On 09/26/09 09:52, andrel wrote:
>> Yes, but even if true, my point is still mildly valid. Having a top
>> education system need not be a priority, if you can convince smart
>> enough people to come here.
>
> True, but not all donor countries might think that is a desirable
> situation.

	Well, they should shape up and try to keep their people around.

	I don't know how it is in your country, but in a lot of countries - 
including industrialized ones - the flexibility to change your career 
path is not that great. In some places, if you start one program, and 
halfway through university you want to switch, the system makes it hard 
for you. Over here, it's trivial. I know lots of people who go to grad 
school in areas quite different from their undergrad. And you can change 
your path at just about any point within your undergrad.

	And then there are lots who have trouble getting into university 
whereas they wouldn't have over here.

	I knew an exchange student from Germany. In his university, they more 
or less have a quota: Only the top n% of students at the end of the 
first year will be allowed to stay.

	The rest weren't completely discarded, and they got to go to other 
institutions, but they couldn't quite study what they wanted. Under 
those circumstances, I can easily see people going to another country to 
study if they could afford it.

> Second, it works as long as the US is the most desirable country for a
> scientist to live in. When another country takes that position, the US
> has not enough trained people to fill the gap. There is a large

	Perhaps.

> To prevent that the US need a couple of big changes:
> - reform the education system

	Perhaps a bit overstated. There are always really good schools and 
colleges. The bad news focuses more on the average ones. The good ones 
may be expensive, though.

> - make sure that someone with knowledge or skills earns more than a
> lawyer (i.e. fix the juridical system)

	Never gonna happen.<G>

> - reform the health care system (I am not going to move to the US and
> this is a major reason. I am assuming it is for others as well and that
> that will increase with time, and that it may become a factor for people
> to actually leave the US)

	Well, when I wrote "perhaps" above, I was going to point out that in 
many regards, the US isn't the most desirable country. It's good mostly for:

- Money
- A lot of a certain kind of freedom. Over here the society is really 
flexible. They may think foreigners act weird, but it rarely bothers 
them. They're flexible in many other ways. My advisor and his wife were 
from Belgium. He came to the university here with short term goals - 
perhaps would spend 2-3 years and then return. His wife knew no English. 
She was so happy how she was treated as a foreigner that she insisted on 
staying. And she really liked the ease with which you can do stuff. 
Once, while on a sabbatical in Switzerland, she tried to get a 
membership at a gym. The amount of paperwork they wanted from her as a 
nonresident was ridiculous, and I think she gave up. Just to go to a 
gym. Of course, perhaps that wouldn't be a problem in all European 
countries, but it's a common complaint I hear from them when they come 
here.

	But in most other categories (like health care), other industrialized 
countries do better.

	Also, the US seems to be really good at marketing. It may not fool you 
Europeans, but it probably does fool all the smart people in third world 
countries who want to come here (with the exception of those the US has 
screwed - although even lots of those guys come).

> - probably fixing the financial system might help too. The 'extravagant'
> lifestyle in the US has been sponsored by foreign countries. When they
> stop doing that the US may lack the money to buy the top-researchers
> from other countries.

	Possible.

> The really smart are education resistant, they will learn and understand
> in any educational model, but you need more than that 0.1% for a healthy

	That's the mentality I reject. I'd rather phrase it as "there will 
always be really smart people who learn regardless of the model".

	I'll also say that some people who would have turned out to be 
brilliant had there been a model that catered to them won't because they 
went through an easier model. That's perhaps the flaw of the US system 
(pre-university at least): People who perhaps could be smart/brilliant 
just aren't challenged enough and they don't develop the skills early 
enough.


-- 
He who slings mud generally loses ground.

Post a reply to this message