Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Uhhh... I don't consider education and training to be bad. Without trained and educated workers, employers would look elsewhere to do business. Sorry you do not agree but that is the way business and government work these days whether you like it or not. Jay
Nobody is saying training / education is bad. The problem is having the Govt do it. More beaurocracy, more pensions, more bennies, etc. Where is the Govt getting the money from? So more re-distribution?
What professions? Business conditions change rapidly nowadays. You think Govt will be on top of this?
Think it thru.
I don't care how we do it now. Obviously whatever we're doing these days is not working. So digging ourselves a deeper hole is the answer to digging ourselves a hole?
Nobody is saying training / education is bad. The problem is having the Govt do it. More beaurocracy, more pensions, more bennies, etc. Where is the Govt getting the money from? So more re-distribution?
What professions? Business conditions change rapidly nowadays. You think Govt will be on top of this?
Think it thru.
I don't care how we do it now. Obviously whatever we're doing these days is not working. So digging ourselves a deeper hole is the answer to digging ourselves a hole?
I agree with you that it should not be governments responsibility to train workers but unfortunately today it is. Can you imagine if we did nothing? Jay
I agree with you that it should not be governments responsibility to train workers but unfortunately today it is. Can you imagine if we did nothing? Jay
It seems to me that so many things the government does are things that in a perfect world the private sector would do--like training workers. But what happens if the private sector simply decides not to do it because it doesn't want to deal with the expense? Someone has to do it.... Yet so many people seem to target their anger at the government instead of the private sector for making the public sector (and taxpayers) to do their dirty work for them and shoulder the costs.
Schools like Cheney Tech, Windham Tech, Prince Tech, etc., have seen many of their graduates highly sought after in trade and vocational fields. Prior to NCLB and the move to prepare for the test, most middle and high schools in CT provided rich experiences in woodworking, graphic design, metal work, photography, culinary, automotives, and other non-academic areas. Many of these programs are now gone or have been significantly reduced. Other valuable programs that gave students rich experiences in arts such as drama, different mediums of visual arts, marketing and business education have also been removed from most HS offerings. This has eliminated the opportunity for many students to explore different interests to find out what they may be good at before embarking on an expensive and possibly misguided post-secondary experience.
John Dewey was a key proponent in early public education. He believed strongly in learning by doing. His philosophy was a driving foundation of education throughout much of the 20th Century. He stated,“To find out what one is fitted to do, and to secure an opportunity to do it, is the key to happiness.” Modern public education has diminished this experience largely to taking computerized tests. It is no wonder why more and more students, especially boys and young men, are more disengaged. Mike Rowe's testimony, that I cited earlier in this thread, explains some of the reasons why the jobs for doing remain unfilled, we removed the programs from the schools and implicitly and explicitly told the kids they have no value.
We can argue whether public (government) schools should exist or if private ones can do a better job. But the fact is that the private sector will not do it alone and where they do offer the programs it is only to the ones who have $$$$ and knowledge to get there. Additionally, those young people who want to try something out may find out what they thought they would like to do and/or are good at doing isn't for them yet they will be saddled with a big bill for exploring a potential interest. The net result is that society loses.
I am thankful that I received my public education in the 70s. It afforded me the opportunity to explore many diverse interests. As a result, I developed a life-long interest in woodworking and construction along with experiences in business education that led me to pursue post-secondary and graduate degrees in business administration, finance, international business and education.
Connecticut historically has had some of the top-quality schools in the nation. This has translated to top-quality candidates for CT employers. In my opinion, the federal government's over involvement in curriculum and the testing movement have taken away our state's control and responsiveness in meeting the needs of our local employers and our communities. Sending control back to the states along with more involvement by local communities and businesses are the key to reviving CT's economic future.
Last edited by Lincolnian; 03-11-2017 at 05:24 AM..
Schools like Cheney Tech, Windham Tech, Prince Tech, etc., have seen many of their graduates highly sought after in trade and vocational fields. Prior to NCLB and the move to prepare for the test, most middle and high schools in CT provided rich experiences in woodworking, graphic design, metal work, photography, culinary, automotives, and other non-academic areas. Many of these programs are now gone or have been significantly reduced. Other valuable programs that gave students rich experiences in arts such as drama, different mediums of visual arts, marketing and business education have also been removed from most HS offerings. This has eliminated the opportunity for many students to explore different interests to find out what they may be good at before embarking on an expensive and possibly misguided post-secondary experience.
John Dewey was a key proponent in early public education. He believed strongly in learning by doing. His philosophy was a driving foundation of education through much of the 20th Century. He stated,“To find out what one is fitted to do, and to secure an opportunity to do it, is the key to happiness.” Modern public education has diminished this experience largely to taking computerized tests. It is no wonder why more and more students, especially boys and young men, are more disengaged. Mike Rowe's testimony, that I cited earlier in this thread, explains some of the reasons why the jobs for doing remain unfilled, we removed the programs from the schools and implicitly and explicitly told the kids they have no value.
We can argue whether public (government) schools should exist or if private ones can do a better job. But the fact is that the private sector will not do it alone and where they do offer the programs it is only to the ones who have $$$$ and knowledge to get there. Additionally, those young people who want to try something out may find out what they thought they would like to do and/or are good at doing isn't for them yet they will be saddled with a big bill for exploring a potential interest. The net result is that society loses.
I am thankful that I received my public education in the 70s. It afforded me the opportunity to explore many diverse interests. As a result, I developed a life-long interest in woodworking and construction along with experiences in business education that led me to pursue post-secondary and graduate degrees in business administration, finance, international business and education.
