Problems with the ED to MED campaign

[Tozanzibarbymotorcar]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I was looking at the description for the ED to MED campaign by AACOM. Part of the mission statement is to "raise the profile of graduate student debt issues in the halls of Congress". The campaign hopes to accomplish this through saving loan programs, which is important, however one of the main issues with student debt is the high tuition costs. Pulling up an article from US News, many of the schools listed as leaving students with the most debt are osteopathic schools. High tuition cost is the elephant in the room. What is being done about this issue and why isn't ED to MED addressing that? Why are DO students being left with the most debt, especially when many go into primary care?

https://www.usnews.com/education/be...hools-where-students-leave-with-the-most-debt

 

[It's lupus!]

I was looking at the description for the ED to MED campaign by AACOM. Part of the mission statement is to "raise the profile of graduate student debt issues in the halls of Congress". The campaign hopes to accomplish this through saving loan programs, which is important, however one of the main issues with student debt is the high tuition costs. Pulling up an article from US News, many of the schools listed as leaving students with the most debt are osteopathic schools. High tuition cost is the elephant in the room. What is being done about this issue and why isn't ED to MED addressing that? Why are DO students being left with the most debt, especially when many go into primary care?

https://www.usnews.com/education/be...hools-where-students-leave-with-the-most-debt

Did you ask them that question?

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

 

[atomheart]

Dear Dean of COM,

I noticed that the solution of the organization that sponsors your job is for me to have more debt. Would you be willing to take a paycut instead?

Sincerely,

Ex-student DO

 

[It's lupus!]

Dear Dean of COM,

I noticed that the solution of the organization that sponsors your job is for me to have more debt. Would you be willing to take a paycut instead?

Sincerely,

Ex-student DO

I was referring to reaching out to Ed to Med. Although, it'd be entertaining to see someone send that letter.

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

 

[Tozanzibarbymotorcar]

I may reach out to them. I am not expecting much..

 

[It's lupus!]

I may reach out to them. I am not expecting much..

I wouldn't either but they are SUPPOSED to be advocating for us right?

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

 

[deleted480308]

I was looking at the description for the ED to MED campaign by AACOM. Part of the mission statement is to "raise the profile of graduate student debt issues in the halls of Congress". The campaign hopes to accomplish this through saving loan programs, which is important, however one of the main issues with student debt is the high tuition costs. Pulling up an article from US News, many of the schools listed as leaving students with the most debt are osteopathic schools. High tuition cost is the elephant in the room. What is being done about this issue and why isn't ED to MED addressing that? Why are DO students being left with the most debt, especially when many go into primary care?

https://www.usnews.com/education/be...hools-where-students-leave-with-the-most-debt

It’s a supply and demand equation.

They charge $70k because there is a line of customers out the door.

The govt shouldn’t be making anyone else pay your loans.....do a roi calculation and make the right choice for you

 

[Tozanzibarbymotorcar]

It’s a supply and demand equation.

They charge $70k because there is a line of customers out the door.

The govt shouldn’t be making anyone else pay your loans.....do a roi calculation and make the right choice for you

So are DO schools like carribean schools where ppl are desperate to go? Most MD schools do not even charge as much as many DO schools yet they also have a line of customers.

 

[It's lupus!]

So are DO schools like carribean schools where ppl are desperate to go? Most MD schools do not even charge as much as many DO schools yet they also have a line of customers.

Those customers are also often in the DO line as well.

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

 

[Tozanzibarbymotorcar]

Those customers are also often in the DO line as well.

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

So why does it seem that MD schools charge less? Is it the extra OMM component that makes DO schools more expensive?

 

[It's lupus!]

So why does it seem that MD schools charge less? Is it the extra OMM component that makes DO schools more expensive?

I'm not sure to be honest. Something to consider though is that the majority of DO schools are private not public. This has some influence. Another unfortunate part is the sneaking and growing suspicion that schools are being produced for the purpose of profit without regard for much else.

