Hi, my name is Andrea with Foodimentary Adventures in Food and today I'm sharing quick and easy grocery store dinner kits for those nights when you need to get dinner on the table in a hurry. If you liked this video, please make sure to like, comment, and subscribe. So the first meal that we're making is Kraft Spaghetti Classics Tangy Italian. I've opened up the box so you all can see what's inside of it. It comes with some spaghetti noodles, and the spaghetti noodles are pretty short so they're not very long at all. It also comes with grated Parmesan cheese, the Tangy Italian herb spice mix, and then you need a can of tomato paste, and on the back of the box it gives you a variation. You can stir in a half a pound of ground beef and garlic powder, so that is what I'm doing. I've already cooked up my ground beef and added garlic powder to it, so let's get started. So I've got my spaghetti noodles boiling away, and now I'm going to start working on the sauce portion. So I am adding in my tomato paste, and there is a variation on the box that says if you don't have tomato paste, you can use tomato sauce and it tells you how much of that you can use, but I have tomato paste so that is what I'm using. Next, the directions say to add in two cans of water, and so I am just using 12 ounces of water because it's a six ounce can, and now I'm adding in that Tangy Italian spice mix, and then I'm just going to stir everything up and let this come to a boil. Okay, so the sauce has been simmering away for about 10 minutes, and now I'm going to add in my ground beef. Okay, so here is dinner, and I tasted the spaghetti, and it is very good. I really didn't think it would be enough for four people like the box says, but it actually is. If you have four average eaters, it's plenty, and of course you know I added half a pound of ground beef to fill it out a little bit, make it a meaty meal, and it is absolutely pretty delicious. I buy it again, and I'm serving it with a bread stick and also a salad. We're going to be using the Trader Joe's, well I'm going to be using Trader Joe's when we get to the table, and then Howard is going to be using this. So this is what we are having for dinner tonight, and we will see y'all next time. So for dinner tonight, I'm going to be trying out this tasty Korean style barbecue beef dinner kit. It's supposed to serve five people, so in the box you get this Korean sauce, it's a liquid, and then you get a dry seasoning mix that you're supposed to coat your beef with, and you also get some rice. To make the dinner kit, you need, it calls for a pound of sirloin steak. I had this flank steak in my freezer, it's a pound, and that's what I'm going to use. It also calls for green onions, but the green onions are optional, and then it also calls for a red bell pepper. So the first thing that you're supposed to do is start your rice, and then while your rice is cooking, they want you to go ahead and slice up your beef, and then add that dry seasoning package to coat it. Okay, so I've got my rice cooking away, and now I'm adding in my beef. I added that seasoning packet in, and it really smells pretty good. And then it says to also add in your bell peppers, and I'm just going to let this cook until that beef is done. So the meat is cooked, and I'm going to add in my green onions. It says to use the green onions as a garnish, but I just tasted some of the meat, and it doesn't have a whole lot of flavor, so I think that'll help it out. The other thing that I'm going to do is I'm going to add in that sauce packet now. It says to drizzle it after you put the meat and veggies on the rice, but I feel like it needs some flavor, so I'm going to add about half. Okay, so here is our dinner all plated up, serving it over the rice that came with it. It actually came with long grain rice, not jasmine rice, and I'm not a huge fan of long grain rice, but Howard and I both tasted it, and we both said it really lacks flavor. And mind you, I did add in that sauce packet. I ended up adding it all, not just half, but still not a lot of flavor. We both said the same thing, probably would not repurchase this again. By the time you buy your beef and buy your vegetables, you could have just gone to your favorite Asian restaurant and ordered this. It says that it serves five. I think that's a bit of a stretch. It would probably serve three comfortably. But anyway, this is what we are having for dinner tonight, and we will see y'all next time. So for dinner tonight, we are having Oroz Compoyo from H-E-B. H-E-B is a grocery store that is local to Texas. It is chicken and rice, and the only thing that you need for this dinner kit is chicken. So inside the box, you get a seasoning packet and you get the rice. And for the chicken, it says that you can use boneless, skinless chicken breast or thighs. And that is what I'm using, chicken thighs. It's a pound and I've cut it up into chunks. And the directions say to start off by browning up your chicken. Okay, so per the directions, I've got my oil heating in the pan and I'm just adding in my chicken. And I'm just going to let this cook until the chicken is cooked through. So my chicken is brown and it says to stir in the rice mixture next and to get that brown as well. So it's been a couple of minutes and I'm adding in my water. I'm adding in two cups of water. It says for a firmer rice to use two cups of water for, I guess, like a moisture, fluffier rice used two and a half. But I do not like an overly done rice. I'm adding in the seasoning packet now. And it says to bring this mixture to a hard boil. And then I'm just going to cover