Parting Thougts on the Occupy Movement and Higher Education

It's not my intention to stay on this topic too much longer, but I'd like to raise a few more points today.  One of the frequent gripes of the movement is the cost of higher education.  While I agree with the complaint, I differ with them on their approach for rectifying it.  I do want to point out that I agree that something is wrong with the higher and higher costs for attending universities.  Our daughter is at this stage now, and the costs are indeed stunning.  Why the dramatic increase in tuition--far outpacing inflation?  I'm no economist, but I suspect that the "education bubble" has much to do with rising healthcare costs as well as the willingness for some students and families to take on huge debts to finance education.


This touches on a personal pet peeve.  Lately on social media, I've seen several versions of a photograph of young person holding up a handwritten sign praising his own sound financial and life choices.  These choices usually boil down to living below one's means and attending public university instead of an expensive private university.  Besides the self-congratulatory or prideful tone, I object to this dismissive characterization of all private universities.  


Don't get me wrong.  There's nothing wrong with a good public university education, and I'm sure there are many cases where it's better than private.  Still, there's a sense in these kind of exchanges that private education is being viewed something like a name brand vs generic product, and that's where it needs to be pointed out that education is more than a retail commodity.  Yes, there is a commonsense cost/value awareness that needs to be taken into the equation, but university is more for the learning and less about the diploma--isn't  it?


Our daughter, for example, is looking for a solid Catholic education.  She looks forward to learning more about her faith from professors--not student teachers.  Private schools by and large (especially Catholic or Evangelical) offer a much deeper education in these areas.  If smaller class size is important, private schools are also the way to go.  If you have a pair of binoculars you enjoy using to watch your professor in the large lecture hall, go for it! 


Lastly, I've been hearing from any number of people that it's possible to attend private university for less than public if you're successful with your aid search.  As I understand it, there's often more aid available for the private universities than the public.  So, don't dismiss a family's sacrifice for a private education, if the student is looking for more than just the diploma.  Education is too important to compromise.  (If your family is looking for a good Catholic university in the Pacific Northwest, may I suggest University of Portland.)


Lastly, below is a response to a friend's concerns with regards to my last blog post.  Without her permission, I'm not comfortable mentioning her by name or linking to her thoughtful essay, but I thought I'd offer this--for what it's worth.

You make some interesting points. While I agree with some of your individual suggestions, I don't concur with your conclusions or logic. I think the central and simplest perspective is to analyze what is meant by social and "economic equity." That's just Socialism by a different name. Striving to address legitimate social justice issues such as poverty, homelessness, and lack of opportunities are laudable goals, but it's entirely different than "economic equity," which suggests (to me anyway) a redistribution of wealth to take everyone to the same standard. 


Since that involves the taking of assets not otherwise belonging to you, I see that as a breaking of the 7th Commandment; whether, or not, the government is doing the confiscating and redistribution, it is morally comparable to theft. If that's all Occupy Wall Street is about, that's just as greedy as the people they are supposedly protesting. While consumerism itself is not a good thing, economic activity and prosperity are. They represent the livelihood of individuals, families, and communities. While we may wish for a simpler--agrarian, for instance--life, that bell can't be unrung. (See my "Connection Illusion" blog post for more.) Instead, we as Catholics need to constructively engage our culture and demonstrate the love of Christ--not Socialism. (You might want to read the CCC, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 7.) 

Occupy Wall Street's Retreat from Relevancy--& Suggestions!

I have to admit I turned and watched the Occupy protesters as I drove past their little camp in downtown Salem earlier today.  They're an interesting bunch, and in some ways I feel a real ambivalence towards what they're doing--or trying to do, at least.  For several years early in our marriage, we were so poor that we made church mice look filthy rich.  Even at the worst of times, though, I think the idea of protesting our situation would have seemed pretty silly to me.  Instead, I worked three pretty rotten jobs to hold things together, and I was always looking and competing for that dream job.  I suppose it's the fact that I've survived with little myself that I don't have a lot of patience for complainers--especially complainers who can't seem to say anything of consequence regarding their movement or its goals.

If they're complaining about not having jobs, it's just possible they might have more luck if they put down those signs and actually began looking for work. I am not saying it will be easy process, but it's a good starting point.  

My impression is that (1) they can't articulate what they're actually protesting against except in vague generalities, and (2) the union involvement in the Occupy movement belies their claims for financial accountability.  (Let's face it, unions aren't exactly the poster children for accountability or financial transparency.)  

So, I figure that this would be an opportune moment to put on my rain-soaked sweater, dirty jeans, and smelly dreadlocks (clip-ons) to really give these misguided folks some thoughtful advice for turning things around, not just achieving numbers but aiming for meaning, too.

First, remind everyone how terrible a proposition President Obama's stimulus package really was.  Second, point out the foolish and over-reaching pursuit of Obamacare in the midst of this Great Recession.  Third, while their hearts might have been in the right place, the latest round of banking and credit card regulations have really added insult to economic injury for the American people.  Yes, Bank of America corporate leadership may need a good spanking, but the most significant thing you can do is to...close your account.  President Obama's misguided policies have created an ecomonic environment of uncertainty and speculation.

It's unfortunate that these protesters can't recognize the irony and humour of the situation (as suggested in the photograph I shared above).  They're protesting corporations and capitalism itself while simultaneously reaping the benefits and innovations of both.  The power of social media, for instance, is being put to great use by these Occupy organizers.  While they've achieved the flash mob status, there not sure what to do now--or what demands to even seek.

On the other hand, the few protesters that can successfully articulate what they're looking for too often betray a Socialist mindset.  Read the following quote, for instance, from Occupy Portland chat forum.

Why do we care if the people are behind us? I am against "democracy" as a political system for this very reason. We, a minority know that this empire needs to be brought down so why do we care if we are in the minority? Why do we care about trying to convince the majority to be on our side. Are we trying to convince people or change the political structure?

After all, socialism has such a fine track record of economic success and environmental stewardship, doesn't it?  It's sad...a good protest is such a terrible thing to waste.

In conclusion this evening, I'd like to share a wise observation Father Robert A. Sirico of the Acton Institute made recently on EWTN's World Over.  The following is his response when he was asked about the moral obligation of "economic equity."

...I don't think economic equity is the real question.  What we care about most is the vulnerability of the poor.  It's not the gap between the rich and the poor; it's the floor.  That is, how well are the poorest and most vulnerable people living?  So, the fact that Warren Buffet has less money than Bill Gates is not the moral dilemma.  The Gap is not the moral dilemma, and I think they're focusing on the wrong question.  The question is not how do we distribute money, but how to create it...

By the way, be sure to read my second post on this general topic.