Does emphasis on higher educaton make public policy sense?

Emphasis on higher education is not always the answer for the unemployed. Furthermore, not every person, nor every job, requires higher education. Available jobs and job creation is the answer for the unemployed and under-employed.

More emphasis should be on jobs and job creation. The best chance we may have for major job creation is addressing the most timely and vital needs of our country; the consumer with the resources, at the cost they can bear and choose to bear. Possibly, a budget may be found by redirecting funds being spent elsewhere by the consumer or in behalf of the consumer. Some of us believe that vital need includes energy.

Regarding education, it is a part of every day life and learning should not end with a degree or degrees. Education creates / grows a knowledge database, teaches the “how to think rather than just what to think”, the mental stimulation improves quality of life and so on. None the less, as mentioned in the first paragraph, higher education is not always the answer to getting a job. To get a job there first needs to be a job that requires the skills acquired at a price the market can bear, is willing to bear but preferably not forced to bear.

The cost of education has escalated to the point of not being in proportion to the return on investment for the “by choice” consumer, the student but more so for the “forced funding source”, the property tax payer.
Furthermore, the cost of education has become a serious financial burden to not only those being educated but also upon the property owners whose resources are being drained by imposed levies via property tax. Possibly, the overhead cost of the education sector has escalated not based on need and fiscal responsibility rather because of the ability to impose a tax.

Not many would argue the need for and benefit of education in communities, even with the knowing that in reality the students most likely will not return unless of course because jobs are available. As for the extra curricular programs in a school, property owners should not be the forced funding source. Extra curricular programs” are activities of choice, therefore, the users, fundraising, scholarships and such should cover the cost for those activities of choice. No doubt, there are and will be the individuals and groups with the resources who will voluntarily fund the wants in addition to the needs with the expectation those funds are responsibly handled.

Posted by: Barbara (CF Ohio) on October 15, 2008 8:28AM