Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Arnold Kling More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
|
||||||||
|
|
Blogging software: Powered by Movable Type 4.2.1.
Pictures courtesy of the authors. All opinions expressed on EconLog reflect those of the author or individual commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views or positions of the Library of Economics and Liberty (Econlib) website or its owner, Liberty Fund, Inc.
The cuneiform inscription in the Liberty Fund logo is the
earliest-known written appearance of the word
"freedom" (amagi), or "liberty." It
is taken from a clay document written about 2300 B.C. in the Sumerian city-state of Lagash.
|
||||||||
Some thoughts:
1) Until we do get experimental data, someone should look closely at the (small) group of very bright students who opted for low-cost higher education such as honors community colleges, instead of shelling out big bucks.
2) Do we know whether college helps you get a job that offers better non-monetary benefits? Some 50K jobs are fun, others stink.
3) Do the data on job remuneration include contribution toward health insurance and other perks?
I guess I'm just biased, but I find it hard to take David Card seriously. His minimum wage study was so absurdly and obviously flawed that one should question the underlying methodology of anything with his name on it.
But then again, he does have a John Bates Clark medal.
I fit Jack's #1 above. Having had the ability and opportunity to attend a "good" school, I instead chose to attend a very inexpensive local state college. I breezed through my classes and worked on the side, which taught me more actual marketable skills than all my classes put together. 7 years later, my career is on an above-average trajectory and my salary is more than satisfactory.
So I intuitively grasp the idea that the correlation we see between going to college (and also going to "better" colleges) is basically pure selection bias. We aren't educating ourselves in college, we are merely sorting ourselves apart from those who either cannot or choose not to jump through this hoop.
Posit a closed economy in which 40% of the jobs would be better done by a person with a degree and the remaining 60% can be done just as well by a person without a degree.
As the percentage of the population with a degree grows from, say, 10% towards 40% we can expect gains to accrue both to society and to individuals.
However, beyond the 40% mark I do not see further gains to society. If 60% of the population has a degree then 20% will feel frustrated whilst doing the job no better than a less qualified people could do.
The question thus becomes what percentage of US jobs really require a degree? Without that datapoint we are in the dark.
[Comment removed pending confirmation of email address and for policy violations. Email the webmaster@econlib.org to request restoring your comment privileges. A valid email address is required to post comments on EconLog and EconTalk.--Econlib Ed.]