and let this simmer until that rice is cooked. It says about 25 minutes. Okay, so here is everything all plated up. Howard and I tried the Arroz Compulio and we both think it's pretty good. Howard said that it reminded him kind of like Cajun food, like Jambalaya. It is really flavorful. It's not spicy, but it is really good. It has a good flavor. As you can see, my rice is firm. I did add again half a cup less of water as the recipe recommended for firmer rice. That's how I like my rice, pretty firm. But it is good. I'm serving it with some buttered corn and a side of avocado. This is what we are having for dinner tonight. And we will see y'all next time. So for dinner tonight, I am making this Chef Boyardee Pizza Maker Kit, traditional. And it comes with a can of the pizza maker sauce. And then it comes with two pouches for the dough. So it says that the box makes two 12 inch pizzas. Let me flip it over for you. But it also says for a thicker crust, you can make it in a 13 by 9 pan. So that's what I'm going to do. I guess it's going to be kind of like a deep dish pizza. And then it says right here for a lighter baked crust, you can bake it. I'm sorry, mix together the packages and the warm water and then let it sit for 20 minutes for a lighter baked crust. So that's what I'm going to do. So what I'm getting ready to do right now is to mix up these two patches, add the water. It says mix it until it's a soft dough and then add a little bit of oil on top and cover it. And then just let it sit for 20 minutes. Okay, so my pizza dough rose for about half an hour instead of 22 minutes. I got kind of busy with my toddler who was having a snack kind of right next to me. So you may hear him from time to time. So what I'm doing right now is spreading out this pizza dough. I have a greased 9 by 13 pan. The direction said to grease it with cooking spray, but I use this garlic ghee instead. It's a clarified butter. So I'm just going to spread this out. Now I'm going to add my pizza sauce. It seems like a lot. So don't know if I'm going to add the whole can and I tasted the pizza sauce and it's not sweet at all. As you can see, it's kind of running, but it's definitely not a sweet sauce. Okay, so that's about a third of the can that I added in. I think I'm going to stop there because I feel like otherwise if I added this entire can, it's just going to be very, very soupy. And now I'm going to add in my cheese. I'm using a pizza blend cheese. I'm going to use the entire package here and now I'm going to add my meat. I have some cooked Italian sausage. I have some pepperoni and then I also have some onions. All right, so now I am just going to pop this into the oven. My oven is preheated to 425 minutes and I think it says to bake it for about 35 minutes or until that crust is done. Okay, so I let the pizza bake for 30 minutes. I took it out. I let it cool for about half an hour, cut out a slice and here it is on the plate. So I don't know if you can tell on camera, but it is pretty thick and fluffy. It's definitely cooked all the way through. Let me try to show you the bottom crust here. So it's cooked all the way through. I will say it tastes more bread-like than pizza-like. And in hindsight, I wish I had made either just one pizza or made two separate pizzas because the crust is pretty thick, thicker than I thought it would be. I was concerned about the amount of sauce in the can. So if you remember, I didn't add it all, but it kind of made the pizza dry. So just FYI. All right, but this is what we are having for dinner tonight and we will see y'all next time. So now I am sharing the last box dinner kit of the week. I hope you all have enjoyed this video so far. If you have, I'd love it if you hit the like button and subscribe button. It would really help our channel out a lot, but I'm including this one as a bonus because I did find it on clearance. I'm not sure if Walmart is selling these or not, but if you happen to find it on clearance or if you happen to have it in your pantry, still wanted to give a review. So this is chicken and broccoli, great value. So it's from Walmart. It's an orzo pasta mix with creamy cheese sauce, broccoli and chicken flavored seasoning. So in the box, you get the dry mix and then you get the creamy broccoli sauce. So it's kind of like it's like a cheese sauce and then you get the orzo and then it calls for a pound of chicken breast. But I am using a pound of boneless, skinless chicken thighs because that's just our preference and water. So all I'm going to do is start off by cooking that chicken breast. I'm sorry, chicken thighs, cooking them all the way done. And then I'm just going to add in my water and then the two seasoning packets. Okay, so my meat is cooked. You just saw me add in water. Now I'm adding in orzo and going to add in my dry spices. And then I'm going to add in that cheese packet going to give it a good stir. And it says to bring the mixture to a boil and then cover and then let it simmer for like seven to nine minutes. If you've never cooked with orzo before orzo is a type of pasta and it cooks really, really quickly. So I'm just squeezing this all out. I'm just going to let it boil and then cover it up. So dinner is ready and I did have to cook it longer than nine minutes, probably for about 13 minutes, but it is very good. Hopefully Walmart will sell this again. I'm not sure, but it is a really tasty dish, very creamy, very cheesy. And then I am serving it with a side of green beans that I doctored up with season salt and butter. So this is what we are having for dinner tonight and we will see y'all next time.


