Top Posts
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- spandrell on Bioleninism, the first step
- spandrell on Bioleninism, the first step
- condude on Bioleninism, the first step
- Daniel Chieh on Bioleninism, the first step
- Lerma on Bioleninism, the first step
Top Posts
Archives
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011

Also, white people are willing to pay more to escape minorities for their education and healthcare. It’s the only politically correct way to segregate yourself.
Yes indeee, especially housing.
Pingback: Cost Disease | @the_arv
If you look at this: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300002#0
It goes from 40% to 60% in that time period, although that’s all labour, not just education.
What about Bretton Woods? It was dismantled around that time the graph begins. The financialization of the economy is a big change since then, along with globalisation increasing greatly.
The items that have gone down in price during the same time period, like mobile phones, have had massive selection pressure from the consumer, and massive creativity on the business side because of its newness as an industry.
The education system has a monopoly on accreditation, so the increase in technology which has led to so much info being free online hasn’t been able to replace the traditional college system, because of the prestige factor, inertia and other things. This puts a hold on the normal selection pressure that consumers would usually inflict on an industry.
Tangentially, college professors used to be paid directly by their students, I believe Goethe was for example. If this happened today you would have a lot less degree inflation, and people would do more worthwhile things and avoid college totally.
We’d have a lot of Jordan Petersons!
I think you have the right of it. Female participation smells like a symptom, not a cause. After all, women hardly ever directly cause anything; their role is to influence men. (With notable, and usually bad, exceptions.)
Look at that sweet increase in GDP!
This is why I often wonder if per capita increase in GDP means very much, if it basically means we’re wasting ever more money than before.
If you paid your wife for sex, GDP would grow up like crazy. File that under “modernity” too.
That’s taxable income too. The IRS would love it.
Pingback: Cost Disease | Reaction Times
One argument I’ve heard about education is that while it always had significant female participation, in the past the most able women were teachers (because it was one of few options available to them), whereas now with more choice female teachers are not so effectively selected. In effect the practical exclusion of women from other professions was a subsidy to education.
I suspect that is marginal, and Jim’s theories are more to the point, but you brought up female participation.
But surely the sheer numbers have increased. Especially in administrative positions, i.e. those with direct influence over the budget.
maybe ‘blank slate’ is to blame: more special ed, more teachers, smaller classes, etc. to futility close an achievement gap that is actually an IQ gap
I’d offer a somewhat more benign hypothesis. Mandatory special education spending. See for example the chart on page 6 here:
http://www.csef-air.org/publications/seep/national/advrpt1.pdf
$11,000 is spent on public education per student on average in the US. There are average 21 children per classroom that is $231,000 of tax receipts per classroom — to pay a teacher $55,000.
Talk about a scam. The scam is way worse in NY, with twice the taxes and more crowded classes.
I’d rather send my children to a fellow in a simple one room school house, and pay him $110,000 per year to teach ten children at his own small facility, what we used to call a one-room school house, where little children learned to act like big children who learned to act like young adults.
There are inefficiencies of scale, because once it gets big, nobody really knows what’s going on, no single person (especially if female) is ever held accountable, and then the professional parasites move in and start sucking.
The graphic start at 1970. There have been peaks in the cost of (higher) education before. Turchin thinks it’s one of the signs of violent times to come (see his book Ages of Discord), Anyway, as it has happened before I don’t think female participation or minorities are the only causes.
Pingback: On Cost Disease | Free Northerner