Flat Screen TVs less costly when Compared to Education. Why?
Interesting article on why certain industries are not feeling the impact of Artificial Intelligence. I am not sure I agree entirely with Marc. Sixty-five-inch TV is around $2,000 today. Why use TVs in comparison which were always less costly?
“We’re heading into a world where a flat-screen TV that covers your entire wall costs $100 and a 4-year degree costs $1M,” Fortune, Marc Andreessen and MSN.
Marc Andreessen is not worrying about artificial intelligence taking people’s jobs. The way he sees it, technological innovation is not allowed to disrupt much of the economy anyway. I am not sure Marc is entirely correct with this premise. Having worked through much of this era and contributing to the change using computerization, there were major changes. My thoughts?
Looking at Machine Tool, functions done by a series of machines and Labor at each operation. Replacing them initially were NC cells and then CNC cells. Four and Five axis CNC replacing 4 and 5 operations done at separate stations and the Labor at each. A major change in manufacturing resulting in an elimination of Labor throughout various industries such as machine tool, die casting, injection molding, etc. In the area of manufacturing, this was a major disruption.
Or take, production and material’s planning as done in the Scheduling and Planning department of a company. Without computerization and MRP/MRP II, scheduling was mostly a manual effort requiring numbers of people collecting information on demand, inventory, shop load, purchasing, and suppliers. The advent of computers and MRP (using this term to cover all) eliminated much of the manual, increased the speed of the planning process and accuracy making the plan relevant to the economy. For example, new product demand. overall demand, and recessions.
This was no small segment of the economy. I can relate to it, as I accomplished the above in various companies as an employee and also as a consultant.
Can aspects of education be computerized? I believe it can. It can, just not to the same degree as the computerization of manufacturing, planning, and inventory control systems. However, the exchanging of personal and technical knowledge between students and teachers is important. This aspect may not be found in computer documentation. It is not that mechanical.
“The prices of education, health care, and housing as well as anything provided or controlled by the government are going to the moon, even as those sectors are technologically stagnant,”
The Gov did it! Yes of course they did. What stopped Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi from increasing the pricing of Insulin? The Gov certainly did not. Neither did they promote it. Lilly was free to increase the prices as Azar saw fit. The same applies to EpiPen and Daraprim.
Waste dictates the price increases of housing as well as land. Government did not do this. The topic of education increases remains open. Why would a Masters Degree at ~$5000 in 1980 increase to $85.000 in 2018? Why would a University of Chicago or Harvard be able to charge even more. It is a good question.
Some thoughts?
There are ways to game the college system through testing and transfer credits, at least in some places (for instance in MA you can use your standardized testing credits to get most of the credits for a 2-year transfer block that’s good at a large number of MA four year colleges). There are websites that help you cram for the standard exams (Modern States for example).
Depending on your GPA, you can also get a discount at the state schools and as long as you live at home, it’s doable without going into 50k+ of debt. But that assumes a level of savvy on the part of the student or their family that probably isn’t common.
If you’re trying to get into some areas you shouldn’t even bother with college anymore. For software engineering you’re best off doing a boot camp and cramming interview questions.
I think the most tragic part of the education system right now is the cost to get an education required to be an educator, combined with the low pay and limited career options once you get that education.
J. Goodwin
That is interesting information. I was thinking more of a college education. OJT is shy of many things you gain in college. It takes a long to gain knowledge globally from one environment too.
It is just me maybe. I would not scam the system. It can catch up with you.
Maybe you could think of educators’ education costs as sort of a multilevel marketing experience.
A couple of observations that lack linkable data.
The cost of an education is not covered by tuition. For state schools some of the money comes from the general budget. That amount (as a share) has decreased over time. For private schools some of the money comes from donors. Harvard’s endowment can afford to pay for every student’s tuition.
My daughter went to an expensive private school. The school gave scholarships to every student. On net, it was not that expensive. Did they overstate their real tuition cost as a marketing gimmick? Can you meaningfully compare tuition today to tuition 40 years ago in the face such a stunt?
The other side of that is state schools where tuition is often limited by law, and they make it up in “fees.”
Looking at my school’s most recent report, salaries and benefits are over half of expenditures, and that includes health care coverage for workers and retirees which have risen a lot faster than inflation. Also, the school used to be surrounded by cheap housing for students and faculty, but it is now surrounded by premium real estate. The school has been building dormitories and apartments even though enrollment has only increased modestly. The big factors seem to be medical costs, real estate costs and building costs. There is also administration fever with a massive bureaucracy that has swollen over the years, but it is harder to characterize.
Of course, my school is a bit weird. It’s mainly a research institution with tuition less than 10% of revenues, but I’ll bet a lot of schools have been bitten by medical cost, real estate associated costs and administration.
Kaleberg:
Yes, to this “big factors seem to be medical costs, real estate costs and building costs.” overall. Building costs are inflated and they also reflect inefficiencies. There is no Critical Path which they would follow to make them more efficient.
Hmmm. Might have something to do with the reality that Higher-Ed is a labor-intensive ‘local’ industry, with many highly paid profs (but surely not all), and ambitious grad students who want to join their ranks. Whereas the TV-building industry exists mostly oversea, is high-techand employs tens of thousands of low-paid assemblers, struggling to breath free, less labor-intensive because of all the robots & large-scale chips.
Maybe MOOCS will do something to change this?
Florida … ranks first in the nation for higher education.
US News
Florida, home to three universities that rank among the 100 Best Colleges nationally, ranks first in the nation for higher education. Washington places second in this subcategory, followed by California, Wyoming and Colorado. …
(Hard to believe. It appears that this is because Florida ranks #1 in lowest debt carried by college graduates. They are actually #29 in Educational Attainment. It’s not clear what Ron DeSantis had to do with this.)