"Equal Opportunity, Our National Myth" NY Times article by economist Joseph Stiglitz

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,083
Reputation
4,736
Daps
67,019
Im really considering educating my boys for college in the West Indies or overseas somewhere....

Well I do have friends that went to college in England and Scotland. But I've met too many people from foreign countries that studied in the US (including college friends) and they tell me about how at the university level we still reign supreme by and large. I mean you have great schools all over the world, but no other country has such a large concentration of them. Those schools get the best international professors and domestic professors so I don't know if it's necessary unless you want the experience of studying in another part of the world. I mean even Stilgitz teaches at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs.

That's one of the reasons why I think our policy of only giving individuals who study in the US those 6 years to stay here until they finish their studies really stupid. I think if they come here and get an American degree, they should be able to stay here and benefit the US economy. We're essentially subsidizing our competition.
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,021
Reputation
3,755
Daps
105,073
Reppin
Detroit
Well I do have friends that went to college in England and Scotland. But I've met too many people from foreign countries that studied in the US (including college friends) and they tell me about how at the university level we still reign supreme by and large. I mean you have great schools all over the world, but no other country has such a large concentration of them. Those schools get the best international professors and domestic professors so I don't know if it's necessary unless you want the experience of studying in another part of the world. I mean even Stilgitz teaches at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs.

That's one of the reasons why I think our policy of only giving individuals who study in the US those 6 years to stay here until they finish their studies really stupid. I think if they come here and get an American degree, they should be able to stay here and benefit the US economy. We're essentially subsidizing our competition.

I guess the question is whether you think it would actually benefit the American economy to have them stay as long as they want. You could argue that there already aren't enough jobs for college grads as it is, and having international students to compete with will just make things even tougher for young grads (who are already being hammered by the job market as it is).

But then again, in the long term it would of course benefit the economy to keep talent here. :manny:
 
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
11,108
Reputation
-2,516
Daps
11,865
Reppin
NULL
commendable article with a message that resonates with anyone distressed by the growing divide between the "haves" and "have nots," but it misses the deliberate nature of this inequality, treating it as if it were an economic problem rather than a racial one.
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
88,218
Reputation
3,616
Daps
157,272
Reppin
Brooklyn
Well I do have friends that went to college in England and Scotland. But I've met too many people from foreign countries that studied in the US (including college friends) and they tell me about how at the university level we still reign supreme by and large. I mean you have great schools all over the world, but no other country has such a large concentration of them. Those schools get the best international professors and domestic professors so I don't know if it's necessary unless you want the experience of studying in another part of the world. I mean even Stilgitz teaches at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs.

That's one of the reasons why I think our policy of only giving individuals who study in the US those 6 years to stay here until they finish their studies really stupid. I think if they come here and get an American degree, they should be able to stay here and benefit the US economy. We're essentially subsidizing our competition.

Yeah a lot of people I know have gotten their graduate degrees in the US it's a real notch under your belt for high level positions abroad. If I could do it again I'd get a bachelors over seas it's pretty affordable if you have the tools. Subsidizing our competition... the people I've known, pay full tuition. We're a global community man!
 

NYC Rebel

...on the otherside of the pond
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
67,962
Reputation
10,404
Daps
229,410
commendable article with a message that resonates with anyone distressed by the growing divide between the "haves" and "have nots," but it misses the deliberate nature of this inequality, treating it as if it were an economic problem rather than a racial one.
I was a bit bothered how he quickly glossed over that.
 

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
79,933
Reputation
14,208
Daps
190,269
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
Basically, material inequality is caused by group closure to maintain monopolistic advantages. Once a social group manages to monopolize occupations of the highest ranks in society, then they acquire differential qualities and other experiences that make them seem exclusively fit for higher positions. It also makes those who do not acquire these characteristics appears to be intrinsically unfit for these positions.

This is what has happened and has continued to proliferate white hegemony because even if we say let those most qualified sit in those positions, the screening will always bring about the same people who are of the group that has monopolized a certain industry or bracket and who passes that down to others of their group. Thus, an innocuous policy has bad results because of the original inequality. One of the arguments for affirmative action is that you would put women and people of color into those circles and widen that group and eventually those individuals would pay it forward.
Interesting, because Asians outpacing "whites" was the first thing that came to mind. They're cleaning in the academic world, especially in fields with above average income...

But the fear is that to break into such circles, individuals will be required to shed the characteristics of their original group and will fail to still feel connected. To quote Nas, "A lawyer left the hood, he never looked back."
sad but true

Im really considering educating my boys for college in the West Indies or overseas somewhere....

