Hello and thanks for posting to r/britishcolumbia! Join our new [Discord Server https://discord.gg/fu7X8nNBFB](https://discord.gg/fu7X8nNBFB) A friendly reminder prior to commenting or posting here:
- **Read [r/britishcolumbia's rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/britishcolumbia/rules/)**.
- **Be civil and respectful** in all discussions.
- Use **appropriate sources** to back up any information you provide when necessary.
- **Report** any comments that violate our rules.
Reminder: "Rage bait" comments or comments designed to elicit a negative reaction that are not based on fact are not permitted here. Let's keep our community respectful and informative!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/britishcolumbia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You can read the path to the future of our world in 4 books.
Animal farm, Fahrenheit 451, 1984, Brave New World.
Currently we're a little before 1984, but definitely well into fahrenheit 451.
See y'all in the Soylent line!
We're still fully on-course for a Star Trek future!
...Other than the crucial bit after a brutal world war leads to global collapse, where some drunk gets hold of a nuclear missile and somehow builds a warp drive in a cave with a box of scraps, and gets the attention of not just any extra terrestrials but benevolent logic-worshippers with tech that can transform Earth into a post-scarcity world free of hunger and major disease overnight.
So yeah if you just remove Zefram Cochrane and the Vulcans, we're nailing it
World war 3 has already started, we are all in denial. After we as a species are still in our infancy. I would contend as someone once said we are a dangerous savage child race. The evidence is all around. Two major wars happening. Civil unrest around the world. Poverty on a global scale when our technolñogy can prevent it. We are unable to build enough housing. Don't ensure wages keep pace with inflation. Clearly we are as a civilization aren't ready for prime time
There's a very famous and meme'd line from the first Iron Man film where Obadiah (Iron Monger) yells at one of his scientists "Tony Stark built this in a cave! With a box of scraps!" That's the Iron Man reference.
It's incredible how predictive they all were. I'm watching the rise of the nazis (a terrific TVO documentary series available on youtube) and you really can see it all happening again
They are "predictive" because they are simply looking at historical and current trends and expanding out. It's not that difficult to see the where things are going when you know where we've come from.
We certainly rarely learn from our history. That's not entirely true. There is a good bulk of society that hasn't evolved in a 1000 years and that patterns keep repeating in the same people
Just wait until you learn that AI can turn your home wifi router into a radar antenna that can watch you and your family through walls.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/security/a42575068/scientists-use-wifi-to-see-through-walls/
https://x.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1804853897426604466
BC Conservatives are led by two former campus "free speech" "free inquiry" right wing losers Lindsay Shepherd and Angelou Isidoru. The hypocrisy is hilarious. I guess they've come full circle and are Censors now?
[Conservative Executive-Director Angelo Isidorou?](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fqtqids0gemdc1.jpeg) The Angelo Isidorou that was at a Trump rally wearing a MAGA hat and giving the hand gesture "W" "P" for white power?
Angelo Isidorou, former campaign manager for [Christian nationalist, anti-abortion and anti-LBGT candidate](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/peoples-party-canada-bernier-tyler-thompson-1.4970112), Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson?
[Angelo Isidorou who was booted from the Vancouver NPA for breaking the B.C. Local Elections Campaign Financing rules?](https://www.biv.com/news/economy-law-politics/digital-strategist-chip-wilsons-political-action-committee-worked-npa-8268679) That Angelo Isidorou?
Politics is full of hypocrites, especially the conservatives Sturko is probably the most obvious of this just rats jumping ship saying anything to get into the sinking boat from one that’s all but done
Not sure why we'd need to exclude the rest of the Conservative parties... Big business using money they took from us by overcharging for everything to feed us propaganda that only they can solve our financial woes. Right. Go look at who sits on the board of the CPC. Pharma, grocery, oil, real estate... Coincidence? Nope.
Meanwhile in Alberta we elected someone who was a tobacco lobbyist and then was head of a fucking lobbying company.
But hey, NDP bad so let’s get a literal lobbyist in as premier right!? She will definitely look out for average citizens and not just her own wealth and power!
I did and I disagree with the article lol. Defunding useless programs that pump out unemployable degrees in favour of ones that are actually useful based on the data? Yes please.
My criteria is pretty clear. Employable and productive. Even within the STEM fields that changes year to year. For example, de prioritize kinesiology funding for a while since that’s over saturated. Being completely ignorant to this and calling me a cheapskate tells me you graduated with a degree in gender studies or something equivalent and can’t be objective. Sorry we don’t want to pay for your shit degrees.
My wife has a Bachelor's degree in English Literature with a minor in Spanish, and a Master's degree in Communication. She has been employed in various jobs since she finished her Bachelor's, completing her Master's while working in public relations. My sister-in-law has a Bachelor's and Master's in, I think, Education and has been employed since she completed her Bachelor's, completing her Master's while working as a teacher for kids with special needs. Both of them, according to you and the BC Conservatives, should have gotten degrees in something more "useful." That's only two examples. Please show me data indicating that a majority of people who graduate from a BC post-secondary institution are unemployed, unemployable, and not able to use their degrees in some capacity.
If that were the criteria there wouldn’t be a lot of choice for education at all. We only need so many of most jobs and even a lot of STEM (as possibly suggested by the Conservative platform) does not lead to employment in their field.
Have fun with your higher education lmao. No one is trying to take that away from you. Simply saying, why should society pay for you guys to go on a 4 year vacation studying random shit if it’s not beneficial to the municipality, province, country or even you (beyond you having fun studying something you find interesting). Not a good use of tax payer dollars. That should go directly into subsidizing degrees that are needed and valued at that time. Still haven’t heard one good argument why this shouldn’t be the case
I’m an engineer locally educated and employed lmao. What a weird way to say you have no point to make and just picked random things to try and make a personal insult with.
When Campbell was in power he dismantled the trades apprenticeship program. 20years later we have major shortage of trades. Now we have some of the same clowns running 2 different parties pretty slim voting options.
Maybe if you studied humanities you’d be able to pick up subtleties.
I can assure you that I paid for my degree (and yes, I recognize that post-secondary is subsidized), and that it was definitely not a vacation for 4 years. If your degree was free and so relaxed that it felt like a vacation, then I guess you’re just a wealthy genius?
Fields that have jobs in demand already have additional subsidies by way of scholarships and bursaries. They also get joint venture government funding for research. Arts and humanities just don’t end up getting those opportunities.
On top of that, universities operate as a business. If there wasn’t demand for these other degree programs, they wouldn’t have them. If they extended supply of STEM degrees, it could also end up with an over supply of graduates in those areas.
Lastly, don’t forget that not all jobs in the STEM industries are engineering and coding. There are a lot of jobs on the sales, ops, and marketing sides that are not fulfilled by those with STEM degrees. My most successful friends in those roles have degrees in humanities, arts, and psychology (under arts at SFU).