So I am Kim Raj. I work at Open Embedded and for daytime job I work at Juliper. So I will be talking about eGlypsy making it configurable. So there are some cool features that's there in eGlypsy that probably many of us know and so today I'm going to talk about the configurability of eGlypsy. So what is eGlypsy? It's a variant of GNU-C library especially aimed at embedded systems. It was launched about six years ago. The main purpose of it was to get improvements into embedded systems and back then Glypsy was more and more targeted towards desktop-based systems and there were improvements that could be done which were specific to embedded systems were not that interesting for desktop systems. So the main focus was of course the features that would make sense into the embedded systems. So as you can see binary compatible with GNU-C library so it would always be in sync with the upstream GNU-C library. It mirrored every day and it follows the least schedule of Glypsy completely. So it's an add-on on top of existing Glypsy. No features are removed from upstream Glypsy and many of the features that are proposed on eGlypsy which are essentially common for Glypsy are redirected to appropriate Glypsy mailing lists all the time. So it's an add-on as I said earlier just makes it easy to get Glypsy into the embedded systems. So what are its goals? One of the goal was to reduce the size and so I'll talk about. So the whole configuration mechanisms that were put in place were mainly to do the size management where the fully blown Glypsy is quite big. And the other fundamental issue was cross compilation. So most of the embedded systems are cross-compiling build systems and there were improvements or fixes that always were done on top of Glypsy and it was thought that Glypsy will consume them and it would make it more cross-compiler friendly if you will. And so for that matter if you go to eGlypsy sites then there are very nice documents on how to cross-compile it and how to actually run eGlypsy tests in cross environments. So it has very extensive and very nice documentation on that and it has been adopted in major distributions especially Debian thereby flows into Ubuntu, Open Embedded flows into Yachto and others and Gen2 also has a port of eGlypsy if you want. So website is eGlypsy.org and it hosts all the information about it, all the releases and information about mailing list and SCM and everything. So what does it have for managing the configurations? When the configuration management was introduced into it it was inspired by key config but wasn't key config. So you can say it's like a homegrown mechanism for handling the configurations. So in eGlypsy's wall they are called option groups. The option groups are key config or configuration in general is can be a blessing and it can be a BMS. So it has to be designed very carefully what parts of your projects you want to configure and it was decided that based on the project specifications the categorization of various option groups will be done and it has the same syntax very similar to Kernel's key config and as we all know key config is also part of other projects like busybox and eGlypsy. So it was it is pretty similar to that one but not exactly same. There has been some work I'll mention that later to bring real key config into eGlypsy. So that's how the configurations are maintained and there is a whole list of option groups which are actually documented in the source code I've given the name the options group dot def it documents all the possible option groups that are right now available. It's being modularized even more but you know as people come with various option sets they get added and so it has grown over a period of time. Essentially as of today what we have is for example networking you can disable it if you want it's as an it's a option group available. Similarly Libam the mat library is optional you can remove it if you want. Other options are essentially locales if you don't want them and then Glypsy uses a lot of inlining so you know it's important for code size sometimes and there is an option to disable really big macros so that's how eGlypsy does inlining it defines macros and then includes them in the source code. So if we disable that option then all the big macros are disabled and they are converted into function calls. So these are kind of and then there is the catalog handling routines they are also optional. Likewise there has been many divisions done at the feature level in the option groups. The default options are stored in option groups dot default so when you're building this is the one that's read first and the default is to enable all the groups which means no change from status code. So if you don't do anything it builds the same set that you would build without keeping fake being part of it. So other thing that's very important is that it only enables the features or disables them essentially it doesn't modify some functionality so for example it wouldn't go and say okay you know there are redundant print apps I'll just remove them so it either enables so like Libam for example it will either enable it or it will disable it fully. The second thing is the consistency is that default is to switch everything on so there is no like a carved out combination that you would use by default so that simplifies the configuration management and essentially it helps in debugging so for example you have a bug right you tweak the configuration somewhere and then you have the issue and you can go back to the default and then start disabling one option after another the ones that you have disabled and thereby you can get to the bottom line of the issue. So it has been tried that we can keep it simple because if you look at for example Usylipsy it has a huge set of K config and there are architecture specific options so if you're compiling for ARM it means something else if you compile for MIPS it means totally something different and buffer sizes vary and you know it's it's it's quite a mess and as a result you end up with like you know this is a well-known working set of configuration set and you live with that. Usylipsy has tried to use the simpler versions to manage the configurations. Moving forward so I have a combination