tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post5262190897037429977..comments2024-03-28T18:32:05.933-04:00Comments on bensozia: More on Education CostsJohnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01037215533094998996noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-43988534017435463502019-05-29T11:44:39.022-04:002019-05-29T11:44:39.022-04:00But prices and costs also rose in medieval conditi...But prices and costs also rose in medieval conditions--not as rapidly, but there was a steady rise. And yes, I'm sure one could find specific causes for specific rises. But I'm wondering if there isn't something deeper at work. I guess my hypothesis would be that what a significant portion of people want out their work is social status maintenance and security against risk--and that there's something about keeping those things going that may eventuate in increasing costs--more or less slow or rapid depending upon circumstantial factors.<br /><br />Arguably, *part* of what capitalism means is the breaking of that maintenance and security imperative. For some contemporary capitalists, that breakage is almost a fetish. And I wonder if a relative imperviousness to disruption is part of what bothers some contemporary capitalists so much about areas like health and education.<br /><br />One could also suggest that the problem with increasing health and education costs is that those cost rises are depriving precisely those who are losing in the modern capitalist efficiency equation, elsewhere in the economy.<br /><br />Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14456987412710878404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-38910883548485195482019-05-28T14:19:02.293-04:002019-05-28T14:19:02.293-04:00We have gotten richer over the past 250 years beca...We have gotten richer over the past 250 years because labor has become more efficient: more wheat grown or widgets made per person-hour. Or four actors delivering a play to 500,000 people at once over television. Or one man driving a big machine that digs as much as a thousand men with shovels. Economic growth essential means labor becomes more efficient. As labor becomes more efficient, salaries can rise; that is the basic economic fact underlying the modern world.<br /><br />Anything that cannot be made more efficient essentially remains medieval. Theoretically, people whose work is done in a medieval way (e.g., teachers) ought to be as poor as medieval people. But we want them to be full-fledged members of our society, so we spend a lot of money to make up for their inefficiency. And the faster the rest of the economy is growing, the faster costs in person-to-person fields will rise.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01037215533094998996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-67721447801057215012019-05-28T12:52:40.346-04:002019-05-28T12:52:40.346-04:00In 1992 I saw a college lower the number of classe...In 1992 I saw a college lower the number of classes, per professor, per semester, from 5 to 4. Few years later from 4 to 3. During that time they also lowered the number of years between paid sabbaticals. Also, the campus was ‘beautified’ and several new building were built, not all paid for by donations. This is a college with 1000 students. They had to do these things to attract qualified professors and to stay up with their peer colleges. Tuition increases came due to these pressures.Susihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08491909280925749677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-48758238419313766012019-05-28T10:28:01.122-04:002019-05-28T10:28:01.122-04:00Interesting. It seems to suggest that the default...Interesting. It seems to suggest that the default position of the economy is that all costs keep rising, *except* where labor is made more efficient.<br /><br />An obvious question is what does making labor more efficient mean? Does it mean hiring fewer to people to do more for longer hours and less reward, with no job security? Does it mean some combination of that and automation? Or is all that just my liberal bias talking?<br /><br />I am intrigued by the idea that the default human social position may be continually rising costs. If it is, I wonder why that would be. And would that explain something deep about the rise and fall of civilizations (or a Chinese-like rhythm of rise, crisis, decline, revival, over and over)?<br /><br />Interesting enough for me, anyway, that I'm willing to teach the AI how to better recognize crosswalks in order to make the comment.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14456987412710878404noreply@blogger.com