The obvious solution is to own your decisions and start doing what you think is right for you, but it's far easier said than done to step out from under the expectations you've been saddled with your entire life.
Certainly a six-figure salary is not necessary for happiness, but if you find yourself working long hours to make rent in some midwestern town it's going to cut into your opportunities for self-discovery and joy. And if you got wise a bit too late, after picking up federal student loans, you might well find that your dream career is genuinely off the table. (Found your true calling as a firefighter? Better keep up on those loans or you'll lose your license.)
It seems like we've created a system where the straight-and-narrow is increasingly narrow, and the cliffs around it are increasingly high. It's still worth finding one's own path, but in both social and purely-practical terms it's gotten steadily harder.
On the one hand yes, on the other hand mobility at every level has never been greater, even if still not at the optimal level.
Are we maybe talking about different forms of mobility?
From Wikipedia:
"In recent years, several studies have found that vertical intergenerational mobility is lower in the US than in some European countries.[1] US social mobility has either remained unchanged or decreased since the 1970s.[2]"
"A study published in 2008 showed that economic mobility in the U.S. increased from 1950 to 1980, but has declined sharply since 1980.[3]"
"A 2013 Brookings Institution study found income inequality was increasing and becoming more permanent, sharply reducing social mobility.[4]"
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/us/harder-for-americans-t...
[2] http://www.economist.com/node/3518560?story_id=3518560
[3] http://jhr.uwpress.org/content/43/1/139.refs
[4] http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/bpea/latest-conferen...
I understand its natural for students to pep talk their peers to study more, but I don't understand why controversial suggestions are being dismissed. I almost feel like these calls for help are just seeking validation to continue hoop jumping instead of actually finding alternative ways to fix the root cause. It makes me sad to think that my peers don't think they are ready for working life until they graduate, whilst I would, as an employer, much rather hire someone capable of self-inspection and listening of people with differentiating viewpoints.
The computer science department and the careers office jointly brought in some startup founders to talk about founding or joining startups and take questions; it was really quite a good idea. Someone asked about degrees and majors - do you need a Master's, which degrees are 'relevant', and so on. The first few founders hemmed and hawed, said "technical skills from any degree" and "undergrad is enough" and so on.
The last founder didn't play the game. His answer was: "I'm not worried about your name on a sheet of paper. If you're good at what you do, I'll hire you."
Cue nervous laughter from the moderator, and a gentle prompt: "but of course it's worth finishing up school for the people who are already here, those are valuable skills, right?"
Founder: "I guess I was unclear. If you drop out today, I will hire you. I recommend it."
The next year that panel wasn't repeated.
This is going to be very anecdotal, but that merit is even more run by buzzwords than qualitative inspection of one's skills compared to a degree. I had the privilege to be employed as 20-year old in Silicon Valley as a foreigner, but I did not find myself doing more challenging work than I had before. However, namedropping Silicon Valley on my CV had huge implications back in my home country once I returned (because ironically I did not have a degree). The interesting part is that not a single workplace back in my home country has yet conducted a technical review for me, yet I have been given offer letters.
What I am saying is that while some people feel like a BSc is a dumb obligation, the path of having a prestigious CV isn't much better. Instead, if you happen to have one, the chances are that some CV buzzwords are regarded as, as you said about degrees:
> considered a signifier of some minimal level of skill and will of course be one of the primary ways that applicants are evaluated
Yet I find this alarmingly false. This has caused me to stray away of those companies, as I don't really want to be employed somewhere where people are hired like this either.
What made it memorable for me was mostly watching people freeze up and basically try to avoid the suggestion. I certainly think there are people for whom dropping out of college to work at a startup is sensible, and yet no one was going to even discuss the merits of the comment.
Much like companies asking for 10 years of Rust experience, from what I've seen qualifications tend to matter less as you get further along in your career.
As I'm not a parent, I have no idea how the modern child is raised or how the modern parent is "expected" to raise their kid, but I get the feeling that, on the whole, creativity and exploration aren't encouraged in young children; rather their lives revolve around structured activities where the agenda is decided ahead of time for them. That's a great way to keep kids busy, but I'm not sure if or how it develops their brains and senses of independence... But I have no actual proof of that claim, just anecdotal evidence from seeing my aunt and grandparents raise my younger cousins.
Lucky ones. Here in Russia you are expected to have university diploma by 21-22, otherwise you are close to being treated as subhuman, lol.
As a result - huge paint for many people, depreciation of higher education etc.
I know Japan still has "simultaneous hiring", where a whole graduating class gets hired at once, and if you don't have a degree and a job on schedule you either avoid graduating or risk being marginalized. Compared to something like that, the US is still admirably willing to let people take time off school, drop out, or just spend some time unemployed after graduating.