NYT: Reaching Out to the Voters the Left Left Behind

NYT: Reaching Out to the Voters the Left Left Behind

Excerpt:

The pattern of net new business creation (new firms minus firms going out of business) reveals an even sharper reversal of fortune. In 1992-96, counties with fewer than 100,000 people produced 32 percent of new enterprises, while the biggest counties produced 13 percent.

Click to expand...

By 2010-14, very rural counties saw zero net growth in new firms, while the biggest counties boomed with 58 percent of new firms. All counties with populations under a million created 87 percent of the nation’s new businesses from 1992-1996, but the number was 42 percent in 2010-14.

Iow, the centuries-long shift of economic activity from country and small town areas to populous urban regions has sharply accelerated over the past 10 years. The result is that “America faces a small-county crisis of dire proportions,” as Mark Muro put it, “and a period of opportunity in cities, the bigger the better.”

By 2015, 74 percent of all high tech jobs were located in the 100 largest counties “where the universities, technology innovation assets, supply chains, and industry clusters on which the sector depends reside,” Muro wrote in a paper in August.

At the same time, Muro noted by email: "Rural America has been hammered by the end of the immediate post-crisis commodity boom and now there is precious little relief there: Agricultural prices are low, coal prices and automation are hammering coal country, natural gas prices are suffering from glut conditions, and meanwhile, no subdivision of the economy is suffering from more moribund employment growth."

The rural crisis, according to Muro, “isn’t just economic but is now compounded by the rising mortality rates” described in detail by the economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton.

Click to expand...

What's a country to do when passing from one age to another? Yes, the world in general and the US in particular are migrating from the Industrial Age (that started in the 19th century) to the Information Age that is now upon us. Jobs - particularly Manufacturing workers - are suffering in the passage because of two reasons: China "catch-up" in lo-cost manufacturing and robotics in the higher-skilled manufacturing industries.

It is clear - and Bernie was shouting it to us last year (and as Hillary had incorporated in her platform) - we need to do this: Just as we did at the beginning of the 20th century when we made Secondary Schooling compulsory, we need today to make Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) as easily accessible as possible to high-school graduates.

Which means subsidizing totally Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) at a state institute of higher-education. Whyzzat?

Today, 91% of American high-schoolers graduate with a degree. (Data from here.) Of that percentage, barely 45.7% continue on to a postsecondary Associates, Bachelor's degree or higher (Masters, Doctorate). (I'm not sure if a vocational degree is included in that statistical series.)

My point being this: If 91% of our children make it through high-school, only 46% of them get a postsecondary degree (that opens them to a better paying job that requires postsecondary credentials). Do the multiplication.

Only 42% of our high-school students today are graduating with the postsecondary credentials necessary for a decent paying job.

So what's a country to do*?

*Hint: half of all college students are graduating today with a $35K debt to repay for their studies ...

Lafayette said:

NYT: Reaching Out to the Voters the Left Left Behind

Excerpt:


What's a country to do when passing from one age to another? Yes, the world in general and the US in particular are migrating from the Industrial Age (that started in the 19th century) to the Information Age that is now upon us. Jobs - particularly Manufacturing workers - are suffering in the passage because of two reasons: China "catch-up" in lo-cost manufacturing and robotics in the higher-skilled manufacturing industries.

It is clear - and Bernie was shouting it to us last year (and as Hillary had incorporated in her platform) - we need to do this: Just as we did at the beginning of the 20th century when we made Secondary Schooling compulsory, we need today to make Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) as easily accessible as possible to high-school graduates.

Which means subsidizing totally Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) at a state institute of higher-education. Whyzzat?

Today, 91% of American high-schoolers graduate with a degree. (Data from here.) Of that percentage, barely 45.7% continue on to a postsecondary Associates, Bachelor's degree or higher (Masters, Doctorate). (I'm not sure if a vocational degree is included in that statistical series.)

My point being this: If 91% of our children make it through high-school, only 46% of them get a postsecondary degree (that opens them to a better paying job that requires postsecondary credentials). Do the multiplication.

Only 42% of our high-school students today are graduating with the postsecondary credentials necessary for a decent paying job.

So what's a country to do*?

*Hint: half of all college students are graduating today with a $35K debt to repay for their studies ...

Click to expand...

