Instead, for Thiel, the bubble that has taken the place of housing is the higher education bubble. �A true bubble is when something is overvalued and intensely believed,� he says. �Education may be the only thing people still believe in in the United States. To question education is really dangerous. It is the absolute taboo. It�s like telling the world there�s no Santa Claus.�
Like the housing bubble, the education bubble is about security and insurance against the future. Both whisper a seductive promise into the ears of worried Americans: Do this and you will be safe. The excesses of both were always excused by a core national belief that no matter what happens in the world, these were the best investments you could make. Housing prices would always go up, and you will always make more money if you are college educated.
Like any good bubble, this belief� while rooted in truth� gets pushed to unhealthy levels. Thiel talks about consumption masquerading as investment during the housing bubble, as people would take out speculative interest-only loans to get a bigger house with a pool and tell themselves they were being frugal and saving for retirement. Similarly, the idea that attending Harvard is all about learning? Yeah. No one pays a quarter of a million dollars just to read Chaucer. The implicit promise is that you work hard to get there, and then you are set for life. It can lead to an unhealthy sense of entitlement. �It�s what you�ve been told all your life, and it�s how schools rationalize a quarter of a million dollars in debt,� Thiel says.
Thanks Bostonian, for the link to the very interesting article. I think in a way that the hostility school folks show our kids it that often our kids - just by existing - call into question the whole 'education will solve all our social problems and insure a good future for everyone' myth.
It does scare me how much money colleges charge - but I see my motivation as a bit different - not 200K for my son to discuss Chaucer, but maybe for him to be in a place where it's normal to delve deeply into Chaucer surrounded by enthusiastic peers and teachers. Probably not Harvard, but maybe Swathmore, Williams, Grinell or Wesylean.
Interestingly to me, is that what doesn't get questioned is the idea that most 18 year olds are ready for the 'independence' granted to college freshmen to be subjected to peer-pressure like the world has never seen with very few supports in a completely artificial environment of college. Judging by my outer-directed perfectionism tinged memories from age 17 of my campus agemates - the answer was
no way back in the 1980. I don't get the sense that campus culture has improved since then.
So I question the whole idea of 'sleep away college' in general, not just on the grounds that the fincial investment isn't a good risk. If you child is one of the ones who is too damaged by the process to finish college, or worse, then the risks go way beyond financial. I do get it that this is going to sound ironic from a mom who's teen is living away at boarding school. ((shrugs and more shrugs)) I didn't say that I thought sleep-away college was bad for me! ((wink))
Love and More Love,
Grinity
