Yep. And we do it largely because we started from a schooling model built to shape factory workers, and then tried to develop it by aping what the upper classes did - regardless of whether their models could actually scale or were at all desirable in large numbers.
Sadly, doing so also stripped dignity from vocational / blue-collar work - even when it pays (very) well, kids are told that a life in the trades is for the uneducated, ignorant swines.
Ironically, part of this development is led by emancipation of the lower classes themselves: "I break my back every day but my son will study and be a doctor". A sentiment we all admire, but ends up reinforcing the idea that the father's blue-collar work is crap - and that's not how it should be, all workers should have equal dignity and value.
I'm all for equal dignity and value, but I think you are misunderstanding the situation here.
The fact is that money buys better health and familial outcomes. The parents want that for their kids. Manual labor, regardless of how well it pays takes a toll on your body and generally pays less than a lot of the highly sought after knowledge worker jobs.
I really think the rising cost of living is whats driving these kinds of ideas. The parents want their kids to make more money so they can have a better life - a reality in america. Others see this and assume that the blue collar job is bad or something.
If we had an adequate healthcare system that didn't favor the super rich with good outcomes, I would agree. Until then, my kids are going to be encouraged to go into a career where they can make lots of money sitting in an air conditioned office.
I've worked the blue collar tough as fuck jobs, and now I work in an air conditioned office making 15x as much. Objectively, which one is the better job?
I agree, not how it should be, but you gotta get yours.
Also, if you've ever worked in the trades you would know that a large portion of them are ignorant and uneducated. That stereotype exists for a reason. Its just a fact, and they have a tougher time navigating life because of it. I've lived it.
> Also, if you've ever worked in the trades you would know that a large portion of them are ignorant and uneducated. That stereotype exists for a reason. Its just a fact, and they have a tougher time navigating life because of it. I've lived it.
I agree with you there, I think there is a tendency to romanticize the life of a blue collar worker, and thing of them as the noble simple idealized "proletariat", when as you point out the stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason.
But I have to wonder is part of that because of the brain drain in the trades that resulted from everyone going to college and feeling they had to do white collar work. Before a smart, observant, hardworking young man could become an electrician and by virtue of being observant and quick witted could succeeded and excel and become an outstanding electrician that could bring about innovation and elevate his work team. Nowadays though the same hardworking intelligent young man is being told that the trades are for stupid people, and he is too smart for that and wouldn't it be much better to go get a college degree so he can get a "real job". Then twenty years and $50,000 of student debt later he finds himself as a project manager trapped in a standup meeting at 8:00 on a Wednesday morning, hating his life, drowning in unfulfilled despair and wondering what went wrong with his life.
I just think that part of the stereotypes about the trades has become a self fulfilling prophecy.
I have hopes that the invisible hand will provide some corrective feedback. Because at the end of the day, someone has to do the electrical work and the construction work etc. If it can't be done without some amount of IQ the market will adjust for that.
This is already coming to pass in hot real-estate markets where it's almost impossible to get any sort of trade help. It feels like most of the skilled tradesmen (and women) have a plethora of job choices and they by far prefer to build new housing instead of dealing with nitpicky rich people for the same money.
I agree we are in an unstable situation and it will equal out over time. My main concern is the burden it places on us all in the meantime. Those most vulnerable are going to be hit the hardest.
According to this source[1], the average student loan debt for a new 4-year graduate in 2020 is $28,400. Of course, this is highly variable depending on the student, but $150-200k is not typical for a 4-year degree.
There seems to be a bunch of variability here. In support of my original assertion of 150-200k, that site has multiple average debts for different fields in my stated range.
Actually, the article you linked confirms my original statement. Look at the "graduate loan debt" section.
From the article you linked:
Average student loan debt for a professional degree from a private, nonprofit institution $243,300
I have no idea how they got 28k when most every number I see on that page is much larger.
There is a huge, huge difference between the debt you take on in undergrad vs grad programs vs law school vs medical school, etc. You are looking at the numbers for the most expensive programs (that also result in some of the highest paying careers!) to make the case that people have high debt, but those are the minority. They also tend to be the most educated and have the highest future earnings potential. Most people do not advance past an undergraduate degree. The 28k number is far more relevant, and within the article you linked.
Your page says the same number as the parent for a bachelor degree: $28950.
All the other numbers you see that are higher are graduate degrees. Comparing a medical student debt (4+ years more of school beyond the 4 of undergrad, residency, perhaps a specialty on top) to only a 4 year degree is not representative of the vast majority of student debt.