Point of order: 91% graduate High School because high school has been tremendously dumbed down over the years and because the books are cooked but anyways....


I think we send way too many people to universities. I want to close down about 25% of the spots and a whole lot of universities, hand out the rest by merit only, and use some of the closed down universities as trade schools.

I'm confused why the NYT seems to be blaming the left for ignoring solutions. What do you think Sanders had in mind when he went to the west virginia coal mining town to argue against the AHCA, and promote free college and RURAL internet, if not the needs of the rural areas? Even Hillary urged for free community college, one of the few promising paths in small counties

Let me tell you, these places will NEVER be tech hubs like the NYT seems to think is possible. If you're talking about a town of 700 or fewer, out where a house is surrounded by dirt roads and corn fields - and this is nearly half of many states - these places are going to survive off welfare and **** no matter what. Hell, they were doing so in the 90s

I agree though with your point about the debt crippling even those who do make the effort their situation, and also deterring those who would like to

Hawkeye10 said:

Point of order: 91% graduate High School because high school has been tremendously dumbed down over the years and because the books are cooked but anyways....


I think we send way too many people to universities. I want to close down about 25% of the spots and a whole lot of universities, hand out the rest by merit only, and use some of the closed down universities as trade schools.

Click to expand...

I actually agree with a lot of this, but because at least 1/4 of colleges today are just glorified high schools, which are becoming perilously worthless. For a couple years while in HS, i took a bunch of classes at the nearest 4 year college and man...saw people sleeping at lecture and just dicking around with their phone. It's really just an excuse to get drunk without parental supervision. What does that tell you? These people need to protected from themselves, meaning they shouldn't have access to $30k in loans for an education they'll never complete

I would cut off loans and pell grants that don't help much anyway to the C students and make college free for the upper echelon (like top 20 schools) who are serious about putting that education to use. The difference is staggering. Even at a relatively cheap community college, under *10%* finish their whopping 2 year degree. At most 4 year colleges the *first year* dropout rate is around 50%. At the top schools over 90% graduate. That's despite the curriculum is much more difficult. Why? Because that's where the serious students go. Should put the fed's resources behind them and *maybe* others who first do well their first 2 years, and for young people who want to take on a short term hands on job training

Lafayette said:

NYT: Reaching Out to the Voters the Left Left Behind

Excerpt:


What's a country to do when passing from one age to another? Yes, the world in general and the US in particular are migrating from the Industrial Age (that started in the 19th century) to the Information Age that is now upon us. Jobs - particularly Manufacturing workers - are suffering in the passage because of two reasons: China "catch-up" in lo-cost manufacturing and robotics in the higher-skilled manufacturing industries.

It is clear - and Bernie was shouting it to us last year (and as Hillary had incorporated in her platform) - we need to do this: Just as we did at the beginning of the 20th century when we made Secondary Schooling compulsory, we need today to make Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) as easily accessible as possible to high-school graduates.

Which means subsidizing totally Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) at a state institute of higher-education. Whyzzat?

Today, 91% of American high-schoolers graduate with a degree. (Data from here.) Of that percentage, barely 45.7% continue on to a postsecondary Associates, Bachelor's degree or higher (Masters, Doctorate). (I'm not sure if a vocational degree is included in that statistical series.)

My point being this: If 91% of our children make it through high-school, only 46% of them get a postsecondary degree (that opens them to a better paying job that requires postsecondary credentials). Do the multiplication.

Only 42% of our high-school students today are graduating with the postsecondary credentials necessary for a decent paying job.

So what's a country to do*?

*Hint: half of all college students are graduating today with a $35K debt to repay for their studies ...

Click to expand...

Interestingly the US spends quite a bit per student comparatively on all levels of education. At the tertiary level the country is second only to Luxembourg, a comparison that resembles comparing Cambridge Mass. to the US as a whole. At the primary level spending is slightly higher than in Sweden and well over 20 percent higher than Germany's. At the secondary level the US spends much less than Luxembourg, Switzerland Austria or Norway, but is well ahead of most social democracies like France Sweden or Germany. These numbers are 2013 by the OECD. https://data.oecd.org/eduresource/education-spending.htm

Where the US has a problem is in the results not in the amount of spending on students. Like in healthcare we spend plenty. To solve the problems one needs to go much deeper than financial numbers. The results seem sociologically driven and not by the level of financing.

joG said:

Where the US has a problem is in the results not in the amount of spending on students. Like in healthcare we spend plenty. To solve the problems one needs to go much deeper than financial numbers. The results seem sociologically driven and not by the level of financing.

