[posbehsf]

I sometimes wonder what it would take for “yellow vest” type protests to happen in the US.

It seems like there’s a combination of shame in talking about money, in being made to feel personally responsible for being in precarious financial situations (e.g. too much avocado toast!), and relatively easy access to consumer credit to numb things over. Or it’s just the “boiling frog” phenomenon where things get slightly worse every year due to everything getting a little more expensive but never sharply enough that it’d create a mass revolt.

[JumpCrisscross]

> what it would take for “yellow vest” type protests to happen in the US

The solution is simpler. If 18 to 34 year olds simply voted at the frequencies 45 to 64 year olds did [1], our views would form a block worth pandering to. Running as a candidate reducing pensions and alleviating student debt doesn't work because the former will vote you out of office in greater numbers than the latter will vote you in.

[1] https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2017/comm/voti...

[deogeo]

> alleviating student debt

Universities will just raise tuition to compensate. As they've been doing so far: https://www.forbes.com/sites/camilomaldonado/2018/07/24/pric...

Edit: Unless you mean allow that debt to be discharged through bankruptcy. Which probably would put downward pressure on tuition..

[philwelch]

I would make student debt dischargeable through bankruptcy and I would also favor the federal government no longer providing, subsidizing, or guaranteeing student loans.

The "cost" of higher education is a sham; with no incentive to ever reduce costs, the cost will always rise to match incoming revenues. Meanwhile, student loans are a predatory mechanism where teenagers are encouraged to take on tens of kilodollars of undischargeable, unsecured debt. This combination has allowed the cost of higher education to grow out of control, backed by the cheap, subsidized credit of millions of Americans. Very reminiscent of the housing bubble, in fact.

[bobochan]

As a parent paying college tuition right now I want to agree, but as a professor I see the other side of it. I teach at the graduate level and despite the high tuition we lose money on every student that we accept. It costs a lot to have faculty spending two hours with each student alone in office hours, plus six hours of class time per week, and countless hours of support virtually 18/7 via email.

My time as faculty is just the tip of the iceberg: the cost of the buildings and grounds, IT costs, academic and administrative support, and the costs to support research, let alone student services and things like admissions, career services, etc.

My father was an engineer that spent his retirement volunteering to teach computer skills to anyone who was interested. I will be retiring in a few years and I plan to follow in his footsteps, however humble my contributions may be. I would love to contribute to a change that would make high quality education available to many more people at a much lower costs, but as a long time participant in MOOCs, I am just not sure they are the way.

[tathougies]

American universities spend much more on buildings and resources. The kind of gym and pool we bad in our tiny liberal arts college was way better than any college resources of europe. Even public universities here spend tons on non academic costs. Way more than other countries. Sowell covers this in 'inside American education'.

Alleviating debt and making it easier to pay more expensive loans incentivizes colleges to compete to attract students who can now affors higher price points

[jccalhoun]

It is becoming an arms race. Colleges in the USA build these things to attract potential students. If one colleges has them and the nearby comparable college doesn't then the one without looks worse in comparison.

[sytelus]

Causes of rising tution: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/05/05/report-says-a...

[OatsAndHoney]

I fundamentally believe programs like MIT OCW and MOOCs are the way of the future. The problem with MOOCs is that they lack focus and quality control.

For example, School Yourself is the single best math program I've ever discovered on the internet: https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-algebra-schoolyourse...

Compare that to the Calc1 course from MIT on EdX as well. The algebra course engages you, helps you think through problems, and offers a customized learning path with a virtual tutor. The MIT course is just lecture and reading materials, it's not interactive, and it doesn't help you to discover the topics on your own in the same way that School Yourself does.

I desperately want to see a focused study program from an entity like EdX that takes a person from algebra to discrete mathematics using the model of School Yourself. I also want to see a similar course path for physics and chemistry.

Being a liberal arts major I wouldn't be where I am in technology today if it wasn't for friends, IRC, and places like EdX. I was willing to literally sift through hundreds of hours of content to get here though. Not everyone has that kind of time or interest, we need to make it easier for everyone to learn.

If we can just have a single platform that really focuses on bringing value to the individual and giving them a strong base to work from piece by piece, then we would have so many more mathematicians, physicists, engineers, programmers, etc.., all without crushing student debt. Imagine the innovation that we could realize!

[ibarea277]

Why do you think college is 10x more expensive now? Seems like maybe some of those expenses are not materially impacting education quality, unless you think that the generation that got us to the moon was working with absolutely substandard educations.

