Comments by "Kristopher Driver" (@paxdriver) on "" video.

  1. Problem @ 11:30 with matching education with job market - training takes longer than markets take to change. By time subsidies work their way around to filling nursing schools, for example, nurses immigrated to Canada and filled the jobs leaving tax payers paying the subsidies and graduates having no jobs or low paying high skilled jobs. The government is notoriously bad at manipulating markets. The real solution: vocational schools geared towards jobs as opposed to academia filling the job training role. Academics are scholarly, which can be helpful in a job but they don't train workers. So when schools get paid by secured loans eligible to every person who applies, tuitions skyrocket and the school only cares about keeping students enrolled not the education. This, over time, makes the entire country stupid and less productive and forcing intelligent hard workers to overpay for ivy leagues just like USA. Then there's corruption of admissions, underfunded public schools and a gift system of tutoring and entrance exam prep industry where it becomes necessary and eventually a standard expense all for worse outcomes across the board. The smart approach is for universities to focus on academics and research. Vocational trade certificates for job training, and make vocational studies the standard aspirational post secondary instead of universities which just gate keep the middle class wages for no benefit to anyone but employers who retain under-employed staff at a discount. There is seriously zero upside to manipulating university demand for career specific training, it hurts everyone across the board except for the bloated school administration and national financial systems; which are already the most unproductive entitlement-seeking workforce in the entire economy as it is. Check the data, universities did fine before all the facilities and grounds were developed to entice teenagers to enrol at higher fees without increasing teachers or libraries or transit proportionally because "fun" campus was more important than a working system when it comes down to the bottom line.
    1
  2. 12:10 if a business can't survive on a 5-15% difference in wage labour thrn their business isn't viable to begin with. If you can only compete with slave labour then you're not competitive in a country that doesn't condone slave labour. Dumbest argument I've ever heard and I keep hearing it. People who have actually started businesses all know they make far more than 20% on each labourer's output because if they didn't, then variability of a worker's personal life could completely crush a company if several happened to align negatively at the same time by freak coincidence. It's a ridiculous argument they make that labour is too expensive when we can train people to use a $100 computer to perform more work than a middle class bookkeeper 100 years ago. There's no way you can't train a high school kid to be productive in any entry level position, but especially more so a university grad if university are graduating competent adults (which I'd argue they struggle to do, and that's the better argument to make against high paid wages is that the ones demanding them don't earn them and the ones earning them don't demand them)
    1