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

 

[Darkness2018]

It seems to me a public versus private school discrepancy with tuition. If a DO school is from a public state university then it shouldn’t be crazy tuition.
Is this wrong thinking?
Some states are great with in-state tuition at public university, like Texas.

 

[Tozanzibarbymotorcar]

I'm not sure to be honest. Something to consider though is that the majority of DO schools are private not public. This has some influence. Another unfortunate part is the sneaking and growing suspicion that schools are being produced for the purpose of profit without regard for much else.

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

We pay more and don’t get the resources/opportunities we pay for such as research. Something doesn’t add up. It would be nice if there was a grassroots effort to put a stop to increases in tuition. That is what is putting students in debt.

 

[deleted480308]

We pay more and don’t get the resources/opportunities we pay for such as research. Something doesn’t add up. It would be nice if there was a grassroots effort to put a stop to increases in tuition. That is what is putting students in debt.

Like a law? That’s no ok. If people will pay it, it’s “worth it”

 

[It's lupus!]

We pay more and don’t get the resources/opportunities we pay for such as research. Something doesn’t add up. It would be nice if there was a grassroots effort to put a stop to increases in tuition. That is what is putting students in debt.

Well research requires grants and funding which helps hold together public institutions along with state and federal funding prices go down while private ones do not have much of the latter luxury which still needs to be paid for some how. Not making excuses for the insane prices but it's not completely unjustified either, but I wish I could actually see how this money is utilized.

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

 

[BorntobeDO?]

I'm not sure to be honest. Something to consider though is that the majority of DO schools are private not public. This has some influence. Another unfortunate part is the sneaking and growing suspicion that schools are being produced for the purpose of profit without regard for much else.

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

There isn't a suspicion, this is a fact at most DO schools.

 

[It's lupus!]

There isn't a suspicion, this is a fact at most DO schools.

Without concrete evidence it's still called a suspicion despite how things appear. (For the record I think it's highly probable)

Sent from my Pixel XL using SDN mobile

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

So are DO schools like carribean schools where ppl are desperate to go? Most MD schools do not even charge as much as many DO schools yet they also have a line of customers.

You are lumping MD that are predominantly a bunch of state run schools with DO that are predominantly private. If you look at the tuition of USC (MD-private), it's higher than WesternU (DO-private). If you compare IS OSU (DO-Public), it's less than IS UCI (MD-Public). If you don't think people are desperate for MD, you might consider a psychiatry evaluation

 

[hallowmann]

So why does it seem that MD schools charge less? Is it the extra OMM component that makes DO schools more expensive?

A lot of MD schools are expensive. MD private schools are pretty close to the cost of DO private schools. In my state I went to the least expensive medical school (a DO school), and MD schools outnumber DO schools there >3:1. Plus 2 of those MD schools are public state schools that give barely any discounts for IS students.

It varies. In general, DO schools are on average more expensive because they are proportionally more private schools, whereas MD schools are either equal or more public than private.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

It’s a supply and demand equation.

They charge $70k because there is a line of customers out the door.

The govt shouldn’t be making anyone else pay your loans.....do a roi calculation and make the right choice for you

as I've mentioned before. government incentives help advance goals such as allowing or convincing physicians to practice in need areas.

simply put individual interests and market forces alone do not make for a functioning society.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[NITRAS]

Probably would would blow some minds here to tell them that it costs a good deal more to train an MD than the cost of tuition at most schools.

 

[deleted480308]

as I've mentioned before. government incentives help advance goals such as allowing or convincing physicians to practice in need areas.

simply put individual interests and market forces alone do not make for a functioning society.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

yes it does...all your interventions have unintended consequences. Case in point is "everyone gets loans so we can afford to go to school!" becomes, "holy balls, how did all these schools get so expensive, no one can pay their loans?!?!?"

