I do find it interesting that so many other First World countries provide higher education to their citizens at low or very heavily-subsidized tuition rates. And yet we cannot. One of the fundamental tenets of economic growth is to invest in human capital since healthy and educated citizens generally help the economy and country to grow and prosper. The devil is in the details, but does the US really pay attention to investing in our human capital, I wonder.
A lot of other countries have highly educated people doing no, or menial, labor
1 too. Just because an investment was made does not mean it was a good investment, or that it will provide any return. Frankly, in a country of 320 million people there is a lot of human capitol that isn't worth giving much more than a high school
2 education to. Our system isn't perfect by any means, but until recently it was at least understood that if you wanted to gamble on yourself and your worth as human capital you did it with YOUR money. You could get an advance on YOUR money (from presumed future earnings) but you were still betting your assets on yourself. Now that a couple hundred thousand people have lost that bet they suddenly want to act surprised that it was their money they were betting, and the rest of us, that made better investments, are somehow morally responsible to cover their losses? Why?
Or alternatively, if I have to pay off student loans with my taxes, do I get a say in what degrees people get loans for going forward? Should the state provide acceptable degrees and quotas for them to finance? Wouldn't that be the smart way to "invest" in human capital, not willy nilly what kids are interested in, but what we need?
1. Or those country import poor people to do the menial labor that their educated citizens are no longer willing to. The migrant labor programs in the Mid-East are truly eye-opening in this regard,
2. High school level as it meant thirty years ago or so, not this "no Child Left Behind" functional illiteracy we get at 12th grade now.