Is it not the employers prerogative to be selective and to only select those who have sufficient knowledge and abilities for the position solicited? Perhaps if employment is available only to those who have completed certain basic learning skills it will stimulate competition for jobs, and thus motivate prospective employees to obtain the necessary level of education. That is not to say that there is no on-the-job training where employees learn to use a spectrum analyzer, or certain software. But that training is specialized and limited. I believe that to some extent, and in certain industries, this is the case already. I quite agree with the "crescent wrench" comment. Furthermore, it seems that this issue is more of a political issue foisted upon industry rather than a genuine industrial dilemma. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vitaliy" To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:42 PM Subject: Re: [OT] You can't make this stuff up... > Apptech wrote: >>>> Teaching employees basic literacy skills is definitely >>>> not the >>>> company's responsibility >> >> And why not? > > Because it's stupid and ineffcient. Kind of like using a crescent wrench > to > drive in nails. Or asking you and your neighbors to provide your own > garbage > collection and police services. > >> If whoever wrote that (and I can guess but don't know)(and >> many think it) also thinks that tax is theft and should be >> minimised or abolished, then whose responsibility is it? > > I wrote that, but I do not recall ever saying that "tax is theft". > >> If industry needs basically literacy skills in its employees >> then it is responsible for helping fund the training. As >> there may be debate as to how this is achieved prospective >> employees could be given a voucher to hand to would be >> employers so they can fund the training. Stupid idea? You >> bet! :-). But hopefully some sort of point is made. Basic >> education benefits the nation as a whole, and individuals >> benefit from their own education (of course). But it IS also >> an employer's responsibility to pick up part of the tab, or >> to shut up about the quality that they get and just pick the >> eyes out of what is available. > > Russell, you yourself do not like it when people make straw man of your > ideas. > > The benefits of education is a positive externality, which is subject to > the > free rider problem, so it makes sense for the government to spend taxpayer > dollars on education (how much, and in what form is another question). > Therefore I agree that the industry is responsible for the education of > the > workforce, in the sense that it should pay taxes that the government then > spends on educating the workforce. > > However, what I meant was that it is NOT the responsibility of each > *individual* company to teach basic literacy to its employees during the > lunch break. > > Vitaliy > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist