I was just skimming though the statement issued by Matt Kaczmarek, President of the University of California Student Association and UCLA Student Body External Vice President in response to the compact announced between the state university system presidents and Gov. S. that had been forwarded to me. Typical student activist boilerplate. This remark, however, did get me thinking:
I suppose most people would agree some basic level of education is a right. But I don't think it's ever be widely accepted that higher education is a right -- at least not a universal one. But it does make me wonder. How much more difficult has it become to get a state university education in California? That is, how has the cost changed in real dollars? And has the number of students as a proportion of applicants or the college-age population overall significantly decreased? Did the baby boomers really take the key to the house and lock the door behind them? Is the compact a sign that the current generation of tax-payers is stingier than previous ones?
I would guess that the one thing baby boomers did have that is missing today was an employment landscape in which well-paying low-skill jobs were much more plentiful. For college-graduates, well-paying jobs are still plentiful. Those without a college education are the ones facing the squeeze. And those on fixed incomes -- which includes now any low-wage, hourly, or manufacturing job -- don't feel as if they have a lot of money to spare and where they exert influence over policy-making, don't show themselves to be supportive of tax-hikes in the abstract.
Education is a right not a privilege. Someone needs to advocate for the future of higher education, and the students are ready to do so.
I suppose most people would agree some basic level of education is a right. But I don't think it's ever be widely accepted that higher education is a right -- at least not a universal one. But it does make me wonder. How much more difficult has it become to get a state university education in California? That is, how has the cost changed in real dollars? And has the number of students as a proportion of applicants or the college-age population overall significantly decreased? Did the baby boomers really take the key to the house and lock the door behind them? Is the compact a sign that the current generation of tax-payers is stingier than previous ones?
I would guess that the one thing baby boomers did have that is missing today was an employment landscape in which well-paying low-skill jobs were much more plentiful. For college-graduates, well-paying jobs are still plentiful. Those without a college education are the ones facing the squeeze. And those on fixed incomes -- which includes now any low-wage, hourly, or manufacturing job -- don't feel as if they have a lot of money to spare and where they exert influence over policy-making, don't show themselves to be supportive of tax-hikes in the abstract.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home