:youngsabo:
 

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,083
Reputation
4,736
Daps
67,019
Yeah a lot of people I know have gotten their graduate degrees in the US it's a real notch under your belt for high level positions abroad. If I could do it again I'd get a bachelors over seas it's pretty affordable if you have the tools. Subsidizing our competition... the people I've known, pay full tuition. We're a global community man!

I don't know anyone who would go get their degree overseas if they could do it over again aside from my friends who went to UCL, Oxford, LSE, etc. Those names matter everywhere. A run-of-the-mill overseas degree won't mean anything, and if you're going to schools of that caliber, once you factor in the difference in currency, you're not changing much. An overseas degree from a non-internationally reknowned university will hurt you more than help you if you plan on coming back home. For one, you won't have the alumni network. Second, employers won't have anyone to compare you against because they will have no history of applicants with those degrees, and in some cases it's not even really considered on the same level over here.

My friend's father had his master's degree is Syria and got to the US and no one cared. He basically said forget it because they were telling him to do credits over and stuff like that. Again, that's not a good idea unless you're going to a powerhouse university or one that has explicit ties and name recognition in the US. There is a reason that the American college degree carries the most weight around the world. You're literally giving VERY BAD advice.

As far as being a "global citizen", not really. We are all competing. Now more than ever we are competing with individuals overseas and abroad. This is some humanitarian notion, this is jobs. Think of all those engineers that we train that we don't allow to stay here (many of whom, if not most want to stay here) that would be great for the American economy which is lacking those workers.
 

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,083
Reputation
4,736
Daps
67,019
I guess the question is whether you think it would actually benefit the American economy to have them stay as long as they want. You could argue that there already aren't enough jobs for college grads as it is, and having international students to compete with will just make things even tougher for young grads (who are already being hammered by the job market as it is).

But then again, in the long term it would of course benefit the economy to keep talent here. :manny:

The thing about it though is that those jobs aren't getting filled. We have a shortage of people in those fields. It's the liberal arts majors and marketing majors and shyt like that who are struggling. They just flat out lack the skillset required for a lot of these jobs and lazy ass employers don't want to train anyone anymore.
 

Broke Wave

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
18,701
Reputation
4,580
Daps
44,583
Reppin
Open Society Foundation
@NYC Rebel demonstrates why hes such a great poster :wow:

On the subject matter, lets consider the facts on the ground... Joseph Stiglitz is simply an academic economist with a Nobel Prize. He has no power or tangible influence even within the Obama Admin or either houses of Congress. So when Stiglitz is decrying a lack of opportunity, let us aptly and correctly relate this to a commentary on the FAILURE of the policies of the president and how they are further exacerbating the inequality problem. If Stiglitz had come out against Neo-Liberalism in the early 90's (Which He did), that is obvious a criticism of the Bush Administration and to some extent the Clinton administration. It's 2013, 4 years removed from the tenure of Bush Jr. and I am inclined to agree with the President's Republican detractors on this issue... he cannot continue to blame Bush for today's economy. This is his economy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
88,218
Reputation
3,616
Daps
157,272
Reppin
Brooklyn
I don't know anyone who would go get their degree overseas if they could do it over again aside from my friends who went to UCL, Oxford, LSE, etc. Those names matter everywhere. A run-of-the-mill overseas degree won't mean anything, and if you're going to schools of that caliber, once you factor in the difference in currency, you're not changing much. An overseas degree from a non-internationally reknowned university will hurt you more than help you if you plan on coming back home. For one, you won't have the alumni network. Second, employers won't have anyone to compare you against because they will have no history of applicants with those degrees, and in some cases it's not even really considered on the same level over here.

My friend's father had his master's degree is Syria and got to the US and no one cared. He basically said forget it because they were telling him to do credits over and stuff like that. Again, that's not a good idea unless you're going to a powerhouse university or one that has explicit ties and name recognition in the US. There is a reason that the American college degree carries the most weight around the world.

As far as being a "global citizen", not really. We are all competing. Now more than ever we are competing with individuals overseas and abroad. This is some humanitarian notion, this is jobs. Think of all those engineers that we train that we don't allow to stay here (many of whom, if not most want to stay here) that would be great for the American economy which is lacking those workers.

There are plenty of overseas universities with ties to American colleges.
No one said run of the mill, of course that wouldn't work out well! You always come up with the most outlandish false equivalence you can with your rebuttals.

I swear you don't even care what you write half the time you just care about one upping or getting one over on whoever is in dispute with you.