of options this is using Yocto. Essentially I did a few measurements and so there is a versions of it's called Pocky Tiny which basically uses reduced set of functionality from G-Lipsy and so I could compare a fully blown E-G-Lipsy the Lipsy part of it for ARM for example is 1.2 megabytes in size and it reduces down to 830 kilobytes. Similarly the LD.so reduces down because LD.so has a lot of debugging options that are part of it and there are options in the key config if you go through that you can disable those which essentially reduces the size but it also removes the functionality so you know you cannot do runtime LD debug and stuff like that so you know it's configurable at a cost. Similarly Libem reduced because Libem has conversion routines from float to long double and double and sometimes if accuracy is not something that's important to you and you can live with you know less accuracy many times in embedded systems you know you really don't care about the transcendal functions but if you do and you can live with like say you know single precision then there are options in Libem that you can disable those routines which do the single float conversion to long double and back and forth so essentially you get little less accurate results in a floating point calculations but the size reduces down half the reduce is quite a bit so so likewise there are main options for the library the C library itself and then then if you disable the network then all the Libresolve and and friends they get disabled similarly there are options to disable crypto if you don't need it you can disable crypto for example so I just picked up three examples but if you know if you see the EG Lib C has a suite of libraries that come with it Lib C is one of them so essentially many times you will see the total size of Lib C is on four meg or something and if you compare with this whole set then the reduction is quite a bit it can get to the half of the size of a fully blown EG Lib C with all the locales and you know message catalogs and everything built in and many times you in embedded systems you really don't want those things so you can easily pull them out so what's missing currently it doesn't do sanity checking for the config file so you have you mistype a option it'll accept it and you miss a dependency it will not take it and you know it will fail to build and if you won't get a sensible message out of the build saying why it failed it will just complain about the missing functionality so this is a problem with the current implementation that I just mentioned earlier that it is pretty homegrown resembles K config but isn't K config so it doesn't do any dependency checks that generally the K config from the kernel will do or it doesn't do other kind of sanity checks that you could get from the K config tools so what has happened in the past year or so Steve Longer beam and one of the developers has posted patches for bringing the kernels K config tools to do the config management essentially into EG ellipsey so the patch has been on the mailing list this hasn't been applied yet but in open embedded essentially we have been carrying it for a long time now we have been forward-porting it and keeping it in shape there are certain improvements that are needed to it which has been commented by maintainers and those needs to be addressed and so that's where the K config patches right now it's not in the sources yet so how we managed to get it to work so there is a tool called K config front-end it's basically if you look at any of the projects which are using K config they have their own copy of K config if you look at busybox it has its own copy of all the tools similarly for EG ellipsey and any other so they occasionally sync with the kernel which is sort of you know pseudo upstream for all the K config work and then they will get all the improvements into their projects and the maintainers have to do that part what we did here is there is a project called K config front-ends it's maintained by the same people who maintain cross tools and the package itself is fairly well maintained it releases with every kernel major release like 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 so you can always have a consistent release of the K config front-ends so essentially that's a dependency we have used so far whether bringing K config directly into EG ellipsey remains to be seen but if K config front-end is available most of the times on all kind of distributions then it's easy to use it because it's a prerequisite now to build EG ellipsey for native across so it supports all the tools that you need mconf and com gconf and so EG ellipsey have been modified so there is an autoconf option which with which you can specify where your K config tools are and if you have standard installation of K config front-ends it will figure it out from user bean and also in all locations but if you have that installed in some different locations then you can specify where the K config is installed and then like kernel you would do like make config to essentially build your final configuration before you start building EG ellipsey so so there is actually some pre-processing and preprocessing that's needed to be done to deal with the traditional options that you know the homegrown system has the options are already defined so it's essentially the tool essentially does is it converts to EG ellipsey naming styles because all the kernel options have to match with config something so the this is a pulse script essentially it runs before on the default config and any defined configuration you have which defines your option groups and then converts that into K config syntax that can be understood by yes ah I see okay yeah we haven't used it but I'll certainly look at it and that's probably a very good thing we can avoid the preprocessing but you know these the patch is almost two years old so yeah correct so yeah so those are kind of improvements like you know we would do moving forward you know when once we get it upstream but that's that's a very good point and essentially reduces the complexity that we have right now to deal with this munging so and then we also have a post processing tool because once K config has done the all