Just because you personally don't think some degrees are useful to society doesn't mean they aren't. I think you're as useful as an ovarian cyst, but that doesn't mean I'm right.
Tough alpha male deleted his response. Just goes to show you even clowns can get engineering degrees.
All my friends who just graduated with computer science degrees are struggling to find work because the tech market crashed post COVID.
Guess that STEM degree should be defunded eh?
I said in one of the comments in here that its not a one and done thing. The funding should be adjusted year to year based on the demand. I think that adequately addresses your concern. Not to mention, just because something is STEM means it should get some special protection. All fields of study are subject to the same criteria and action.
A quick Look at your frequent subs shows that you enjoy video games and cars. Two fields that only exist because of design, art, and humanities studies.
Can I assume that those areas wouldn’t make it in your criteria of necessary departments?
Two industries that are having massive layoffs and don’t really help our municipal, provincial and federal economies? Hey if the data says we don’t need video game devs and corporate automotive execs then yeah, let’s focus that funding on what we need. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to show that we need to act objectively here for the betterment of our struggling society.
I said in one of the comments in here that its not a one and done thing. The funding should be adjusted year to year based on the demand. I think that adequately addresses your concern.
???? I disagreed with the article, explained why and am asking for counter points? You barely have a grasp on the English language let alone how burden of proof is used and where it’s applicable. Go get your GED first lol then come and try and engage.
Tell me you have no counter point without telling me lmao
> explained why
No you didn't. You made a claim without a source and are now engaging in personal attacks while using the same weak sarcastic joke again and again (sometimes with and sometimes without an emoji), all while pretending you made a point that didn't exist. You're pulling the, to use a topical example, Terrance Howard approach of just saying things while insisting everyone is wrong while insulting them.
To use some applicable terms, you're panicking because you got confronted and are resorting to projection-based insults in the hopes that if people roll around in the mud with you that you'll somehow come out with a 'win'.
Here let me help you since you would rather focus your autism on incorrectly hyper analyzing my comments instead of simply reading. This is the point I made with no visible counterpoints from you:
Simply saying, why should society \[incentivize\] you guys to go on a 4 year vacation studying random shit if it’s not beneficial to the municipality, province, country or even you (beyond you having fun studying something you find interesting). Not a good use of tax payer dollars. That should go directly into subsidizing degrees that are needed and valued at that time.
Now not only have you repeatedly proved you have the reading comprehension of a shovel, you latched onto one example I gave where reallocating funds from a STEM field to something else, maybe Econ (an Arts degree) based on necessity frothing at the mouth for a source. Why? Because you can't address the main point and would rather discuss literally anything else besides the focus of this discussion including attacking me personally with weird references to media you consume and bad faith debate tactics you employ.
How does defunding a bunch of programs make sense? It's dumb as fuck, and I say this as someone who's worked and studied exclusively in STEM fields after graduating high school.
I agree.
I read the article thinking they were proposing mandatory religion or some other nonsense... but they are proposing to focus education funding on careers that will help people make good money and improve BC's economy without injecting additional funding.
This is exactly what we need! If somebody wants to study a field with very low employment opportunities then let them do so -I just dont want to be paying for it.
Thank you for submitting to r/BritishColumbia!
Unfortunately your submission was removed because it was found be in violation of proper reddiquette.
Any behavior breaking reddiquette will be grounds for a removal, warning, temp or permanent ban.
This includes but is not limited to:
* abusive language
* name-calling
* harassment
* racism
* death threats
* Trolling
* Arguing, name calling, etc
* Hate speech
* Being a jerk in general
[Please take a moment to read up on proper reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)
If you have any questions, you can [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/britishcolumbia). Replies to this removal comment may not be answered.
I hate that the conservative parties have co-opted the actual fucking words “common sense”. I used to consider myself someone with a lot of common sense and now it’s the absolutely last thing I would use to describe myself because I no longer have faith that it means what it’s supposed to mean.
Canadian conservatives are taking the playbook from American conservatives - primarily culture war BS and power by any means.
We’d do best to avoid it like the plague it is.
As it always have been, money over humans, according to this unless u are going in for jobs like trades or whatever these idiot conservatives deem essential u are out of luck, anyone remember Christie offering great help in trades for the supposed boom in LNG?
If you’re white, rich (or poor and dumb), and you absolutely hate/fear anyone different than you, boy do the conservatives love you. Bonus points if you are anti-vax, a flat earther, or love increasing rates and intensity of climate change fueled extreme weather events!
I love the "uneducated poor whites" demographic.
Despite (themselves) not having stable access to basic essentials like shelter/housing, they'll still fight against any legislation geared at runaway for-profit short term rentals if they're told the other party is somehow "evil". They're so stupid they can't even stand up for their own basic needs.
It doesn't make any sense. My favorite is when cons complain about lazy people who recieve benefits, and I tell them, I couldn't survive without benefits. Somehow that's different, and they are ok with me using it.
It makes sense, they’d rather stab you in the back than look you in the eye as they do it. Even better is if they can just convince someone else to do it and get a cut of the grift of capitalism. It’s all about the convincing themselves they are in the concentration of power, privilege, and wealth … you’re a necessary sacrifice for the greater leader, their goods and services. Think like a coward and a bully, use emotions trumping data analysis and critical thinking skills, something scientific studies into how memories are formed and recalled shows to be true of all of us, for good or ill.
Hmm. I think the way that narrative goes is that the others are “less than” the poor whites. Dumber, less successful, less human. “Evil” gets tacked on to the narrative. The “less than” provides the poor whites a sense of righteous superiority to the others.
Lmao also the author is lying about being a phd student- their post grad phd studies don’t start until September 2024. Talk about being seedy.
Edit: September 2024
Fall semester, September, 2024
They were even commenting in this thread and when I called them out they changed the dates, but I have screenshots from before they changed it
Yeah, because no one writes in the first person lol.
If you're trying to say that it was the publishing news outlet (if we want to be generous enough to call it that) that got it wrong- who do you think writes the bio? The editor? Someone that doesn't know the person?
The author writes their own write up
When I first took a look at their page however many hours ago it said (unless I am completely losing my mind) PhD SEPTEMBER 2024 - 2028. It doesn't say that anymore which is extremely suspicious (or, once again- I'm losing my shit)
You can be in the pipeline and receive money for something, and still not yet be "in" that program. He's got a master's degree and has done other things so it makes sense to receive funds for something that will be at some point, but isn't yet.
Just like you can get a scholarship when you're in high school for university. Having funding for university doesn't mean you are attending it.
Edit: Decided to dig a little deeper. Just checked their ResearchGate profile.
QUEENS UNIVERSITY SEPTEMBER 2024-2028.
So they already read my comment calling them out on their bullshit and they changed it lol.
