Hacker News Reader

Comment by rayiner | Hacker News Reader

This is an excellent article, but may I suggest an alternative theory: the lack of emphasis on education in the U.S., at least historically, has been a sign of the strength of the U.S. economy, not a weakness of the culture. From World War II until the 1990's, Europe's economy was stagnant, while the American economy was dynamic.

From 1975 to 1985, Finland's annual GDP growth rate averaged from 0-2%, peaking at 4%. The U.S's averaged around 5%, peaking near 15% and nearing 10% several years. You can use this site to compare: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/finland/gdp-growth.

Fast economic growth means that education isn't as necessary to differentiate yourself and get a good job.

View on HN

> This is an excellent article, but may I suggest an alternative theory: the lack of emphasis on education in the U.S., at least historically, has been a sign of the strength of the U.S. economy, not a weakness of the culture.

A better theory might be a synthesis of those: it has been a sign of a weakness of the culture produced by the long-term strength of the economy (and which, itself, produces a prospective long-term weakness that threatens to counteract the long-term strength that produced it.)

This. A bunch of meatheads who don't feel compelled to be part of their kids education because they managed to buy homes and get solid jobs at 18 with a HS diploma is the legacy we need to correct. Fleeing to private schools or the best suburban districts has been the plan for a long time, which is nice for those who can afford it.

Meh. I think the "meatheads=people with only HS diplomas" equation is facile. If you're speaking specifically about blue-collar workers, it's still pretty insulting, but you could probably make a better case with that differentiation up front.

Practically speaking, there is nothing sacrosanct about a college degree. It is the educational system, with its bureaucratic filtering mechanisms, elitism, and status-consciousness that has turned it into a humanist sacrament. Education need not be formal for it to be both valuable to the student and the society he/she lives in.

I think by "meatheads" GP means people who undervalue education on the basis of "I succeeded without much of it" (failing to understand the contribution of a particular social context to that success) and thereby promote a culture which undermines the context which allowed them to succeed. (The specifical example he gave was people with only a HS diploma, not people without one, but I think that example was, in any case, illustrative of the problem, not an exhaustive equivalence; nor do I think "blue collar workers" is the right generalization from the example.)

There's plenty of people (blue collar and otherwise) that succeeded with only (or even without) a HS diploma that don't undervalue education, and they don't meet GP's description of the meatheads he is talking about.

Thanks, you're right. Note: I edited it for clarity on the point you mentioned.

Well it's not like American education teaches people about social context and how much it matters.

That would be Communist.

What does this even mean? Is this a Markov criticism, or do you really think US public schools don't teach kids about "social contexts"? From what I can tell, as the parent of a high schooler and a middle schooler, social contexts and algebra problems are the core of the curricula.

I'm a High School drop out with no college education. My family grew up in the inner city and was poor. I work for a large software company and have over 10 years experience in linux system administration. I still live in the inner city.

I know other people that are like me in many ways, having well paying jobs and still choosing to live in the city.

It's not everyone's plan.

I would go a layer deeper - the inescapable conclusion seems to be the focus on money itself. Without extreme discipline, these shallow economic metrics encourage myopic behaviors. And when these economic metrics become cultural pillars, welcome to Rome on the decline.

> the lack of emphasis on education in the U.S., at least historically, has been a sign of the strength of the U.S. economy, not a weakness of the culture

And when the country is suddenly not that attractive anymore for some reason, the whole thing collapses like a house of cards.

I'm not saying it's going to happen necessarily, I'm just saying the system is dangerously tuned to extreme levels of high-performance / high-risk.

When the engine in my Honda Civic will eventually fail (after many decades probably), it will just stop working. When the engine in an F1 car fails, it may blow up sending flames all over the vehicle and its occupant.

> The U.S's averaged around 5%, peaking near 15% and nearing 10% several years

You completely over-estimate the growth rate of US economy. You have probably read the raw GDP data that doesn't correct the growth rate with inflation which was very high in 1975-1985. (cf http://www.bea.gov/national/xls/gdpchg.xls )

We import the geniuses we need from abroad. Finland can't manage that.

We will be fine so long as we bring in the science and math majors we need to drive our economy. Our own kids can then be overpriced car salesman, barristas, part-time actors, aspiring playwrights, etc.

Thanks, that's a real comfort to those of us who wanted to be scientists.

You seem to labor under the misapprehension that this country should be run for the benefit of the people who already live here as well as their posterity. That's just crazy, as all enlightened thinkers know.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com