4 - Friday, February 3, 2012
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
4 - Friday, February 3, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
bE ffi1d4V&i43
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
ASHLEY GRIESSHAMMER
JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ANDREW WEINER JOSH HEALY
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views ofttheir authors.
Imran Syed is the public editor. He can be reached at publiceditor@michigandaily.com.
Encouraging investment
Businesses should follow Quicken into Detroit
nnovation outside the automotive sector may have finally found
its way back to Detroit. After decades of constant and well-pub-
licized troubles, the city has begun to cultivate entrepreneurial
spirit once again. On Monday, Quicken Loans founder Dan Gilbert
announced plans to recruit "the best and the brightest businesses" to
the Motor City. The company will aim to accomplish this in part by
purchasing its ninth building in the city. Quicken Loans' investment
in a city that is usually an afterthought of commercial interests is
commendable, and the potential businesses it's helping will add value
to the city. Other companies should follow suit, and the city of Detroit
and state of Michigan should do all they can to encourage this invest-
ment and entrepreneurship.
Love atfirst site
With February upon us,
stores everywhere
have stocked up on
heart-shaped
chocolate boxes,
mushy greet-
ing cards and
red everything.
Campus is no
exception, as 1
students either
anxiously await LEAH
or dread the POTKIN
arrival of Val- _
entine's Day, the
Hallmark holi-
day.
While the comfort of old relation-
ships encourages some students to
take advantage of sharing romantic
evenings with their significant other,
many other students celebrate the
day by going outon thectown with the
excitement of searching for and kin-
dling new relationships. Still, other
students turn to a more novel way of
meeting new people and finding love
- the Internet.
The world of online dating is
nothing new, but its recent appear-
ance on college campuses with web-
sites like Datemyschool.com, a site
founded by two MBA students at
Columbia University, have left col-
lege students' hearts pounding in an
untraditional way. While in the past
college students have taken advan-
tage of their surroundings to meet
potential love interests - at bars, in
class or through other school-related
activities - dating websites geared
specifically toward college students
have added a whole new level to the
playing field, for better or for worse.
At first blush, the idea of a group-
specific dating website targeting col-
lege students makes perfect sense in
the same way religious dating sites
such as JDate.com and Christian-
Mingle.com do. Upon further con-
sideration, however, turning to the
Internet to find love at such a young
age poses more cons than pros.
While I accept that people
searching for partners in isolated
or familiar communities may need
dating websites to broaden the pool
of potential mates, University stu-
dents have the unique advantage of
thousands of other students at their
dating disposal. At the University
there are myriad opportunities to
meet like-minded people face to
face. Given this environment, I can't
help but question the need for dat-
ing websites on college campuses.
Generally speaking, as a genera-
tion we have already discarded the
now old-fashioned forms of courtship
such as phone calls and face-to-face
interaction in favor of text messaging
and Facebook. According to many
of our elders, these new practices
impede our ability to sustain person-
al relationships. So, before we give
technology even greater control over
the course of our relationships and
hamper our already compromised
ability to interact with others in per-
son, I firmly believe students should
shun these new dating websites and
continue to give the old-fashioned
way of meeting people a fair shot, at
least while they're still in college.
Furthermore, I truly question
whether students' interests are actu-
ally served by embracing online
dating at a young age. Unlike older
users on Internet dating sites who
are often looking for more serious,
lasting relationships but tend not to
have time or opportunity to meet
potential soul mates, college students
often are more interested in "playing
the field." While dating website users
looking for long term commitment
could comprise a rare sector of young
20-somethings, it seems more plau-
sible that users would only be looking
for an easy fling.
Assuming the latter is true, and
students feel no immediate rush to
settle down, it seems that meet-and-
greets could be done equally and
many times more effectively out and
around campus. And it almost goes
without saying that meeting people
in person also eliminates the surpris-
es, disappointments, not to mention
risks associated with online set ups.
This isn't to say I'm anti-online
dating as a whole. In fact, I'm actu-
ally quite for it. Dating websites
undoubtedly have their benefits
as mediums by which people with
busy schedules and limited time
can branch out and meet people
they wouldn't otherwise. However,
keeping in mind that college pres-
ents a unique opportunity in a per-
son's life to meet all different types
of people, I don't think students
necessarily need the help of a vir-
tual Cupid's arrow so early on.
Students should
shun new college
online dating.
So, if I find myself boyfriend-less
a couple of years down the road
and living with cats, I'd turn to the
Internet in a heartbeat. As college
students at such a large and diverse
University, however, where new
dating prospects constantly sur-
round us, we shouldn't be too quick
to rely on computers to make all the
effort.
Ultimately, in light of the Feb-
ruary rush to find love before the
approaching "holiday," students
should put down their computers to
find that special someone, and they
should save online dating for later
down the road.
- Leah Potkin can be reached at
Ipotkin@umich.edu. Follow her on
Twitter at @LeahPotkin.