[jccalhoun]

I have a friend who is an advisor at a Big 10 school. While going through the old papers in her office she found the budget of the school from the late 90s. The school's expenses have doubled in that time. Part of it is certainly the amenities arm race. However, the amount of money they get from the state has only gone up by 50%.

[sytelus]

Increase in tuition is almost entirely due to pull back in state funding coupled with increased administrative/executive overhead. Vast majority of increase don't go to faculty. Keep in mind tuition has increased by 3.1% each year on inflation adjusted basis [1]. I don't think faculty paychecks have increased by that rate anywhere close.

[1] https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tabl...

[cousin_it]

At least for subjects like math or programming, I think the right way might be self-study (going through a textbook and solving all exercises) plus an hour of one-on-one time with a teacher every couple days to check progress and resolve questions.

[sjy]

When you say you 'see the other side of it' that suggests that you think the status quo is inevitable. But wasn't tuition much cheaper when you were an undergraduate?

[ng12]

I'm sure they make a killing on undergrads though. I can't imagine losing money when you're paying adjuncts a few grand to teach a class of 60 students.

[bobochan]

We do not have many adjuncts so I don’t think we actually lose less money on undergraduates. If it were not for the generosity of alumni and an endowment built over two centuries then I am not sure how we would stay afloat.

[roganartu]

> I would make student debt dischargeable through bankruptcy and I would also favor the federal government no longer providing, subsidizing, or guaranteeing student loans.

I completed a Bachelor and Master degrees at a top 50 world-ranked university with an (Australian) government sponsored loan of, by graduation, around $30k USD, that I never would've had a hope of funding privately at that point in my life (or honestly any point after if I had never gotten the degree and hence a high-paying job).

My loan is not dischargeable through bankruptcy, and is repaid as a percentage of taxable income (~10% at the top tier), and not repaid at all if you earn below a threshold a few multiples above the poverty line. The "interest" is actually just inflation as the cash rate from the reserve bank is applied to the outstanding balance at year end. My interest last year was $800 AUD on a $40k AUD balance.

I disagree that the problem is specifically easy access to capital. There is a value in attending university; it creates an educated population which benefits everyone. I believe the core of the problem in the US is the lack of appetite for regulation and government intervention leading to a situation where the government guarantees private capital to fund things that they don't control the cost of. This creates a reason for the lender to discount the risk of the debt (because the government guarantees it by making it undischargeable) leading to capability for borrowers to get bigger loans. Universities quickly cottoned on and billed more for less, and the cycle continues until it (eventually) collapses.

The cost of degrees in Australia are easily regulated as the majority of universities are government institutions. There is one private university but the government loan limits are often not enough to finish a 4 year degree there so in reality only rich kids whose parents wish to buy them business connections attend.

I think it's the government guaranteeing loans to expensive institutions are the problem, not that people are getting degrees. Why remove all government loan assistance? Just stop giving it to people who want to go to private universities.

[haihaibye]

The argument for student debt not being dischargable is to stop lots of people declaring bankruptcy upon graduation.

You can repossess a house or a car, but you can't repossess a degree.

If there was an option of cancelling a degree (either because of bankruptcy or user disatisfaction) this could perhaps work for vocational degrees or where the degree is 100% signalling.

If some kind of learning took place - how do you give that up?

[philwelch]

This would have the effect of drying up the credit market for completely unsecured 5-6 figure loans to teenagers. This is the intended effect.

[novok]

An idea is to make universities add some skin in the game and personally fund a portion of student loans for their students along with bankruptcy provisions for those loans.

[user17843]

It already happened, and was called "Occupy Wallstreet". Then identity politics came around and occupied the left.

[4ntonius8lock]

Well, there were mass arrests of hundreds of people at a time. Accusations of spying and subterfuge happening to the leaders.

COINTELPRO happened with virtually no one being punished. Not understanding that it has and will happen again is to not learn from history.

[spamizbad]

All politics is identity politics. The difference is the left embraced it without trying to sugar coat it.

It’s too bitter and now there’s some backlash.

[whatshisface]

>All politics is identity politics.

That's only true if you define the term broadly enough to be useless. What about, say, anti-war demonstrations during Vietnam?

[spamizbad]

It’s less literal than that.

You can think of the whole cosmopolitan urban vs salt-of-the-earth rural aspect of American politics as one example. Or southern identity/culture. “As a veteran who served”/“As a parent”, or the cross-denomination “moral majority”— it’s all based around the idea that your lived experience as something shapes your political perspective and is intrinsically valuable to the political conversation.

