Problems with the ED to MED campaign

[Staphylococcus Aureus]

---

Members do not see this ad.

The primary reason for most institutions is overly generous, indiscriminate government loans and grants.

Yes that is one of the main factors, not competition between schools.

monopolistic pricing schemes... which will likely break down as new schools open, more physicians flood into the market, and the socioeconomic rewards of becoming a physician decrease.

We'll see, but flooding the market and decreasing reward certainly hasn't driven down the price for literally every other degree (Bachelors, law, pharmacy, etc) quite the opposite.

 

[Osminog]

I like the way you think lol, but in a free market no one is doing genome editing for free. Will only the wealthy have access to this increase in IQ? Will this further seperate the have and have nots? Its still going to be more expensive to pay a human to do a job than pay the electric bill on a robot that works 24/7 with no need for days off or sick days. But i also doubt the relms of human intelligence capabilities even with superhuman genomes will be able to compete with the supercomputers and AI of their times. But i would absolutelty love to be proved wrong, transhumanism/superhuman genomes sound baller to me.

At first, gene editing procedures will be expensive and only available to the wealthy, but there will be a strong incentive to make the procedures less expensive and more widely available as AI and automation expand. If you're a wealthy super-genius, would you want millions of unintelligent people sitting around doing nothing, or would you rather have millions of super-intelligent coders and engineers who can contribute to human progress?

When computers were initially being developed, did wealthy people try to hoard the technology and keep it to themselves in order to gain an edge over lower-class people? No -- over time, the technology became less expensive and more widely available, and now many of the poorest people in our society have smart phones. I expect gene editing technology will turn out the same way.

 

[SurgDoc95]

You seem to be confusing value to society with value to corporate big-wigs. Since the average person is not an owner of a company that will profit off of a legion of business majors, I’d argue that someone with a BA degree may contribute more to society. But I guess it all depends what you consider valuable to society. Also what exactly that BA degree holder does after graduation, as thats a pretty broad spectrum of people.

In the end it comes down to dollars and cents. If you go to college and get a degree in theatre with a minor in German you are more than likely going to contribute less economically than your average business admin major. Argue that all you want, but it’s true. We need people of all walks of life and those in all professions, but let’s not kid ourselves about the difference in monetary value between these jobs.

Also, to your point about there being a legion of business majors, there’s also a legion of humanities majors. At least (most of) the business majors will have jobs and be able to pay their loans back.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Staphylococcus Aureus]

I think we need philosophers too though. and if we as a society invested in teaching kids more there would be more good jobs for these people too.

The point is cultivating the humanities and philosophy as a society does not cost $50k a year per person.

 

[NITRAS]

You seem to be confusing value to society with value to corporate big-wigs. Since the average person is not an owner of a company that will profit off of a legion of business majors, I’d argue that someone with a BA degree may contribute more to society. But I guess it all depends what you consider valuable to society. Also what exactly that BA degree holder does after graduation, as thats a pretty broad spectrum of people.

You give value to society, and in the US, they give you certificates of appreciation with dead president's faces on them. We live in the most wonderful time and place in the entire history of the world, and people insist on being victims. It has NEVER been so easy for upward social mobility. Yes, it isn't fair, and its harder for some than others, but for your own sake, chose to be a victor. Do what you have to do to win. Bitching about how the world is unfair to you will only worsen your attitude. Your ultimately control your own destiny.

“Whether you think you can or whether you think you can't,you're right.” Henry Ford.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

You give value to society, and in the US, they give you certificates of appreciation with dead president's faces on them. We live in the most wonderful time and place in the entire history of the world, and people insist on being victims. It has NEVER been so easy for upward social mobility. Yes, it isn't fair, and its harder for some than others, but for your own sake, chose to be a victor. Do what you have to do to win. Bitching about how the world is unfair to you will only worsen your attitude. Your ultimately control your own destiny.

“Whether you think you can or whether you think you can't,you're right.” Henry Ford.

it's actually the most difficult period since the 1920s for upward mobility.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[SurgDoc95]

it's actually the most difficult period since the 1920s for upward mobility.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

Do enlighten us on the reasoning behind that.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Scrubs101]

At first, gene editing procedures will be expensive and only available to the wealthy, but there will be a strong incentive to make the procedures less expensive and more widely available as AI and automation expand. If you're a wealthy super-genius, would you want millions of unintelligent people sitting around doing nothing, or would you rather have millions of super-intelligent coders and engineers who can contribute to human progress?

