Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Wednesday that he would like to link financial aid for college students to the jobs they pursue after graduation.
Romney offered no specifics on what careers would warrant more money for a student during their undergraduate years, such as whether a future lawyer, doctor, teacher or social worker would receive more aid than a future economist or engineer.
"I like the idea of linking the level of support that we're able to provide to young people going to college to the contributions they're going to make to our society," Romney told more than 200 people at a campaign event at a Davenport hotel.
Now that's a good idea.
In truth, I have been particularly hostile to the english, art, and communications departments of various universities. Why in the world should there be free rides for such individuals that are financed through the regular financial aid pool? There are lots of people that are struggling that are engineers and scientists that are in that same pool. If the department has endowments for scholarships, but all means...otherwise, IMAAO, let the individual pay for their own way. Most of the time, I my experience at least, the english et al majors never actually work in their field.
Not endorsing the candidate here, BTW, just the idea that he espoused has merit. If you're afraid of it, don't worry: he'll change his mind.
3 comments:
So, engineering majors are more deserving than english majors? Presumably because they'll contribute more to society?
That's interesting. Could you spin it out a little?
Doug M.
Hm. There is a good cop, bad cop rhythm Doug and I naturally fall into.
Will, a university isn't a vocational school. Many advanced nations tried it your way in the past, and suffered economically and culturally for it.
One side-effect you might not have considered is that it would create an intelligentsia: far fewer people would be philosophers, literature professors, art critics, et cetera (and those who did would have money or connections) -- but their individual influence would be much greater.
The glory of the American university system is, now anyone can do this. It's largely de-elitified culture, which is a vastly good thing.
(It's also great for the auto-didact and the polymath. Ahem.)
The annoying granola hippie with the degree in cultural studies and the Che Guevara T-shirt is annoying, sure. But annoyance is no way to make policy.
Not ignoring you guys. This deserves a thought out response.
Post a Comment