I normally don't counter-post, but since DSW at Sonoran Alliance has misrepresented what I said in an earlier post, a counter-post is an appropriate response.
Especially since DSW himself (or herself; it's an anonymous blog) chose to go the counter-post (both to me and to David Safier at Blog for Arizona) route instead of simply commenting on my original post.
The post in question criticized Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Gilbert) for rationalizing his anti-education funding vote by saying that ' "Education does not create jobs," he [Biggs] said. "Entrepreneurs and businesses create jobs." '
My response was thus - "Apparently he believes that entrepeneurs and businessmen don't need educations, nor do they need a workforce knowledgeable enough to adequately staff their businesses."
DSW's response to my criticism?
"Maybe this is a good time to chime in and remind our liberal bloggers that there are many highly educated Ph.D’s employed by our fine university system who could only find jobs within the university system. They have created no jobs. Simply put, having an excellent education does not guarantee you a job."
On a couple of points he is correct - having an excellent education does not guarantee one a job, nor, generally speaking, do teachers create jobs.
They just give people the tools (knowledge, ability to think critically and learn more) to create jobs or to fill those jobs adequately. In other words, they give people the tools they need to succeed in our society.
And a commenter (John) on DSW's post does bring up the success of college dropout Bill Gates and uses it as a bulwark to the argument that education isn't necessary for success.
That commenter might have had a point, except for a few things - Gates is highly intelligent, had access to oodles of investment capital via family connections (hat tip to commenter Ron on DSW's post for reminding everyone of that fact) and Gates had access to highly educated people to write Microsoft's software and do its accounting and legal work, and so forth.
Now, I'm not disparaging John's point completely - people without much formal education *can* succeed greatly if they have enough drive and intelligence (Gates is a case in point) and people with a lot of formal education and not much active intelligence can fail spectacularly (to whit: George W. Bush of the two Ivy League degrees and the lowest Presidential job approval ratings ever. To be fair to the Ivy League schools though, legacy admissions and "gentlemen's Cs don't motivate people to learn, especially when the Friends of Dad and Granddad are around to smooth the way.)
BTW - DSW should update his post - Tedski at R-Cubed is on the Biggs quote, too. :)