I’ll give an example of the bad-side of the “go to college is the way to success”:

College was suitable for me, but no combination of student loan/grant/income was able to make it happen.

I’m ok with that though, precisely because of the kind of thing Mike Rowe is talking about.

I found a lot of successes that were possible OUTSIDE of a diploma. I *had to*. I wanted the academic route. But it wasn’t possible for me.

It never stopped me though.

He’s not anti-education. What he *is about* is being _realistic_ about life.

We need people doing things everywhere to have a functioning society.

No college doesn’t mean jail. Bernie is wrong about that. He’s very wrong about that.

This doesn’t mean that college shouldn’t be free or better subsidized: it should be.

But it’s not the only way.

I’ll give an example of the bad-side of the “go to college is the way to success”:

“I can’t work at McDonalds: I have a degree.” and so, they sponge off of hard-working parents instead, justifying their choice because of the diploma.

Or look at how we regularly degrade hard-working people. Or people who work in multiple professions. They’re often called losers because they go from job to job, freelance.

Why? If they’re working hard to make money, what’s the difference whether they have a university degree or not?

So, Mike Rowe is correct. It’s also his personal campaign: to give more respect to people in the “dirty jobs” department. I’m rather proud of him for taking this stance. He’s not anti-college, despite appearances. He’s anti-discrimination.

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

7 − = one

Leave a Reply