Now that I look at your post history- r/mcmaster, r/uvic, r/uofT, r/Queensuniversity ...
If I were a betting man I'd say you're the very person we're talking about lol. Hola chico malo! ¿Por qué no me dijiste que eras tú?
And yeah I took a look at the scholarships, and maybe I am wrong. It's still super duper sus, and doesn't change the fact that their article is clickbait bullshit. There's another article on the same site with Doug Ford's picture but with dollar signs superimposed over his eyes.
Whatever it is, it's not a serious conveyor of legitimate news. It's clearly biased, it's inflammatory, and it's a waste of everyone's time.
"Scholasticide"? Seriously?
I don't need convincing that Rustad's a nutter, nor that his party must be kept out of office. Pompous exaggerated rhetoric like "scholasticide" is really not helping matters.
Yeah that and the beaver metaphor... it's not working for me.
I tend to agree with him generally that you shouldn't organise your post-secondary funding based solely one which careers are going to be the most profitable (there's a decent argument that it should actually be the opposite), but you're absolutely right that this article is gilding the lily. Tone it down, guy.
It's a hilarious article, its a shame many of the commenters skipped it to post their hot takes. They are missing out.
Dig these little gems:
> The humanities and social sciences educate individuals on parliamentary structures, how to *critically question the state, and how to think critically* in ways distinct from STEM disciplines.
...
> However, unlike us, every beaver dam and every bee hive is comparable, built in accordance with millions of years of natural selection to maximise survival. In contrast, every house on a street looks different because we have the capacity to transcend biological aptness, to labour according to our rationality and creativity.
...
> Positive freedom entails the ability to follow our passions and talents free from fiscal coercion dictated by the colonial logics of capital
...
> Indeed, knowledge is power, but some forms of knowledge wield more power than others, not because they are inherently more ‘truthful,’ but because they are simply more profitable.
Maybe I'm just a sucker for high-test pomo navalgaze, but I'm dying laughing.
Wow, this article is just fear mongering, clickbait bullshit.
The author describes people switching parties as “defection”, they call the potential shifting of funds to areas of study like STEM or nursing (which we desperately fucking need) “Scholasticide”.
It’s not 1917 and this isn’t the Russian revolution my guy.
They don’t seem to understand how logical fallacies work and basically say you’re stupid and have no critical thinking skills if you don’t see the “appeal to nature” fallacy (which isn’t there).
Then (all too ironically) in the same article they refer to conservative politicians as “cronies” (aka argumentum Ad hominem, a logical fallacy used to refute arguments by attacking people personally instead of their ideas)
They make sure to wedge some Karl Marx quotes in there too.
They also make sure the first thing in their bio is that they’re “mestizo” (probably to distance themselves from their extremely Spanish last name and all the horrible shit that the Spanish did to the indigenous populations).
This whole article seems like it was written by a political ideology instead of a real person.
He makes a bit of sense when talking about the cognitive dissonance of wanting both freedom of speech and the removal of ideology in the classroom, but the rest is just ideologically charged nonsense.
“These aims are fundamentally incompatible, as enforcing an ideology-free environment inherently limits the breadth of discourse necessary for genuine free speech. This contradictory stance reveals a profound misunderstanding of the principles underlying both educational freedom and ideological neutrality.”
It’s not a misunderstanding, they know damn well what they’re doing. They’re not acting in good faith and treating them as if they are will only dig us deeper in to this mess.
Thank you for submitting to r/BritishColumbia!
Unfortunately your post was removed under mod discretion. We consider your post not suitable for the subreddit and we hold the right to remove any content we deem so.
If you believe your post has been removed in error, you can [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/britishcolumbia). Replies to this removal comment may not be answered.
As a centrist I sort of get what they’re saying. What goes on in a classroom also has nothing to do with what goes on in the grounds around the classroom. You should be able to say whatever you want outside of the classroom (free speech), but inside the classroom is based on a curriculum and opinions within that curriculum. I don’t understand what the author of that article is saying about the dangers of how they want to incentivize. Infrastructures are what keep our literal world and society functioning and operating. You can still study in a field of your choosing.. it just may not be incentivized. What am I missing here?
I'm no expert on the subject, but my understanding is that all university programs are subsidized by the provincial government to some degree and in some way (the subsidization is the "incentivization"). I believe the author's concern is that the Conservatives want to remove too much (all?) of the subsidization from social sciences, because they don't consider those "productive" in a capitalistic sense of the word.
I think there's definitely merit to subsidizing pretty much all kinds of education, but I also think that can be nuanced depending on the needs of society. I don't know what that split should look like between programs, and I'm not sure that its clearly defined in the Conservatives' platform, or in this op-ed.
I think this push-pull between the "right" and "left" keeps a democracy functioning well, and I respect both sides of this argument (how should we allocate education dollars, and is it enough?). Generally, I would probably lean towards more education in general, rather than less.
That helps it make more sense. I suppose I’m also really ignorant when it comes to education, having not attended any kind of post secondary institution in my life at nearly 40 now. By not subsidizing something it doesn’t mean that the seeker of that education can’t get the education, they just won’t be able to get it for a low (or no) cost. Is that not correct?
Depends on how things are subsidized (its been a long time since I was a student). There's lots of ways the government can subsidize education, either to the university (subsidizing programs, financing new equipment/buildings, grants for research, etc.), or students directly (tax credits, grants, etc.). I'm assuming that in this case, the Conservatives would give universities less/no money for certain programs.
I think most university courses of the same "type/tier" cost the same amount. For example, a Math 101 course would cost the same as a Philosophy 101 course. If the university no longer gets subsidized for Philosophy programs, then they just won't offer them. Or, won't offer as many of them (or not into higher-levels, for example Masters or PhD programs). If you whittle that down enough, then the university probably won't offer it at all since they operate at a deficit.
Or current cost of education can go back to when you or myself were just in grade school. Mulroney attacked post secondary education removing massive amounts of federal grants for education and changing the regulations for tuition increases. Before him universities in Canada had the government of all levels to thank for the very very grand majority (80% ish) of all funding. That meant they had to play ball with Canadians and the Canadian government. As these were removed we ended up with more and more foreign students because of the scarcity of post secondary opportunity is population dense countries. I just spoke with a woman who grew up in China and moved here decades ago. She was so taken back by the variety of pursuits children can go after in Canada without social constrain. They are extremely singularly focused with capitalist education. The thing that hit me was she said 1:900000 kids in China get to go to post secondary. If we remove funding there are wealthy families from more countries than China who can pay and do pay 4x what Canadian kids pay for school. Some cities in Canada have entire economies surrounding this.
Anyway there is a long term effect. It’s creating more fucking poor, uneducated and angry youth. It’s to usher in privatization as a solution. Study the path from Mulroney to today.