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

yes it does...all your interventions have unintended consequences. Case in point is "everyone gets loans so we can afford to go to school!" becomes, "holy balls, how did all these schools get so expensive, no one can pay their loans?!?!?"

I think not doing anything has far more consequences tbh.

Schools increase in tuition because the government has been in bed with large organizations and banking firms. Any laws that actually protect against these rises have been eroded.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[deleted480308]

I think not doing anything has far more consequences tbh.

Schools increase in tuition because the government has been in bed with large organizations and banking firms. Any laws that actually protect against these rises have been eroded.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

We don’t need laws against prices. Stop federally guaranteeing loans and barring people from bankruptcy to get out

Then all lenders will evaluate the student and the ROI of a degree before giving a broke kid $200k for a creative writing degree

Without the constant flow of cash, schools will need to edit their degrees and luxuries to reflect value better

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

We don’t need laws against prices. Stop federally guaranteeing loans and barring people from bankruptcy to get out

Then all lenders will evaluate the student and the ROI of a degree before giving a broke kid $200k for a creative writing degree

Without the constant flow of cash, schools will need to edit their degrees and luxuries to reflect value better

We do. Regulating against predatory practices is extremely important in life and in medicine.

stopping loans only harms the poor and stuns their economic mobility while those who benefitted from cheaper loans in the past have already amassed wealth.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[deleted480308]

We do. Regulating against predatory practices is extremely important in life and in medicine.

stopping loans only harms the poor and stuns their economic mobility while those who benefitted from cheaper loans in the past have already amassed wealth.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

No.

Stopping guarantee of loans just stops poor student from being able to afford useless degrees. A poor student with a med school acceptance would still get money because the risk for that student is so low. This is evidenced by physician mortgages given to residents with no deposits and barely any credit requirements. We are low risk

The model you are defending sets up that poor student you claim to care about with a $150k indigenous history degree they cannot get a career with and they can’t bankrupt the loans away.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

No.

Stopping guarantee of loans just stops poor student from being able to afford useless degrees. A poor student with a med school acceptance would still get money because the risk for that student is so low. This is evidenced by physician mortgages given to residents with no deposits and barely any credit requirements. We are low risk

The model you are defending sets up that poor student you claim to care about with a $150k indigenous history degree they cannot get a career with and they can’t bankrupt the loans away.

a college degree up until the formation of ridiculous entry requirements and mass internships was adequate. plenty of wealth and middle class people managed with degrees in indigenous studies.
but sure. let's fund only stem or profitable degrees. clearly we as a civilization dont need an educated class of individuals for humanities.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[deleted480308]

a college degree up until the formation of ridiculous entry requirements and mass internships was adequate. plenty of wealth and middle class people managed with degrees in indigenous studies.
but sure. let's fund only stem or profitable degrees. clearly we as a civilization dont need an educated class of individuals for humanities.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

“We” don’t need to fund any degree

The students who want that degree can fund it. If hav money they can write a check. If there is social value they can solicit donations from likeminded folks. If the degree is part of a solid financial plan, lenders will absolutely offer a loan for a market rate. Those are appropriate ways to fund a degree. “We” shouldn’t be funding degrees, that’s how “we” ended up with our current set up

 

[Osminog]

The DO sub-forums are full of hilarious contradictions.

A bunch of people complain that too many new DO schools are opening up. And then the same people complain about tuition hikes at DO schools. Don't you realize that the tuition hikes are largely due to a lack of competition? If you don't support increased competition among DO schools for high-quality applicants, then you'd better be ready to tolerate monopoly pricing.

 

[NITRAS]

a college degree up until the formation of ridiculous entry requirements and mass internships was adequate. plenty of wealth and middle class people managed with degrees in indigenous studies.
but sure. let's fund only stem or profitable degrees. clearly we as a civilization dont need an educated class of individuals for humanities.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

This is a case of people confusing the effect with cause. Yes, an education will give you the tools to help you succeed, but ultimately its your ability to monetize your skills is how people succeed. Giving more people education will not make them win. Giving people 18 year olds the ability to go into debt they will take decades to recover from is not helping people.

