Rusty's Rants

I think the impeachment thing is less about overturning the 2016 election (although it’s also about that) but more about preventing a second Trump term, because they know when he no longer has to worry about being relected, he might go full bore on weeding out the partisans from the federal bureaucracy (FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, DEA, DOJ, etc) as well as go after the extreme leftists infesting our educational institutions.

I know I would push for cutting any and all federal aid to ANY college or public school system with a Social Justice curriculum until such time they remove that curriculum and any teacher involved in teaching “social justice” and or “intersectionality”, and place a severe restriction on federal loans (not an outright ban) on liberal arts degrees.

I know that’s what I would do in his place. The school systems would have 1 calendar year to comply before the cuts kicked in.

Any school systems that took longer would lose all federal funding until such time that their curriculum had been replaced with something emphasizing critical thought, scientific and mathematical facts, teaching a course on taxes, balancing budgets, civics, home economics, history, reading and writing the English language, sexual health starting at grade 9, and physical health.

Upon the adoption of such a curriculum, funding would be resumed. Also, increased funding for any school system that cut the pay rate of any and all administrative personnel and increased the pay of actual educators.

Also, kill the “no child left behind” thing.

1 Like

All children left behind!

Sounds better to me.

1 Like

Why this?

I know several folks with liberal arts degrees that are in management, law, medical school, I.T. and software development.

Seems like a weird thing to enforce government regulation on.

But do they also have degrees related to those fields?

My goal is to lessen the number of people who get worthless degrees (such as gender studies) and end up working at Starbucks and blaming the system rather than their own choices.

If liberal arts is not the correct term for what I am thinking of, my apologies.

No.

English, History, Philosophy… Those are the people I’ve worked with and known that have gone on to do great things.

Also, Uncle is a CPA. He has a masters of fine arts. Lulz.

Might as well throw aerospace engineering, computer science, mechanical engineering, architecture, business administration, marketing, biology, chemistry, mathematics, and physics in with worthless degrees, too.

How so? I would imagine aerospace engineers can actually get well paying jobs.

It’s one of the lowest growing industries

https://www.bls.gov/ooh/architecture-and-engineering/aerospace-engineers.htm

2% growth over the next ten years.

Dropped from 9% growth over the last ten years.

The industry is highly dependent on government assistance, something which everyone claims to want to reduce. It’s a fringe industry that other disciplines are able to compensate for.

Computer science is oversaturated, just like liberal arts and business degrees.

With undergrad math and science degrees, you’re only getting the base level of knowledge required to pursue that field. Unless you’re going to graduate school (another mound of loans necessary to pursue) there won’t be anything you can do with those degrees that you wouldn’t have been able to do with an English or History degree.

There are exceptions, of course. I know someone with an undergrad math degree that was invited to study abroad, was hired on as a junior researcher, and they paid for his Ph.D.

Still, he took out an ungodly amount of money to get that degree and was only making like $40k a year to pay off ~$180,000 in debt.

1 Like

engineering degrees - even aero - are still useful… there’s still at least a few years of focused stuff you need to learn to be an effective engineer. The issue is that the cost of such degrees is being driven up by other useless degrees clogging the system and all the subsidy trying to paper over this at a societal level…

CS has always been a tricky one because the reality of programming computers in the real world is that it is incredibly pragmatic. It is “engineering” not “science”. Some colleges figured this out a long time ago and focused on “compute engineering” rather than “computer science”, but not all of them did.

In my personal experience, I only really needed 3 focused CS classes to give me everything I needed to know to write software for a living - the rest of the things I learned were general engineering courses (high-level math, communications [as in radio, encoding, telecoms, etc], physics, chemistry)

  1. a focused language course that tied the language to its consequences on the CPU. Java isn’t right for this… you need to understand the physical memory implications

  2. a CPU design course ended up being a fantastic follow on to understanding the implications of your code and designing a compiler from the ground up. That wasn’t the intention of this masters level course, but it could be distilled into an undergrad course targeted at reinforcing #1

  3. A data structures class - I actually never took a “data structures” course, but work in #2 led to me purchasing a course book for one and learning on my own. It would have been easier had I taken that course.

3 Likes

Lack of industry growth is a concern, but not a show-stopper for employment… growth and demand are not the same thing. There are only a small % of people really qualified to operate at that level.

All of the above are not to say that English, Philosophy, History, shouldn’t exists as majors… The issue is the disservices colleges, highschools and employers are doing to eachother and themselves by driving "everyone"TM through this system as a proxy for employability.

Correlation!=Causation - yes college correlates with performance, but its a stupidly expensive test that could be accomplished much cheaper/faster.

2 Likes

I’m more thinking about things like “lesbian dance theory”, “Gender Studies”, etc.

Also I’m not saying outlaw those classes, just don’t subsidize the loans federally. If a bank wants to give someone a loan for it, fine, but not taxpayer money.

3 Likes

Still, I think Rustys point stands. If that type of knowledge was truly in demand he’d be getting paid more. I make nearly that amount as a drop out (and only racked up $10k in debt)

We need to stop teaching kids that college is necessary in the first place. I could have skipped the 3 years I spent in school and actually trained at what I do now and been far better off. If I had just followed your path of self teaching at 18, I could be a fuckin whiz by now. Instead I spent the years where I had the most opportune time to learn toiling in the educational system for no tradable knowledge

I also don’t think I would have missed any broader knowledge, many people I know that finished undergrad school didn’t really pay attention to much. If a person has any curiosity, they will accumulate knowledge naturally

1 Like

In fairness I do have a personal disdain for higher education due to the sheer amount of elitism involved with those institutions

PhD syndrome and all

Instead of teaching people about our past wrongs and idealized theories about how to right those wrongs, teach people the skills necessary to actually be marketable and our economic disparities can be solved

Especially when it comes to tech, going to school to have a prof tell you what books to purchase and read that were published years ago on a topic that evolves daily

CS I imagine is a bit more static but still

I like the old school apprentice model but I suppose that doesn’t really work at scale

That is the very thing I seek to end.

As well as stopping the student victims of those programs being turned into permanent cripples via curriculum brainwashing.

1 Like

The system is absolutely tuned to creating economic and intellectual cripples.

1 Like

Then why are we supporting it?

Mostly apathy and the rule of the apathetic, infantilized mob…

We allow it. We can stop… every election gives us an easy and peaceful way to do so, yet we fail.

1 Like

If many professors don’t like (and want to bring down) the current free market system, what incentive do they have to teach you to be successful in it.

Successful people aren’t normally revolutionaries.

2 Likes

Sounds to me like they should not receive any government funding at all.

Or maybe be labeled enemies of the state.