This is a key consideration. If I'm helping my kid pay for college, he/she needs to come out with a degree that WILL get him/her a job. Accounting/pre-med/whatever. No BS classes like 'art and activism'. He/she can take those later, on his own dime. |
| I run a fair bit in Thiel circles when I'm out in the Bay Area, so I've certainly met plenty of people who think in the manner that the OP describes, but he's wrong to talk about it as if it's very common; it's still a niche way of thinking among a small segment of rich folks, it's not at all universal or even the dominant way of thinking. |
Your kid can do both, that's what electives are for. My dad was a brilliant aerospace engineer, and the science fiction and creative writing courses he took at his Ivy helped him in his eventual livelihood every bit as much as his formal engineering education. |
I think that this is the attitude our country was founded on and I like the grassroots efforts to bring it back to it's founding ideals. The only obstacle I see if government making it very difficult on start-ups by regulating them out of existence. |
| I think you and theil will rethink things when the current frothy tech bubble bursts. Enjoy. |
Why did you pay for her to take those classes? If she wanted to take classes like that, you should have made her pay. |
OP, you say "the Rich" in the title of your post, but you are referring to a very narrow part of the spectrum of truly wealthy people. In your circle, it may be true that college is a waste of time and money, but you are focusing on people who create technology-based start-ups. How do you know your child won't be interested in becoming a middle-manager at Wal-Mart, or a curator at a small museum, or a physical therapist, or a salesperson at Macy's? Not everyone (even your own child) is cut out to be an entrepreneur, or is interested in technology or engineering or business. If your child wants to be a doctor or a physicist or a writer, s/he doesn't have to go to college, but it would take a very highly self-directed, self-motivated person to power him- or her-self through the education needed to succeed in one of these areas. Your expectations for your children are so narrow -- Ivy or nothing? There are lots of wonderful colleges where children can find themselves, can learn where they fit into the world, and what makes them feel successful. You are assuming that what motivates you will also motivate your children. By depriving them of the opportunity to attend a college that's not an Ivy, you are saying to them that if they can't attain a certain level of success, which you define as an Ivy education or making an insane amount of money through a tech start-up, you won't support them. I don't think college is about the education for most people. I think it's a transition from home to workplace, and it allows children to grow up. It's not all about learning skills to use in a career. Telling a child who isn't interested in becoming an entrepreneur, or one who is not a self-starter, to go out and make something of themselves without giving them enough time to mature, isn't a recipe for success. Your children are only 10. What do you know about them? What do they know about themselves? OTOH, I don't think college is necessary or even desirable for many people who go to college now. It's a waste of money and time for those people, no matter what their family's finances. [BTW, You may have an Ivy education, but you've missed out on basic grammar, which you probably think is obsolete too. In the old school, we use an adverb to modify a verb, e.g. "schools are moving too slowly."] I agree that college, particularly private college, is far too expensive, and no way is it worth the money any more. I too have an Ivy education, but I am not wealthy. I'm an artist married to a mid-level executive. We can't afford Ivies, so our kids are going to public colleges. I'm not sure those are worth the money either, but I do think the four years my kids are going to spend in college will help them make the transition from home to work. I don't think my kids are ready to tackle the working world at age 18. Your kids might be ready, OP, and if so, skip college. But if "the Rich" as you define them, give up on college for their kids, I don't expect it will have much of an impact on the rest of us middle-class folk. |
|
If the economy continues the way it has been, with the rich getting richer and everyone else getting poorer, it stands to reason that we no longer have a "meritocracy." Instead, the rich will seek to build tall walls around their wealth to contain it. Getting a higher ed degree has little to do with keeping and sustaining mega wealth, because you need to do nothing to "deserve" or "earn" it.
Just make sure that the economic system works to your advantage. |
Totally agree. It's freakin' 1999 out there all over again. I was in SF when the bubble burst the first time. I can't believe people have forgotten so quickly. I kinda enjoyed watching them get their comeuppance the first time, almost wish I was still out there to watch it again. Almost. |
The mega rich won't be impacted by this because they know enough to diversify and protect their investments. It's the upper-middle and middle classes, trying to inch ahead in a system that is failing them, who will put their eggs in too few baskets in an attempt to beat the market, that will build up and then take the fall for various "bubbles." |
Eeew. I'm embarrassed for you. |
|
I first encountered the super-rich when I was around 20. Some went to my (fancy) university. But I think I really understood something about that segment of society when I met one of the kids' fathers and ignorantly asked: "What do you do?" And he sort of had a weird look on his face, as if he didn't quite know how to answer the question (or maybe was puzzled that I asked it), and he said: "I manage the family estate."
It took me a few minutes to let that sink in. What, no profession? No job? Well, no... He moved (or let someone else move) his money around into various tax shelters and investments and lived very, very, VERY well off of that. I think he found it amusing that his daughter wanted to go to university. She studied Art History and Italian, got an internship at Sotheby's, and went on to be a governing board member (or something like that) of some big international museum and worked in the charity circuit. Not my world. At all. |
|
I think one key point in this discussion -- which is unrelated to $$ -- is the proliferation of information and near universal access to it.
At any station in life now, there is no excuse for not going beyond the assignment, whether in school, the workplace or an area of interest. Successful kids will be curious and not rely on the teacher or professor to tell them everything. Students need to supplement the syllabus -- early, often and continuously. |