Well, I’m going to be traveling to St. Cloud MN. tomorrow morning … and don’t think I’ll be able to blog in the morning. So, I’m going to get my links out tonight … with more of my remarks this time. Let me know if you like the remarks or not.
- Ob-Wings is a liberal blog and I haven’t thought about it enough to figure out if I agree or disagrees with the main thrust of this piece. “Second, if colleges ultimately shift to an on-demand model, students will be missing what I consider to be the best parts of “college.” The aggregation of years of dining hall conversations, tavern debates, and dorm room bull sessions are my most valuable memories.” This makes no sense to me. I mean, I enjoyed bull sessions. But they weren’t in any sense better or ultimately more valuable than my classes. This must be the clearest demonstration that a comparing a non-science/non-technical higher education to a science/math/engineering education is like comparing apples and rocks.
- ACORN should in any reasonable universe, taking a fatal blow. My guess is that business as usual will continue unabated.
- Water we are told is the resource more threatened than petroleum, which itself might have passed the point of no return. I would like to note (brag?) that about a month ago we installed a dual/low flush toilet in our house (this one: Kohler K-3654-0).
- Three simple rules for Afghanistan. Mr Easterly has some questions. I’d add, another. Wasn’t David Petraeus sent to Afghanistan. He seemed to grok COIN. Where is he now?
- I don’t get it. This notion that the tea party is the “last gasp/stand” of the demographically waning rural/small town Christian white demographic seems to have
- So it’s over. If you didn’t lose your job you’ve figured that out … and are likely working a lot harder than you were a year ago. I’m not convinced that’s a bad thing (that is the working harder part). The unemployment will likely ease on its own over the next year. Too bad we wasted 800 billions on an unnecessary stimulus package that had to be passed in the dark of the night as an emergency measure.
- Mostly foreign policy links. I can’t figure Mr Obama’s foreign policy ideas out. He’s nasty to our allies, mushy to those who don’t like us, who still don’t like us, but now they don’t respect us either. And then there’s Honduras.
- Mr Boudreaux asks how Mr Obama can call the financial sector “reckless”. Well, many a drunk can recognize another man to be drunk. I don’t see how that’s a problem. Ms McArdle, however, has repeatedly pointed out regarding the prior crisis for any indication that this was a regulatory failure, for it seems pretty clear the regulators were egging the whole mortgage bubble on.
- A mother’s choice celebrated.
- I read that book some years ago (before I began blogging). It should be in the scholastic canon, by which I mean everybody should have read that book. Recalling the linked notes on the Dostoevsky/Tolstoy (false?) choice … I’d offer that this one (The Death of Ivan Ilyich) is superlative and short.
- Saving the whales … at what expense. Mr Kuznicki once offered that issues on the front burner don’t necessarily push others out of the limelight. That, in his case, even if SSM is on the front burner, we’ll all be attentive and paying attention to the myriad other issues. That there is no bandwidth problem for activism. This is, I think, clearly false as Mr Carter’s example demonstrates. Sudan/Darfur and the Congo is another example. Attention to the one, where the other is worse but not in the limelight … is a common problem. And yes, I realize that was not the main thrust of Mr Carter’s essay, but I’d offer it as a side matter.
“Second, if colleges ultimately shift to an on-demand model, students will be missing what I consider to be the best parts of “college.” The aggregation of years of dining hall conversations, tavern debates, and dorm room bull sessions are my most valuable memories.” This makes no sense to me. I mean, I enjoyed bull sessions. But they weren’t in any sense better or ultimately more valuable than my classes.
That’s actually a distinction I’ve often seen between liberals and conservatives, which is interesting because it’s not a political issue so it must come down to some difference in personality. You hypothesize that the difference is between “a non-science/non-technical higher education to a science/math/engineering education,” but I don’t think that’s right. After all, I was a CS major.
Now (some of) my classes were extremely valuable, obviously. I’m a professional computer programmer now. But as a human being, I’d say the friendships and conversations and intellectual explorations I had as a result of interacting with my peers were at least as important and possibly more important.
I think in general conservatives tend to look at college more as a vocational school while liberals look at it more as an important phase of life, like adolescence but with more freedom, (somewhat) more maturity, and less acne.
