Comment: I'm not sure if you

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Nothing personal, just some (see in situ)

I'm not sure if you

I'm not sure if you understood my original comment the way I meant it, because it seems we agree.

I'm saying that, in my experience with my colleagues and my own professors as a grad student, the average professor of today tends to rather mind-numbingly accept the notion that if more people were formally educated to a higher level and if the federal government would do more, particularly in health care, social security, and education, we would all be better off. Of course, nearly all of us on this forum think that is rather the opposite of true.

If you are saying that a college education tends to promote socialistic principles and big government, I COMPLETELY AGREE -- thus my original post. Reading it again, I see I wasn't exactly clear in my meaning that unfortunately, it is NOT a rare professor today that believes in what America is doing with regard to centralization and socialism. The only thing professors seem to oppose is all the wars, but they don't do a very good job of it, and they don't care that Obama is even worse than Bush.

However, in response to the idea that professors aren't what they once were, I disagree. When I say they are more highly trained today, I mean trained in their respective fields of study. Why else would you hire a professor? If i want to be a great chemist, i should go study with the best one available, not the one whose political opinion I value. So even though I believe colleges to be cesspools of socialistic nonsense, I also believe the professor to be better at their respective fields of study than in previous days, and I can back up my argument using the same economic theory all of you already understand.