 

[Osminog]

This is a case of people confusing the effect with cause. Yes, an education will give you the tools to help you succeed, but ultimately its your ability to monetize your skills is how people succeed. Giving more people education will not make them win. Giving people 18 year olds the ability to go into debt they will take decades to recover from is not helping people.

For non-technical degrees (humanities, social sciences, etc.), the end goal is to get a diploma, because it tells employers, "Hey, I've got an IQ over 110, and I'm able to complete cognitively intensive tasks." That's what the kids are shelling out the big bucks for.

Ideally, non-STEM degrees would be replaced by g-loaded problem-solving tests (e.g., old SAT) -- along with a few tests that cover a lot of content and require a lot of independent studying, in order to test motivation. Same end result, but four years and hundreds of thousands of dollars saved.

 

[Staphylococcus Aureus]

The DO sub-forums are full of hilarious contradictions.

A bunch of people complain that too many new DO schools are opening up. And then the same people complain about tuition hikes at DO schools. Don't you realize that the tuition hikes are largely due to a lack of competition? If you don't support increased competition among DO schools for high-quality applicants, then you'd better be ready to tolerate monopoly pricing.

This is simply not true. Tuition inflation is a major problem in all of higher ed for a number of reasons (ahem administrators) but it’s not because of lack of competition.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

“We” don’t need to fund any degree

The students who want that degree can fund it. If hav money they can write a check. If there is social value they can solicit donations from likeminded folks. If the degree is part of a solid financial plan, lenders will absolutely offer a loan for a market rate. Those are appropriate ways to fund a degree. “We” shouldn’t be funding degrees, that’s how “we” ended up with our current set up

again. we do because we have an uneven playing field. we need to foster and encourage talent, upward mobility, not just in the people who are well off due to histories of policies that have left a segment of society much better off than the others.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

This is a case of people confusing the effect with cause. Yes, an education will give you the tools to help you succeed, but ultimately its your ability to monetize your skills is how people succeed. Giving more people education will not make them win. Giving people 18 year olds the ability to go into debt they will take decades to recover from is not helping people.

and this conversation wasnt even a thing 20 years ago. People went to college and got a job.

now employers pay less, recruit free interns, demand tons of internships, dont care about in job training, and have one person doing the job of 3.

yes, an education is no longer the way to a good life. but it's not because the education has become less worth, its because employers have eroded the culture of workers and instead only care about shareholders.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

For non-technical degrees (humanities, social sciences, etc.), the end goal is to get a diploma, because it tells employers, "Hey, I've got an IQ over 110, and I'm able to complete cognitively intensive tasks." That's what the kids are shelling out the big bucks for.

Ideally, non-STEM degrees would be replaced by g-loaded problem-solving tests (e.g., old SAT) -- along with a few tests that cover a lot of content and require a lot of independent studying, in order to test motivation. Same end result, but four years and hundreds of thousands of dollars saved.

idk why we need to belittle the humanities. Most of us would be pretty **** humans without much ability to think independently without them.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[SurgDoc95]

idk why we need to belittle the humanities. Most of us would be pretty **** humans without much ability to think independently without them.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

Belittling the humanities has little value you’re correct. However, you can’t argue that these newly minted BA degree earning students are worth the same dollar value to society as someone with a degree in day business admin or accounting. In a bubble having an unlimited number of humanities majors is great for a society, but in reality they do not contribute (for the most part) as much as other degree fields for the same cost of education. A clean wipe of funding to those interested in these fields isn’t appropriate, but neither is leaving on the unlimited nozzle of government funded loans.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[deleted480308]

and this conversation wasnt even a thing 20 years ago. People went to college and got a job.

now employers pay less, recruit free interns, demand tons of internships, dont care about in job training, and have one person doing the job of 3.

yes, an education is no longer the way to a good life. but it's not because the education has become less worth, its because employers have eroded the culture of workers and instead only care about shareholders.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

Education in monetizeable (might not be a word 😉 ) fields is actually a way to economic mobility

A degree in something not economically viable isn’t

Guaranteeing every idiot can spend $100k on a useless bachelor degree to “find themselves “ is bad policy.

