Leftists overwhelmingly come from the strata with inflated and hollow educational credentials who are paid more than they're worth. They like big government because it creates endless jobs for their pseudo expert class. So it's not surprising at all that they're not receptive to your message.
You seem to take their claims of being champions of the less privileged and less educated at face value. Didn't public choice theory teach us not to do that?
At very least, the sort of Leftists who post on Substack and go on podcasts tend to fall into the "inflated credentials/overpaid" category. There are other left-leaning (or at least Democrat-voting, which is not the same thing) demographics that are much less educated, but they don't engage much in the Substack/podcast "marketplace of ideas."
I sent this to my wife who went to Berkeley MBA (and is less woke than most of her classmates) and even after trying to explain it at length she persisted in framing it as (paraphrasing her) "yet another privileged white guy engaging in unjustifiable self-pity" and "an austerity solution in search of a problem -- barely half of middle aged people have a 2-year degree or higher -- what arms race?" and "education for me but not for thee -- you're a hypocrite if you want all the advantages of higher education for your own kids but other people's kids" and "have you ever even talked to working class people? What bias against skipping college?" and "vocational programs get big subsidies too, so there's no problem with people being diverted from that".
I was surprised by #6. From Grok: “While enforcement may be inconsistent, the risk of litigation isn’t trivial. A single successful disparate impact lawsuit can cost millions in damages and legal fees, plus reputational harm. For example, in 1997, the New York City Police Department settled a lawsuit for $15 million over a discriminatory entrance exam.” This is an extract. In the full response, Grok does acknowledge that the point doesn’t lack merit: https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5LWNvcHk%3D_e017c481-1578-4628-b17f-28f4bb17837e
You say that a lot of education is just "hoop jumping." On a rational standard, that's true. But isn't lots of this hoop-jumping "meaningful" if you want to acquiire leftist credentials? They use the hoops to vet their membership and exclude those who refuse to jump through the hoops. Agree? Therefore, we should expect a bias toward "formal education" from the left. The system benefits them, so why should they acknowledge your criticisms?
Number 4 bullet point is the interesting one. For decades Econ textbooks have “shown” that education is under-provided. Therefore deserving of a subsidy…. Maybe it deserves to lose its tax exempt status?
Leftists overwhelmingly come from the strata with inflated and hollow educational credentials who are paid more than they're worth. They like big government because it creates endless jobs for their pseudo expert class. So it's not surprising at all that they're not receptive to your message.
You seem to take their claims of being champions of the less privileged and less educated at face value. Didn't public choice theory teach us not to do that?
At very least, the sort of Leftists who post on Substack and go on podcasts tend to fall into the "inflated credentials/overpaid" category. There are other left-leaning (or at least Democrat-voting, which is not the same thing) demographics that are much less educated, but they don't engage much in the Substack/podcast "marketplace of ideas."
I sent this to my wife who went to Berkeley MBA (and is less woke than most of her classmates) and even after trying to explain it at length she persisted in framing it as (paraphrasing her) "yet another privileged white guy engaging in unjustifiable self-pity" and "an austerity solution in search of a problem -- barely half of middle aged people have a 2-year degree or higher -- what arms race?" and "education for me but not for thee -- you're a hypocrite if you want all the advantages of higher education for your own kids but other people's kids" and "have you ever even talked to working class people? What bias against skipping college?" and "vocational programs get big subsidies too, so there's no problem with people being diverted from that".
Formal education produces leftists. Anything that helps your political tribe increase its numbers is going to be something you support.
I was surprised by #6. From Grok: “While enforcement may be inconsistent, the risk of litigation isn’t trivial. A single successful disparate impact lawsuit can cost millions in damages and legal fees, plus reputational harm. For example, in 1997, the New York City Police Department settled a lawsuit for $15 million over a discriminatory entrance exam.” This is an extract. In the full response, Grok does acknowledge that the point doesn’t lack merit: https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5LWNvcHk%3D_e017c481-1578-4628-b17f-28f4bb17837e
You say that a lot of education is just "hoop jumping." On a rational standard, that's true. But isn't lots of this hoop-jumping "meaningful" if you want to acquiire leftist credentials? They use the hoops to vet their membership and exclude those who refuse to jump through the hoops. Agree? Therefore, we should expect a bias toward "formal education" from the left. The system benefits them, so why should they acknowledge your criticisms?
What would be the effect of defunding education on “social mobility”, assuming everything else in our culture remains the same?
Number 4 bullet point is the interesting one. For decades Econ textbooks have “shown” that education is under-provided. Therefore deserving of a subsidy…. Maybe it deserves to lose its tax exempt status?
Where can we find the book?