the sanity checking processing we have to convert it back into something that EG ellipses build system understands so there is a preprocessing and there is a post processing but if we have that option that as you mentioned then you know these tools can be removed but status code as of now we use those tools and they get invoked implicitly when you are building the config which is the first step and this is again a post processing tool does conversion again into the option group settings that are understood by the EG ellipsey or G ellipsey build system so what it will do is essentially the build system has a another fragment into it which reads the config files and then it has kernel make file style targets that are then optionally added to the build or not so since default is on all of them are added if you have any of them set to know then they will be removed so that's pretty simple so what's the current state in the patches they were discussed on EG ellipsey mailing lists and they were feedback improvements done but after that there are still some some comments that needs to be addressed hasn't been done yet still pending those reviews or in fact those reviews needs to be addressed and as we know that you know a lot of features from EG ellipsey are moving into G ellipsey proper of late and there is a big list of feature list if you go to EG ellipsey mailing this then it lists exactly the amount of the number of features that are in EG ellipsey which are not in G ellipsey are being proposed for G ellipsey upstream which means there will be less and less to carry in G ellipsey in future and certainly I hope that K config is a very good feature that could make into upstream G ellipsey once we have it in in a in an acceptable state and working in upstream EG ellipsey and eventually I think it will be a good improvement into G ellipsey and that's all I have and


My name is Kevin Kerry. I'm the Director of the Education Policy Program here at New America As you can see I've written a book titled The end of college. I know we have a lot of people here who are employed By colleges or even run them and so on behalf of New America. I want to say sorry We're not trying to take your jobs away Probably not anyway depends No, I title like that I think deserves an explanation So I'd like to take a few minutes before our great lunchtime speaker today To talk about what we mean by the end of college There there is no doubt that Education is crucial to the future economic and civic prosperity of this country. We cannot be Neither a great nation nor a good nation if we don't provide everyone Regardless of who they are or where they come from with opportunity for a world-class education And we are not doing that right now. We heard from senator Cory Booker yesterday about the alarming statistics around education Educational opportunity in the United States of America The beginning of providing that opportunity begins before formal schooling as we've just heard In early education it extends through our K through 12 school system, but it certainly doesn't end there The time when even a good high school diploma could get you a good job in a middle-class income in this country has long since passed Everybody needs high quality education after high school to have a fighting chance in the modern economy and yet the Institutions that we have charged with that responsibility our colleges and universities are Not succeeding to the extent that they should be they are Great, but kind of peculiar Organizations in a lot of ways they were designed a long time ago Most of them operate off of a model that really came to being in the late 19th century they are getting Enormously expensive as anybody who either recently put kids through college or is thinking about putting kids through college Someday is very much aware of The international comparisons again that senator Booker talked about which we are we tend to be pretty familiar with and know that our School children don't compare well educationally to children in other countries. Well, it turns out and we don't know this as much If you look at our college graduates and compare them to college graduates in other countries Even countries that graduate just as many or more people from college as we do they look about the same which is not very good So we have one of if not the most expensive higher education systems in the world and yet one that is deeply riven by inequality One in which typical results are not very good And one in which that we are paying more and more for if you get through college at all And as as Michael crow talked about yesterday many students don't get through college at all Fortunately, we have the opportunity To move in a new direction and there are a lot of different reasons why we came to this place that we are in terms of college But if I was to sum it up I would say that our colleges and universities were designed in a time of educational scarcity If you go back to the very first Western colleges all the way back to the University of Bologna Which was founded over 800 years ago Their formula was pretty simple and it's really still the formula we're using now if you want to create a university What you need to do is provide a place where someone can have access to other students Where they can have access to teachers and smart people who can help them learn and where they can have access to Educational technology which for a long time has meant books and those kind of places are expensive You need to locate them at some kind of center of Transportation and commerce somewhere where all the roads and the rivers come together They need to be of a certain size so you can have access to Someone who can teach you English and someone who can teach you French and someone who can teach you history and someone who can teach You math And it was expensive even after the printing press revolution to provide to put together in one place all of the books that one might need and Because of that scarcity I think we've become very used to the idea that there can only be a fairly small number of places That can be colleges that can provide a great higher education That they by nature have to be exclusive That they have to be comprehensive and that they have to