The U.S. Navy has seen its ship production drop to a 25-year low, falling behind Chinese production even as the service faces increasingly complex threats around the world.
Issues such as the one faced by Marinette Marine have been widespread throughout the country, with shipyards turning to creative solutions such as offering training academies or partnering with technical colleges to get more workers the skills they need to build the Navy’s high-tech vessels.
I agree with this part so much. Instead of free college, we need free trade and technical schools. Good paying jobs, typically union with pensions and we have a huge shortage.
Getting more manufacturing back in the US, becoming more self sufficient, and having dignified employment are all my goals as a progressive too, and I’m really happy there’s movement from the current administration in their areas (despite complaints in other areas)
(I used all Whitehouse links as a from-the-horses mouth source, but there are plenty of articles about each)
I fully agree, companies whine and complain that they can’t find any skilled labor without ever acknowledging that it’s their job to train and take risks on the newbies. Instead they just want the perfect candidate for their specialized position to be gift wrapped and at “market rate” and desperate enough to go through multiple interview stages.
Even in my job, I’ve asked over and over for them to hire a junior/apprentice that I can train up from the beginning on our complex system and work, but they just want to hire short term contractors instead. We end spending the same amount of time training them as a junior, but then 6-12 months later when their contract is up, they go off somewhere else and we have to do it all over again and never build on our foundations.
I was hired as a contractor, and stuck through until I was an employee, and I’m now 5 years in, but it was not easy. It was essentially a two year paid interview.
And most don’t make it that way. If I was hired as a real employee as a junior, and able to train my way up with the masters of my company, who knows where I’d be and how not-delayed and not-over-budget our project would be.
When I talk to business about it, they moan how employees and contractors come from different budgets and the stock market favors contractors so their hands are tied, and I call bullshit on that. It’s bad business and the solution is obvious - train up the workforce you want to have.
It’s like buying a good pair of boots once, or buying cheap boots every year.
When I talk to business about it, they moan how employees and contractors come from different budgets and the stock market favors contractors so their hands are tied, and I call bullshit on that. It’s bad business and the solution is obvious - train up the workforce you want to have.
Agreed. Very few companies invest in their employees now day and that is the problem.
I can’t think of the company right now, but it was in the early 2000s. They needed more programmers, so anyone interested could take the aptitude test. If they passed, they were sent to a boot camp; if they passed that, they got to take college courses while working as entry-level programmers.
I have not seen any programs like that in a very long time.
Do you think high skill trades aren’t an education? I don’t think they are saying anything against a traditional university education, but more supporting skilled trades as well.
My mistake, they did say “instead of free college”. I think we could probably support both if we raised the standards a bit.
Even if the fractions you provided are accurate, they don’t speak to the qualitative benefit of educating a population. This seems to be a problem with conservatives, y’all are only concerned about quantitive measures.
What is the qualitative risk of an educated population?
I am not a conservative wtf… my body of work speaks for itself. What are you basing this clown take on?
they don’t speak to the qualitative benefit of educating a population.
This is benefit in the room with us right now?
All I see is increasingly improvised and indebted population, working longer hours, getting less benefits… people are not forming families. People can’t afford rent.
Now show me this benefit you are talking about, dear!
What is the qualitative risk of an educated population?
Debt slavery which solid part of millennials is currently suffering.
If we’re talking about altering society on a mass scale, you’re damned right I care about measurable outcomes.
I value freedom. I value economic consent. If you’re going to use centralized power to forcibly trade me something else for a loss of those two, the the other thing needs to be measurable.
No, we poured tons of government money into making college accessible. I went to college on loans designed for that purpose.
We valued college and we backed the notion with hard cash. Well, with forced loans.
It drove the price of college through the roof though. Just like housing, just like medicine, just like all the other things we provide government money to help people get.
It’s a consistent pattern. People don’t trust the free market, something is deemed too important to let the market handle, so we pump government money into purchasing assistance and, predictably to anyone who’s taken macroeconomics 101, the prices of those things skyrocket and the availability drops.
There are student loans available to fund college or scholarships. The military also had the GI Bill. The National guard has the GI bill and variable program based on the state.
My whole point is cost shouldn’t be a barrier to education. Loans only serve as a bridge to affording something otherwise unaffordable, but they don’t address the root cause.
Which people do you consider “improper”? Are you saying only “proper” people should be educated? How do you make the distinction, and what is the benefit of having an uneducated portion of the population? Are you suggesting educated drug dealers are responsible for the general unaffordability of education?
This sounds racially coded. I think you just outed yourself.
While I am not a conservative, I may agree with you strongly on education. College degrees are massively overinflated in value and propped up by government-backed student debt. We need to get away from this idea that everyone needs to go to college to secure their best life because we critically need these trade skills in the economy, in conjunction with policies that support these workers with fair compensation for their high technical skill.
This system we have today cannot possibly be sustainable.
I know people with master’s degrees who work in construction. They could have saved a lot of time and money by entering construction from the start.
There is nothing wrong with a trade. Most of my family works in a trade.
I think the problem is people have focused on college degrees as being magical, and people rush to get them without thinking how they will benefit them or make them employable.