When computers were initially being developed, did wealthy people try to hoard the technology and keep it to themselves in order to gain an edge over lower-class people? No -- over time, the technology became less expensive and more widely available, and now many of the poorest people in our society have smart phones. I expect gene editing technology will turn out the same way.

Oh no I totally agree, it will eventually become cheaper. That's one of the many upsides of automation and the future of tech, everything becomes easier to make/do and at a lower cost. But how long did it take for it to be accessible to everyone? How much of a leg up did this give the superhumans? Did it spark any genocidal thoughts, the whole master race idea has been an issue for a while and I dont think genome editing will make it any better. How long did the lower class/unemployed (which in this potential future will be the vast majority) go unemployed until they had even a sliver of a shot? How many people starved to death while waiting for the free market to stabilize their only shot at a decent future?(in this hypothetical scenario)

In the end it comes down to dollars and cents. If you go to college and get a degree in theatre with a minor in German you are more than likely going to contribute less economically than your average business admin major. Argue that all you want, but it’s true. We need people of all walks of life and those in all professions, but let’s not kid ourselves about the difference in monetary value between these jobs.

Also, to your point about there being a legion of business majors, there’s also a legion of humanities majors. At least (most of) the business majors will have jobs and be able to pay their loans back.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I agree people in the arts on average (ignoring the few that make it big) do not contribute nearly as much to the economy, the thing is money isnt the only way to contribute to society. It all depends on what you value, and it's true some people value money primarily and thus think if you're not contributing monetarily to boost the economy then you are societally worthless. Which I disagree with, and is what I was trying to convey. I wasn't really commenting on the original discussion about whether the government should fund degrees that dont have return value, as thats a more straight forward answer and I agree more so on what you were saying with regards to that. I just was getting nit-picky and stating societal value isn't alway monetary.

You give value to society, and in the US, they give you certificates of appreciation with dead president's faces on them. We live in the most wonderful time and place in the entire history of the world, and people insist on being victims. It has NEVER been so easy for upward social mobility. Yes, it isn't fair, and its harder for some than others, but for your own sake, chose to be a victor. Do what you have to do to win. Bitching about how the world is unfair to you will only worsen your attitude. Your ultimately control your own destiny.

“Whether you think you can or whether you think you can't,you're right.” Henry Ford.

By stating that you are basically assuming all poor people just want to grow up to be poor and it's their fault theyre stuck there. It has been proven that having a gifted uprising better tailors one to be successful, having good role models, having access to out of school programs (both for socialization and academic reasons), not having to worry about where the next meal comes from, being able to stress about getting into your dream college and not stressing about getting a second job to help out your family, the list goes on and on. The stress and consequences of being born underprivileged is what keeps poor people poor, not the lack of motivation.

Will a good work ethic help? Undoubtably. Will a middle class/upper class kid without any work ethic outperform the average poor kid in this game we call life? Most likely. Most of the time you cannot just will yourself out of being born poor. I agree this is a very pessimistic way of looking at things and I encourage everyone to try their best no matter what, as there still will be people that can will their way out, but bringing these issues to light is necessary to equal the playing field.

Edit: My apologies I'm misquoting information, due to the fact the lowest income bracket cannot go down in mobility they are actually not the least likely to move upwards. They however are the least likely to be found in a top quintile bracket.

 

[deleted480308]

it's actually the most difficult period since the 1920s for upward mobility.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

An era when literally anyone can afford a degree in literally anything? When almost any skill can be learned for free on youtube?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

An era when literally anyone can afford a degree in literally anything? When almost any skill can be learned for free on youtube?

an era where worker productivity is tripled what it once was. where jobs pay far worse than ever. and where the entire generation is in debt and unable to access adequate employment due to being required to spent their 20s as free or underpayed interns.

we are the most indebted. the most unpaid. and the most trained. we are paid far less and it's going to destroy the economy in 10 to 20 years when ppl cant afford houses.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[deleted480308]

an era where worker productivity is tripled what it once was. where jobs pay far worse than ever. and where the entire generation is in debt and unable to access adequate employment due to being required to spent their 20s as free or underpayed interns.

we are the most indebted. the most unpaid. and the most trained. we are paid far less and it's going to destroy the economy in 10 to 20 years when ppl cant afford houses.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