I absolutely understand your POV, I've worked crap jobs too (dropped out of uni), and I have kids who have to suffer through the classist UK education system. But my point is that this was not inevitable, it's the result of societal and individual choices made over the last 40 years.
> if you've ever worked in the trades you would know that a large portion of them are ignorant and uneducated
Yes, and that's why there used to be a view that adult education was to be promoted and encouraged.
My point is that at some point, we just stopped aspiring to a better tomorrow and accepted we're all doomed to live in hell. Which, inevitably, condemned us to a life of pain.
> Manual labor, regardless of how well it pays takes a toll on your body and generally pays less than a lot of the highly sought after knowledge worker jobs
In many places a skilled plumber or electrician earns more than an office worker or even junior engineer. A skilled highway construction worker earns more than the country average. A crane operator makes more than the average software developer. There are many surprises when it comes to blue collar job payment.
I think you're comparing entry level tech jobs to mid to sr level blue collar jobs.
Take the electrician for example. Minimum 4 years of work as an apprentice, then you have to do a year of schooling, pay for it out of pocket, take a test and your making about as much as a entry level developer who only needed to spend 1 year studying in their free time, spent $400 on a laptop, got all their learning for free online, and isn't doing back breaking, more dangerous work. And from there the tech worker's salary is going to go to 150k+ in 3-5 years. You don't even need college to do that anymore.
Same thing with the crane operator. Starting salary for tech is more, requires less time to get started, and the tech worker's salary goes up quick after starting. You don't start out on the path to being a crane operator at 50k+ a year. You start helping doing rigging and spotting for $12 an hour.
I lived both sides of it, trust me. I see where your coming from, some blue collar jobs pay more than you'd think, but in reality there's just no comparison.
Modern factory work is going to need a lot of that "upper-level" knowledge too, due to technical change. Pure "blue-collar" work where one could neglect education altogether is either gone or fast disappearing.
That's going to be severely problematic for those in the bottom 15% of the intelligence distribution when there comes a point that there is nothing in society they could do that wouldn't be actively counter productive.
Modern society and its trajectory seems a fundamentally unsustainable enterprise.
> A sentiment we all admire, but ends up reinforcing the idea that the father's blue-collar work is crap - and that's not how it should be, all workers should have equal dignity and value.
Assuming that value equals price, the only way everyone would have an equal price is if supply and demand were exactly equal across all occupations over a long period of time.
That is not a realistic expectation. And the only way for people (by and large) to be incentivized to do the things where supply is not meeting demand is to have a higher price where supply of labor is more needed than elsewhere.
That's a big assumption. There are lots of careers with social and financial values that diverge, ignoring that would I think miss the point OP is trying to make.
My point is everyone can never have equal “value”. The blue collar father urging their kid to be a doctor is not doing it because he thinks he is inherently less “valuable” than a doctor. The father is urging their kid because the father has experience on the type of quality of life a blue collar father can provide versus a doctor father can provide, which is a function of the price that they can sell their labor at.
You are still being reductive in a way that I think misses the point grandparent was trying to make. It may be true that not everyone's career can have the same value, but it's hopeless to try and define that by paychecks alone - that's just not how society values things.
In other words your argument could works equally well for the father urging their kid to do something that on average won't pay better, but will bring them more respect and social standing.
I find that it is usually purchasing power which results in respect and social standing. What are examples of the opposite, that do not involve being related or networked to someone who does have purchasing power?
If most plumbers started earning top 10% wages in the US, they would have similar social standing to doctors. Even doctors have probably moved down in relative status, where the new ones are basically W2 employees with metrics for a big company.
The example could be replaced by a father encouraging their child to be a scientist rather than an accountant - likely a net financial loss.
Hell, put a noble prize winner (or Olympic gold medallist, or astronaut, or you pick) in a room with a guy who made 50mm on property development. No contest, but chances are the developer is at least 10x as wealthy.
There are examples all around you; might not be why you respect people, but its' what people actually do. Trying to reduce this all to wealth just doesn't stand up to even a little scrutiny, though it's equally clear that wealth does contribute.
Sadly, doing so also stripped dignity from vocational / blue-collar work - even when it pays (very) well, kids are told that a life in the trades is for the uneducated, ignorant swines.
Ironically, part of this development is led by emancipation of the lower classes themselves: "I break my back every day but my son will study and be a doctor". A sentiment we all admire, but ends up reinforcing the idea that the father's blue-collar work is crap - and that's not how it should be, all workers should have equal dignity and value.