being a STEMcel elitist. As a Comp Sci major, I am stunned by how many versions of a Masters in Data Science there is. Literally, all of them should be merged into an MSc Statistics and mandatory computational course/element (statisticians need it anyway).

Literally, 80% of undergrad + postgrad degrees can be eliminated or merged into more established centralised disciplines that lead to a career track. Then reverse engineer career entry points to see what paths you can have.

If universities were run as a business we would all be a lot better off. Currently they run as socialist programs with huge govt grants and students that are guaranteed whatever loan they want.

If universities were required to run without govt assistance and students had to take private loans then universities would be required to offer better quality degrees for lower costs or risk having no students.

I agree with you OP that universities are full of fluffy crap that is unnecessary. I disagree with you when it comes to the cause.

That is also an argument but university loans are paid directly to unis. So they are still kinda running as a business because the fact that the GOV gives whatever price they set to the student is none of their concern. The quality argument is very wonky when you consider that you have variations of the same bull**** coming up every year packaged as something new.

I am talking about swallowing the red pill that a Political Science degree doesn't make you more cultured than a tradie.

Actually, a free education system can be run very effectively if it is trimmed down to the bare establishment that is vocationally oriented. E.g have streams for healthcare where you study some biochem science then do exams to enter centralised streams like a doctor, nurse, allied health professions stream that have a common origin. Stuff like philosophy/arts etc can be completely dropped and can be studied for fun online.

Just because someone with a BA in Arts can get a JP Morgan markets trader job doesn't negate the fact that he/she probably could have gotten it without the degree in fact.

Sounds very socialist in nature but when you think of all the savings that can be made not paying for tenures of social science professors, aka glorified opinionated social engineers, the USA can have very. It is just 80% of degrees shouldn't exist or should be merged and some people will have to face the red pill that they are not smart enough to do medicine, law, engineering etc;

Can you elaborate how the thought of "enrolling as many students as possible" via 10 different Masters programmes for the same thing or having whole Departments without caring whether they lead to careers (Arts etc) is not the cause of education as a business?

You can go online and learn whatever you want, short of specialised vocations. If someone is interested in African and Slavic Literature they can do it in their own time via the internet. No need to do a degree in it.

Students taking private loans have problems - banks might limit access to those who do not have collateral etc.

If you ask me eliminating degrees, cutting them short a bit the gov will save money rather than a debt that is about to explode.


Just think about this.

Some guy is finishing HS and is wondering what to do with his life. Interested in vocations that require higher education -> opens simple websites that show a streamlined pathway of careers and the necessary certificates. You jsut go on the pathway and have free time to do side projects.

Meanwhile, Business Marketing, Digital Marketing, IoT Marketing (wtf), Marketing Data Science, Product Marketing, Marketing Project Management - all available in Masters. JFL.

Oh okay. I agree with most everything.

Imo university will be much less expensive in the future due to most of it being online and covid really accelerated the transition from brick and mortar to online. The justification to go to college in person with "you need the college experience" has always been dumb to me.

I think it is pseudo business. Because govt gives so much money to universities they are able to make a bunch of specialized crap in order to attract students. So in that way it is business. However if govt did not give universities so much tax money and give everyone loans then college would be forced to operate business in a more efficient manner, namely make their degrees more valuable.

In other words, the university business model is based on students with unlimited money. If the business model is based on limited money with picky students they will have to change.Completely agree here.This is a good point. I have no answer for this. In China if a % of graduates of a certain degree do not get jobs then that degree is removed from universities. I do not trust the US govt to make good decisions if doing something similar so I am at a loss.Schools were designed in the US to produce mindless drones and factory workers. Career fairs and mandatory job shadowing would be good requirements in high school so kids see different types of jobs and are forced to see them for entire work days.

based


that's why I didn't go. Most of college is too expensive and too long for what you're actually paying for. I realized that it was garbage at 18 srs

Average undergrad can be cut down from 4 years to 2 years + anything extra available online. Only people who study **** that needs equipment - biomedical/chemical scientist (diagnostic and lab machinery) need to have dedicated facilities.

A lot of disciplines can be completely removed from workforce education and can be manifested into cultural clubs and associates based on donors - Arts, Music, Classics, History etc

A lot of disciplines, which are a fluffy extension of established ones, such as Economics in relation to Maths/Stats, can be merged into their established base science as an application module subset.

Centralisation allows people to carve their education pathway in a very clear structured manner that allows them to free up time to do useful stuff.

A career/vocation reverse-engineered approach can give people clarity:

E.g Healthcare? Start with a 2-year biomedical undergrad then go do medical school, nursing school, pharmacy school whatever.

Pure scientist? Start with a base/mixed foundation of the base stuff - chem, bio, math, physics and try to grind out the academia stream.

There can be whole "pipelines" where you will have the flexibility of mix-n-match choices or switching pathways (e.g start with a math base science then go on to do computer science or engineering).

IMHO, applying all of the above can save so much money and time that it can be completely free, subject to limited spaces on courses (closely linked to how many jobs there are related to these areas).

now, even though I am pretty sure you do not mean that literally, but college is not garbage because a subset of it actually gives opportunities

you can't say engineering, comp sci, medicine, law and nursing for instance do not lead to well-paid opportunities compared to not going at all

the trick is to remove the rest of the bloat