You are really exaggerating the internship requirements in most jobs

The generation doesn’t have to be in debt if they make better decisions

Every house with an owner/tenant is affordable

 

[Scrubs101]

I realize what I’m about to say is very much an exception to the norm but it’s my personal family experience so I find it applicable. My father grew up poor with a mother who was a single mom with two young children in a new city where she had ZERO support system. She worked in insurance sales which was very much a man’s business at the time. My dad recounts stories of him and my grandma sitting in the kitchen crying because they barely had enough to eat. They had it rough and the ONLY reason they got out of that situation was because my grandma refused to be a victim. She worked 14+ hour days to support her children all the while cultivating relationships around this new city and eventually started her own insurance sales company. After 30+ years of hard hard work she sold it and retired a very well off woman. My father who has no college degree started his own company from the ground and without my mother’s income we would have had no income to live off. Again, following the example set by my grandma and the support of my mom, my father worked long long hours (still does) to grow his company into something that is now very prosperous. There were times where it looked like the company would go under but he refused to quit. He wasn’t going to be a victim.

So I’m sorry, but I have very little sympathy for those who cry woe is me. I haven’t had to struggle the way my dad and Grandma did, but I know what they endured to put me in a position to succeed. Not all those who grow up poor have the will power to get themselves out of their situation true and likely my family’s story involved a bit of luck where others haven’t had it. But it doesn’t change that what is really required is hard hard work and sacrifice.

Rant over.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I'm very glad that it worked out for your dad and grandmother, but it has been proven that it is harder for people in poverty to gain upward mobility and this story is most certainly not the norm. There are plenty of impoverished people working 14+ hrs a day that still can't support their families. There are plenty of people that start businesses that crash and burn. It's unfortunate but true, and it's not because all poor people want to be poor or have poor work ethics.

 

[Osminog]

we are the most indebted.

Yes, because the government haphazardly gives out loans to short-sighted people who are seeking worthless degrees instead of entering the workforce.

the most unpaid.

Compared to whom? Compared to Americans from past generations, who weren't as eager to overextend their educations and delay their entrance into the workforce?

and the most trained.

Yes, many people are overtrained. Too many people go to college on the public dime, only to come out with a useless degree and four years' worth of lost income and career advancement.

we are paid far less and it's going to destroy the economy in 10 to 20 years when ppl cant afford houses.

As millennials inherit the wealth of the Baby Boomers, they will start to be able to afford mortgages. Until then, they'll have to settle for renting a place. Boo hoo.

 

[deleted480308]

I'm very glad that it worked out for your dad and grandmother, but it has been proven that it is harder for people in poverty to gain upward mobility and this story is most certainly not the norm. There are plenty of impoverished people working 14+ hrs a day that still can't support their families. There are plenty of people that start businesses that crash and burn. It's unfortunate but true, and it's not because all poor people want to be poor or have poor work ethics.

More than half of the lowest quintile of earners have their kids move up at least one quintile.

Mobility is not hard

 

[Scrubs101]

More than half of the lowest quintile of earners have their kids move up at least one quintile.

Mobility is not hard

Sorry I'm definitely misstating information, you are correct. The lowest quintile of earners cannot go down in income rank, so it kind of only leaves two options. Some interesting things i did find are the ability to move up is higher in countries with more structured governmental support, parental income rank is highly correlated to their childrens income rank, mobility has been going down in the US over the past 70 years, and even all of this is highly geographically different even within the US as it seems the south has the lowest income mobility.

 

[Ho0v-man]

No, not "ehem administrators." The primary reason for most institutions is overly generous, indiscriminate government loans and grants.

For medical schools, it's a different story, because even if the government didn't offer loans to medical students, private lenders still would still be willing to cover medical school expenses in their entirety (albeit at higher interest rates) -- because unlike a gender studies or interpretative dance degree, a medical degree is lucrative and a physician would actually be able to pay off the debt. In this case, the blame can't be placed on government loans, but rather on monopolistic pricing schemes... which will likely break down as new schools open, more physicians flood into the market, and the socioeconomic rewards of becoming a physician decrease.

You’re logic is flawed. More schools than ever exist despite decreasing physician compensation and decreased medschool applications overall. There will never be more seats than applicants thus a straightforward free market is not going to happen.