Quote: (06-25-2013 09:29 PM)kdolo Wrote:
Jezebel should blame women and feminism for the rise in college costs leading to sugardaddy.
The price of education i.e. tuition is a function of supply and demand. Increase demand for college by women demanding to enter higher education (mostly to study nonsense) = higher prices.
Not really. Your conclusion - that women and feminism is responsible for the rise in college costs - may hold water, but you're off on the mechanism.
College tuition is not a function of supply and demand as we think about it, as the regulation and externalities of government funding on differing levels have conspired to decouple tuition from market forces.
The increase in college tuition since the early 1980s has been almost wholly a function of bloating administration and unnecessary construction on campuses. Now, most of these administration jobs are horseshit makework positions staffed by women - which lends credence to your original conclusion - but it's really not so much a feminism problem as it is a teat-sucking problem. Feminism is just one teat-sucker.
If we were to truly describe tuition in a supply-demand curve setting, we'd view the supply curve as being an almost perfectly inelastic ratchet. Even at minor changes in demand, prices sharply rise, but rarely if ever fall. You're identifying the demand side as the dominant driver of price, when the supply is really the crucial factor.
Think about it critically for a second. How much does it actually cost to teach another 1000 girls some dumb gender studies shit? All you need is a classroom (already part of your fixed physical plant cost, and generally NOT part of the increased construction), a lecturer (anywhere from $30K to 250K per year), and some overpriced books (which the girls buy themselves anyway).