be expensive And those basically are the terms of quality and prestige that we live in that we live with now in American higher education And they have many many very negative consequences, and they are I think the root cause of the problems that we have in higher education today But the great thing is that we don't live in a time of educational scarcity anymore We don't live in a time where you have to follow a road or a river to a place And knock on the door and ask for permission to get inside the walls and Pay a lot of money for the privilege of being there for two or four years We can use technology to connect with people everywhere around the world There is a great story if you haven't read it in the Atlantic this week that was written by Amanda Ripley Who was a new America fellow who wrote the best-selling education book in the United States over the last couple of years the smartest kids in the world It is a story about a partnership between Arizona State University who you all heard from yesterday and Starbucks and A innovative program they put together to help tens of thousands of Starbucks employees finish college And in that article there's a story about a young woman who enrolled in this program and had her laptop computer stolen But she kept on going and she used her iPhone to finish the classes and just that one piece of technology Which many many people have she was able to interact with other students. She was able to watch lectures. She was able to provide Texts back and forth and she was able to talk on the phone with the real person She needed to talk to who helped guide her through these classes And just with that one piece of technology. She was able to pass these classes We don't live in a time of educational scarcity anymore You don't need to go someplace where there's a big building full of all the books because all of the books and the people And the smart people can come to you and it's not just about video or books again We heard yesterday the state of educational technology is advancing rapidly. We are now integrating artificial intelligence into creating amazing digital learning environments actually right at Carnegie Mellon University Who we just heard from recently? And yet most of our colleges and universities look an awful lot like they did a hundred or a hundred and fifty years ago So we are at a time that is very familiar if you look at the evolution of human history Where what's possible and what is there's a distance between them and this is the moment where? When we have that distance between possibility and reality that is the moment when ideas matter most Because bridging that distance is really about getting people to understand their world in a different way It's about getting them to understand what they can do in a different kind of way And to get to where we need to be a few really important things are going to have to happen we're going to first of all need leadership from the existing colleges and universities that we have we are going to need people like Arizona State University Michael Crowe somebody who will stand up and say That we as an institution are going to educate students who look like the America of today who look like our students economically who look like our students academically who look like our students racially and ethnically And we're going to do that. We are going to embrace that mission not as an act of charity or as a concession of some kind not as a way to Burnish our reputation, but it's because it's who we are and it's because that's the mission that we have Embodied in our organization, and I think President Crowe has really made that a reality at Arizona State University We need organizations like MIT who just a few years ago said we have this abundance of educational resources and prestige and money and Expertise and technology and we are going to because we technology is advanced to the place Where we can now take our classes and make them available to the world at a marginal cost of essentially zero to the last students That's what we're going to do. We're not going to charge them We're not going to create a for-profit company to try to make as much money as we can We're going to open these resources up to the world And try to try to extend them to as many people as possible So we need that kind of leadership, but that kind of leadership is not all we need We also need to kind of work through the tricky nuts and bolts issues of both changing minds and changing public policy It was really interesting just to see some of the reaction over the last 24 hours to the edX Arizona State University Partnership that we that was just announced here in this room yesterday Even something as innovative as saying Rather than have the traditional process where we someone tries to Come to us and say can I come into your class? Can I come into your class and we say yes or no and then we charge them up front? And maybe they succeed and maybe they don't and only if they succeed Do we give them credit and then if they want to transfer that credit somewhere else? Maybe we let them transfer and maybe we don't that's higher education in America today What we'll do instead is say open the class to everyone let anyone with the will and the wherewithal And the desire to learn enroll in this class if they succeed we keep our standards high if they succeed Only then do we have a conversation about whether it makes sense for them to pay us and only then and if they do The transfer of credit is not uncertain. It's guaranteed Just that reordering of things can really have a profound effect on the kind of educational opportunity that we can provide That we can do things like say if we have two world-class research universities like MIT in Arizona State Of course, it makes sense that we should be able to offer them credit For students who finish these classes and yet that's not the way our higher education system works today There are thousands of colleges and universities in America. Some of them frankly are Kind of sketchy and don't do a very good job of educating students yet All of them can offer credit all of them can offer these credentials that are crucial to American opportunity And yet the best universities in the world because they've