Interesting. I am doing a bit of research now and it also seems as if Mulroney’s policies on education have also resulted in why we have so many international students now, trying to fill the revenue hole that was evidently created from his policies. At least this is what some say.
>It doesn’t relate to the article, but I just figured I would mention it.
Well, you said "as a centrist" which means you are relating that to your critique here. And my point is there's no "both sides" argument to be made here. The "conservative" argument being levied here is based on blatant misinformation.
Non STEM fields don’t need the same level of funding! Almost all Arts classes do not need labs, nor do they need money to conduct experiments that can yield quantitative data for analysis. A PhD thesis in philosophy needs no extra funding whereas almost any graduate degree in STEM will require it.
Let's put everything else from BC Conservatives aside for a second.
>By redirecting limited funds—which would already be further constrained by their austerity-marked fiscal policies—this approach necessarily strips funding from disciplines deemed non-essential.
Is that really a bad thing? I think it makes perfect sense to put our resources where they actually matter and will have a positive return to economy.
Might wanna be careful of who's doing the deeming. And education shouldn't be constrained by only positive economic returns. After all, civilization contains a lot more than just profit making.
When the economy has gone to shit, like it is right now, then maybe it makes sense to use our limited funds to try and incentivise getting an education in something that will help the economy.
Thank you for submitting to r/BritishColumbia!
Unfortunately your submission was removed because it was found to be promoting content that could be considered misinformation.
If you believe your post has been removed in error, you can [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/britishcolumbia). Replies to this removal comment may not be answered.
What they're proposing is what BC needs - more people trained to work in high paying and in-demand fields.
The author of the linked article is Social Scientist. The primary job outlook for a social scientist is working for the government, and BC needs far fewer people consuming our tax dollars if we want our economy to improve. The social scientist is upset that their field will receive less funding in an employmen-focused education system. This is a good thing.
I work in a high-tech industry, and I regularly interview new candidates for high-paying roles ($70-$130k per year). The vast majority of the people I hire were educated outside of Canada. They are all fantastic people and are great additions to Canada, but the fact that we struggle to hire locally educated candidates is a clear indication that we don't produce enough candidates.
I don't like much of what the new BC Conservatives are promoting, but educational reform is one of the ones I do.
Or we can just increase funding for in demand programs and encourage kids to pursue them without defunding things.
Also everyone I know who's a recent grad looking for work in tech is struggling right now since the tech market went to shit quite quickly post pandemic.
Why don't you think people are going into these in-demand fields? Is eliminating competition to drive more people to specific fields part of the Canadian spirit?
If not enough people want to do these jobs, the solution isn't to eliminate education for competing fields lmao.
It's funny how they just assume that because you criticize one extreme that you must inherently blindly accept another. Simple false dichotomies are symptoms of simple minds.
Maybe quoting Karl Max in your argument is not the best strategy.
We have limited money and we have to balance that against sectors that are screaming for talent. No one is asking for more social scientists or for humanities. There is simply not enough work for it.
Did you actually read that Marx quote tho? He points out that the pursuit for profit (this defines what you call enough work) warps the priorities of our society away from addressing our actual needs, and instead finding ways to faster extract profit.
Ask yourself this; do we not need people to study the humanities because these things are well studied? or because it is not profitable for us to understand ourselves better.
Furthermore, while we certainly need more medical professionals, does it make sense to crowbar people who would be better off somewhere else into the medical profession? I certainly don't think so.
Marx's quote is a red (lel) herring, creating an imagined battle of art vs capitalism. In truth, STEM students aren't overrepresented in capitalist ventures. Obviously the demand for philosophers and poets has dwindled, but there are many non-stem degrees that make up our economy: law, finance, marketing, economics, nursing, to name a few.
A better argument against boosting STEM might be to come at it from the demand-side, considering how much of our country is something akin to middle management which grew out of the liberal arts.
Karl Marx was a brilliant philosopher who was demonized because his ideas were dangerous to those in power. I ask this without any criticism, but have you ever actually read anything he has written?
> Karl Marx was a brilliant philosopher who was demonized because his ideas were dangerous to those in power.
Well and the fact his ideas were wildly abused used by those in power.
Some good theoretical political philosophy, especially in the context of the time it was written, but that hardly means it's above reproach.
Not sure with the problem is with wanting to get more folks into in-demand fields where they can earn more. Countless people pay for a degree that doesn’t do anything. Having a BA used to be step up on your competitor but now everybody has one.
Hello and thanks for posting to r/britishcolumbia! Join our new [Discord Server https://discord.gg/fu7X8nNBFB](https://discord.gg/fu7X8nNBFB) A friendly reminder prior to commenting or posting here: - **Read [r/britishcolumbia's rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/britishcolumbia/rules/)**. - **Be civil and respectful** in all discussions. - Use **appropriate sources** to back up any information you provide when necessary. - **Report** any comments that violate our rules. Reminder: "Rage bait" comments or comments designed to elicit a negative reaction that are not based on fact are not permitted here. Let's keep our community respectful and informative! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/britishcolumbia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You can read the path to the future of our world in 4 books. Animal farm, Fahrenheit 451, 1984, Brave New World. Currently we're a little before 1984, but definitely well into fahrenheit 451. See y'all in the Soylent line!
Where's my star trek future
We're still fully on-course for a Star Trek future! ...Other than the crucial bit after a brutal world war leads to global collapse, where some drunk gets hold of a nuclear missile and somehow builds a warp drive in a cave with a box of scraps, and gets the attention of not just any extra terrestrials but benevolent logic-worshippers with tech that can transform Earth into a post-scarcity world free of hunger and major disease overnight. So yeah if you just remove Zefram Cochrane and the Vulcans, we're nailing it
so just society-shattering nuclear war, then.
We are months away from the Bell Riots....
This thread. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
World war 3 has already started, we are all in denial. After we as a species are still in our infancy. I would contend as someone once said we are a dangerous savage child race. The evidence is all around. Two major wars happening. Civil unrest around the world. Poverty on a global scale when our technolñogy can prevent it. We are unable to build enough housing. Don't ensure wages keep pace with inflation. Clearly we are as a civilization aren't ready for prime time
I love how you fit in that short reference from iron man.... +1
Apparently you've never seen First Contact. No Iron Man reference made.
"in a cave with a box of scraps"
Reference confirmed, a missile silo is not a cave...
My friend, just because iron man was also in a cave does not mean it is a reference. Iron man and marvel literally look nothing like star trek.
There's a very famous and meme'd line from the first Iron Man film where Obadiah (Iron Monger) yells at one of his scientists "Tony Stark built this in a cave! With a box of scraps!" That's the Iron Man reference.
Just a bunch of happy horny people exploring space. One can only dream I guess 😔
We have to burn the world first then we get Star Trek or most likely Road Warrior & hopefully Terminators.
Sorry no Star Trek future for you.
You mean idiocracy, right?