 

[Osminog]

This is simply not true. Tuition inflation is a major problem in all of higher ed for a number of reasons (ahem administrators) but it’s not because of lack of competition.

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.

 

[Osminog]

idk why we need to belittle the humanities. Most of us would be pretty **** humans without much ability to think independently without them.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

I wasn't belittling the humanities. I'm all for the idea of reading Shakespeare, Plato, and Kant in your free time. I'm just saying that a bachelor's degree in gender studies, with a minor in studio art, may not be as valuable as four years in a professional role in the workforce.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I wasn't belittling the humanities. I'm all for the idea of reading Shakespeare, Plato, and Kant in your free time. I'm just saying that a bachelor's degree in gender studies, with a minor in studio art, may not be as valuable as four years in a professional role in the workforce.

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.

but sure. I think the core problem is with employers however. a college degree should be adequate for putting someone behind a desk job as it once was.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[Scrubs101]

Belittling the humanities has little value you’re correct. However, you can’t argue that these newly minted BA degree earning students are worth the same dollar value to society as someone with a degree in day business admin or accounting. In a bubble having an unlimited number of humanities majors is great for a society, but in reality they do not contribute (for the most part) as much as other degree fields for the same cost of education. A clean wipe of funding to those interested in these fields isn’t appropriate, but neither is leaving on the unlimited nozzle of government funded loans.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

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.

 

[deleted480308]

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.

but sure. I think the core problem is with employers however. a college degree should be adequate for putting someone behind a desk job as it once was.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

How many philosophers are you hiring this year?

I’m betting your answer is as low as it is identical to everyone else’s answer. If no one is willing to pay them society has decided they don’t “need” them

 

[Osminog]

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.

but sure. I think the core problem is with employers however. a college degree should be adequate for putting someone behind a desk job as it once was.

We arguably have too many philosophers. It's extremely challenging to get a tenure-track position, even with a humanities or social science PhD from a top-tier institution. And most of the students getting a bachelor's degree in the social sciences or humanities don't go down that road.

Good question: Why is a college degree no longer a near-guarantee of a desk job? In the past, fewer people went to college. The number of people going to college has increased, thereby lowering entry standards and decreasing the average value of a college degree... so you end up with sociology and English literature graduates landing jobs as cashiers and janitors.

 

[Scrubs101]

None of this will matter in 25-50years when 50% of jobs are eradicated due to automation and we all bow down to our robot overlords/the few select people profitting off of automated workers.

 

[deleted480308]

None of this will matter in 25-50years when 50% of jobs are eradicated due to automation and we all bow down to our robot overlords/the few select people profitting off of automated workers.

Which is something people have said for ever.....automation just frees workers to do a different task for others

 

[Scrubs101]

Which is something people have said for ever.....automation just frees workers to do a different task for others

Technology advances exponentially essentially, and will eventually replace most jobs. In the more tangable future jobs on the cutting block include transportation, delivery services, store clerks, and fast food services. Sure these may be mostly low education level jobs and you can argue that someone should market themselves better to get the jobs available, but what happens when you have a growing population competing for a shrinking job market? People who were born more unfortunate than others will be sliding in the dystopian future first, which will probably lead the issue to be ignored until its too late.

There’s programs coming out that can write other programs, AI being created, and many other impressive things in the works. What happens when we start running out of other tasks to do that are worthy of a living wage? Automation will eventually be more cost effective than paying anyone a living wage.

