Tuesday, 4 October 2016

The Bernie Crowd

“You have millions of young people, many of whom took out loans in order to go to college, hoping to go out and get decent-paying jobs, and they are unable to do that."

-- Bernie Saunders on why Hillary is correct on her statements

There are at least forty different angles to the whole college gimmick, and why the economy attached to it is so screwed up.

With the exception of IT-related positions, the vast number of entry jobs in America really don't require a bachelors degree.  I would even challenge half of the IT-related jobs on needing a guy with a bachelors degree unless this is a full-up engineer's position.

Go and ask a hundred newly hired kids out of a major university over what they learned and how they apply that knowledge to their entry-level job.  I would take a guess that 90-percent will tell you that they could easily accomplish their job with just two years of college.  I might even take a guess that five percent would tell you that with three or four college classes.....they could do their entry-level job without any degree attached.

When you ask colleges and universities about the number of instructors/professors to the number of support staff.....most just grin and refuse to answer questions.  The simple truth is that when you pay $15,000 for tuition at some college for a year....probably fifty-percent or more of that is going toward non-lecture or non-instructor costs.

You have Johnny Junior establish his big dream at age 15 to be such-and-such graduate of a big-name university, and he latches onto a particular degree.....never researching the job field for that degree or what it'll pay for entry-level and the next two or three steps up.  So Johnny Junior gets some help from dad, but he'll owe $40,000 by the end of four years.  Then Johnny Junior discovers that in the region that he wants to live.....there's an overage of people with this degree and entry-level is difficult.  Johnny Junior will waste eight months trying to get job number one, and discover that this only pays $28,000 a year.  Paying the $40k back?  Well, Johnny discovers five years later that he's not moving up much and only making $30,000 a year at age 27.  His debt situation is miserable and not improving.  Who is to blame? Johnny or the system?

These big-name entry jobs?  There's a certain number existing, and then there's marginal entry positions from that point on.  If you dragged this fact out to a bunch of sixteen-year-old kids....they'd all get freaked out and start to look for strictly a two-year occupational field only.  Everyone in the four-year university business is scared that eventually.....reality will be put out on the table and make people grasp the future.

The amusing thing about this whole discussion is that every foot deeper that you get into debt at age 24, means you have less spending power, and will lessen the nation's overall spending on houses, cars, trips, vacations, TVs, or whatever.  If Johnny Junior has to come up with $3,000 this year to cover his college debt....that's money that goes toward a bank or the government....and it means Johnny Junior won't buy a house by age 30 like most people. Neither will Johnny Junior spend that much on cars, or be able afford what was normal spending twenty-five years ago.

The sad thing about all of this is that these are now educated people, who realize that the economic knowledge they should have had twenty years ago.....to avoid getting so far into debt.....was marginal or non-existent.  Now, they sit there in an apartment because they can afford to buy a house, and they drive a six-year old Nissan because there's just no cash left at the end of the month.....all for a lousy four-year degree that seems to have limited value.

Legalization versus Anti-Legalization

Over the past decade, I've had this interest in the various states moving toward legalization of marijuana.  It's mostly over the fact that sales and usage simply exist today, within the ream of illegality but no one seems to care.  The path to legalization?  It's always an odd path.

So I noticed today, there's a fair amount of hype in California about bringing legalization there.  Most users want it.  Of those opposing?  Oddly, growers are against it.

Now, one would sit there and wonder about this.  Why would weed growers be anti-legalization?

The growers tend to say that if it was legal....there would be regulatory inspections, which means there are rules in place and a necessity for more legal understanding.

It is quiet possible that within five years of legalization....there might be thirty pages of legal codes for growers to be "acceptable" by state law.

This oversight thing would become a daily thing.  Is your product pure?  Is your product grown within bio-ethical standards?  If this is such-and-such category of weed.....are you farming by the right rules?

Then you have to wonder about BIG farms hustling up to the table and having massive operations....cutting cost with migrant workers in the background?  Could the small-time grower with 200 to 300 plants make it?  Would competition cause half the growers of today to drop the product?

Thirty years ago, no one would have thought much about regulations and harm being brought to a profitable enterprise.  Today?  People are very aware of the dangers of over-regulation.  They see examples every evening on TV.

People might vote legalization in....but what happens over the next decade might be curious to watch.