[LockeWatts]

Perhaps we should stop telling kids they can be whatever they want when they grow up.

That's a rather depressing idea, but it's the truth. Unless you're independently wealthy or one in a hundred million, you will not be able to sustain yourself in certain pursuits.

They're great to have as a hobby, but sometimes you just need to pay the bills. The land of opportunity is closed for our generation, but nobody told us until we had already packed our bags and boarded the plane.

[danielweber]

Used to be poets earned very little but had very simple lifestyles. It was their choice so everyone was happy.

Now if you want to be a poet, you still can. But the problem is that there are upper-class kids who want to be poets but not live like one, and they are going to bid up the cost of the poet lifestyle.

A similar thing happened in journalism. Kids of rich families wanted to "change the world" and bid the wages of working journalists down to nil.

[cdcarter]

The issue here is that the liberal arts degree shouldn't be seen as job training. That's not the purpose of a liberal arts degree.

[jmtame]

I would probably ask them to read What You'll Wish You'd Known (http://www.paulgraham.com/hs.html). I like the analogy of staying upwind because it provides you more options when the time comes that you find out what you want to do.

[fuzzythinker]

No, telling kids they can be whatever they want can never change (as long as it isn't unethical). The idea is to teach them to be responsible and logical. If tuition for say an art major cost $15k a yr, they have to understand or be told that unless the parents support them, they will either need to work part time or other means to come up with the tuition, or if getting a loan, working more than fulltime outside the major field may be necessary.