1 edit
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-gop-suddenly-turning-against-145105656.html
This article argues that republicans are abandoning higher education because it's no longer profitable to train our workforce since globalization has made educated foreigners a cheap commodity.
Is this true? And if not, why are the candidates seemingly turning their back on funding for higher education rather than proposing ways to fix it to not be an "indoctrination mill"?
Originally posted by WoodPushThe article is disturbed by "Mitt Romney's advice to high school seniors considering college: shop around, try to save money and don't count on government help"
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-gop-suddenly-turning-against-145105656.html
This article argues that republicans are abandoning higher education because it's no longer profitable to train our workforce since globalization has made educated foreigners a cheap commodity.
Is this true? And if not, why are the candidates seemingly turning their back on ...[text shortened]... for higher education rather than proposing ways to fix it to not be an "indoctrination mill"?
Does anyone really think that is bad advice? In fact, I cannot even see how this is controversial. Just because a politician tells you that the government may not pay 100% for something you want (let's call it x) , does not at all mean that government is anti-x.
Originally posted by WoodPushIt is interesting how the university environment having a proliferation of ideas is labeled as a "indoctrination mill."
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-gop-suddenly-turning-against-145105656.html
This article argues that republicans are abandoning higher education because it's no longer profitable to train our workforce since globalization has made educated foreigners a cheap commodity.
Is this true? And if not, why are the candidates seemingly turning their back on ...[text shortened]... for higher education rather than proposing ways to fix it to not be an "indoctrination mill"?
