[lumost]

This aligns with the experience I and my parents had growing up in the US. My grandparents worked in factories and did relatively well for themselves, living in the same town in Connecticut that their grandparents worked in as farmers 2 generations prior. They had the notion that factory life wasn't wear the future was and pushed my parents to go to college in the 70s.

By the time I was growing up in the 90s and 00s just 2 towns over the very notion of factory work as a viable career had vanished. Everyone was prepped to live in a 2-tier system of college goers and those who weren't heading to college.

Flash forward to now and it turns out that it was only certain types of college that paid off and everyone else went into unstable service jobs or unstable non-technical disciplines.

If we're building a meritocracy that feels like a lottery people are going to be angry. If it works like a lottery, then the people with the most tickets are going to win every time.

[taurath]

It turns out that all they have to do is split the angry people in two to confuse who to be angry at and that works for decades.

[reducesuffering]

I think it was pretty apparent back in 2012 when I was picking college majors that it was essentially engineering, economics, medical, or you're going to have a rough time.

[lumost]

I suspect the mentality started to shift after the '08 crises. But I know quite a few undergraduate "business" majors who weren't able to find remunerative work from that era.

[nradov]

Business is still one of the most remunerative college majors.

https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/average-sala...

[lumost]

There’s a lot of hidden correlations in that stat.

It’s almost certain that it includes individuals who went on to get MBAs which open big doors in terms of compensation. Would love to see how this stat breaks down by cohort.

[Pokepokalypse]

>people are going to be angry.

sure. I reckon they are.