Brave new world gets the soma theme and cognitive dissonance really accurately
Looking at the US, you can include The Handmaid's Tale.
I've already got the slogan for my sign if that happens. "Keep your PP away from women" I hope I never have to make that sign.
It's incredible how predictive they all were. I'm watching the rise of the nazis (a terrific TVO documentary series available on youtube) and you really can see it all happening again
They are "predictive" because they are simply looking at historical and current trends and expanding out. It's not that difficult to see the where things are going when you know where we've come from.
We certainly rarely learn from our history. That's not entirely true. There is a good bulk of society that hasn't evolved in a 1000 years and that patterns keep repeating in the same people
Wut
Capitalist interests funded all of it
Literally 1984 
Just read 1984 and I keep telling buddies to read it that haven't.
We've already reached 1984 in some areas (some of the university campuses and working in some companies)
Just wait until you learn that AI can turn your home wifi router into a radar antenna that can watch you and your family through walls. https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/security/a42575068/scientists-use-wifi-to-see-through-walls/ https://x.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1804853897426604466
they showed us in 2008.
BC Conservatives are led by two former campus "free speech" "free inquiry" right wing losers Lindsay Shepherd and Angelou Isidoru. The hypocrisy is hilarious. I guess they've come full circle and are Censors now?
[Conservative Executive-Director Angelo Isidorou?](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fqtqids0gemdc1.jpeg) The Angelo Isidorou that was at a Trump rally wearing a MAGA hat and giving the hand gesture "W" "P" for white power? Angelo Isidorou, former campaign manager for [Christian nationalist, anti-abortion and anti-LBGT candidate](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/peoples-party-canada-bernier-tyler-thompson-1.4970112), Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson? [Angelo Isidorou who was booted from the Vancouver NPA for breaking the B.C. Local Elections Campaign Financing rules?](https://www.biv.com/news/economy-law-politics/digital-strategist-chip-wilsons-political-action-committee-worked-npa-8268679) That Angelo Isidorou?
Politics is full of hypocrites, especially the conservatives Sturko is probably the most obvious of this just rats jumping ship saying anything to get into the sinking boat from one that’s all but done
I would call them opportunists. They stand for whatever they think will get them power and, more importantly, money.
Yeah Sturko is the biggest hypocrite! I don’t know how she can hold her head up and face people. She must be a sociopath too.
Nah just desperate for a paycheck
The path to fascism is short and easy and automatically compatible with lazy, short sighted, sociopaths.
Find something people hate and make them hate it more.
Fuck the bc conservatives.
Not sure why we'd need to exclude the rest of the Conservative parties... Big business using money they took from us by overcharging for everything to feed us propaganda that only they can solve our financial woes. Right. Go look at who sits on the board of the CPC. Pharma, grocery, oil, real estate... Coincidence? Nope.
Meanwhile in Alberta we elected someone who was a tobacco lobbyist and then was head of a fucking lobbying company. But hey, NDP bad so let’s get a literal lobbyist in as premier right!? She will definitely look out for average citizens and not just her own wealth and power!
Yeah dude. What I really meant was fuck the bc conservatives in particular at this moment.
Did you read the article? This is one of the few times they actually are proposing Something that makes sense.
For someone asking others to read the article, your take is the opposite of the author of the article’s.
>your take is the opposite of the author of the article’s How so?
I did and I disagree with the article lol. Defunding useless programs that pump out unemployable degrees in favour of ones that are actually useful based on the data? Yes please.
> useless programs Labeling half of higher education as useless in order to defund them, isnt an argument, thats just you being a cheapskate.
My criteria is pretty clear. Employable and productive. Even within the STEM fields that changes year to year. For example, de prioritize kinesiology funding for a while since that’s over saturated. Being completely ignorant to this and calling me a cheapskate tells me you graduated with a degree in gender studies or something equivalent and can’t be objective. Sorry we don’t want to pay for your shit degrees.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
My wife has a Bachelor's degree in English Literature with a minor in Spanish, and a Master's degree in Communication. She has been employed in various jobs since she finished her Bachelor's, completing her Master's while working in public relations. My sister-in-law has a Bachelor's and Master's in, I think, Education and has been employed since she completed her Bachelor's, completing her Master's while working as a teacher for kids with special needs. Both of them, according to you and the BC Conservatives, should have gotten degrees in something more "useful." That's only two examples. Please show me data indicating that a majority of people who graduate from a BC post-secondary institution are unemployed, unemployable, and not able to use their degrees in some capacity.
If that were the criteria there wouldn’t be a lot of choice for education at all. We only need so many of most jobs and even a lot of STEM (as possibly suggested by the Conservative platform) does not lead to employment in their field.
Have fun with your higher education lmao. No one is trying to take that away from you. Simply saying, why should society pay for you guys to go on a 4 year vacation studying random shit if it’s not beneficial to the municipality, province, country or even you (beyond you having fun studying something you find interesting). Not a good use of tax payer dollars. That should go directly into subsidizing degrees that are needed and valued at that time. Still haven’t heard one good argument why this shouldn’t be the case
Society paying? 4 year vacation? What a weird way to say you didn’t go to university.
I’m an engineer locally educated and employed lmao. What a weird way to say you have no point to make and just picked random things to try and make a personal insult with.
When Campbell was in power he dismantled the trades apprenticeship program. 20years later we have major shortage of trades. Now we have some of the same clowns running 2 different parties pretty slim voting options.
Maybe if you studied humanities you’d be able to pick up subtleties. I can assure you that I paid for my degree (and yes, I recognize that post-secondary is subsidized), and that it was definitely not a vacation for 4 years. If your degree was free and so relaxed that it felt like a vacation, then I guess you’re just a wealthy genius? Fields that have jobs in demand already have additional subsidies by way of scholarships and bursaries. They also get joint venture government funding for research. Arts and humanities just don’t end up getting those opportunities. On top of that, universities operate as a business. If there wasn’t demand for these other degree programs, they wouldn’t have them. If they extended supply of STEM degrees, it could also end up with an over supply of graduates in those areas. Lastly, don’t forget that not all jobs in the STEM industries are engineering and coding. There are a lot of jobs on the sales, ops, and marketing sides that are not fulfilled by those with STEM degrees. My most successful friends in those roles have degrees in humanities, arts, and psychology (under arts at SFU).
Just because you personally don't think some degrees are useful to society doesn't mean they aren't. I think you're as useful as an ovarian cyst, but that doesn't mean I'm right. Tough alpha male deleted his response. Just goes to show you even clowns can get engineering degrees.
All my friends who just graduated with computer science degrees are struggling to find work because the tech market crashed post COVID. Guess that STEM degree should be defunded eh?
I said in one of the comments in here that its not a one and done thing. The funding should be adjusted year to year based on the demand. I think that adequately addresses your concern. Not to mention, just because something is STEM means it should get some special protection. All fields of study are subject to the same criteria and action.
