SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Conspicuous consumption persists today. But just as the patricians of classical times changed their habits once the masses gained the ability to copy them, so too have modern American elites recoiled from accumulating mere goods now that globalisation has made them affordable to the middle class. Instead, argues Elizabeth Currid-Halkett, a professor at the University of Southern California, in "The Sum of Small Things", they have begun consuming the fruits of "conspicuous production": socially worthy things like fair-trade coffee. They also emphasise "inconspicuous consumption", of services like education. Far from making the world more egalitarian, this shift, in particular, threatens to entrench modern elites' privileged position more effectively than the habits of their predecessors ever did.
[...] Rather than filling garages with flashy cars, the data show, today's rich devote their budgets to less visible but more valuable ends. Chief among them is education for their children: the top 10% now allocate almost four times as much of their spending to school and university as they did in 1996, whereas for other groups the figure has hardly budged. They also invest heavily in domestic services such as housekeepers, freeing up time that the less fortunate must spend on chores.
Rather than frittering away that precious leisure time on frivolities, as Veblen's leisure class did, they devote it to enriching experiences, like attending the opera, holidaying in far-off lands and working out at fancy gyms. Their children, by tagging along and thus absorbing this "cultural capital", develop the sophistication needed to win admission to selective universities, vastly increasing the odds that they will form the next generation's elite.
The rich also throw lavish birthday parties for their dogs.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 08 2017, @07:03AM (6 children)
Probably cost a lot to educate everyone (including the poor) properly. But in the long run it may cost them even more to not do so ;). Maybe take half the defense spending and spend it on education and healthcare instead? Defend your country.
FWIW, many Asians not from the elite class are entering top universities in disproportionate numbers (disproportionate in terms of demographics, but perhaps not in terms of conventional scores and achievements). So much so that even Harvard has made it harder for them, in order to reduce their numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Federal_Complaints_Against_Harvard_University%27s_Alleged_Discriminatory_Admission_Practice#Complaints [wikipedia.org]
But in a way that's diversity for you. Having 25% consist of these top achievers might reduce diversity. Need to have some less hardworking losers in class too ;).
FWIW I'm Asian and not one of those top achievers. I know a few of them and they are really "best of the best". You can add more required achievements and the next batch will just work harder to get all the new checkboxes checked ;). So the only way Harvard could keep the numbers down was to discriminate.
There are billions of Asians in the world, most of us know very early that we weren't born a special snowflake, we actually need to do something special to be special. Many Asian parents can be quite demanding (often abusive too). Maybe not to this extent but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkN9VdjgDwM [youtube.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 08 2017, @09:33AM (3 children)
It is an illusion that mediocrities can control top achievers indefinitely. Just a magicians sleigh of hand is enough to open your eyes: What would Harvard do if Asians realized that they alone can found their own new university which would overshadow any Ivy League university? Complain that it is not fair to admit only top-scoring individuals?
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday August 08 2017, @11:21AM (1 child)
Why not? I heard an anecdote once that was how Stanford University was begun--Harvard snubbed them haughtily, and so the Stanfords went off and founded their own university because they were quite wealthy.
The only trouble I can foresee with an all-Asian university is that the Japanese will get ragged on by everybody, the Koreans will split into warring factions amongst themselves immediately, the Chinese will demand xiuxi every afternoon when everyone else wants to attend class, and the Filippinos will become increasingly irritated that everyone's always hitting on their women.
Asians are not a monolith.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 08 2017, @12:46PM
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday August 08 2017, @07:18PM
It is an illusion that mediocrities can control top achievers indefinitely.
Correct, that's why you make sure there's some lead [columbia.edu] in their water [npr.org] so they don't become top achievers in the first place.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday August 08 2017, @01:42PM (1 child)
One big objection to some sloppy terminology here: the lumping of educational services in with consumption. There is poor quality education, and the sort of private school that is more about show and running an exclusive clubhouse than education, and maybe those could be labeled as consumption. Sticking to the commonly understood meaning, education is definitely investing in the future, and not mere consumption.
I've come to realize a whole lot of things are more political than I thought. People are looking everywhere for competitive edges, and some will look for and take ways to disadvantage rivals. Education is one of the top political footballs. Social conservatives trying to wreck public education with garbage such as "teach the controversy", "abstinence only", and the general anti-intellectual hate for science, and desire to instill their religion in young minds, are merely useful idiots for those among the elites who would like education to be more exclusive. Making the public school system a hostile work environment for teachers as well as students, by cranking up competition to the extreme, and trying to instill harsh, military style discipline, also helps serve that nefarious purpose.
Several big changes should be made to the public school system in the US: First, offer preschool to all. Currently, elites spend upwards of $10k/year to send their toddlers to school, a sum that is impossible for the poor to scrape up, and from what I hear, the kids who learn foundational math and literacy skills at age 3 have a big advantage over the kids who didn't start until 1st grade. It's possible to home school, yes, but even if the parents have the time, they probably lack the skills. If preschool is such a good idea, it should be available to all. Second, change summer vacation. Perhaps have students do a week of school twice over the summer vacation, to keep them fresher. Third, make school less rigid and regimented. Be good if more of school was more about access to resources and equipment and knowledgeable adults than forced memorization to score better on tests. And fourth, make the transition from high school senior to college freshman less of a jarring brick wall by lowering fees and reforming this scandalously predatory student loan system. Your high school years are free, and required, but for college you have to take on massive student loan debt, unless your parents step up of course, and they can't entirely unless they're rich. Paying something for college seems a good idea, helps people value college education and take it more seriously, but asking for too much excludes people, and the US is definitely on the side of asking for too much.
(Score: 1) by crafoo on Tuesday August 08 2017, @04:57PM
Too many people are going to college. Most of the people I met at university shouldn't have been there. They were too immature, not prepared, and not motivated to do the work. Fewer people should be going into higher education. This will reduce the demand for student loans, reduce the demand for classroom space, and reduce the cost (lower demand).
Universities need to cut all the BS classes. You know what they are. Everyone does. If It's not a science or math class it needs to be firmly grounded in the classics and HARD AS HELL. No more BS easy rides through a poly-sci or anthropology program and into 80k+ of debt. Students are ripping themselves off and it's sickening to watch.
As far as your assessment of earlier education; I disagree with pretty much every assertion you make. It needs to be harder. It needs to be more competitive. Students should be allowed to fail and feel the consequences. There needs to be less inclusiveness and a more realistic worldview taught. Cultural Marxism is a real thing corrupting our primary education system. We as a society must recognize it and methodically confront it, stamped it out, and impart a more usable, realistic, and ethical worldview to young students. Something that will not cripple them mentally before they have even begun.