been operating in this kind of non-traditional environments in this online environments Credit is somehow something we have to negotiate through the regulatory system and through Our kind of standard way of thinking about what higher education is and is not So our mission here at New America really is to both change people's minds About what's possible and then to change the architecture of our our public policy So when people do start to see possibility they can act on it That they can be encouraged and not stymied by our regulatory systems in the way that we subsidize And help people go through college And the great thing about this effort that we're working on and so when I say the end of college I should say I don't mean the end of colleges I mean a transition from the kind of colleges we have now to the kind of colleges we need in the future a transition from colleges built From this reality of educational scarcity to colleges built from the ground up Based on the reality of educational abundance the world we live in now And the great thing about doing this work here at New America, of course is that we're not doing it by ourselves in order to have access to the kind of Technology driven educational opportunity that we talked about people need access to technology, which is why our open technology initiative is working to Create both the policy and the technological infrastructure to provide that opportunity These things will be less expensive. I think but they won't be free lower-income families will need to have the resources In order to help their students Move toward higher education, which is why our asset building program is working to provide exactly Those kind of assets for people once people have these credentials. They'll need to go and get better jobs It's what and so that's why our Center for Education and Skills And our new opportunity at work program are going to be working to rewire and improve the labor market So that when you when you get that diploma you can actually match yourself up with the employer who has the right job and the Right opportunity for you And it's why our economic growth in our open markets programs are working to make sure that the jobs are actually there Not just for the select few but for the great middle class and everyone in the United States of America So it is really this interrelation Among the programs here at New America that allows us to talk about something like the end of college in such a positive Spirit and that's really the mission that kind of brings us here today So again on behalf of the program I want to say thanks so much to all of you for coming I know I'm the pre-important person speaker and you guys are all very much looking forward to hearing from Governor Kasich and his ideas About the future, but I very much appreciate taking a few minutes to talk about college today. So thank you very much


Hey everybody and welcome back to our channel. Today we're going to talk about vertical videos from A to Z, how to crop your videos, how to purpose to shoot vertically, expert settings, and much more. But before we start, hit that like button and subscribe to our YouTube channel with that notification bell on to never miss another video from us. And you better stay tuned till the end of the video because we're going to announce our last video's giveaway winners and we're going to have another giveaway for this video. Let's jump in. So if you haven't noticed by now, vertical video is everywhere. It's in our Facebook feeds, it's in the Instagram stories, and even on YouTube. And there's a good reason for that. Vertical videos take a lot of real estate on our phone screens. With almost 60% of video content being consumed with our phones, it only makes sense to create video content created for mobile phones, which is vertical videos. That's why brands, influencers, and marketers use this method when creating video content. When creating a vertical video, there are two ways to go with. The first way is to shoot normally and then crop your videos in post-production. This is the common way to do it usually. And the second way is to actually flip your camera when shooting and shoot vertically. Of course, there's pros and cons to each method, so let's dive deep into that. So let's first talk about the common thing to do, which is shooting normally on a wide aspect ratio and cropping it in post-production. The benefit of doing that is you get more versions of your video. You get the wide version, which you can upload it to YouTube or screen it on a TV screen. And you get the vertical video that you can utilize on social media and the different platforms like Instagram or Facebook. Sounds great, right? Well, the problem with that is that your vertical video will suffer a major quality loss in framing, composition, camera movement, and overall storytelling. Just think about it. If you originally shot your video for a wide-screen TV experience, taking that width away from your composition can really hurt your final product. For example, if my idea was to take a long shot to introduce the environment and the location to the audience, now taking that shot and cropping it in post-production takes away a lot of the details that help to do that and thus hurt my storytelling. Or let's look at this close-up shot. If I try to force it into a vertical frame, we're now getting an extreme close-up and a not-so-pleasing frame. Now it is possible to take your wide videos and crop them successfully in post-production. All you need is a bit of a mind-shift. You have to start thinking vertically at the very beginning of your video project. First, you need to figure out on which social media platform your video is going to be published. Then, according to that, you'll know which aspect ratio you'll need to take into consideration when shooting your video. For example, it could be one by one or nine by 16. If you want to know all the details regarding the pixels for each aspect ratio, we have a dedicated blog article which is linked in the description below. The next thing you want to do is create guidelines on your monitor so you can actually see the vertical frame while shooting and take out all that guesswork. You can do this by turning on your guides in your