Poll: Do you think the public sector should provide stronger support for reskilling displaced workers? Vestluse postitaja: ProZ.com Staff
|
|---|
This forum topic is for the discussion of the poll question "Do you think the public sector should provide stronger support for reskilling displaced workers?".
View the poll results »
| | | |
It's not only a matter of taking good care of their citizens, but they would be penny-wise and pound-foolish if they wouldn't help with this. It directly gives a boost to the local and national economy.
I just read about the way Sweden does this, with loads of options to reskilling and retraining at several educational levels, subsidised for young and older people (up to 60). They understand how to take care of their people and economy  ... See more It's not only a matter of taking good care of their citizens, but they would be penny-wise and pound-foolish if they wouldn't help with this. It directly gives a boost to the local and national economy.
I just read about the way Sweden does this, with loads of options to reskilling and retraining at several educational levels, subsidised for young and older people (up to 60). They understand how to take care of their people and economy  ▲ Collapse
| | | | Dan Lucas 
Suurbritannia
Local time: 17:35
Liige (2014)
jaapani - inglise
| Is there any evidence that it works better than the private sector? | Dec 31, 2024 |
One thing to keep in mind is that "public sector" is shorthand for "money taken from other peoples' pockets". In some situations I think most of us would agree that is a reasonable approach, but such spending should always be scrutinized and justified, otherwise we end up with the government extracting more and more money from individuals on various pretexts.
Taking the case of Sweden, for example, do we see that they have better outcomes? Lower unemployment rates, maybe? I'm not tr... See more One thing to keep in mind is that "public sector" is shorthand for "money taken from other peoples' pockets". In some situations I think most of us would agree that is a reasonable approach, but such spending should always be scrutinized and justified, otherwise we end up with the government extracting more and more money from individuals on various pretexts.
Taking the case of Sweden, for example, do we see that they have better outcomes? Lower unemployment rates, maybe? I'm not trying to be provocative, just wondering there is data that confirms or refute the idea that having the public sector get involved in reskilling - as opposed to leaving it to the private sector - is a good thing.
Regards,
Dan ▲ Collapse
| | | | IrinaN
Ameerika Ühendriigid
Local time: 11:35
inglise - vene
+ ...
"I think you all know that I've always felt the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help."
R. Reagan
| | |
|
|
|
Daryo
Suurbritannia
Local time: 17:35
serbia - inglise
+ ...
| Is there any evidence that the private sector is ALWAYS better? | Jan 2 |
Dan Lucas wrote:
Is there any evidence that it works better than the private sector?
One thing to keep in mind is that "public sector" is shorthand for "money taken from other peoples' pockets". In some situations I think most of us would agree that is a reasonable approach, but such spending should always be scrutinized and justified, otherwise we end up with the government extracting more and more money from individuals on various pretexts.
Taking the case of Sweden, for example, do we see that they have better outcomes? Lower unemployment rates, maybe? I'm not trying to be provocative, just wondering there is data that confirms or refute the idea that having the public sector get involved in reskilling - as opposed to leaving it to the private sector - is a good thing.
Regards,
Dan
As far as I can remember the spectacular failure of the bankers in 2007-2008 financial crisis was the deed of the 'financial geniuses' from the private sector.
A failure so colossal that to avoid the total collapse of the system the state had to give these 'master experts' more handouts than to all the unemployed and unemployable together.
As for "public sector" is shorthand for "money taken from other peoples' pockets", that's true - in theory.
In practice, a not so small chunk of that money is NOT "money taken from other peoples' pockets", but borrowed money (see statistics of national debt ...), or just money printed from thin air.
Or another example, closer to home: it's the "private sector's expertise" that has made such a monumental mess of the interpreting for courts in UK.
Or of many railways franchises in UK – anyone remembers why the privately owned Railtrack PLC - created in 1994 - was hastily renationalised only few years later in 2002 and rebranded Network Rail? Surely because they were doing such a great 'expert' job of taking care of the railways infrastructure?
[Edited at 2025-01-02 13:24 GMT]
| | | | Kay Denney
Prantsusmaa
Local time: 18:35
prantsuse - inglise
Dan Lucas wrote:
One thing to keep in mind is that "public sector" is shorthand for "money taken from other peoples' pockets". In some situations I think most of us would agree that is a reasonable approach, but such spending should always be scrutinized and justified, otherwise we end up with the government extracting more and more money from individuals on various pretexts.