The free market has no solution to this issue that will eventually occur, the free market will favor those born to rich corporate owners who profit off of the automated workforce and will punish the vaste majority of people that will eventually become jobless.

I agree this has been said before and i could be way off on my timeline, like many other in the past were. But i do think its a valid concern for the future, eventually. I could also be shortsighted and not be able to fathom new classes of jobs being created in response to old jobs being wiped out. But when I hear even the tech industry isnt safe from the tech theyre creating (AI, programs programming new programs, robots fixing robots, etc), it creates some growing concerns for me.

 

[deleted480308]

Technology advances exponentially essentially, and will eventually replace most jobs. In the more tangable future jobs on the cutting block include transportation, delivery services, store clerks, and fast food services. Sure these may be mostly low education level jobs and you can argue that someone should market themselves better to get the jobs available, but what happens when you have a growing population competing for a shrinking job market? People who were born more unfortunate than others will be sliding in the dystopian future first, which will probably lead the issue to be ignored until its too late.

There’s programs coming out that can write other programs, AI being created, and many other impressive things in the works. What happens when we start running out of other tasks to do that are worthy of a living wage? Automation will eventually be more cost effective than paying anyone a living wage.

The free market has no solution to this issue that will eventually occur, the free market will favor those born to rich corporate owners who profit off of the automated workforce and will punish the vaste majority of people that will eventually become jobless.

I agree this has been said before and i could be way off on my timeline, like many other in the past were. But i do think its a valid concern for the future, eventually. I could also be shortsighted and not be able to fathom new classes of jobs being created in response to old jobs being wiped out. But when I hear even the tech industry isnt safe from the tech theyre creating (AI, programs programming new programs, robots fixing robots, etc), it creates some growing concerns for me.

I’m just not seeing it.

 

[Scrubs101]

I’m just not seeing it.

Fair enough, it is definitely still a “what if” situation. Just an issue I’m fascinated by

 

[Osminog]

Technology advances exponentially essentially, and will eventually replace most jobs. In the more tangable future jobs on the cutting block include transportation, delivery services, store clerks, and fast food services. Sure these may be mostly low education level jobs and you can argue that someone should market themselves better to get the jobs available, but what happens when you have a growing population competing for a shrinking job market? People who were born more unfortunate than others will be sliding in the dystopian future first, which will probably lead the issue to be ignored until its too late.

There’s programs coming out that can write other programs, AI being created, and many other impressive things in the works. What happens when we start running out of other tasks to do that are worthy of a living wage? Automation will eventually be more cost effective than paying anyone a living wage.

The free market has no solution to this issue that will eventually occur, the free market will favor those born to rich corporate owners who profit off of the automated workforce and will punish the vaste majority of people that will eventually become jobless.

I agree this has been said before and i could be way off on my timeline, like many other in the past were. But i do think its a valid concern for the future, eventually. I could also be shortsighted and not be able to fathom new classes of jobs being created in response to old jobs being wiped out. But when I hear even the tech industry isnt safe from the tech theyre creating (AI, programs programming new programs, robots fixing robots, etc), it creates some growing concerns for me.

Free market solution to automation: advances in gene editing (Crispr-Cas9) -- increasing average IQ of workforce so that people can work in high-order cognitive jobs, as opposed to menial ones. (This isn't a silly fantasy, by the way. It will likely be a reality by the time automation fully kicks in.)

In a world of automation, there will be just as many jobs available for people; the jobs will just be more complex and cognitively demanding.

 

[Scrubs101]

Free market solution to automation: advances in gene editing (Crispr-Cas9) -- increasing average IQ of workforce so that people can work in high-order cognitive jobs, as opposed to menial ones. (This isn't a silly fantasy, by the way. It will likely be a reality by the time automation fully kicks in.)

In a world of automation, there will be just as many jobs available for people; the jobs will just be more complex and cognitively demanding.

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.