Plumbers, electricians, and carpenters all make good money.
If we every want to grow out middle class, that is how we do it.
Personally I’d prefer if we didn’t have to hyperfocus on one specific skill, where demand could suddenly dry up at any moment for any number of reasons, to have to support ourselves.
A huge factor in our stagnation is that we promise people stability if they do this one thing… then we have to cater to that one thing for the next fifty years because they now have no other way to support themselves. So we keep pandering to coal miners and corn growers and whatever else.
Education should not be tied this closely with economy. It should be about growing and expanding our horizons, our ability to better understand the world around us and the people around us. Not about how best to be stuck in the same career for the next 50+ years.
Most agree. Corn is a little different as are most food crops. They’re fairly versatile in what they can be used for but otherwise I agree
I’ve done many things in my life by my core education for the most part was the binding factor.
My core education allowed me to explore many things while still being tied. Now liberals mock me because I’ve explored many things but doesn’t that make life fun?
Union jobs are typically not good paying. They pay better than entry level fast food for sure. They on paper seem to pay than non-union jobs in the same industry, but that is often an illusion - often there is weird fine print and so your yearly take home pay is about the same either way. However the elephant in the room is there are many many jobs in Engineering, medicine and the like pay much better.
I agree with this part so much. Instead of free college, we need free trade and technical schools. Good paying jobs, typically union with pensions and we have a huge shortage.
To reach across the divide for a handshake:
This is something Biden and many progressives have been pushing for,
Free community college/trade schools: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/06/21/readout-of-white-house-meeting-on-expanding-access-to-free-community-college/
Advanced manufacturing training and jobs in the US: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/01/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-highlights-new-commitments-toward-equitable-workforce-development-in-advanced-manufacturing/
And even pushing paid apprenticeships: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/06/fact-sheet-president-biden-signs-executive-order-scaling-and-expanding-the-use-of-registered-apprenticeships-in-industries-and-the-federal-government-and-promoting-labor-management-forums/
And specifically in shipbuilding and getting the workforce where it needs, both in private ships and the military, the admin is moving in the right direction, opening new shipbuilding yards, getting people to train up, and putting in ship orders https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/07/29/fact-sheet-white-house-announces-new-private-sector-investments-in-american-maritime-industries-due-to-biden-harris-administration-efforts/
Getting more manufacturing back in the US, becoming more self sufficient, and having dignified employment are all my goals as a progressive too, and I’m really happy there’s movement from the current administration in their areas (despite complaints in other areas)
(I used all Whitehouse links as a from-the-horses mouth source, but there are plenty of articles about each)
In the old days, companies used to provide all of these as benefits.
IBM used to take high school graduates, let them work for a few years, and then pay them to go to college and pay for their tuition.
IBM was not unique, my friend did something similar for Honeywell. They paid him to get his master’s degree and paid for the degree.
Companies wonder why employees don’t have loyalty and the answer is simple, they are not the same companies they used to be.
JD Vance has said we need to focus more on fighting companies. I wish they would focus more on his views and the voting base would agree with them.
https://time.com/6999104/jd-vance-trump-business-community-separation/
I fully agree, companies whine and complain that they can’t find any skilled labor without ever acknowledging that it’s their job to train and take risks on the newbies. Instead they just want the perfect candidate for their specialized position to be gift wrapped and at “market rate” and desperate enough to go through multiple interview stages.
Even in my job, I’ve asked over and over for them to hire a junior/apprentice that I can train up from the beginning on our complex system and work, but they just want to hire short term contractors instead. We end spending the same amount of time training them as a junior, but then 6-12 months later when their contract is up, they go off somewhere else and we have to do it all over again and never build on our foundations.
I was hired as a contractor, and stuck through until I was an employee, and I’m now 5 years in, but it was not easy. It was essentially a two year paid interview.
And most don’t make it that way. If I was hired as a real employee as a junior, and able to train my way up with the masters of my company, who knows where I’d be and how not-delayed and not-over-budget our project would be.
When I talk to business about it, they moan how employees and contractors come from different budgets and the stock market favors contractors so their hands are tied, and I call bullshit on that. It’s bad business and the solution is obvious - train up the workforce you want to have.
It’s like buying a good pair of boots once, or buying cheap boots every year.
Agreed. Very few companies invest in their employees now day and that is the problem.
I can’t think of the company right now, but it was in the early 2000s. They needed more programmers, so anyone interested could take the aptitude test. If they passed, they were sent to a boot camp; if they passed that, they got to take college courses while working as entry-level programmers.
I have not seen any programs like that in a very long time.
What’s wrong with an educated population?
An educated population is the only way we can compete on the world stage.
You’re right, makes sense why conservatives don’t want that.
They don’t vote against their best interests.
Do you think high skill trades aren’t an education? I don’t think they are saying anything against a traditional university education, but more supporting skilled trades as well.
My mistake, they did say “instead of free college”. I think we could probably support both if we raised the standards a bit.
I agree we could support both. My comment was addressing the idea of valuing one over the other.
Well we spent 30 years valuing college… How did that work out?
We valued the idea of going to college, yes.
