Purposed solution: make it harder for educated people to stay in the state.
Yeah I fully believe this guy studied economics. This is exactly the kinda ass-backwards logic they would come up with. It not only fails the smell test it does not match up with real world data at all. If you want more of something you dedicate more resources to that thing. The only reason why someone would suggest doing the exact opposite of what should be done is if there is a big incentive to lie. In this case for political advancement. Like I said, he is an economist. A paid shill.
By making programs not available it means that young people leave the state even earlier. It means that they don’t have a career back home when they finish. Which means they have even less resources. A vicious cycle. They suck at subject X, so it gets less funding, which means they suck more, so they get even less funding, and it continues until the subject is gone and with it all the jobs. Instead of a diverse intellectual workforce you are doubling down on the few narrow subjects that show profit in a short period of time. Totally unprepared for any market shifts. And in the meantime you can’t accommodate anyone who doesn’t excel at the thing you doubled down on.
There might be some excuse for this if it were working but it isn’t working. You could imagine San Jose pushing their schools to teach engineering or NYC schools pushing fashion but Mississippi is pushing for degrees in fields that have no hope in competing in.
Every single fucking thing is wrong about this plan and no one gives a shit. This guy is going to get some consulting fees bullshit for telling politicians what they want to hear because fuck truth.
Problem: the state has a brain drain.
Purposed solution: make it harder for educated people to stay in the state.
Yeah I fully believe this guy studied economics. This is exactly the kinda ass-backwards logic they would come up with. It not only fails the smell test it does not match up with real world data at all. If you want more of something you dedicate more resources to that thing. The only reason why someone would suggest doing the exact opposite of what should be done is if there is a big incentive to lie. In this case for political advancement. Like I said, he is an economist. A paid shill.
By making programs not available it means that young people leave the state even earlier. It means that they don’t have a career back home when they finish. Which means they have even less resources. A vicious cycle. They suck at subject X, so it gets less funding, which means they suck more, so they get even less funding, and it continues until the subject is gone and with it all the jobs. Instead of a diverse intellectual workforce you are doubling down on the few narrow subjects that show profit in a short period of time. Totally unprepared for any market shifts. And in the meantime you can’t accommodate anyone who doesn’t excel at the thing you doubled down on.
There might be some excuse for this if it were working but it isn’t working. You could imagine San Jose pushing their schools to teach engineering or NYC schools pushing fashion but Mississippi is pushing for degrees in fields that have no hope in competing in.
Every single fucking thing is wrong about this plan and no one gives a shit. This guy is going to get some consulting fees bullshit for telling politicians what they want to hear because fuck truth.