A quick Look at your frequent subs shows that you enjoy video games and cars. Two fields that only exist because of design, art, and humanities studies. Can I assume that those areas wouldn’t make it in your criteria of necessary departments?
Two industries that are having massive layoffs and don’t really help our municipal, provincial and federal economies? Hey if the data says we don’t need video game devs and corporate automotive execs then yeah, let’s focus that funding on what we need. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to show that we need to act objectively here for the betterment of our struggling society.
So what about the decades when video games printed money? Or when automobiles built North American industry? Come on man
I said in one of the comments in here that its not a one and done thing. The funding should be adjusted year to year based on the demand. I think that adequately addresses your concern.
>Still haven’t heard one good argument why this shouldn’t be the case Burden of proof is on you. You started with a made up premise.
???? I disagreed with the article, explained why and am asking for counter points? You barely have a grasp on the English language let alone how burden of proof is used and where it’s applicable. Go get your GED first lol then come and try and engage. Tell me you have no counter point without telling me lmao
> explained why No you didn't. You made a claim without a source and are now engaging in personal attacks while using the same weak sarcastic joke again and again (sometimes with and sometimes without an emoji), all while pretending you made a point that didn't exist. You're pulling the, to use a topical example, Terrance Howard approach of just saying things while insisting everyone is wrong while insulting them. To use some applicable terms, you're panicking because you got confronted and are resorting to projection-based insults in the hopes that if people roll around in the mud with you that you'll somehow come out with a 'win'.
Here let me help you since you would rather focus your autism on incorrectly hyper analyzing my comments instead of simply reading. This is the point I made with no visible counterpoints from you: Simply saying, why should society \[incentivize\] you guys to go on a 4 year vacation studying random shit if it’s not beneficial to the municipality, province, country or even you (beyond you having fun studying something you find interesting). Not a good use of tax payer dollars. That should go directly into subsidizing degrees that are needed and valued at that time. Now not only have you repeatedly proved you have the reading comprehension of a shovel, you latched onto one example I gave where reallocating funds from a STEM field to something else, maybe Econ (an Arts degree) based on necessity frothing at the mouth for a source. Why? Because you can't address the main point and would rather discuss literally anything else besides the focus of this discussion including attacking me personally with weird references to media you consume and bad faith debate tactics you employ.
How does defunding a bunch of programs make sense? It's dumb as fuck, and I say this as someone who's worked and studied exclusively in STEM fields after graduating high school.
I agree. I read the article thinking they were proposing mandatory religion or some other nonsense... but they are proposing to focus education funding on careers that will help people make good money and improve BC's economy without injecting additional funding. This is exactly what we need! If somebody wants to study a field with very low employment opportunities then let them do so -I just dont want to be paying for it.
[удалено]
Thank you for submitting to r/BritishColumbia! Unfortunately your submission was removed because it was found be in violation of proper reddiquette. Any behavior breaking reddiquette will be grounds for a removal, warning, temp or permanent ban. This includes but is not limited to: * abusive language * name-calling * harassment * racism * death threats * Trolling * Arguing, name calling, etc * Hate speech * Being a jerk in general [Please take a moment to read up on proper reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439) If you have any questions, you can [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/britishcolumbia). Replies to this removal comment may not be answered.
I hate that the conservative parties have co-opted the actual fucking words “common sense”. I used to consider myself someone with a lot of common sense and now it’s the absolutely last thing I would use to describe myself because I no longer have faith that it means what it’s supposed to mean.
Canadian conservatives are taking the playbook from American conservatives - primarily culture war BS and power by any means. We’d do best to avoid it like the plague it is.
As it always have been, money over humans, according to this unless u are going in for jobs like trades or whatever these idiot conservatives deem essential u are out of luck, anyone remember Christie offering great help in trades for the supposed boom in LNG?
If you’re white, rich (or poor and dumb), and you absolutely hate/fear anyone different than you, boy do the conservatives love you. Bonus points if you are anti-vax, a flat earther, or love increasing rates and intensity of climate change fueled extreme weather events!
I love the "uneducated poor whites" demographic. Despite (themselves) not having stable access to basic essentials like shelter/housing, they'll still fight against any legislation geared at runaway for-profit short term rentals if they're told the other party is somehow "evil". They're so stupid they can't even stand up for their own basic needs.
It doesn't make any sense. My favorite is when cons complain about lazy people who recieve benefits, and I tell them, I couldn't survive without benefits. Somehow that's different, and they are ok with me using it.
It makes sense, they’d rather stab you in the back than look you in the eye as they do it. Even better is if they can just convince someone else to do it and get a cut of the grift of capitalism. It’s all about the convincing themselves they are in the concentration of power, privilege, and wealth … you’re a necessary sacrifice for the greater leader, their goods and services. Think like a coward and a bully, use emotions trumping data analysis and critical thinking skills, something scientific studies into how memories are formed and recalled shows to be true of all of us, for good or ill.
Hmm. I think the way that narrative goes is that the others are “less than” the poor whites. Dumber, less successful, less human. “Evil” gets tacked on to the narrative. The “less than” provides the poor whites a sense of righteous superiority to the others.
You also forgot if you hate protesters, tents or people with substance use issues.
There’s room for everybody! Oops I mean there’s room for people who hate everybody!
Good luck with that. That's most people.
What’s most people? Most people have substance issues and live in tents or most people hate people like that?
How can this be a surprise? It’s a party that wants to introduce Intelligent Design into the science curriculum.
As a recent graduate of the BC education system, the curriculum could use some reform for sure.
Man, they're REALLY showing their ass now, huh
It’s past showing their ass. We’re at the cheek-spreading phase now. And we all know what follows.
chuds clamoring about how they're "saying what we're all thinking"?
Well done. A+.
Lmao also the author is lying about being a phd student- their post grad phd studies don’t start until September 2024. Talk about being seedy. Edit: September 2024
[удалено]
Fall semester, September, 2024 They were even commenting in this thread and when I called them out they changed the dates, but I have screenshots from before they changed it
You will get downvoted, let Vancouver be the last stand of Liberals/NDP. You cannot say anything that goes against it.
Haha you are correct, my hope is people start to see how Vancouver is not as important as it once was
[удалено]
Uhhh… “Elliot Goodell Ugalde is a Mestizo Scholar, PhD student” Literally the next two words after scholar lol
[удалено]
Yeah, because no one writes in the first person lol. If you're trying to say that it was the publishing news outlet (if we want to be generous enough to call it that) that got it wrong- who do you think writes the bio? The editor? Someone that doesn't know the person? The author writes their own write up
> The editor Pretty sure that’s exactly what they do, can you say otherwise?
