Open email to Sen. Cruz (TX):
Dear Sen. Cruz,
Thank you for your form letter on student loan
interest rates.
You said you joined with Democrats and Republicans to
support a step in the direction of market-based solutions, voting for
legislation that would tie those rates to the value of U.S. Treasury securities
each year, rather than allowing Congress to set them at an arbitrary
percentage. This would presumably
increase the student loan interest rate to something higher than the previous
3.4%, but that is not clear.
While this is a step in the direction of
market-based solution, as you claim, it is not sufficient. Student loan interest
rates should be consistent with lending rates in the general market. While this
will give a higher interest rate, it will also discourage unnecessary borrowing,
on the part of students to obtain college degrees which in many cases will be of
no significant value. The market is already flooded with college graduates who
cannot find jobs equivalent to salary payments which would allow them to pay off
their student loans in a practical manner. In effect, low student loan rates
have done damage to the educational system, and should be stopped as soon as
possible.
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Unnecessary Government Involvement in Education
Open email to
Congress:
In the June 17 issue of C&E News, it was
reported that Pres. Obama surprised the
educational community by proposing some significant changes in the federal
education program. The President wants
to cut the total number of federal education programs from the current 226 to
110. Great! However, he would also increase federal funding for science
education to $3.4 billion from $2.9 billion last year. Bad
news!.
How
does Pres. Obama get involved in science education in universities? He does so through the various agencies, which have
been created by Congress and which then have developed grant programs whereby
they give significant amounts of taxpayer funds to universities. This has been a
bad move by Congress, and I have said many times before that the federal
government should have no involvement in using taxpayer funds for federal
education programs. The average American citizen is well able to handle his own
education program.
The President's plan also proposes that the various grants
for education purposes should be removed from the various agencies and
consolidated in the Department of Education. That's good news, because if
there's one agency that we should dispose of, it is the Department of
Education.
Other
good news is that skepticism of the general education program has already
started in Congress through the House of Representatives Science, Space, and
Technology Committee.
In the same issue of C&E News, it is reported that the American Chemical Society's Committee on Professional Training (CPT) has developed guidelines and a review program to determine whether the undergraduate chemistry program at universities meets and remains in compliance with requirements related to faculty and staff, infrastructure, curriculum, undergraduate research, and student development. More simply, the American Chemical Society has taken a leadership position in developing and continuing to develop adequate educational programs within the universities, without any input from the federal government. I also suspect that similar organizations in physics and mathematics have had strong inputs to the educational programs of the universities.
On this basis, I strongly urge Congress and particularly the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology to immediately start efforts to not only defund any federal programs related to education, but also to begin elimination of the Department of Education. Private industry and the public can well handle all requirements, without government intervention.
In the same issue of C&E News, it is reported that the American Chemical Society's Committee on Professional Training (CPT) has developed guidelines and a review program to determine whether the undergraduate chemistry program at universities meets and remains in compliance with requirements related to faculty and staff, infrastructure, curriculum, undergraduate research, and student development. More simply, the American Chemical Society has taken a leadership position in developing and continuing to develop adequate educational programs within the universities, without any input from the federal government. I also suspect that similar organizations in physics and mathematics have had strong inputs to the educational programs of the universities.
On this basis, I strongly urge Congress and particularly the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology to immediately start efforts to not only defund any federal programs related to education, but also to begin elimination of the Department of Education. Private industry and the public can well handle all requirements, without government intervention.
Saturday, August 3, 2013
Teacher Evaluations Available to the General Public
There was another discussion this morning on Fox News concerning release of teacher evaluations to the general public. The public seemed to be for the release. The teachers are against.
I would like to make an analogy.
In my many years of business, I found that one of the standard procedures involving personnel was to have an annual evaluation by each person's immediate boss. Those evaluations that were kept in the Personnel Department, now Human Resources, and were used for subsequent management judgments on employee advancement within the organization, or in some cases dismissal. The basis for the system was that the organization was paying the employee salary and had a right to determine the effectiveness of the employee within the organization, to see whether it was getting its money's worth.
I see no difference between that private operation in companies and public employees. Since the public is paying salaries, it has a right to know how effective the individuals are with respect to earning those salaries.
