Why doesn't the government subsidize useful majors? I keep hearing about this engineering/science/math crisis that's on its way, but we're still offering the same federal loan rates for academic pursuits that aren't exactly critical to national security, like sculpture and gender studies. I'm sure that if this was designed right, then this coming scientific crisis would be mitigated.
If it was super cheap to get a degree in the above 3 fields, and/or much more expensive to borrow money to major in dance, etc (loans at prime + 4.3% [that's about 3-4 times the present rate]) we would have many more engineers, etc. It makes me sick to think taxpayer dollars are being spent so people can go to Naropa and get a degree in Transcendental Buddhism or some 200 person "Bible college", when they could be spent inducing someone to go into a field that actually matters**.
I don't want to live in a world where the U.S. is the second banana. Who would have thought that stickin' it to hippies was an important part of the answer? Who says there aren't any win-win solutions?
*Maybe they have. I don't have lexis-nexus.
** No, smarty pants, I do still think the Bible is awesome, but most "Bible colleges" are a freaking sham.
Also: have either Miguel or I violated some kind of blogging rule by just writing original material with no hyperlinks?
-paul 10:23 EST |