http://www.theatlantic.com/national...gnoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/ The Scandinavian country is an education superpower because it values equality more than excellence. Compared with the USA education model -- long hours of exhaustive cramming and rote memorization -- Finland's success is especially intriguing because Finnish schools assign less homework and engage children in more creative play. And there are no private schools in Finland.
Well, mostly $40k is total cost, and room and board is half of that if you stay on campus, and next to nothing if you commute from home. I'm saying unless you have scholarships it will be very difficult to ever earn your way out of nondischargable debt like that.
That is a fallacy. Better go get your education first, and from teachers other than literary, liberal communists who know nothing about Business or International Finance and only want utopia.
Deflation is a pipe dream. Only if you started with a pile of cash when deflation hit would you benefit. Everyone else is screwed because they will pay back more purchasing power then they borrowed. Deflation in a debtor nation is a financial disaster.
In general my observation has been that in countries that do better in educating their population, in general there is a deep sense of need for the masses to get educated so that they can elevate their standard of living. In the developed countries they already have enough money to live a decent life so they tend to spend more time on non-academic activities. When i went to undergrad in india i will tell you for sure; there are a lot fewer (if any) parties and a lot more hours of hard work put in by students who have the "necessity" to beat their class mates at grades. -gariki
1. It is almost always wrong to reach general conclusions from specific anecdotes. 2. It is very common to confuse a liberal arts education with job training. There may be considerable overlap, but they are not the same. 3. There are now at least four tiers of higher "education" institutions in the U.S. The first and second tiers have almost nothing in common with the fourth tier. 4. At all except the elite, private and public colleges and universities the effect of Johnson's "Great Society" was profound; even at the elite institutions the effect was significant. The change took place, for the most part, in the decade spanning the mid 1960's to the mid 1970's. Later, when colleges and universities experienced undesirable outcomes from these changes they did not reverse course, which would have been very costly, but instead introduced remedial measures in the hope of making the new educational paradigm work out. That has brought us to where we are today. 5. Common wisdom has it that college graduates earn much more and do much better in life than high school only graduates. This is a clear-cut case, supported by statistics, where the common wisdom is actually right! It may be, that in the future, these statistics will divide according to the type or tier of educational institution.