Young people may like the the over-arching concepts... what I was getting at is that the two factions would dislike different parts of the models.
The example I talked about before with regards to the Scandinavian model for tuition-free college.
It goes without saying that the conservative side wouldn't like the higher taxation aspect (they've already made that abundantly clear)
However, younger progressives certainly wouldn't like some of the strings that come attached with the Finnish model for tuition-free education.
Their admissions system into the free college program is very selective and meritocratic. (They reject 2/3 of applicants)
And the fields that younger progressives tend to want to study at disproportionately higher rates, are strictly capped/rationed over there, and those caps are based on what the market will bear.
Point of reference, here's the number degrees conferred for Finland (year 2019):
View attachment 346978
And no, you're not reading those numbers wrong, the numbers of students accepted to study things like Arts and Journalism/Philosophy/Social Sciences are really that low.
en.wikipedia.org
The University of the Arts Helsinki (
Finnish:
Taideyliopisto,
Swedish:
Konstuniversitetet), also known as
Uniarts Helsinki, is a Finnish arts university that was launched in the beginning of 2013. Apart from a few exceptions,
it is the only university in Finland that provides education in the fields it represents.
View attachment 346979
Fewer than 2,000 undergrads and just over 200 post-grads were accepted into their various programs.
You compare that to "degrees conferred" data from the US, and it's wildly different. We have huge number who choose to pursue Humanities, Visual & Performing Arts, and Journalism (way more than there will be jobs for)
So it's not exactly what some people here think it is. You talk to some younger people here, and they have it in their minds that "If we just did things the way Finland did, I'd be able to spend 6 years pursuing and cultivating my passion, and exit the experience debt-free"
When in reality, "The Finnish Way" is:
"Are you in the top 1/3 academically? No?, well in that case you'll have to use your public education benefits for the vocational/trade school down the street, sorry"
And if you happen to be in that top 1/3:
"Oh, you want to pursue arts and/or journalism? Well, we have only have 200 seats available for that and they're reserved for the top people who show the most promise in that field, since you're not in the top 200, you'll need to apply to enroll in either the business or engineering programs which are less selective"
Are the young people here going to go for that kind of selective/meritocratic type of model? Or will they have some "equity-based" objections to those stipulations?
Same goes with this Vienna model for housing...it's not exactly what people think it is. It would seem as if people are under the impression that it's getting the same kind of nice apartment you'd get here, with all of the freedoms, but for a fraction of the price due to subsidization. That's not exactly what's happening.
Just a couple of bullet points:
- Renters are responsible for most maintenance and upkeep (and can be fined if they let something fall into disrepair (meaning if you neglect to get some pipes fixed and it leaks into the unit below, you're financially responsible for it...Fridge breaks and you need a new one, you pay for a new fridge)
- Move-in costs can be up to $30k
- You must compensate the prior tenant for upgrades/updates they made to the apartment.
- The ability to "hand down" your units (at grandfathered rates) has created some challenges.
- Things like asking your GF/BF to move in with you comes with more hoops to jump through & challenges than it would under traditional apartment arrangements. (in fact, you can get in some trouble just for having "unregistered" overnight guests in some instances -- though I don't know how enforceable that part is, I would imagine most people probably aren't picking up the phone to say "Hey, I saw Joe bring a girl home from the bar and she stayed the night" to rat out their neighbors)
- There is a 2-year waiting list, and the government assigns your unit to you, which means there's no browsing around to see which layout/floorplan you like the best or which one would be in easiest walking distance to the places you like to frequent...so you could be lucky enough to get into the one the newer buildings that happens to be next to the library or your favorite shops, or you could get stuck being assigned to the Karl Marx HOF building (no joke, that's the name of one of their social housing complexes) that was built almost 100 years ago and is in need of repairs and that the prior tenant may have made no upgrades to in the last 30 years.
In many regards, it's less like having an apartment, and more like having a Condo in an HOA (except you don't get to select your own unit)
The NY times articles (and other publications touting the model) conveniently only showed the interiors of some of the newer units with flattering lighting like this one
View attachment 346984
Hint: they don't all look like that lol. You could just as easily get assigned to the one that has an interior that looks like a throw back to the 1970's.
One could just as easily get assigned to one that looks like this:
View attachment 346985
(and if they want to make it look nicer, it's on them to do the work and cover the expenses for modernizing)