Meaning "meaningless story."
It's not. There are still niches to be filled, and for those there's a good chance of upward mobility. But there are fewer than there used to be, so upward mobility, once common, is more restricted.
The key word is "competition." If you can compete, then you can move upwards. By saying there's no chance to successfully compete, you're saying there's no point in preparing for competition.
I teach a wide mix of kids. Some of them have good imaginations and can see themselves competing, they can see themselves moving into jobs that don't exist. Many can't see themselves moving into jobs that they don't see adults around them filling already. Many of those jobs are going to go away, and they can't conceive of an alternative. Unrealistic dreams are more likely to produce something innovative than a relentless prosaicism that merely asserts that what is is and what is will be.
There's not much of an alternative except simply paying people the same for doing something that requires a lot of education and hard work as for doing something that requires no education but still a lot of hard work. That won't wash. You simply don't produce as much flipping burgers and cleaning toilets as you do on an assembly line or producing a new medicine. It would require massive redistribution of income to less efficient companies in order to pay them. We could pay directly through the IRS, but then the risk is paying people to breathe.
We don't like doing that kind of redistribution. It accounts for much of the rising cost of higher ed. Colleges aren't efficient. They have virtually 0% productivity gain over the last 50 years.
= new reply since forum marked as read