And even Occupy: was occupy simply making a statement about economic politics or was it the identity of “the 1%” or “Bankers” vs the rest of Americans? These categories were somewhat arbitrary and basically represented which group you identified with.

[whatshisface]

That's what I mean by defining the phrase so broadly it becomes useless. You can say, "I am, and I have an identity, therefore my politics is identity politics." However, identity politics is specifically when the tribal motivations exceed and dominate all other motivations. It's similar to how islands are not called bodies of water even though soil contains water.

[spamizbad]

> However, identity politics is specifically when the tribal motivations exceed and dominate all other motivations.

Then the term "identity politics" shouldn't be applied. But even if we accept that extremely narrow view: there are numerous political segments that are notorious for doing what you describe across the political spectrum. Most notable the rural Scotch-Irish, often criticized for routinely voting against their self-interest and instead choosing to vote for pols who simply provide them cultural validation and do nothing to address their material concerns.

[User23]

Parent should have been more specific: all politics is identity politics in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious state. The USA of the Vietnam war no longer exists, and isn't comparable to the USA of today.

In a nation state, politics tend to be divided more on ideological and regional lines, because everyone shares an identity.

[scroblart]

This is very weird comment. Are you saying that the USA was not a multi-ethnic/multi-religious state in the 1960s?

In a nation state, politics tend to be divided more on ideological and regional lines, because everyone shares an identity. There has never been a "nation" where everybody shares an identity in the sense discussed above.

[hyperdunc]

The comment makes sense, but the US isn't best example. Although last century the US was somewhat dominated by one identity (which is now waning and leaving room for others to grow) it has always been multi-ethnic and multi-religious.

A better example would be European nations like Hungary, which have reinforced their national identities in the face of the recent migrant crisis.

[tracker1]

Really? One thing that is starkly contrasted today vs. even 10 years ago.

People used to be able to listen, understand, empathise and compromise with those that they don't agree with. Showing a due amount of respect for people. This has been sorely lost with the tail end of the Millennial generation, and it shouldn't be surprising that nothing of value is being accomplished at all imho.

I may not agree with all politicians, but there are some I feel that I genuinely respect. Those who lean on identitarian tribalism are not in the list.

[spamizbad]

Singling out a generation: That's identity politics.

[tracker1]

Generally speaking, which generation ...

    * Force ever expanding identitarianism view
    * Force corporations to align with their views
    * Make anti-semetic statements while supporting other religions
    * Seek to ignore the foundations of government and the press
    * Work to displace government
    * Are willing to use physical violence to accomplish their goals

?

[higherpayusa]

>All politics is identity politics.

This is probably as true today as at any time in the past. What has changed, for the worse, is the definition of "other" identities (those that are not our own).

What did "rural america" mean to "city dwellers" in the 1970s? What does it mean now? I'd guess the definitions most of us carry in our minds have narrowed.

[deogeo]

I heard (and take this with a bucket of salt) that the aim of the ruling class is to de-economize politics, and de-politicize the economy. I.e. don't let pesky democracy get in the way of capital.

Matches reality rather well.

[themagician]

As long as their is cheap food, cheap gas and television there will be no mass revolt in the US.

Few are willing to risk their life when they ride around in their F150 picking up cheeseburgers, fries and a large drink for <$10 on the way home to watch the game… or whatever. That’s the real power of America that so many underestimate. You can placate 90% of the population with that alone.

Take away any ONE of those things the US will spiral into anarchy in mere weeks.

[badpun]

> Few are willing to risk their life when they ride around in their F150 picking up cheeseburgers, fries and a large drink for <$10 on the way home to watch the game… or whatever. That’s the real power of America that so many underestimate. You can placate 90% of the population with that alone.

And no wonder. It's the lifestyle that billions of people in countries other than US can only dream of. A lot of them are risking their lifes to be able to live this dream.

[sizzle]

Don't forget alcohol and marijuana for placating the masses.

[kikoreis]

And narcotics and antidepressants to handle chronic pain and PTSD. Having spent the last month on the West Coast I have started to think these might have a real dampening effect on violence potential.

[themagician]

You can get drugs in most places on the world pretty easily though.

[sysbin]

Definitely a culture & behaviour mix that keeps people from acting in their best interest. Might be that the current offline/online social platforms don't allow what's needed to occur. Friends might talk about being tight on finances for a day but what else will come of it?