Are Government Subsidies to Higher “Education” Justified?
2nd December 2008
Hint: No.
Leef points out that a lot of higher education is in pursuit of a credential. Why would a company want to hire someone with a credential when there are more efficient means of testing aptitude? Leef cites economist Lowell Gallaway’s argument about the effect of the Supreme Court’s 1971 Griggs v. Duke Power Company decision, which held that employers can be liable for violating federal equal employment law if they use general aptitude testing that has a “disparate impact” on minority job seekers. This, say Gallaway and Leef, has caused many employers to abandon such tests in favor of using educational credentials. On its face, the Griggs decision seems to argue against credentialism. But read Gallaway’s subtle reasoning to see why the unintended consequence is more credentialism.
And bear in mind that, the way education sucks these days, an employer has to require a 4-year degree to be reasonably sure of getting an employee who has what his parents would consider a high-school education.