Click to expand...

"Spending" is not so much the point as is "cost of an education".

As I said in the post, nearly half of all students graduate from a postsecondary education with a debt of around $35K.

I sent my kids to university here in France and I paid, at the very most, $1000 per year plus room 'n board. Because France, like the rest of the European Union, has understood the overall important of a damn fine education - not only for finding a good job, but being an all-round good citizen ...

NB: Moreover, if the US did not spend 54% of its Discretionary Budget on the DoD, there would be plenty left for Bernie's and Hillary's offer to subsidize Tertiary Education (at a state institution of higher learning) all children from a family earning less than $100K a year. Given that the average salary in the US is $54K per individual, the total is about the average family total (given that not in all families do both parents work).

Lafayette said:

NYT: Reaching Out to the Voters the Left Left Behind

Excerpt:


What's a country to do when passing from one age to another? Yes, the world in general and the US in particular are migrating from the Industrial Age (that started in the 19th century) to the Information Age that is now upon us. Jobs - particularly Manufacturing workers - are suffering in the passage because of two reasons: China "catch-up" in lo-cost manufacturing and robotics in the higher-skilled manufacturing industries.

It is clear - and Bernie was shouting it to us last year (and as Hillary had incorporated in her platform) - we need to do this: Just as we did at the beginning of the 20th century when we made Secondary Schooling compulsory, we need today to make Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) as easily accessible as possible to high-school graduates.

Which means subsidizing totally Tertiary Education (vocational, 2 & 4-year) at a state institute of higher-education. Whyzzat?

Today, 91% of American high-schoolers graduate with a degree. (Data from here.) Of that percentage, barely 45.7% continue on to a postsecondary Associates, Bachelor's degree or higher (Masters, Doctorate). (I'm not sure if a vocational degree is included in that statistical series.)

My point being this: If 91% of our children make it through high-school, only 46% of them get a postsecondary degree (that opens them to a better paying job that requires postsecondary credentials). Do the multiplication.

Only 42% of our high-school students today are graduating with the postsecondary credentials necessary for a decent paying job.

So what's a country to do*?

*Hint: half of all college students are graduating today with a $35K debt to repay for their studies ...

Click to expand...

What's a country to do?

Make it easier to start a business, and roll back the extreme anti-business environment that has sent jobs outside of the country.

It would certainly make these "free education" screeds more credible if they included in their argument statistics that demonstrate there will be 10's of millions of jobs available for college graduates with their new "free" degrees.

Hawkeye10 said:

Point of order: 91% graduate High School because high school has been tremendously dumbed down over the years and because the books are cooked but anyways.

Click to expand...

This is a highly personal opinion.

Hawkeye10 said:

I think we send way too many people to universities. I want to close down about 25% of the spots and a whole lot of universities, hand out the rest by merit only, and use some of the closed down universities as trade schools.

Click to expand...

Bollocks to that notion. Education is a necessity far more important than even food in any country. Not just to employ people, but for upstanding, knowledgeable and active citizens.

The Trade Schools are there for those who want them, and a good many attend - most after they drop out of an Associate- or Bachelor-degree program. The higher the educational level, however, the better the individual's overall income. That fact is dead certain since it has been measured as described here:


The only problem, as my original post above underlines, is that a Tertiary Education is too damn costly in the US. If we can spend a massive 54% of our Discretionary Budget on the DoD (see here), we can certainly reduce that amount and spend the money on a free Tertiary Education program.

That option will benefit the country far, far more than the present system of outlays centered on the DoD ...

ocean515 said:

It would certainly make these "free education" screeds more credible if they included in their argument statistics that demonstrate there will be 10's of millions of jobs available for college graduates with their new "free" degrees.

Click to expand...

Sarcasm was never a legitimate response in a serious debate.

Try harder ...

Lafayette said:

Sarcasm was never a legitimate response in a serious debate.

Try harder ...

Click to expand...

Sarcasm?