What we failed to do was value the accessibility of college.
Anyone who had a social security and blood pulse could go to college and that’s what happened.
1/3 failed out,1/3 doing jobs which don’t require a college degree.
1/3 benefited to varying degree.
Do you think we needed note millennials in college.
Even if the fractions you provided are accurate, they don’t speak to the qualitative benefit of educating a population. This seems to be a problem with conservatives, y’all are only concerned about quantitive measures.
What is the qualitative risk of an educated population?
I am not a conservative wtf… my body of work speaks for itself. What are you basing this clown take on?
This is benefit in the room with us right now?
All I see is increasingly improvised and indebted population, working longer hours, getting less benefits… people are not forming families. People can’t afford rent.
Now show me this benefit you are talking about, dear!
Debt slavery which solid part of millennials is currently suffering.
If we’re talking about altering society on a mass scale, you’re damned right I care about measurable outcomes.
I value freedom. I value economic consent. If you’re going to use centralized power to forcibly trade me something else for a loss of those two, the the other thing needs to be measurable.
That is the problem—too many unqualified people in the pipeline.
The problem is that there are not enough well paying jobs to support this “educated” population esp with a ton of debt.
No, we poured tons of government money into making college accessible. I went to college on loans designed for that purpose.
We valued college and we backed the notion with hard cash. Well, with forced loans.
It drove the price of college through the roof though. Just like housing, just like medicine, just like all the other things we provide government money to help people get.
It’s a consistent pattern. People don’t trust the free market, something is deemed too important to let the market handle, so we pump government money into purchasing assistance and, predictably to anyone who’s taken macroeconomics 101, the prices of those things skyrocket and the availability drops.
Sounds like forced loans were the problem, not the government funded education.
With proper funding, you shouldn’t have had to take out loans.
Why shouldn’t we have both?
If we made college free, we would restrict college to only the best and brightest. That is how the rest of the world does it.
I prefer our current system where it is available to anyone.
You forgot the part where you have to have money first.
There are student loans available to fund college or scholarships. The military also had the GI Bill. The National guard has the GI bill and variable program based on the state.
Many of those loans have interest attached, and can have a detrimental effect on credit score, and that’s if you even qualify.
Why should people put themselves into poverty to be educated when it benefits us as a country to have an educated population?
That’s not the answer you think it is. Clearly you’re just out of touch.
Hi Boba
Yes that is how a loan works. You have interesting attached to loans.
Everyone qualifies unless you fit certain disqualifying statuses such as drug dealing, didn’t register for the draft, etc.
Taking the improper people and trying to educate them wastes time and money. That is how we ended up in this situation.
Even in countries that offer “free” education, students earn just as much as Americans.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/upshot/an-international-final-four-which-country-handles-student-debt-best.html
My whole point is cost shouldn’t be a barrier to education. Loans only serve as a bridge to affording something otherwise unaffordable, but they don’t address the root cause.
Which people do you consider “improper”? Are you saying only “proper” people should be educated? How do you make the distinction, and what is the benefit of having an uneducated portion of the population? Are you suggesting educated drug dealers are responsible for the general unaffordability of education?
This sounds racially coded. I think you just outed yourself.
Test scores. That is how other countries do it that have cheap or free education. Only the best get to go. The other people just do trade school.
While I am not a conservative, I may agree with you strongly on education. College degrees are massively overinflated in value and propped up by government-backed student debt. We need to get away from this idea that everyone needs to go to college to secure their best life because we critically need these trade skills in the economy, in conjunction with policies that support these workers with fair compensation for their high technical skill.
This system we have today cannot possibly be sustainable.
I know people with master’s degrees who work in construction. They could have saved a lot of time and money by entering construction from the start.
There is nothing wrong with a trade. Most of my family works in a trade.
I think the problem is people have focused on college degrees as being magical, and people rush to get them without thinking how they will benefit them or make them employable.
Plumbers, electricians, and carpenters all make good money.
If we every want to grow out middle class, that is how we do it.
Personally I’d prefer if we didn’t have to hyperfocus on one specific skill, where demand could suddenly dry up at any moment for any number of reasons, to have to support ourselves.
A huge factor in our stagnation is that we promise people stability if they do this one thing… then we have to cater to that one thing for the next fifty years because they now have no other way to support themselves. So we keep pandering to coal miners and corn growers and whatever else.
Education should not be tied this closely with economy. It should be about growing and expanding our horizons, our ability to better understand the world around us and the people around us. Not about how best to be stuck in the same career for the next 50+ years.
Most agree. Corn is a little different as are most food crops. They’re fairly versatile in what they can be used for but otherwise I agree
I’ve done many things in my life by my core education for the most part was the binding factor.
My core education allowed me to explore many things while still being tied. Now liberals mock me because I’ve explored many things but doesn’t that make life fun?
Union jobs are typically not good paying. They pay better than entry level fast food for sure. They on paper seem to pay than non-union jobs in the same industry, but that is often an illusion - often there is weird fine print and so your yearly take home pay is about the same either way. However the elephant in the room is there are many many jobs in Engineering, medicine and the like pay much better.