Taking the case of Sweden, for example, do we see that they have better outcomes? Lower unemployment rates, maybe? I'm not trying to be provocative, just wondering there is data that confirms or refute the idea that having the public sector get involved in reskilling - as opposed to leaving it to the private sector - is a good thing.
Regards,
Dan
I know several people who have trained in Sweden and they were all delighted with the courses they took. Much more useful that the degree in anthropology one of them started out on in France.
Also an elderly lady who signed up to study at uni after she retired, it was free and she had a great time even if she didn't need to do the course in order to find work.
Education is a wonderful thing and money spent on it is money well spent. It's great that in so many European countries, it costs very little.
According to a report I translated a while back, the worst problem Sweden had in terms of unemployment was not being able to hire staff at job centres (their solution was to create virtual centres where people could go for online appointments).
Here in France, it's mostly the public-funded schools that have the best reputation. People only go private if they don't get a place in a public school.
| | | | | Commercial or cultural | Jan 2 |
I agree with Kay about the education.
In Argentina, we have public education, from kindergarten to National Universities, that has its pro and cons.
A big pro is the prestige, when you get graduated from a public university people know you burned your eyelashes studying, because public universities have a good reputation, cultural interests and renowned professors. If you study at a public university, you'll get a chance to do short courses while you are studying or hav... See more I agree with Kay about the education.
In Argentina, we have public education, from kindergarten to National Universities, that has its pro and cons.
A big pro is the prestige, when you get graduated from a public university people know you burned your eyelashes studying, because public universities have a good reputation, cultural interests and renowned professors. If you study at a public university, you'll get a chance to do short courses while you are studying or having internships during the last year/semester.
After you graduate, most of the public universities have postgraduate courses or specializations (even when they are paid ones) that private universities don't have.
Two big cons are teacher's strikes and political/unions influence, this might cause loosing classes or having to assist to political parties debates. The other con is the schedule, since some subjects might have only one schedule to attend.
Regarding private universities, the most important thing is PROFIT, in capital letters.
Payment is mandatory to attend classes and to take exams. If you don't pay, they don't allow you to enter the class or to take the exam. So, it always makes you wonder if the students that get better notes are because they come from wealthy families and can pay/buy exams in advance. So this is a huge con, IMHO.
Education in private universities is only for elite/aristocratic families and many times is sponsored by companies, that later will hire the graduated students. So content is focused on what the companies need, therefore education has a for-PROFIT aim, not a pure gain of knowledge. That's why private universities don't have as many cultural programs or activities as public ones. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Daryo
Suurbritannia
Local time: 17:35
serbia - inglise
+ ...
| Confusing terminology | Jan 6 |
Kay Denney wrote:
Dan Lucas wrote:
One thing to keep in mind is that "public sector" is shorthand for "money taken from other peoples' pockets". In some situations I think most of us would agree that is a reasonable approach, but such spending should always be scrutinized and justified, otherwise we end up with the government extracting more and more money from individuals on various pretexts.
Taking the case of Sweden, for example, do we see that they have better outcomes? Lower unemployment rates, maybe? I'm not trying to be provocative, just wondering there is data that confirms or refute the idea that having the public sector get involved in reskilling - as opposed to leaving it to the private sector - is a good thing.
Regards,
Dan
I know several people who have trained in Sweden and they were all delighted with the courses they took. Much more useful that the degree in anthropology one of them started out on in France.
Also an elderly lady who signed up to study at uni after she retired, it was free and she had a great time even if she didn't need to do the course in order to find work.
Education is a wonderful thing and money spent on it is money well spent. It's great that in so many European countries, it costs very little.
According to a report I translated a while back, the worst problem Sweden had in terms of unemployment was not being able to hire staff at job centres (their solution was to create virtual centres where people could go for online appointments).
Here in France, it's mostly the public-funded schools that have the best reputation. People only go private if they don't get a place in a public school.
Just to clarify, as the terms used can be very misleading and confusing.
l'école publique = state funded and state run schools
vs.
l'école privée = privately funded schools, roughly the equivalent of UK 'public schools'
And yes, in France it's the state run schools that have ways better reputation than privately funded schools, which are seen as refuge for those who can't make it in state schools or for parents who can't stomach 'laïcité'.
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Poll: Do you think the public sector should provide stronger support for reskilling displaced workers? | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