Perhaps you could gain greater understanding of what that is.

The usual dodge of the point I raised doesn't help your cause.

Lafayette said:

"Spending" is not so much the point as is "cost of an education".

As I said in the post, nearly half of all students graduate from a postsecondary education with a debt of around $35K.

I sent my kids to university here in France and I paid, at the very most, $1000 per year plus room 'n board. Because France, like the rest of the European Union, has understood the overall important of a damn fine education - not only for finding a good job, but being an all-round good citizen ...

NB: Moreover, if the US did not spend 54% of its Discretionary Budget on the DoD, there would be plenty left for Bernie's and Hillary's offer to subsidize Tertiary Education (at a state institution of higher learning) all children from a family earning less than $100K a year. Given that the average salary in the US is $54K per individual, the total is about the average family total (given that not in all families do both parents work).

Click to expand...

What a load of malarkey. You spent far more than "$1,000 per year", you just won't admit it. What is the level of taxation to pay for all this "free university"?

Also, if the USA didn't spend so much to defend the rest of Western civilization, you wouldn't have so much to spend on other things. You might actually have to provide for your own defense. Give us a break already. :roll:

ocean515 said:

What's a country to do?

Make it easier to start a business, and roll back the extreme anti-business environment that has sent jobs outside of the country.

It would certainly make these "free education" screeds more credible if they included in their argument statistics that demonstrate there will be 10's of millions of jobs available for college graduates with their new "free" degrees.

Click to expand...

Not to mention the watering down effect free college degrees for everyone, would place on the actual value of an education.

Comparing France, pop. 66 million, to the USA, pop. 318 million, is classic "apples and oranges".

chromium said:

It's really just an excuse to get drunk without parental supervision.

Click to expand...

No it isn't.

If you are employing people and are seeking "creds", those who respond with diplomas are far more certain to meet the job-requirements than those who fart-around in postsecondary education program.

Moreover, we in the US keep assigning the most importance of a degree to that of finding a job. When, in fact, higher education is key also for the the Quality of Life as measured by a good many other factors. Like the high divorce and crime rates in the US, and not just the fact that indolence and obesity are afflicting mostly those without a postsecondary degree.

For instance, from here, this excerpt: Research has produced ample evidence of the individual labour market returns of education. Economists have shown much interest in the estimation of the causal effect of education on wages and economic growth but only recently has work begun to investigate the non–monetary returns of schooling (see McMahon, 2004 for a review).

Empirical studies, for example, suggest that education has a positive impact on health and well-being (Wolfe and Haveman 2002; LlerasMuney 2005), particularly in poorer countries (Cutler and Lleras-Muney, 2006), reduces crime (Lochner and Moretti 2004) and water and air pollution (Appiah and McMahon 2002). The finding that education has positive externalities provides a rationale for government intervention.

countryboy said:

Not to mention the watering down effect free college degrees for everyone, would place on the actual value of an education.

Comparing France, pop. 66 million, to the USA, pop. 318 million, is classic "apples and oranges".

Click to expand...

Bollocks and re-bollocks!

There is not a shred of evidence in the above posted allegations.

Besides, if I mentioned France, it is only because the example typifies the entire EU - which is, btw, a population more than twice the size of the US.

What planet do you live on ... ?

countryboy said:

Not to mention the watering down effect free college degrees for everyone, would place on the actual value of an education.

Comparing France, pop. 66 million, to the USA, pop. 318 million, is classic "apples and oranges".

Click to expand...

Not to mention the impact of filtering an opinion through a lens that refracts reality far to the left.

I totally agree the watered down effect would have an impact. It already has.

The interesting thing to me is the reluctance to provide reasoned analysis showing all these new college graduates would have access to these new "high tech" jobs.

The far lefts argument for "free" college education always centers on this need for educated people in high tech. So what jobs will they then have? How many people are projected to be needed in these fields?

That dot never seems to be connected while promoting their socialist objectives.

Lafayette said:

Bollocks and re-bollocks!

There is not a shred of evidence in the above posted allegations.

Besides, if I mentioned France, it is only because the example typifies the entire EU - which is, btw, a population more than twice the size of the US.

What planet do you live on ... ?

Click to expand...

Planet Earth, unlike you, evidently.

ocean515 said:

Not to mention the impact of filtering an opinion through a lens that refracts reality far to the left.