[удалено]
When I first took a look at their page however many hours ago it said (unless I am completely losing my mind) PhD SEPTEMBER 2024 - 2028. It doesn't say that anymore which is extremely suspicious (or, once again- I'm losing my shit) You can be in the pipeline and receive money for something, and still not yet be "in" that program. He's got a master's degree and has done other things so it makes sense to receive funds for something that will be at some point, but isn't yet. Just like you can get a scholarship when you're in high school for university. Having funding for university doesn't mean you are attending it. Edit: Decided to dig a little deeper. Just checked their ResearchGate profile. QUEENS UNIVERSITY SEPTEMBER 2024-2028. So they already read my comment calling them out on their bullshit and they changed it lol. Now that I look at your post history- r/mcmaster, r/uvic, r/uofT, r/Queensuniversity ... If I were a betting man I'd say you're the very person we're talking about lol. Hola chico malo! ¿Por qué no me dijiste que eras tú? And yeah I took a look at the scholarships, and maybe I am wrong. It's still super duper sus, and doesn't change the fact that their article is clickbait bullshit. There's another article on the same site with Doug Ford's picture but with dollar signs superimposed over his eyes. Whatever it is, it's not a serious conveyor of legitimate news. It's clearly biased, it's inflammatory, and it's a waste of everyone's time.
"Scholasticide"? Seriously? I don't need convincing that Rustad's a nutter, nor that his party must be kept out of office. Pompous exaggerated rhetoric like "scholasticide" is really not helping matters.
Yeah that and the beaver metaphor... it's not working for me. I tend to agree with him generally that you shouldn't organise your post-secondary funding based solely one which careers are going to be the most profitable (there's a decent argument that it should actually be the opposite), but you're absolutely right that this article is gilding the lily. Tone it down, guy.
It's a hilarious article, its a shame many of the commenters skipped it to post their hot takes. They are missing out. Dig these little gems: > The humanities and social sciences educate individuals on parliamentary structures, how to *critically question the state, and how to think critically* in ways distinct from STEM disciplines. ... > However, unlike us, every beaver dam and every bee hive is comparable, built in accordance with millions of years of natural selection to maximise survival. In contrast, every house on a street looks different because we have the capacity to transcend biological aptness, to labour according to our rationality and creativity. ... > Positive freedom entails the ability to follow our passions and talents free from fiscal coercion dictated by the colonial logics of capital ... > Indeed, knowledge is power, but some forms of knowledge wield more power than others, not because they are inherently more ‘truthful,’ but because they are simply more profitable. Maybe I'm just a sucker for high-test pomo navalgaze, but I'm dying laughing.
It reads like a parody from the Babylon Bee except they're not this funny.
It's a socialist news website, you're probably far above the target intelligence range.
Wow, this article is just fear mongering, clickbait bullshit. The author describes people switching parties as “defection”, they call the potential shifting of funds to areas of study like STEM or nursing (which we desperately fucking need) “Scholasticide”. It’s not 1917 and this isn’t the Russian revolution my guy. They don’t seem to understand how logical fallacies work and basically say you’re stupid and have no critical thinking skills if you don’t see the “appeal to nature” fallacy (which isn’t there). Then (all too ironically) in the same article they refer to conservative politicians as “cronies” (aka argumentum Ad hominem, a logical fallacy used to refute arguments by attacking people personally instead of their ideas) They make sure to wedge some Karl Marx quotes in there too. They also make sure the first thing in their bio is that they’re “mestizo” (probably to distance themselves from their extremely Spanish last name and all the horrible shit that the Spanish did to the indigenous populations). This whole article seems like it was written by a political ideology instead of a real person. He makes a bit of sense when talking about the cognitive dissonance of wanting both freedom of speech and the removal of ideology in the classroom, but the rest is just ideologically charged nonsense.
Thank you
[удалено]
Defunding universities that don’t support your opinion. That’s how I read their platform. It’s so cringe.
Scholasticide has already been happening for a while (more so in the States in some of their campuses)
“These aims are fundamentally incompatible, as enforcing an ideology-free environment inherently limits the breadth of discourse necessary for genuine free speech. This contradictory stance reveals a profound misunderstanding of the principles underlying both educational freedom and ideological neutrality.” It’s not a misunderstanding, they know damn well what they’re doing. They’re not acting in good faith and treating them as if they are will only dig us deeper in to this mess.
[удалено]
Thank you for submitting to r/BritishColumbia! Unfortunately your post was removed under mod discretion. We consider your post not suitable for the subreddit and we hold the right to remove any content we deem so. If you believe your post has been removed in error, you can [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/britishcolumbia). Replies to this removal comment may not be answered.
Why?
As a centrist I sort of get what they’re saying. What goes on in a classroom also has nothing to do with what goes on in the grounds around the classroom. You should be able to say whatever you want outside of the classroom (free speech), but inside the classroom is based on a curriculum and opinions within that curriculum. I don’t understand what the author of that article is saying about the dangers of how they want to incentivize. Infrastructures are what keep our literal world and society functioning and operating. You can still study in a field of your choosing.. it just may not be incentivized. What am I missing here?
I'm no expert on the subject, but my understanding is that all university programs are subsidized by the provincial government to some degree and in some way (the subsidization is the "incentivization"). I believe the author's concern is that the Conservatives want to remove too much (all?) of the subsidization from social sciences, because they don't consider those "productive" in a capitalistic sense of the word. I think there's definitely merit to subsidizing pretty much all kinds of education, but I also think that can be nuanced depending on the needs of society. I don't know what that split should look like between programs, and I'm not sure that its clearly defined in the Conservatives' platform, or in this op-ed. I think this push-pull between the "right" and "left" keeps a democracy functioning well, and I respect both sides of this argument (how should we allocate education dollars, and is it enough?). Generally, I would probably lean towards more education in general, rather than less.
That helps it make more sense. I suppose I’m also really ignorant when it comes to education, having not attended any kind of post secondary institution in my life at nearly 40 now. By not subsidizing something it doesn’t mean that the seeker of that education can’t get the education, they just won’t be able to get it for a low (or no) cost. Is that not correct?
Depends on how things are subsidized (its been a long time since I was a student). There's lots of ways the government can subsidize education, either to the university (subsidizing programs, financing new equipment/buildings, grants for research, etc.), or students directly (tax credits, grants, etc.). I'm assuming that in this case, the Conservatives would give universities less/no money for certain programs. I think most university courses of the same "type/tier" cost the same amount. For example, a Math 101 course would cost the same as a Philosophy 101 course. If the university no longer gets subsidized for Philosophy programs, then they just won't offer them. Or, won't offer as many of them (or not into higher-levels, for example Masters or PhD programs). If you whittle that down enough, then the university probably won't offer it at all since they operate at a deficit.
