[tivert]

> Or hell, even the way Germany does with its emphasis on vocational schooling as an alternative to university?

Increasing emphasis on vocational schooling would probably be a good idea from an economic (when viewed outside the narrow free market lens) and national competitiveness standpoint.

I kind of feel like there may be some ideological factors going on, but I don't know enough about Germany or East Asia to comment. Are those countries more comfortable with certain kinds of inequality or are vocational professions more respected (or a little bit of both)?

[cjpearson]

In Germany I think it's a bit of both. Beginning in 5th grade, pupils attend different schools. It differs a bit between the states, but generally those in the university track schools (gymnasium) will attend secondary school until 12th or 13th grade then go on to university while the other schools finish at 9th or 10th grade. Those students can then begin working, take an apprenticeship or attend vocational school.

While it may be beneficial to have support for apprenticeships and vocational training, it's controversial that the decision point is made so early. At that age, it may be less about the child's ambitions and abilities and more about the family's resources and social class.

[tivert]

> While it may be beneficial to have support for apprenticeships and vocational training, it's controversial that the decision point is made so early. At that age, it may be less about the child's ambitions and abilities and more about the family's resources and social class.

Part of me thinks that may not be such a bad thing. It's very meritocratic thinking to assume that the smartest ("best") kids should always bubble to the top, but that also probably has some perverse consequences. All parts of society need and benefit from talent (e.g. becoming a union leader or a really skilled mechanic), and concentrating talent at the top helps tell a (false) moral story that only those at the top are really deserving of the rewards.