Hacker News Reader

Comment by bakuninsbart | Hacker News Reader

Well, our life expectancy is so high by now that I think the purpose of young people (and I include people in their 20s here) is to become well-rounded people and citizens. Going travelling for a year or two, working odd jobs, taking chances in a low probability career or opportunity, and yes, also studying for the purpose of pure education are all things young people should be encouraged to do.

I do however completely agree that going into deep debt to do just that is a bad idea, but that's more of a societal problem in the US. Most rich countries heavily subsidize young people's education, including travel and service.

Luxembourg is an example of doing this incredibly well: most young people I met there were really well adjusted, broadly educated, and also quite happy.

View on HN

Luxembourg is a ridiculous example...

I'm from Europe as well, mid 30s, so my friends/peers have no significant college debt. Somehow I grew up with people who all went to art school (mom pushed me in that direction early on) - and all my childhood friends that went to art school are now in entry level/low paid jobs with low job ambitions, limited options in life because of income, no long term relationships, no children.

Subjectively I'm not seeing the "complete people" produced by this system. Compared to my friends that only finished high school they may have more complex opinions, but the reality is they are still in dead end situations - I would not call them any more "complete" personalities. Both end up wasting time on "moms couch" and smoking weed, just discussing different topics.

Life expectancy may have extended (although that's average so it's kind of a moot point I'd argue), but prime age for having children has not.

Having children later on in life not only increases pregnancy risks but also gives you more childbirth defects. Objectively the modern "waste 20s to jump around and party" and "spend your 20s/30s building a career" is leading to a societal collapse.

IMO big countries should not be taking policy/lifestyle queues from a country with 700,000 people with an economy made up of EU transfer pricing schemes/tax haven machinations.

Cues. But I would t take their queues, either.

>>>>Most rich countries heavily subsidize young people's education, including travel and service.

That's partially true. The reality is that most rich countries (That we are talking about) purposefully make young kids stay out of the workforce, unemployable, until their very late 20s pursuing "well rounded people" education that is not useful and leads nowhere but extended unemployment. They have even culturally codified some of this (see: erasmus) This is how they keep unemployment stats low, said countries classified every u-26 as out of the workforce and not looking for work.

In contrast, the US is at least minting some U-21's that end up becoming millionaires, plus by the time most american grads hit their 30's , the majority have a very upward career trajectory, even bought 1-2 large assets.

Meanwhile, their economic peers outside of the US are still at their first job, trying to make ends meet. They could only dream of buying an apt, let alone a house.

You can have differing opinions on what this extended education model provides, whether its more/less useful vs USA, and what it means for social cohesion and peace (by keeping a very large contingent of young kids hooked education freebies). However, it is not up for debate that the limited economic opportunities connected to extended education are severely diminishing the economic prospects of those young kids

Luxembourg's GDP per capita is close to twice that of the United States. I don't think the comparison the fair given how rich they are.

Luxembourg is a strange example but there are a lot of countries in Europe that invest in education. Germany has essentially free college and university education for everyone.

'Everyone'?

Perhaps if the US was Germany levels of selective in University admittance and Germany levels of efficient in the administration of the various degree paths, costs in the US would look more like Germany.

There are more options in the US, all those choices have costs that make the US more expensive.

>if the US was Germany levels of selective in University admittance

I only ever seen people bring up the cost of university in Europe such as Germany's free system but never the other differences. I'm beginning to think most people only know about the cost difference and don't realize there are many other differences, and by the time someone points out those differences (and how they relate to cost) the person has already formed an opinion which disagrees with the new information and thus choose to ignore it.

What are the differences then? I literally went to university in Germany and don't know what these significant differences are.

How were you selected for admittance? How many of your cohort had to complete remedial math and German before being able to perform the math and German for their degree program? How much support was provided for those struggling academicly? What's the administrator/faculty ratio at your university? How many of the administrators have diversity, equity or inclusion or similar in their title? How many different courses could you use to fulfill the same requirement of your degree program?

How long was the leisure river constructed in the shape of the University's initials? This one is kind of egregious, but most will have an expensive stupid something.

Human capital is a big difference between Germany and the US. My wife attended medical school in Germany. Her year, veterinary was more competitive due to higher demand. If you select for the top n% and demand excellence lots of things are easier and cheaper.

What was the dropout rate from your program?

Lots of money is flushed down the toilet in the US, but the university already got paid so there's not much incentive. Much of the noise around affordability still ensures the university gets paid.

Maybe just because it was a competitive STEM program, but nothing you mentioned differed from American university programs, with the possible exception of diversity requirements which I was privileged enough to not notice. The application was more straightforward than for American schools, and because it was a competitive applied math degree, no remedial math was given. I also don't think much help would much have been given if I had say failed quals in an American university. Requirements were a little obnoxious but they're being improved and the year after me has a much easier time.

No idea what a leisure river is.

There are different programs in the US as well, including competitive ones which will cover the full cost of college (some do have income limits, but they are generally quite high). Generally when we are talking college costs we aren't talking about the subset of competitive programs in the US that don't have a cost.

For example of the difference, look at the per capital rate of school students going to university in both countries. It can be a bit messy to compare because you need to break down different routes. University not being the same as trade school which is not the same as apprenticing, though sometimes these will be lumped together in different ways. Last time I looked it up the acceptance criteria to get into university in Germany was stricter than the US. Not necessarily if you are looking at the really good schools, but those often have scholarships that work on a combination of academics and need based, but for a degree in general.

There is also the issue of in state vs out of state in the US, where an out of state can be double or more the price compared to instate. Rarely is out of state a requirement, it is a personal preference and one that costs greatly if the difference isn't covered by a scholarship.

When talking about 'free' university in Germany, they're competitive in an academic meritocratic sense. Spaces are limited and access to programs is competitive based on demand. Applicants are excluded based on their performance.

I suspect if the US followed a similar path, we woukd see similar results. I've not heard calls to make US admission more selective or academicly rigorous.

https://www.wbrz.com/news/lsu-promotes-newly-opened-leisure-...

Remedial math (algebra) is often required even for the cohort getting useless degrees. Which program / university would admit this cohort in Germany? In the US everyone who applies will be admitted somewhere. Pushing this cohort through their program adds costs that everyone bears.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinesimon/2017/09/05/bureau...

germany's admission system would be quite impossible in america's civil rights law.

Can you explain? I don't know much about their admission system.

Germany basically only requires a high school degree for most University degrees. Physics? Just sign up. Computer Science? Just sign up. History ? Just sign up.

Medicine, Psychology and the like have hard requirements on grades. Sometimes these requirements are so absurd that they are considered unconstitutional. But most things are both for free and easy to get into.

I would rather use my long life expectancy to build a passive income through investments and retire for several decades. Something about having a longer life expectancy requiring a longer time in the workforce rubs me the wrong way.

> Luxembourg

> really well adjusted, broadly educated, and also quite happy

Being obscenely rich helps.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com