Canadas Immigration Policy-Our education program

[Bob]

Very good points. Subsidization of university education should be directly correlated to private sector employability and job sector needs upon graduation.

I bet student loan interest rates could also be further reduced if there were less arts grads defaulting on their loans by fleeing to Europe and Southeast Asia to "broaden their horizons".

I don't think there is any reasonable explanation for why philosophy degrees are subsidized to the same extent as engineering degrees. If people want to become lawyers/doctors, etc., they shouldn't have a taxpayer funded 3 year party in undergrad to learn Kant's categorical imperative. People should have to learn something useful in undergrad or pay the full cost of their useless degree.

Absolutely correct. I'd go one step further - stop all subsidies for post-secondary education. At the very least, create a much smaller fund for government supports towards post-secondary education and make it conditional on high-performance. Let the market determine post-secondary education, and you'll quickly see a dramatic decrease in nonsense arts disciplines that are only able to exist because of unjustifiable public financial support. People shouldn't be pursuing educational endeavours at the expense of the taxpayer if they can't cover the costs on their own.

I think a student loan system is a fantastic idea, but as it currently exists in Canada it punishes young people who earn a living or who have gainfully employed parents. If your parents have strong incomes, your eligibility for student-loans is greatly diminished, as is the case if you're employed. Student loans should be based on one thing only - acceptance and enrolment into a program. Beyond that, stop subsidizing post-secondary education which only props up unjustifiable "academic" pursuits like "women's studies" and "conflict resolution".

[Bob]

Unfortunately, postsecondary institutions that have tried gearing program enrolments to employer needs have not been successful ... in some cases disastrous. It appears that employers aren't very accurate in their estimates of what they'll need a few years down the road. They also fail to mention that they will only want to hire people with experience, not straight out of college ...

Canadian employers are laziest and cheapest in the developed world about training people for jobs. They spend very little money on training compared to eg Germany. They're always demanding that the governments 'do something' about skills training but do they contribute? No. They demand that the government provide them with employees trained to their needs, whatever those are. Their sense of entitlement is outrageous!

Actually, those efforts have never been implemented. Let the market decide which disciplines live or die by stopping the subsidization of post-secondary education. Student-loans should be the be-all and end-all of academia, not automatic subsidies that cover a huge portion (over 50%, I think) of every undergraduate student's tuition costs. Many students would think twice before enrolling in "Social Justice" programs if they were required to pay over ten thousand dollars in tuition costs per year rather than the five thousand they currently pay. If real free choice was implemented, we'd have a lot less people pursuing nonsense educations and being economic liabilities rather than assets.

[Guest Peeves]

Actually, those efforts have never been implemented. Let the market decide which disciplines live or die by stopping the subsidization of post-secondary education. Student-loans should be the be-all and end-all of academia, not automatic subsidies that cover a huge portion (over 50%, I think) of every undergraduate student's tuition costs. Many students would think twice before enrolling in "Social Justice" programs if they were required to pay over ten thousand dollars in tuition costs per year rather than the five thousand they currently pay. If real free choice was implemented, we'd have a lot less people pursuing nonsense educations and being economic liabilities rather than assets.

Right,

paying for a degree that qualifies one for a job in the fast food industry.

[Bonam]

Many students would think twice before enrolling in "Social Justice" programs if they were required to pay over ten thousand dollars in tuition costs per year rather than the five thousand they currently pay.

I wouldn't be so sure. In the US, people pay thirty to sixty thousand a year at many schools for the same privilege.

The reality is a lot of people coming out of high school and entering college are not particularly tied into the realities of the workforce. Many still believe that any college degree at all will land them a good job for life, or just don't think about life after college at all, picking their discipline based on what they find "fun" or interesting, or just going into what their friends go into. Very few research the economic conditions in the field they are choosing prior to entering college.

Those that do pause to think and do some research are the types that will have most likely gone into a useful field anyway. And, of those who do not pause to consider, how many are really smart enough to become doctors, scientists, and engineers anyway?

There will always be people who end up working in service, retail, hospitality, etc, at least in the next couple decades until most of these jobs are replaced with new technologies. These people may as well have their fun in college for a few years if they want to.

If real free choice was implemented, we'd have a lot less people pursuing nonsense educations and being economic liabilities rather than assets.

The real problem is that someone even has the option of being an "economic liability". The problem isn't with what people choose to get an education in, even though many make choices we may consider unwise. The problem is that the programs exist to then let these people spend their life living off the government's teat, either constantly between jobs and collecting EI most of the time, or, even worse, on welfare. If these programs weren't around or were more appropriately restricted, some might consider going back and getting an education in a useful field once they've been exposed to reality. And, also importantly, many might just keep the practical if unglamorous jobs they can get, instead of trying to chase after their mythical dream career in "social justice".

Edited February 15, 2012 by Bonam

[Argus]

Wide open immigration is the best way forward, IMO.

To the edge of the cliff, you mean...

[kendersonic]

To the edge of the cliff, you mean...

Allow me to amend my previous statement:

Wide open immigration for any and all computer scientists, technicians, engineers, mechanics, researchers, etc etc.

Better?