Gilbert doesn't just plan to expand Quick-
en's internal operations within the city. He
announced that the company would hire 300
software engineers along with 500 summer
interns. The Intern Alley program is focused
on exposing college students to business-relat-
ed entrepreneurship. Creating jobs, particu-
larly in technology related fields, is preparation
for an economy of the future. Quicken Loans
climbed Fortune's "Best Companies to Work
For" ranking once again this year - jumping
to loth place from 29th last year. Forbes cited
Quicken's move from the suburbs into Detroit
as part of the improved ranking.
With all of the drama concerning Detroit's
budget playing out in the background, news
that private companies are moving back to
Detroit is exciting. Small business and entre-
preneurship in emerging technology sectors
have grown exponentially in the past few
years. Technology startups, including Twitter
and Facebook, have demonstrated the poten-
tial economic power of investments similar
to the one Quicken is making. Investment
in Detroit, especially in its youth, projects a
bright economic future. Progressive move-
ment forward is precisely what the city needs
to move beoynd its troubled past.
Detroit has been trying to attract start-ups
and innovative companies for years - the
Tech Town business park in Midtown comes
to mind. These efforts are commendable, but
must be continued to attract young entre-
preneurs. There are large numbers of recent
college graduates in Michigan, and students
should take advantage of the low cost of living
in Detroit, coupled with incentives and invest-
ments like the ones Quicken is offering.
Companies are starting to invest, but part
of the responsibility must be put on the city
of Detroit to build a solid foundation. Detroit
must offer basic residential services, includ-
ing those currently threatened by budget
cuts. Electricity and garbage pick-up are
necessary to create an attractive business
climate. If people are to invest in the city, the
city must invest in the people and in itself.
If Detroit is to rely on the innovations of its
residents, the residents must be able to rely
on Detroit's infrastructure.
It seems like Detroit's recovery is on its way.
Investment in emerging markets, innovation
and imagination are valuable pursuits. Yet
none of them can happen without the rein-
forcement of the Detroit city government. To
encourage Detroit's success, the state, city,
businesses and residents must cooperate with
a powerful vision of the future in mind.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Aida Ali, Laura Argintar, Kaan Avdan, Ashley Griesshammer, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein,
Patrick Maillet, Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Harsha Panduranga,
Timothy Rabb, Adrienne Roberts, Vanessa Rychlinski, Sarah Skaluba,
Seth Soderborg, Caroline Syms, Andrew Weiner
Education is overrate
0
PATRICK MAILLET
Fou yers later...
"Yes we can! Yes we can!" Four years later,
I heard these words being sung outby a select
few students in front of the Michigan Union
as they waited in line for tickets to see Presi-
dent Barack Obama speak on campus last
friday. As the small group of students - 5 or
so - continued their attempt at getting the
political chant going, they looked around and
quickly realized that it simply wasn't work-
ing. The previously over-used catchphrase
wasn't igniting their peers like it once did.
Instead, the couple hundred students
standing in that particular segment of the
line had uneasy looks on their faces as they
listened to the chant. They seemed afraid of
yelling those three infamous words. Even
I, someone who used to sing this battle cry
to anyone who would listen, felt like it just
wasn't the same. The students who were yell-
ing eventually realized that they weren't in
2008 anymore and fell quiet.
Last week, University students were con-
fronted with a once in a lifetime opportunity
- to see the president speak in person. Thou-
sands of us waited outside in bone-chilling
temperatures all night outside of the Union
just to get a ticket. Even those who didn't
wait in line were anxious to see Obama. Some
reported scalping their ticket for as much as
$150. Needless to say, once we were able to
actually see Obama speak, the electricity in
Al Glick Field House was undeniable.
Standing 20 feet away from the leader of
the free world, I felt that same rush that I had
in 2008. I felt like I was part of something
bigger than myself and perhaps real change
was on the horizon.
Thinking my friends felt the same way, I
asked them if they were goingto get involved
in the 2012 campaign. One of my friends, a
fellow applicant to the Ford School of Public
Policy and someone who I consider one of
my more politically-aware peers, sheepishly
replied, "I don't think I am going to be able
to vote for Obama. He has just done too many
things that I just can't agree with."
"Really," I said in disbelief, "You're such
a liberal-minded person. Why are you even
waiting in line right now?" She explained to
me that Obama hadn't lived up to his word
from 2008 and that she was waiting only
because of the honor of being able to see the
President speak.
Shocked by my friend's response, I asked
others their feelings about this topic. Almost all
of them agreed that along with not volunteer-
ing in the 2012 campaign, they were just there
for the experience of seeing the president and
weren't even planningon voting for him.
How did this happen? How did so many
of the very people that helped catapult an
unlikely candidate, the African-American
senator from Illinois, into the presidency
suddenly not care about the election? In
2008, Obama promised change and a future
different from the status quo - a difficult
promise to live up to. Unfortunately, people
aren't satisfied with how it has been fulfilled.
"So what now?" I asked my peers. "Are you
just goingto vote for whoever the Republican
nominee is?"
"Oh, God no!" most of them responded.
Almost all of my friends who once supported
Obama aren't switching sides - they simply
aren't voting at all. A generation at the fore-
front of political involvement in 2008, will
once again go unheard in 2012.
