Going to university has become a bit of a contentious issue in recent years, especially in countries like the US or the UK where students are graduating with large debt burdens and face uncertain job prospects depending on the subject they have chosen.
It would be interesting to know how this trends over time, what the first derivative of the IRR slope is. I am guessing that the IRR of a university education has declined over time and will continue to do so (possibly discontinuously if there is some kind of “tipping point” moment), as it seems impossible that universities can continue to charge ever increasing tuition in a world where pretty much everything you learn in undergrad (academically at least) can be learned for free on the Internet. The entire university business model is anachronistic, as it is premised on a privileged access to information that no longer exists. The main thing keeping it afloat is the credentialing aspect, but I think the wave of closures of small colleges we are seeing is a canary in a coal mine.
'all the benefits of getting a university education in terms of cognitive capacity and acuity (e.g. the ability to think logically and make a coherent argument'
?
I guess you don't want to spoil the reader's weekend? But i think a growing number of grads has serious problems with that list (and not just that list). And perhaps some of their teachers as well. Especially as education feminizes. The emphasis has moved from competition, curiousity and debate to levels-inflation, agreement and making everybody happy.
This s a very nteresting discussion about the changing nature of education with Luise Perry and behavioural scientist Cory Clark:
1) It were academics who built out renewable energy while completely ignoring the grid (and a lot more). Now project after project is being canceled - mostly without political discussions let alone repercussions since almost everybody visits the same church. Of course the same people made a nice buck for as long as it lasted.
2) I remember your post on academc economists as the only group in a 4 group scheme believing that all available information on a stock was already in the price and thus no further analysis (somethng changed?) was necessary.
Academics live in theory (hello abstraction) and they can typically get away with it since the consequences appear on someone else's plate. The greatest addition is of course the new German gender law that allows anybody to decide what their gender is. Unless war is declared. Thén their biological gender suddenly reigns supreme and the real men (typically not the academics) will be shipped to the front. (I think n this respect i can safely add the adjective 'real' to 'men' to produce some good old machismo).
(Comparable to 1940s US high school graduation levels)
# Peter Turchin's elite overproduction. Expect more political turmoil as these progressive darlings with high expectations, high anxiety (and high debt as they mostly chose high status universities) cannot find the status and income they long for.
In England repayments as % of earnings & Interest Rates vary depending on year the student started.
Various analyses suggest that most students should take the full loans and repay as above. In investment terms that may be best, but to avoid the Millstone it is better to pay in full when due. Either way I have sympathy for our young people who can be deceived in taking a course which does not lead to employment with incurrence of large Debt.
In the Dark Ages (1960s) we had a better system:
* far fewer went to a university
* Tuition fees paid by state plus maintenance grant (£360 pa)
* on graduation there were employment opportunities which used the skills and were interesting.
But no repayment by the student? There was: with higher rates of Income Tax I repaid the fees & grants many times over - and was pleased to do so.
The ethos was very different. Then HMGs created higher level jobs and enabled working class students to obtain them. Like many, I was the first in my family to go to a university, and I am grateful to those who enabled it. Today undergraduates are ‘customers’ for the university to make more money. We have lost family, community & society (“We”) and have atomized individuals.
It would be interesting to know how this trends over time, what the first derivative of the IRR slope is. I am guessing that the IRR of a university education has declined over time and will continue to do so (possibly discontinuously if there is some kind of “tipping point” moment), as it seems impossible that universities can continue to charge ever increasing tuition in a world where pretty much everything you learn in undergrad (academically at least) can be learned for free on the Internet. The entire university business model is anachronistic, as it is premised on a privileged access to information that no longer exists. The main thing keeping it afloat is the credentialing aspect, but I think the wave of closures of small colleges we are seeing is a canary in a coal mine.
Good morning Joachim,
once more, great stuff! 💪
That question sort of slept in the back of my head for a long time now.
I don’t know where and how you find these studies all the time but please keep it up.
Have a great weekend.
'all the benefits of getting a university education in terms of cognitive capacity and acuity (e.g. the ability to think logically and make a coherent argument'
?
I guess you don't want to spoil the reader's weekend? But i think a growing number of grads has serious problems with that list (and not just that list). And perhaps some of their teachers as well. Especially as education feminizes. The emphasis has moved from competition, curiousity and debate to levels-inflation, agreement and making everybody happy.
This s a very nteresting discussion about the changing nature of education with Luise Perry and behavioural scientist Cory Clark:
The Feminisation of Society - Cory Clark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GYtRo5Ggvo
As for academia and intelligence:
1) It were academics who built out renewable energy while completely ignoring the grid (and a lot more). Now project after project is being canceled - mostly without political discussions let alone repercussions since almost everybody visits the same church. Of course the same people made a nice buck for as long as it lasted.
2) I remember your post on academc economists as the only group in a 4 group scheme believing that all available information on a stock was already in the price and thus no further analysis (somethng changed?) was necessary.
3) Then there is this: 'Can we please stop selling these products'. https://klementoninvesting.substack.com/p/can-we-please-stop-selling-these
Me thinks its academics who buy that stuff.
Academics live in theory (hello abstraction) and they can typically get away with it since the consequences appear on someone else's plate. The greatest addition is of course the new German gender law that allows anybody to decide what their gender is. Unless war is declared. Thén their biological gender suddenly reigns supreme and the real men (typically not the academics) will be shipped to the front. (I think n this respect i can safely add the adjective 'real' to 'men' to produce some good old machismo).
4 And the big whammy:
'Meta-analysis: On average, undergraduate students' intelligence is merely average' https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14293/PR2199.000694.v1
(Comparable to 1940s US high school graduation levels)
# Peter Turchin's elite overproduction. Expect more political turmoil as these progressive darlings with high expectations, high anxiety (and high debt as they mostly chose high status universities) cannot find the status and income they long for.
In England repayments as % of earnings & Interest Rates vary depending on year the student started.
Various analyses suggest that most students should take the full loans and repay as above. In investment terms that may be best, but to avoid the Millstone it is better to pay in full when due. Either way I have sympathy for our young people who can be deceived in taking a course which does not lead to employment with incurrence of large Debt.
In the Dark Ages (1960s) we had a better system:
* far fewer went to a university
* Tuition fees paid by state plus maintenance grant (£360 pa)
* on graduation there were employment opportunities which used the skills and were interesting.
But no repayment by the student? There was: with higher rates of Income Tax I repaid the fees & grants many times over - and was pleased to do so.
The ethos was very different. Then HMGs created higher level jobs and enabled working class students to obtain them. Like many, I was the first in my family to go to a university, and I am grateful to those who enabled it. Today undergraduates are ‘customers’ for the university to make more money. We have lost family, community & society (“We”) and have atomized individuals.