I totally agree the watered down effect would have an impact. It already has.

The interesting thing to me is the reluctance to provide reasoned analysis showing all these new college graduates would have access to these new "high tech" jobs.

The far lefts argument for "free" college education always centers on this need for educated people in high tech. So what jobs will they then have? How many people are projected to be needed in these fields?

That dot never seems to be connected while promoting their socialist objectives.

Click to expand...

Not only is that dot not connected, it's ignored completely. Libs want it both ways. On one hand, automation and technology is going to destroy our jobs, economy, and way of life. Burger flippers MUST be paid a "living wage" to compensate for this. BUTT (and that's a big butt), on the other hand, we need free college degrees for everyone, to fill all these non-existent jobs. I think they need more hands.

countryboy said:

Not only is that dot not connected, it's ignored completely. Libs want it both ways. On one hand, automation and technology is going to destroy our jobs, economy, and way of life. Burger flippers MUST be paid a "living wage" to compensate for this. BUTT (and that's a big butt), on the other hand, we need free college degrees for everyone, to fill all these non-existent jobs. I think they need more hands.

Click to expand...

:thumbs:

Exactly. Certainly exposes some objectives they try to avoid admitting.

countryboy said:

What a load of malarkey. You spent far more than "$1,000 per year", you just won't admit it. What is the level of taxation to pay for all this "free university"?

Click to expand...

Yes, taxation is MUCH higher than in the US. But I stand by remark of $1000 per year tuition fee in France (plus room 'n board).

countryboy said:

Also, if the USA didn't spend so much to defend the rest of Western civilization, you wouldn't have so much to spend on other things. You might actually have to provide for your own defense.

Click to expand...

The US set-up NATO, which defended successfully Europe from Communist invasion. Since then, there has been no ostensible threat - so costs are much lower. Yes, Europe is grateful for US troops in Europe during the Cold War.

France is fighting ISIS in Africa, and its cost is very high. Europe defends itself where it needs to. Russia is no military threat for the moment - all the oligarchs own property in Paris and the Riviera! (Putin's daughter bought an expensive Bordeaux winery three years ago.)

Taxation in France is much higher than in the US. And the reasons are that France (along with the rest of Europe) prizes Tertiary Education and National Health Care as primary responsibilities of the national government. Paid for, yes, by higher taxation.

See here:

Taxation and redistribution are key policies of any government (with the sole exception of the US). Which is why Europe has fewer people with postsecondary degrees than the US, mostly due to WW2. (See that here: Population with tertiary education)

But (due to national health care) we live three years longer than Americans. See that here:

So?

Well, it's a mixed bag. We live longer in Europe, but due to WW2 in the age group of 55/62 fewer people have postsecondary degrees. That will be corrected over time, however, since the EU has higher rates of the young going into postsecondary educational schooling - and the cost is almost fully subsidized by the national governments.

Lafayette said:

*Hint: half of all college students are graduating today with a $35K debt to repay for their studies ...

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you've overstated the median undergraduate debt at graduation by about $20K.

Lafayette said:

No it isn't.

If you are employing people and are seeking "creds", those who respond with diplomas are far more certain to meet the job-requirements than those who fart-around in postsecondary education program.

Moreover, we in the US keep assigning the most importance of a degree to that of finding a job. When, in fact, higher education is key also for the the Quality of Life as measured by a good many other factors. Like the high divorce and crime rates in the US, and not just the fact that indolence and obesity are afflicting mostly those without a postsecondary degree.

For instance, from here, this excerpt: Research has produced ample evidence of the individual labour market returns of education. Economists have shown much interest in the estimation of the causal effect of education on wages and economic growth but only recently has work begun to investigate the non–monetary returns of schooling (see McMahon, 2004 for a review).

Empirical studies, for example, suggest that education has a positive impact on health and well-being (Wolfe and Haveman 2002; LlerasMuney 2005), particularly in poorer countries (Cutler and Lleras-Muney, 2006), reduces crime (Lochner and Moretti 2004) and water and air pollution (Appiah and McMahon 2002). The finding that education has positive externalities provides a rationale for government intervention.

Click to expand...