But, there is hope for Democrats - espe-
cially those who fear Obama may lose his re-
election bid. Though America's youth isn't
supporting Obama right now, at least they're
not supporting the alternative. The night
that thousands of students waited outside to
hear Obama speak, the Republican presiden-
tial candidates had another debate. As usual,
nothing came of it. Mitt Romney and Newt
Gingrich just tore each other apart, trying to
convince countless Americans that neither
was fit to be commander in chief.
America's youth may not be willing to rally
behind Obama just yet. But, as the Republi-
can presidential candidates continue their
circus and avoid working towards actual
solutions, America's youth will slowly realize
that Obama is better than the alternative.
It may be a little premature to start the
"Yes we can" chants, but with a little more
encouragement, the faint murmur heard out-
side of the Union may once again turn into a
mighty political voice.
Patrick Maillet is an LSA sophomore.
ducation is overrated, and
that has to change.
Yes, learning is a wonder-
ful thing. Yes, degrees are a prereq-
uisite for decent
jobs these days.
And yes, I'm glad
President Barack
Obama is con-
cerned about the +
rising cost of col-
lege, or at least
his poll numbers JOEL
amongstudents. BATTERMAN
But is the
number of years
we spend in school a good measure
of how much we've learned? Do we
need 17 years in class and a pile of
debt just to find work that pays the
bills? And are the modest reforms
advocated by Obama last Friday a
real solution to the problem?.
I don't think so. There's a deeper
problem here: The runaway over-
development of American educa-
tion in response to an exaggerated
labor market focus on educational
credentials, a phenomenon with
hugely regressive implications. It
favors kids whose parents can pay
for premium schooling, slams a
door on the poor and accelerates
inequality in the guise of meritoc-
racy.
For much of the past century,
logical reasons existed for the rise
of education. In 1900, a majority of
Americans still lived in rural areas,
and hardly one quarter graduated
high school. As we made the switch
from an agrarian society to a mostly
industrial one, specialized training
became more important for prepar-
ing workers for skilled jobs. Higher
education went from an elite privi-
lege to a necessary stepping stone
to a professional career. Like its
peers, the University exploded dur-
ing the post-WWII era, sprawling
onto North Campus and building
massive new residence halls such as
Markley, Bursley, South Quad and
East Quad.
Unfortunately, the U.S. never
made the same commitment to
free higher education that many
European nations did, even as a
bachelor's degree grew more vital
to professional success. When the
middle class started slipping in the
1970s, the relative necessity and
affordability of college was bound
to diverge. Today, a bachelor's
degree is probably as important
to decent employment as a high
school diploma was 50 years ago,
but it's hard to find one offered for
no charge.
To put it bluntly, our generation
got burned - and, of course, some
of us got burned more than others.
Stanford University sociolo-
gist David Grusky argues that we
are "rationing" college for the rich
through the high cost of tuition.
The result of the pay-to-play col-
lege game is a labor market very
far from free. Because we've made
college a prerequisite for full par-
ticipation, the whole economy is
rigged against those of us not born
into wealth.
Meanwhile, so-called "credential
inflation" isn't stopping. Master's
degrees are becoming the new bach-
elor's, a July New York Times article
observed. Does that imply soon the
Ph.D. will become the new master's?
Where will the educational arms
race end? When every office temp
needs a doctorate?
I've heard more than one student
say that they won't become "a real
person" until they finish school for
good. If that's true, just how long
will people in the future have to put
personhood on hold for a few let-
ters' sake?
For all the time and money, the
hyperextension of education would
make a certain amount of sense if
it produced more talented work-
ers with specialized superpowers
that previous generations could
only dream of. But, in the majority
of cases, I doubt that's happening.
Pundits regularly bemoan the state
of American undergraduate educa-
tion. While graduate students are
supposed to have a more definite
focus, I've heard plenty complain
they aren't learning much new
material. The trend toward dual
master's degrees on this campus
suggests that graduate professional
programs could become one more
grab bag of classes on the road to
credentials that stand largely as
ends in and of themselves.
"Credential
inflation" isn't
stopping.
0
0
The expansion of higher educa-
tion has also exacerbated compe-
tition in the lower grades to the
point of absurdity. "It has always
been difficult getting [admitted,]
but what's changed is the amount
of hassle," one New York education
consultant told the Times last year.
"Now test prep is de rigueur, and
you're applying to more schools."
She was talking about kindergar-
tens.
Learning is good. Expanded edu-
cation is good when it builds a more
intelligent, compassionate society.
But instead, the over-development
of education is engineering the ero-
sion of the middle class and our
generation's lives. Only policies
that level with that fact can put us
back on track.
- Joel Batterman can be
reached at jomba@umich.edu.
CONTRIBUTE TO THE COVERSATION
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and viewpoints. Letters should
be fewer than 300 words while viewpoints should be 550-850 words.
Both must include the writer's full name and University affiliation.
Send submissions to tothedaily@michigandaily.com
0