Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 11596823)

I don't have an issue with free education. I approve. I don't approve of people expecting the state (i.e. other people) to subsidize their future superior income.

Originally Posted by dbd33 (Post 11596854)

The acquistion of any skill may stimulate intellectual curiousity so being able to write is of potential benefit there. The lack of skills commonly held is a social disadvantage so illiteracy, albeit in the limited sense of not being able to read or write documents created by hand, is a disadvantage there. The presumption that children need not be able to deal with traditional written forms because they'll always have an electronic device to hand and will have no interest in source documents seems to me presumptuous; what if the child wants to be an archivist?

My analogy remains the use of a knife and fork; it's not strictly necessary to be familiar with that technology but I'd certainly prefer my children to have mastered it; even if they're living in Canada. I don't think anything is lost by being able to use real cutlery as well as a spork or chopsticks and I don't think any skill or knowledge need be sacrificed in order to learn to write.

Originally Posted by MarkG (Post 11596812)

So has America. Last I looked, student loans were the biggest single source of new credit in the US economy, which is why the government keep pushing kids to borrow lots of money to blow on a Tarantino Studies degree. Keeps them off the unemployment figures, too.

Originally Posted by ExKiwilass (Post 11596954)

I don't think it's a big deal. Someone could create a "reading cursive" course aimed at Archivists if it's needed. Maybe my kid could do that.

Originally Posted by Oink (Post 11596957)

She'll be a teacher, nurse or secretary/pa, its all just an extension of the childcare/family protocol.

Originally Posted by Jericho79 (Post 11596956)

No, this is not what I meant. In Germany, Finland, and a few others, university education is now tuition fee free.
You, or I, or anyone, pretty much, can study for free.

Student loans are not providing free education.

Originally Posted by Jericho79 (Post 11596972)

You're talking to a kiwi. University education in New Zealand doesnt extend much further than chasing sheep.

Originally Posted by Oink (Post 11596957)

She'll be a teacher, nurse or secretary/pa, its all just an extension of the childcare/family protocol.

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian (Post 11596979)

So, do you prefer it that those that choose work (plumbers, electricians, etc.) over obtaining a degree pay for others to obtain a degree so that they can go on to earn far more? How many degrees should be free? The first one, the second one, etc?

A lawyer I used to work with has written this on her profile: [She has a] Master of Arts in English Literature. The focus of her Master's thesis was gender constructions and subjectivity in sonnet sequences written during the Renaissance period.

Should taxpayers have paid the tuition for such a course?

Originally Posted by Jericho79 (Post 11596953)

You approve of free education, but dont want the state to pay??
So who pays?

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 11597018)

Education free (paid by state).

Remedial job training free (paid by state).

Job training masquerading as higher education for high earning careers to be paid for by the trainee/employer/whoever, but not the state

Originally Posted by ExKiwilass (Post 11597002)

ha, she's actually thinking about being a midwife.

Originally Posted by Oink (Post 11597028)

My comment was rather tounge-in-cheek. The NA economy will need a lot more women coders than are being produced at the moment. :unsure:

Originally Posted by Jericho79 (Post 11597013)

There are two ways to look at this.
1) The person who goes on to university can expect to earn more money, so they should be expected to pay for it. Personally, I think this is the short sighted view.
2) Compare any two countries where there is significant disparity over the % of people with university education. There is empirical evidence to show that country A (with more graduates) has a higher standard of living, collects more taxes, has a stronger/more stable economy, scores higher in qualify of life index, etc, etc.
A country benefits by having a better educated population, and should treat education as an investment in its own future.