But the blogger in question isn’t even talking about importance! He’s talking about good memories. And I can tell you this, no CS class ranks in my top ten college memories. Or probably top hundred. And I really liked some of my CS classes.
ACORN should in any reasonable universe, taking a fatal blow. My guess is that business as usual will continue unabated.
Certainly some big changes should be made. That is absolutely disgraceful. Funny the double standard, though. Lynddie England engages in activities we know were approved at the highest levels, and she’s a bad apple. A volunteer for ACORN acts like a sociopath and ACORN itself should be dismantled.
# I don’t get it. This notion that the tea party is the “last gasp/stand” of the demographically waning rural/small town Christian white demographic seems to have
You trailed off there so I’m not sure where you were going, but I will say there seems to be some truth to this. Just a few years ago it was taken as a given that Democratic presidential nominees had to come from the South. The Republicans still had hopes of winning a significant share of the Hispanic vote. It wasn’t 100% clear who would win the fight for/against gay rights. There was some possibility at least that the GOP could make some strides even in the black community.
Now, they seem to have given up on appealing to anybody who doesn’t look like Joe the Plumber and talk like Sarah Palin, alienating not just virtually all non-whites, but even conservative and independent-minded intellectuals.
Who do you think Sarah Palin was referring to when she spoke of “real America?”
Mr Boudreaux asks how Mr Obama can call the financial sector “reckless”. Well, many a drunk can recognize another man to be drunk. I don’t see how that’s a problem. Ms McArdle, however, has repeatedly pointed out regarding the prior crisis for any indication that this was a regulatory failure, for it seems pretty clear the regulators were egging the whole mortgage bubble on.
Fundamental misunderstanding of what caused the crisis. The mortgage bubble was a factor, but not the (sufficient) cause. The cause was the financial sector’s reckless gambling on the mortgage bubble.
If you bet the house on a Cowboys’ victory next Sunday and the Cowboys lost, would you blame yourself or the Cowboys? Who was more reckless?
That there is no bandwidth problem for activism. This is, I think, clearly false
I agree with you on that.
JA,
I will admit that while I attended arguably the best university in the Midwest for social sciences, philosophy, and the like my course load was more akin to a CalTech/MIT background, i.e., very heavily math/physics. I think the biggest effect on my life and thinking derives from those classes in math and physics, where I learned how to study well, how to problem solve and so on.
I enjoyed bull sessions. I they didn’t change my life. Physics did. The blogger in question is putting the value of the “bull session” experience at a higher level than I do. That’s all I’m commenting on.
Wasn’t that the Army? What are you suggesting? The clear suggestion is that the bad elements of ACORN are more than just “one bad element.”
There is a problem with where you are going with this. Demographically the tea party protesters don’t identify with the GOP. So don’t equate the two.
So?
The blogger in question is putting the value of the “bull session” experience at a higher level than I do. That’s all I’m commenting on.
Okay, fair enough. YMMV, right?
Wasn’t that the Army? What are you suggesting? The clear suggestion is that the bad elements of ACORN are more than just “one bad element.”
England was hardly the only one… just the only scapegoat (with two of her “colleagues” iirc.) We’ve tortured hundreds and killed probably dozens of prisoners over the last 7-8 years. But it’s still just a few bad apples, apparently. Even though we know the administration explicitly authorized most of the techniques used.
There is a problem with where you are going with this. Demographically the tea party protesters don’t identify with the GOP. So don’t equate the two.
I don’t know to what extent that is true. Still, I was thinking of the large rally last weekend, not the tea parties per se. My mistake.
The cause was the financial sector’s reckless gambling on the mortgage bubble.
So?
What do you mean, “So?” So, that’s how Obama can call them reckless. And why the problem was not enough regulation.
JA,
And said authority has been retained by the current admin.
I’ve seen on more than two occaisons remarks indicating the tea partiers are fed up with government spending … and target both parties with that charge.
Yes, and my point was that Obama, who is also recklessly spending, can indeed make that charge. This is contrary to Mr Boudreaux’s contention. This is true on the grounds that one drunk can still call another drunk a drunk.
And said authority has been retained by the current admin.
And this is relevant… why?
I’ve seen on more than two occaisons remarks indicating the tea partiers are fed up with government spending … and target both parties with that charge.
Yeah, well every Democrat I know criticizes the Dems constantly. That doesn’t mean we aren’t Dems.