The teachers union is well-organized and seems to have the ability to out-shout the general public. However, that is no reason for the general public to acquiesce to unreasonable demands. It pays teacher salaries and has a right to know how effective those teachers are.
I would like to make an analogy.
In my many years of business, I found that one of the standard procedures involving personnel was to have an annual evaluation by each person's immediate boss. Those evaluations that were kept in the Personnel Department, now Human Resources, and were used for subsequent management judgments on employee advancement within the organization, or in some cases dismissal. The basis for the system was that the organization was paying the employee salary and had a right to determine the effectiveness of the employee within the organization, to see whether it was getting its money's worth.
I see no difference between that private operation in companies and public employees. Since the public is paying salaries, it has a right to know how effective the individuals are with respect to earning those salaries.
The teachers union is well-organized and seems to have the ability to out-shout the general public. However, that is no reason for the general public to acquiesce to unreasonable demands. It pays teacher salaries and has a right to know how effective those teachers are.
College Students Going Home
There was a discussion this morning on
Fox News concerning a large number of college graduates going home to live with
their parents after graduation.
The consensus was that this is bad, because as those young people return to homes where they lived his children, they do not have an opportunity to mature. The question then is what is maturity and is it a good thing? It seems that maturity is primarily an ability to assume a sense of responsibility, particularly maintaining one's own life and subsequently assisting in the development of responsibility in others, such as children.
A second disadvantage of "going home" is that it admits to likely having made an improper judgment in obtaining a college education in a field for which there are no jobs. From that point of view, the cost of a college education is a waste of money.
We should then be asking why the US society finds itself in this position. The answer is a fairly obvious. First, the advantages of a college education with respect to employment have been oversold. There is no doubt that employed college educated people on average make a higher annual salary than those with high school educations, but there is a limit to the availability of such high paying jobs.
The second fallacy is a belief in the minds of the general public that a college education solves all personal economic problems. This leads to young people obtaining college degrees in fields where there is limited job opportunity, such as Family Relations and International Politics. This belief also leads to avoiding fields, where there are known bona fide job opportunities, such as Statistics, Accounting, Genetic Biology, and Mechanical Engineering. In other words, if all I need is a college education why not take the easy courses?
The third significant problem is the interference of the federal government. Perhaps politicians see the opportunity for garnering additional young people votes or perhaps even have a misguided understanding of market economics. This has led to subsidizing college educations with taxpayer funds. In effect, the federal government is using your money to entice young people to do the wrong thing. However, you stand for this obvious stupidity, because you likely believe also that there is some advantage to you and your children. There is not. Your children will not mature under the system of living at home. They will have wasted your and taxpayer funds in an education of insignificant value to improve their own economic situations and aid in the development of the country.
The consensus was that this is bad, because as those young people return to homes where they lived his children, they do not have an opportunity to mature. The question then is what is maturity and is it a good thing? It seems that maturity is primarily an ability to assume a sense of responsibility, particularly maintaining one's own life and subsequently assisting in the development of responsibility in others, such as children.
A second disadvantage of "going home" is that it admits to likely having made an improper judgment in obtaining a college education in a field for which there are no jobs. From that point of view, the cost of a college education is a waste of money.
We should then be asking why the US society finds itself in this position. The answer is a fairly obvious. First, the advantages of a college education with respect to employment have been oversold. There is no doubt that employed college educated people on average make a higher annual salary than those with high school educations, but there is a limit to the availability of such high paying jobs.
The second fallacy is a belief in the minds of the general public that a college education solves all personal economic problems. This leads to young people obtaining college degrees in fields where there is limited job opportunity, such as Family Relations and International Politics. This belief also leads to avoiding fields, where there are known bona fide job opportunities, such as Statistics, Accounting, Genetic Biology, and Mechanical Engineering. In other words, if all I need is a college education why not take the easy courses?
The third significant problem is the interference of the federal government. Perhaps politicians see the opportunity for garnering additional young people votes or perhaps even have a misguided understanding of market economics. This has led to subsidizing college educations with taxpayer funds. In effect, the federal government is using your money to entice young people to do the wrong thing. However, you stand for this obvious stupidity, because you likely believe also that there is some advantage to you and your children. There is not. Your children will not mature under the system of living at home. They will have wasted your and taxpayer funds in an education of insignificant value to improve their own economic situations and aid in the development of the country.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