Competing in different markets that Americans never had access to before! Things are better than ever.
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,021
Reputation
3,755
Daps
105,073
Reppin
Detroit
The thing about it though is that those jobs aren't getting filled. We have a shortage of people in those fields. It's the liberal arts majors and marketing majors and shyt like that who are struggling. They just flat out lack the skillset required for a lot of these jobs and lazy ass employers don't want to train anyone anymore.

True.

What I think would really benefit the economy is if we could somehow incentivize employers to actually train people for positions, because, truth be told, not everybody is going to major in engineering. These days a lot of employers are so cheap that they'd rather let a position go unfilled than train someone for a month or two (even though it costs more in the long run not to hire anyone). In this economy a lot of employers are really picky and will wait for a "perfect" candidate rather than hire someone who'd be perfectly capable of doing the job after a month of training.



@NYC Rebel demonstrates why hes such a great poster :wow:

On the subject matter, lets consider the facts on the ground... Joseph Stiglitz is simply an academic economist with a Nobel Prize. He has no power or tangible influence even within the Obama Admin or either houses of Congress. So when Stiglitz is decrying a lack of opportunity, let us aptly and correctly relate this to a commentary on the FAILURE of the policies of the president and how they are further exacerbating the inequality problem. If Stiglitz had come out against Neo-Liberalism in the early 90's (Which He did), that is obvious a criticism of the Bush Administration and to some extent the Clinton administration. It's 2013, 4 years removed from the tenure of Bush Jr. and I am inclined to agree with the President's Republican detractors on this issue... he cannot continue to blame Bush for today's economy. This is his economy.

Looking at the economy as a statement of a sitting president's economic policy is, at best, greatly oversimplifying things (that goes for Clinton, Bush, and Obama). It's not like presidents just come in and their administrations get to just do whatever they want, the House and Senate have to cooperate, and if they don't then not much gets done.

In all honesty I feel that economic failures usually have much more to do with Congress' actions (or, with the current Congress, lack thereof) than the President.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,083
Reputation
4,736
Daps
67,019
There are plenty of overseas universities with ties to American colleges.
No one said run of the mill, of course that wouldn't work out well! You always come up with the most outlandish false equivalence you can with your rebuttals.

Competing in different markets that Americans never had access to before! Things are better than ever.

88m3, I understand that you're a troll and we all know that, but think before you post. Your 3 sentence vapid responses aren't helpful to anyone. This is education here. @NYC_Rebel straight up mentioned the WEST INDIES. There are very few schools in the West Indies that carry any sort of weight in the US. Second, there are not "plenty" of overseas univerisities with ties to American colleges. Even if that were true, that's not the point. You must be confusing study abroad programs with having an established and respected connection to the US economy. Michigan has a study abroad program with a university in Prague, that school in Prague means shyt in the US. It was a glorified vacation. Stop it.

I wish Naija was online, we broke this down on SOHH for everybody once. I'm only responding because you're genuinely giving bad advice.
 

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
79,933
Reputation
14,208
Daps
190,269
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
. @NYC_Rebel straight up mentioned the WEST INDIES. There are very few schools in the West Indies that carry any sort of weight in the US.


:dead: I was wondering if he was talking about UVI( :snoop: ) or some college in Jamacia...

Either way, all my peeps from the west indies, either go some unknown college in Florida or England...

Nothing even remotely prestigious. A bad bishes have gone on to IVY Leagues, but they're my cousins, as well... ( :sadbron: )
 

Broke Wave

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
18,701
Reputation
4,580
Daps
44,583
Reppin
Open Society Foundation
Looking at the economy as a statement of a sitting president's economic policy is, at best, greatly oversimplifying things (that goes for Clinton, Bush, and Obama). It's not like presidents just come in and their administrations get to just do whatever they want, the House and Senate have to cooperate, and if they don't then not much gets done.

In all honesty I feel that economic failures usually have much more to do with Congress' actions (or, with the current Congress, lack thereof) than the President.

To the first part of your statement, I think that's how most economy's in America have been looked at since the Roaring 20's. I don't believe that it is an oversimplification to say that the biggest single economic factor is the policies that are proposed and signed by the White House... The "Left" has no problem calling the last recession the Bush recession, or saying that Bush's policies caused or exacerbated the recession. While this may or may not be the case, the economy is almost totally linked to Bush's 8 years during that 8 years.

As far as the congress, I dispute this notion because the current congress has been in control in the majority of one body of the 3 branches. The Democrats controlled the House during the recession... can we blame it on them? Rather it is the policies proposed and passed that have an impact, and when Obama had a majority, he proposed and passed policies that were ineffective in changing the current economic status quo.
 
Top