Yes, and my point was that Obama, who is also recklessly spending, can indeed make that charge. This is contrary to Mr Boudreaux’s contention. This is true on the grounds that one drunk can still call another drunk a drunk.
I disagree that Obama is spending recklessly but agree withe the notion that a drunk can call a drunk a drunk. (!)
ACORN should in any reasonable universe, taking a fatal blow. My guess is that business as usual will continue unabated.
Here is what I think ACORN’s CEO or President would say if he could really speak freely….note the below quotation marks are totally fictional but inspired by what I think is really the situation:
“Look, we are an organization that helps poor people and is staffed by poor people. We pay people min wage or less than that or nothing. For example, here we had an office that helped people get mortgages. We have next to no money so we can’t hire professionals and professionals for the most part won’t volunteer so we make do with what we can get. Bottom of the barrel people who we send through cheap training courses. The result is more often than not we end up helping people. The poor people who went to these loan counselors did get help getting mortgages. Yes some of them ended up getting foreclosed on. That’s a fact of life, the poor have high rates of dysfunction and high rates of plain old bad luck. But more than a few of them were able to break away from giving all their money to slum lords and building some equity of their own. Yes they may cut corners here and there, you do that when you live paycheck to paycheck. But at least they are moving up and out and we helped them when the banks, businesses and more ‘high brow’ charities didn’t want to touch them.”
“Now the Republicans hate us because we register lots of people to vote. We hire dregs who need cash. Sometimes they just goof off and submit a bunch of fake sheets in order to collect a paycheck. We try to manage but management is a skill and most people who are good at management demand a good salary which we cannot pay. So we make do with what we can, cheap bottom rate managers (even by the standards of the non-profit sector which is known for low pay scales to begin with). Sometimes we get robbed and sometimes they are nothing but scumbags but its what we can afford. For all the cries about fake voters, the fact is that not a single criminal charge has ever been mounted, only endless ‘investigations’ which we all know means they don’t want to admit they have no real evidence but don’t want to say it. The real reason we are hated is because we get a lot of poor people registered to vote. Legitimate people who have every legal right to vote and that means if we are taken out hundreds or thousands of people won’t be voting even though its their right. If we were registering fake voters it would be easy to stop us since fake voters can be taken off as soon as they are discovered. You can’t take off legitimate voters so they’d rather not see us canvassing the areas where poor people are trying to get them to register.”
This isn’t an excuse. At the end of the day you have to control your staff and take responsibility for them.
for it seems pretty clear the regulators were egging the whole mortgage bubble on
Putting the cart before the hoarse IMO.
This makes no sense to me. I mean, I enjoyed bull sessions. But they weren’t in any sense better or ultimately more valuable than my classes. This must be the clearest demonstration that a comparing a non-science/non-technical higher education to a science/math/engineering education is like comparing apples and rocks.
Two facts to consider:
One – Studies have shown that colleges seem to be associated with a real increase in lifetime earnings and elite colleges providing a bigger boost than non-elite ones. For example, a Harvard Education really does seem to boost your earning power quite a bit even when considering the cost.
Two – Somewhat ancedotally, when I used to tutor a lot I noticed that many colleges courses were the same. Calculus at a two year community college looked a lot like the calculus course at a better 4 yr school. In fact, the topics and textbooks were often the same. While an ‘elite’ school might do a slightly better job, I wouldn’t be surprised if much of the knowledge taught was more or less standard.
Put one together with two. Elite colleges are doing something to generate value but its not cramming more textbooks into their students heads. The answer I suspect is the extensive networking, alumni networks and social skills they impart….partially by all those ‘late night bull sessions’.
While I do think there’s differences in raw ‘textbook cramming’…. A Harvard Law Grad or Harvard Med probably does have some edge over a more common lawyer or doctor….I think there is a value to college over and above the simple academics. Which, I think, supports the argument that you aren’t going to get quite the same thing as a college education simply by mirroring all the credits a college requires or even by taking the whole and doing it in tiny pieces (say one or two courses a year for ten years).
Now costs have to be compared to benefits. Just because college has an added benefit in doing it ‘old school’ (full time for 4 straight years living on campus bull sessions and all) doesn’t mean that in all cases that benefit offsets the cost.