There is an overvaluing of university degrees. The idea that everyone needs a degree is idiotic. You have people taking programs don't teach any usable skills, or are in oversupplied fields (if there is any demand to begin with). Small companies I know don't want university grads because they're arrogant, and need to be retaught to become competent in the subject they have a degree for. Corporate still uses it as a minimum requirement.

There is a need for more trades, something that is undervalued in society, or at least in metropolitan areas and academia. Students don't have to take on much, if any debt, and they start earning much faster. Trades also pay well, are in demand, and it's nice to be able to fix your own things. Not that people that go into trades are dumb or less capable, it's a different skill set. One that many people who graduate university are completely incompetent in. And people in trades don't have university debt while they work as a "journalist" or a cashier.

Academia has been in control of public perception for too long, and the result has shown itself. People need to get into local government, or onto local school boards and bring back shop class, or programs that teach other necessary fields that. Education, and education spending should be about filling the needs of society, and ensuring everyone can succeed (to the extent they can) in the field best for them (if there's demand), even if that success isn't academics.

I agree that corporations are often abusing immigration rules to bring in people in, although I see that as a separate issue from university enrollment. Corporations should have to work harder to prove they can't get workers locally. Do they actually need the high qualifications they advertise locally (that prevent applicants), and can they pay more, and advertise to the local community better. Can they train local people. Unless it's a highly technical field, or the individual is of special importance (like a known artist) there probably isn't a legitimate reason not to use local people.

There is an overvaluing of university degrees. The idea that everyone needs a degree is idiotic. You have people taking programs don't teach any usable skills, or are in oversupplied fields (if there is any demand to begin with). Small companies I know don't want university grads because they're arrogant, and need to be retaught to become competent in the subject they have a degree for. Corporate still uses it as a minimum requirement.

There is a need for more trades, something that is undervalued in society, or at least in metropolitan areas and academia. Students don't have to take on much, if any debt, and they start earning much faster. Trades also pay well, are in demand, and it's nice to be able to fix your own things. Not that people that go into trades are dumb or less capable, it's a different skill set. One that many people who graduate university are completely incompetent in. And people in trades don't have university debt while they work as a "journalist" or a cashier.

Academia has been in control of public perception for too long, and the result has shown itself. People need to get into local government, or onto local school boards and bring back shop class, or programs that teach other necessary fields that. Education, and education spending should be about filling the needs of society, and ensuring everyone can succeed (to the extent they can) in the field best for them (if there's demand), even if that success isn't academics.

I agree that corporations are often abusing immigration rules to bring in people in, although I see that as a separate issue from university enrollment. Corporations should have to work harder to prove they can't get workers locally. Do they actually need the high qualifications they advertise locally (that prevent applicants), and can they pay more, and advertise to the local community better. Can they train local people. Unless it's a highly technical field, or the individual is of special importance (like a known artist) there probably isn't a legitimate reason not to use local people.

I live in a country where the government advertises overseas for strippers that want to immigrate, and is focused on replacement immigration.

There is an overvaluing of university degrees. The idea that everyone needs a degree is idiotic. You have people taking programs don't teach any usable skills, or are in oversupplied fields (if there is any demand to begin with). Small companies I know don't want university grads because they're arrogant, and need to be retaught to become competent in the subject they have a degree for. Corporate still uses it as a minimum requirement.

There is a need for more trades, something that is undervalued in society, or at least in metropolitan areas and academia. Students don't have to take on much, if any debt, and they start earning much faster. Trades also pay well, are in demand, and it's nice to be able to fix your own things. Not that people that go into trades are dumb or less capable, it's a different skill set. One that many people who graduate university are completely incompetent in. And people in trades don't have university debt while they work as a "journalist" or a cashier.

There are also people who may only work in unskilled, or "less skilled" labor.

Academia has been in control of public perception for too long, and the result has shown itself. People need to get into local government, or onto local school boards and bring back shop class, or programs that teach other necessary fields that. Education, and education spending should be about filling the needs of society, and ensuring everyone can succeed (to the extent they can) in the field best for them (if there's demand), even if that success isn't academics.

I agree that corporations are often abusing immigration rules to bring in people in, although I see that as a separate issue from university enrollment. Corporations should have to work harder to prove they can't get workers locally. Do they actually need the high qualifications they advertise locally (that prevent applicants), and can they pay more, and advertise to the local community better. Can they train local people. Unless it's a highly technical field, or the individual is of special importance (like a known artist) there probably isn't a legitimate reason not to use local people.