Connecticut historically has had some of the top-quality schools in the nation. This has translated to top-quality candidates for CT employers. In my opinion, the federal government's over involvement in curriculum and the test movement have taken away our state's control and responsiveness in meeting the needs of our local employers and our communities. Sending control back to the states along with more involvement by local communities and businesses are the key to reviving CT's economic future.
Great post. There is a ton of money and a huge demand for skill trades. I love living in CT and do very well here working in a skill trade. The issue is the youth of today doesn't want to get their hands dirty. They want some office job. CT needs to push programs towards skill trades.
I am thankful that I received my public education in the 70s. It afforded me the opportunity to explore many diverse interests. As a result, I developed a life-long interest in woodworking and construction along with experiences in business education that led me to pursue post-secondary and graduate degrees in business administration, finance, international business and education.
And except in rare instances, exploring diverse interests in education in the 70s only worked for boys. Ask me how I know?
I had many interests, aptitude tests said the same thing. Being nurtured towards them? Not a chance. I cannot imagine where my life would be now had I been able to develop those interests at such a young age.
I agree with you that it should not be governments responsibility to train workers but unfortunately today it is. Can you imagine if we did nothing? Jay
Jay: this is how this is supposed to work:
Private sector has 10,000 blue-collar unfilled positions in CT (I know we're talking about Springfield, MA, but let's just take an example.)
If local population cannot fulfill this need, businesses would offer higher salaries, and even relocation bonuses to people throughout the country to come to CT to get these jobs. But businesses aren't willing to sweeten the pot. Why? Probably because they are using that money instead to pay for high compliance costs, and high taxes -- both Govt-induced heavy costs to CT businesses.
Secondly, blue-collar people across the nation would say -- "hey look, Company XYZ in CT offers me better pay, relo bonus, so let's move to CT."
But these blue-collar workers are not moving into CT, because CT is such a high-tax, high cost place to live.
So, it is CT Govt, via its heavy regulation, high taxation, which create a high COL that inhibit these positions from being filled.
That's why CT needs to think these things holistically, and not simply offer a bandaid after it cuts a limb.
Nobody is saying training / education is bad. The problem is having the Govt do it. More beaurocracy, more pensions, more bennies, etc. Where is the Govt getting the money from? So more re-distribution?
What professions? Business conditions change rapidly nowadays. You think Govt will be on top of this?
Think it thru.
I don't care how we do it now. Obviously whatever we're doing these days is not working. So digging ourselves a deeper hole is the answer to digging ourselves a hole?
I like to think of the government as a waste coefficient, let's declare it 'g'. Then we can have money be 'M'.
The very over simplied formula of money as a function of government looking something like
F(M) =gM , where g << 1.
Let's put a dollar into this jacked up system. I've seen data that supports government at .25 (the 'g')
F($1) = $0.25
Well that sucks. Now let's have coefficient for private sector. I've seen data that supports .75.
F($1) = $.75
So even when operating at inefficiency, we see huge improvement in private sector. With the government, for every dollar that goes into the system, only .25 cents come out of the other end after winding its way through the useless, convoluted money sink system. Not nearly as bad in private sector and in many cases private sector can generate profit, having one dollar go in and >$1 come out. Governent is basically guaranteed waste and so should be utilized very strategically. But I preach to choir with you
Private sector has 10,000 blue-collar unfilled positions in CT (I know we're talking about Springfield, MA, but let's just take an example.)
If local population cannot fulfill this need, businesses would offer higher salaries, and even relocation bonuses to people throughout the country to come to CT to get these jobs. But businesses aren't willing to sweeten the pot. Why? Probably because they are using that money instead to pay for high compliance costs, and high taxes -- both Govt-induced heavy costs to CT businesses.
Secondly, blue-collar people across the nation would say -- "hey look, Company XYZ in CT offers me better pay, relo bonus, so let's move to CT."
But these blue-collar workers are not moving into CT, because CT is such a high-tax, high cost place to live.
So, it is CT Govt, via its heavy regulation, high taxation, which create a high COL that inhibit these positions from being filled.
That's why CT needs to think these things holistically, and not simply offer a bandaid after it cuts a limb.
Henry10, Did you watch the link to Mike Rowe's testimony or any of his related interviews? He has been on this mission since 2001, has a private foundation that has placed 600 graduates, and has gathered and cited a lot of supporting data. He repeatedly points out that it is a false narrative that opportunity satisfies demand for these unfilled skilled jobs. He stated numerous factors and examples of why this is so. I believe he has done an excellent job of laying out why this problem exists and has some practical and pragmatic solutions. I only wish this discussion could take place in education circles but it goes against the testing movement, the Common Core, and the push for sending more kids to four-year colleges. Those three areas are all benefiting from both public and private money with the belief that it will benefit the student. There is little evidence that the national testing or the Common Core is benefiting any student and in many cases the opposite is true especially when it leads a student to pursue an expensive path which doesn't focus on their true talents and abilities.
And except in rare instances, exploring diverse interests in education in the 70s only worked for boys. Ask me how I know?
I had many interests, aptitude tests said the same thing. Being nurtured towards them? Not a chance. I cannot imagine where my life would be now had I been able to develop those interests at such a young age.
That was true in many areas of society. I'd like to believe we have grown. If these same opportunities existed today on the same scale there is no reason to believe many girls wouldn't be interested in pursuing them as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