Dude...did you miss the part where i said 50% drop out in a single year? That does not apply to those who actually finish. You're arguing against a point i never made

This is what you said in your post:

At most 4 year colleges the *first year* dropout rate is around 50%. At the top schools over 90% graduate. That's despite the curriculum is much more difficult. Why? Because that's where the serious students go. Should put the fed's resources behind them and *maybe* others who first do well their first 2 years, and for young people who want to take on a short term hands on job training

Click to expand...

The drop-out rate is in fact much higher. And how do you know what "serious students" are doing. Let's see the stats please. (Have fun finding them.)

At the top-schools 90% graduate? Who cares? Top schools are not necessarily the place one has to go to get a damn fine education. But, in America's money-hungry society, a Hah-vahd MBA will certainly put you on the right money-track.

What you (and a great many others in America) refuse to understand is that the purpose of an Tertiary Education is not just to learn a trade, but to expand one's intellectual horizons. And one need not earn a megabuck a year to accomplish that fact.

But what can you do? The US has become a Muney-Muney-Muney Society, where your principle quality is measured by your bank account statement ...

Greenbeard said:

I'm pretty sure you've overstated the median undergraduate debt at graduation by about $20K.

Click to expand...

For your edification in the subject matter (stats galore!): A Look at the Shocking Student Loan Debt Statistics for 2017

Excerpt:

Americans owe over $1.4 trillion in student loan debt, spread out among about 44 million borrowers. That’s about $620 billion more than the total U.S. credit-card debt. In fact, the average Class of 2016 graduate has $37,172 in student loan debt, up six percent from last year.

Click to expand...

And:

General student loan debt facts

First, let’s start with a general picture of the student loan debt landscape. The most recent reports indicate there is:
*$1.41 trillion in total U.S. student loan debt
*44.2 million Americans with student loan debt
*Student loan delinquency rate of 11.2% (90+ days delinquent or in default)
*Average monthly student loan payment (for borrower aged 20 to 30 years): $351
*Median monthly student loan payment (for borrower aged 20 to 30 years): $203
(Data via federalreserve.gov, newyorkfed.org here, here and here and clevelandfed.org here)

Click to expand...

And:

In 2012, 71 percent of students graduating from four-year colleges had student loan debt:

Represents 1.3 million students graduating with debt, increase from 1.1 million in 2008, and
*66 percent of graduates from public colleges had loans (average debt of $25,550)
*75 percent of graduates from private nonprofit colleges had loans (average debt of $32,300)
*88 percent of graduates from for-profit colleges had loans (average debt of $39,950)

Twenty percent of 2012 graduate loans were private

Click to expand...

Lafayette said:

But what can you do? The US has become a Muney-Muney-Muney Society, where your principle quality is measured by your bank account statement ...

Click to expand...

of course if that was true everybody would get a job and nobody would want low paying jobs like nurse, teacher, EMT, social worker, coaches, etc etc. It always pays to think twice before you post .

chromium said:

I'm confused why the NYT seems to be blaming the left for ignoring solutions. What do you think Sanders had in mind when he went to the west virginia coal mining town to argue against the AHCA, and promote free college and RURAL internet, if not the needs of the rural areas? Even Hillary urged for free community college, one of the few promising paths in small counties

Let me tell you, these places will NEVER be tech hubs like the NYT seems to think is possible. If you're talking about a town of 700 or fewer, out where a house is surrounded by dirt roads and corn fields - and this is nearly half of many states - these places are going to survive off welfare and **** no matter what. Hell, they were doing so in the 90s

I agree though with your point about the debt crippling even those who do make the effort their situation, and also deterring those who would like to

Click to expand...

Part of the problem in rural areas is loss of the family farm. I grew up on a farm of around 120 acres, more than enough to have everything that we needed, not want, but needed and lived fairly comfortable. Today, corporate farming has taken over. Where before farms were handed down from father to son, that isn't there anymore.

College is like the military, it isn't for everyone. I also agree with Hawkeye that our schools have been dumbed down. That what I learned in High School in subjects like math, English, history, etc. are now being taught in the first and even the second year of college.

Perhaps our problem is one has to have a two year degree in college to come away with the knowledge taught in high school some 50 years ago. In certain subjects anyway. It seems to me graduation rates became an end to be met by any means available even if it mean teach down instead of up.