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