The Employment to Population Ratio

I'm sorry but it's just excuses...it took me 7 years to work my way through college paying cash and not using debt. Student loans are given to anyone who wants them! Join the military and get free education! Get a job at a company that provides tuition assistance.

 

Kids and people who focus on achieving more will achieve more...it is truly that simple...

 

Perhaps the US has a percentage of people who are simply incapable of achieving more...

 

"Americans are feckless compared to them there Europeans"? Weak as pish argument!

 

if you count $60,000 in free food, health care, housing, education, infrastructure, and military the liberal inequalities disappear. If anything America needs to cut way back on the freebies to encourage people to achieve equality on their own.

 

Useless ad hominen.

You insist on responding to comments without the exact quote in a forum that has a great number of respondents. And WE are supposed to know who you are responding to?

Yeah right - what planet do you live on ... ?

 

No, it aint.

Kids who do not have the proper education credentials end up cutting lawns for a living.

We must educate them in order to keep up with the world. China is now the Number One Economy in terms of GDP. Europe is second, and the US is third.

And both China and Europe graduate more postsecondary students annually than the does the US.

Which is how they will continue to eat our lunch ...

 

The above sounds pretty much like a defeatist attitude.
I disagree that 'ALL' people violate laws, perhaps true that many do.
When our Federal government works with a budget of about $4 trillion applied to a population of over 325 million people $10 million equates to just pennies per person, while the same $10 million would equate to more than $2.50 per person applied to Oklahoma State government spending, and the amount per person would quickly rise as applied to local government spending.
What I'm trying to make apparent is that people are much more likely to make demands upon their governments excessive/wasteful spending when the costs are applied directly to them than they are upon the Federal government who by deficit spending can pass the costs off to future generations.
Is it 'FAIR' for future generations to be held liable for the inequities of those living today?

Something could be done, should we?

I'm sure there are, but how many are not being terminated who should be?
I disagree there should be a win-win solution in cases of fraud and corruption; in such instances the result should be a win-lose.

 

Again with the dishonesty. Here is the quote you have ignored twice now:

Loans aren't working at all. We're seeing worsening factors regarding the widening participation agenda (which will help maintain inefficient inequalities). Particular disciplines are seeing significant negative consequences (such as nursing suffering from the recent shift to loans). Student debt is over £100 billion (average is around £60,000 per graduate). Interest charges are 6%, considerably higher than the base rate. When the salary threshold for repayment is met, effective marginal tax rates increase to over 40%. The system couldn't be more disastrous!

 

"Ignore?" How was I supposed to go back in a full thread and find it? How am I supposed to know that you are directing a post to me if you do not copy my own? Duhhhhhh.

PS: So change the system! Lotsa luck on that one ...

 

Again with the trolling. You made an accusation which was false. I demonstrated that twice via the quote.

Please construct economic comment on an economics subforum, using that to avoid obvious trolling designed only to try and provoke response.

 

state college education used to be cheap in America. You could pay for it with a good summer job. now its 10 times more expensive because we have 10 times more socialism or 10 times more people on the dole. Its no mystery why East Germany was so poor and West Germany so rich.

 

Libcommies deal only in class warfare, cultural marxism, or identity politics. They define a class, but them on the dole and keep them there to subversively harvest votes; so of course there is little class mobility when you actively prevent it.

 

And another "free-troller" goes on Ignore ...

 

Comparing serves no purpose to solve anything? There is a group of Americans, just as there are the same groups across the world, who operate in the lower rungs of the economy. There are myriad reasons for this group. And IMO none of these reasons can be solved and forced. It's nothing more than human traits and/or behaviors. Some will achieve their potential and some will not. It has been this way since the beginning of humans and will remain this way! There are humans from the US and around the world who push themselves out of horrific conditions to achieve their potential so obviously it can be done. For those with potential, what's missing is a determined will to invest the time, and money, to make better decisions to achieve more. For many others they simply do not possess the mental and physical factors needed. As outsiders it's easy for us to judge these people as lazy, worthless, scum, bums, etc. and to politicize the issue, but at the end of every day since the beginning of time and into the future these people simply are what they are. And yes, many of them will be a burden on society. And they are forever relegated to the lower rungs of the economy. If there was a solution to this it would have been done 100 or 50 or 25 or 10 years ago. Of all places in the world, the US provides the tools to achieve more, but without the will of the people to achieve more, the tools go unused...

 

In the US we have free public education...why do you suppose 50% of our kids fail the public school system?

 

My comments are not defeatist...I try to remain in reality as much as possible.

35,000 people are killed every year in traffic accidents with most caused by SPEED...all we need to do is lower the speeds to save thousands of lives. It can be done but we'll never do it.

Anytime you think win-lose you will fail...

 

Well, that too sounds defeatist.
I'm not sure how we got on traffic accidents and speed, but government not only sets speed limits but also regulates the car industry in various ways. In addition to fuel efficiency government could mandate a maximum speed cars produced and sold in the U.S. could achieve, but then we would still have accidents and deaths but only at lower speeds. Drive defensively.

There are many instances which result in a win for one and a loss for another. Back to the thread topic, there are 5 jobs available and 10 applicants. the 5 persons hired have won and the remaining 5 have lost and must continue to seek employment. Sometimes you have to accept a loss, but that doesn't mean you should give up.

 

Of course it does. It provides the mechanism to understand extent of mobility. If opportunities are available, particularly given the effects of immigration, mobility rates would be higher. That the US has such low social mobility rates informs us that the American Dream is myth-driven.

But, as I've already mentioned, the US has a documented underclass. This makes it distinct from a lot of other Western economies. Typically we see a lot of movement lower down the distribution (e.g. as people move in and out of employment). That the US has a significant proportion of the population which exhibits no upward mobility makes it peculiar.

Evidence shows otherwise. The US isn't a meritocracy. Folk don't typically succeed, or fail, because of work ethic. It is luck and the negative effects of intergenerational inequality

 

Germany has tuition fee free education. That doesn't reflect socialism mind you. Free tertiary education is not a sufficient criteria for socialism. Indeed, using neoclassical economics, it can be simply described as a merit good. To fail to subsidise is therefore, without doubt, economic inefficient. Of course, once we factor in the human capital model we can appreciate that higher investment- ceteris paribus- will come from youngsters from richer background. Free education is therefore a 'must' to promote equality of opportunity and enjoy the gains from a relative shift towards meritocracy.

 

if education is free for those who receive it then the people who pay for it are not free. Better for the people who benefit most from a product or service pay for it. That way you maximize efficiency and a societies standard of living. Now you can understand why West Germany did better than East Germany. Notice how easy it is to defeat a liberal?

 

Basic economic error. Education is a merit good which creates social benefits for others. Reliance on the price mechanism is certainly inefficient.

 

that is the attitude that enabled the USSR and Red China to slowly starve 120 million human souls to death. When everyone is looking for a dole who is working?

 

but of course you have to also provide food clothing shelter transportation medical etc so that one can be a properly prepared student-right? Now can you see why socialism slowly starved 120 million to death?

 

You continue to make ludicrous comment that only demonstrate ignorance of basic economics. The idea that neoclassical economics, and that's all I've mentioned, has anything to do with dictatorship and state capitalism is not credible. Why don't you understand simple economics such as the distinction between private benefits and social benefits?