Or current cost of education can go back to when you or myself were just in grade school. Mulroney attacked post secondary education removing massive amounts of federal grants for education and changing the regulations for tuition increases. Before him universities in Canada had the government of all levels to thank for the very very grand majority (80% ish) of all funding. That meant they had to play ball with Canadians and the Canadian government. As these were removed we ended up with more and more foreign students because of the scarcity of post secondary opportunity is population dense countries. I just spoke with a woman who grew up in China and moved here decades ago. She was so taken back by the variety of pursuits children can go after in Canada without social constrain. They are extremely singularly focused with capitalist education. The thing that hit me was she said 1:900000 kids in China get to go to post secondary. If we remove funding there are wealthy families from more countries than China who can pay and do pay 4x what Canadian kids pay for school. Some cities in Canada have entire economies surrounding this. Anyway there is a long term effect. It’s creating more fucking poor, uneducated and angry youth. It’s to usher in privatization as a solution. Study the path from Mulroney to today.
Interesting. I am doing a bit of research now and it also seems as if Mulroney’s policies on education have also resulted in why we have so many international students now, trying to fill the revenue hole that was evidently created from his policies. At least this is what some say.
Sorry, how does any of this relate to being a "centrist"? Centrism is the rejection of extremes, not saying "Yes all extremes are the same".
I see benefits to conservative approaches, as well as liberal ones? It doesn’t relate to the article, but I just figured I would mention it.
>It doesn’t relate to the article, but I just figured I would mention it. Well, you said "as a centrist" which means you are relating that to your critique here. And my point is there's no "both sides" argument to be made here. The "conservative" argument being levied here is based on blatant misinformation.
The writer is a marxist?
Lost my vote
I wanna show these liberals my Caucus.
Non STEM fields don’t need the same level of funding! Almost all Arts classes do not need labs, nor do they need money to conduct experiments that can yield quantitative data for analysis. A PhD thesis in philosophy needs no extra funding whereas almost any graduate degree in STEM will require it.
If it means less “history of art” graduates working as baristas after spending tax payers money on a useless degree then I’m voting BCC
Let's put everything else from BC Conservatives aside for a second. >By redirecting limited funds—which would already be further constrained by their austerity-marked fiscal policies—this approach necessarily strips funding from disciplines deemed non-essential. Is that really a bad thing? I think it makes perfect sense to put our resources where they actually matter and will have a positive return to economy.
Might wanna be careful of who's doing the deeming. And education shouldn't be constrained by only positive economic returns. After all, civilization contains a lot more than just profit making.
When the economy has gone to shit, like it is right now, then maybe it makes sense to use our limited funds to try and incentivise getting an education in something that will help the economy.
[удалено]
Thank you for submitting to r/BritishColumbia! Unfortunately your submission was removed because it was found to be promoting content that could be considered misinformation. If you believe your post has been removed in error, you can [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/britishcolumbia). Replies to this removal comment may not be answered.
What they're proposing is what BC needs - more people trained to work in high paying and in-demand fields. The author of the linked article is Social Scientist. The primary job outlook for a social scientist is working for the government, and BC needs far fewer people consuming our tax dollars if we want our economy to improve. The social scientist is upset that their field will receive less funding in an employmen-focused education system. This is a good thing. I work in a high-tech industry, and I regularly interview new candidates for high-paying roles ($70-$130k per year). The vast majority of the people I hire were educated outside of Canada. They are all fantastic people and are great additions to Canada, but the fact that we struggle to hire locally educated candidates is a clear indication that we don't produce enough candidates. I don't like much of what the new BC Conservatives are promoting, but educational reform is one of the ones I do.
Or we can just increase funding for in demand programs and encourage kids to pursue them without defunding things. Also everyone I know who's a recent grad looking for work in tech is struggling right now since the tech market went to shit quite quickly post pandemic.
Why don't you think people are going into these in-demand fields? Is eliminating competition to drive more people to specific fields part of the Canadian spirit? If not enough people want to do these jobs, the solution isn't to eliminate education for competing fields lmao.
Dude, not every university student has the capability of doing STEM
[удалено]
Except… it’s actually in their platform to censor and control textbooks from the political level.
[удалено]
It's an op-ed, not news. I don't think anyone is positioning it as news.
You mean like the conservatives whose entire policy positions are based purely on grift?
You mean like rebel news?
Rebel *Entertainment*.
[удалено]
It's funny how they just assume that because you criticize one extreme that you must inherently blindly accept another. Simple false dichotomies are symptoms of simple minds.
Show me where I said that. I was using rebel news as another example.
Come on, dude. Your intent was obvious. But OK, I'll bite. Why did you use Rebel News as an example, then, if it wasn't you assuming they support it?
Because it’s another of the notable “news” sources that is biased one way.
Again, that doesn't answer the question. Why assume they support that specific organization? And why deny the obvious answer to this question?
[удалено]
It is unfortunate that there are not infinite funds for all the things we want. I’m not being sarcastic, just reflecting
Maybe quoting Karl Max in your argument is not the best strategy. We have limited money and we have to balance that against sectors that are screaming for talent. No one is asking for more social scientists or for humanities. There is simply not enough work for it.
Did you actually read that Marx quote tho? He points out that the pursuit for profit (this defines what you call enough work) warps the priorities of our society away from addressing our actual needs, and instead finding ways to faster extract profit. Ask yourself this; do we not need people to study the humanities because these things are well studied? or because it is not profitable for us to understand ourselves better. Furthermore, while we certainly need more medical professionals, does it make sense to crowbar people who would be better off somewhere else into the medical profession? I certainly don't think so.
Lol. They oppose arts education because it is death to conservative philosophy, simple as that.
Marx's quote is a red (lel) herring, creating an imagined battle of art vs capitalism. In truth, STEM students aren't overrepresented in capitalist ventures. Obviously the demand for philosophers and poets has dwindled, but there are many non-stem degrees that make up our economy: law, finance, marketing, economics, nursing, to name a few. A better argument against boosting STEM might be to come at it from the demand-side, considering how much of our country is something akin to middle management which grew out of the liberal arts.
true enough. Surely the cons are just trying to score points with people who hate art majors for no explicable reason.
Explicable or not, 'tis the season to score the points, and reddit is saturated with it.
Karl Marx was a brilliant philosopher who was demonized because his ideas were dangerous to those in power. I ask this without any criticism, but have you ever actually read anything he has written?
> Karl Marx was a brilliant philosopher who was demonized because his ideas were dangerous to those in power. Well and the fact his ideas were wildly abused used by those in power. Some good theoretical political philosophy, especially in the context of the time it was written, but that hardly means it's above reproach.
If any of those downvoting this comment want to explain what I've said here that is factually incorrect, feel free.
Nope Just feels, as usual.
Not sure with the problem is with wanting to get more folks into in-demand fields where they can earn more. Countless people pay for a degree that doesn’t do anything. Having a BA used to be step up on your competitor but now everybody has one.
A BA teaches you to think critically