The article is drawing attention to the kind of jobs being generated in the US economy, which reflects the kind of formal training needed. It seems that little formal training is needed for the kind of jobs being generated implying a lot of things but especially that debt-led education requires reconsideration. But it also leaves open what kind of sectors the US can engage in in a highly internationalized economy. Clearly there are interventionist policy implications. So I think the piece is not anti-education but from an employment-income perspective what kind of education might be worthwhile.
Anthony P. D'Costa Chair and Professor in Contemporary Indian Studies Australia India Institute and School of Social & Political Sciences University of Melbourne 147-149 Barry Street, Carlton VIC 3053 Ph: +61 3 9035 6161 Visit the Australia India Institute Website http://www.aii.unimelb.edu.au/ Recent books: http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780198082286.do#.UI5Wzmc2dI0 http://www.oup.com/localecatalogue/cls_academic/?i=9780199646210 http://www.anthempress.com/pdf/9780857285041.pdf Sent from my iPad On Sep 4, 2013, at 8:28, [email protected] wrote: > "Anthony D'Costa" <[email protected]> wrote: > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-d-atkinson-phd/what-emerging-knowledge-e_b_3819181.html > > I can't figure out what field of knowledge is of no use to most people. > > We need to know a lot about a variety of things just to vote intelligently. > > We need to know about health and diet issues to stay healthy. > > -- > Ron > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