camera if you have that option or you can do it physically by cutting out a cardboard and putting it on your monitor or taking two pieces of gaffer and sticking it on your display. Now you could focus on storytelling instead of focusing on whether or not this frame works for vertical. And here are some more useful tips while shooting your video and in post-production. Try to shoot everything wider than you usually do. Like we've said before, a close-up can turn out into an extreme close-up and a long shot can lose a lot of details when cropping it. Shoot in the highest resolution possible for that extra flexibility in post- production. Try to avoid shaky footage and fast camera movements. These will be very enhanced on the vertical versions of your video and you'll find it very difficult keeping your subject in the center of the frame. Get creative with split screens. These are very trendy these days and can really spice up your edit and make good use of a vertical format. Another common trick you can do is this. Simply duplicate your video, blur it out and use it as a background layer to your scale-down video. This way you get to keep more details but you still utilize the vertical screen real estate. And our last pro tip. Use positioning keyframes to keep your subject in frame or just use the new Premiere Pro auto reframe tool. Now you know everything you need to create a vertical version out of your already existing wide video. But what if you want to shoot the whole video vertically in camera? How would you go about doing that and more importantly, why would you even want to? On one of our recent campaigns we decided to shoot a video dedicated to Instagram stories and Facebook therefore shooting it vertically in camera which gave us the full control when deciding on framing, frame blocking and composition. Because we had a heavy-duty camera we had to build a special rig. If you have a smaller camera like a DSLR or a mirrorless camera there are easier ways to rig it vertically.  If you have a camera cage all you need to do is take a quick release plate and mount it on the side of the cage. Or just go handheld. You can figure it out with the gear you have at home. Here are some more tips when actually going out and shooting your vertical video. Because the vertical frame is so narrow you'll have to be very precise with your camera moves to keep an ideal framing. Try to go for smaller or more controlled movements. Try to be as stable as you can. Use a tripod, a dolly or a gimbal if possible. Shakenness is very noticeable in a vertical frame. All the usual rules regarding composition still apply. Don't discard them just because you're going vertical. Using leading lines for example can have an even greater effect when used in a vertical composition. Have your subject move towards or away from the camera instead of moving horizontally across the frame. When using a wide lens try lifting the camera and tilting it down. This usually helps creating depth and an overall more compelling shot. So whether you like it or not vertical video is here to stay. We hope this video inspired you and now you can go out and film beautiful vertical videos and get all the benefits that comes with it. If you got any value from this video please help us out with the youtube algorithm and slap that like button and subscribe to our youtube channel with that notification bell on to never miss another video from us. Now let's get to the giveaway we promised you at the beginning of the video. Four lucky winners will win four artless t-shirts. All you need to do to enter this giveaway is comment down below what do you want us to talk about next. Here are the four lucky winners from our last giveaway just DM us through instagram or contact us via email. Till then, stay creative.


This is a this is a talk. I've not given Before here or anywhere else. So you'll you're my Guinea pigs on this you'll have to give me some feedback afterward and let me know what I need to change But it's an area that I've obviously got a personal professional interest in This is what I do. I do higher education and I've watched a lot of things change over the years I was informed by a colleague of mine at Wofford College where I teach In South Carolina that I'm now considered a senior faculty member and I I'm not sure how well I took that I'm used to being the the younger faculty member and and With all the the privileges that go with that and and so I've been around higher education for about 25 years now and went to graduate school here at Auburn and Did my undergrad and my master's at Clemson and now I teach at a small liberal arts college So I've seen a variety things I've seen private education large private universities that I've taught in a large private university I've taught in a small private college. I went to school at large state institutions and Again, a lot of a lot of stuff has changed here Maybe I should have said crises because I'm going to talk about three different Crises here in this talk. I'm going to get through as much of this as I as I can the first crisis is I think that college does not do what it advertises. Maybe it hasn't for some time, but people seem to be Recognizing this so we might want to ask what is it exactly that we expect higher education to do Do we expect it to transfer skills? to the students I Think that's the most common view of higher education you go to college so that you can learn something so that you come out with Greater abilities in some area you learn something about business or you learn something about language or you learn about a Science you learn something While you're there and then you come out better able to do whatever it is that you've set your sights on But there's been some work done in recent years Looking at the so-called signalling hypothesis that is that higher education is not so much transferring abilities to the students as it is performing a kind of a sorting function and Allowing those who pass a certain number of tests and other hurdles to demonstrate to the Potential employers out there that they have a certain Skill or characteristic about them that is desirable Maybe it's that you've got a disposition toward higher higher-order thinking and Going through four years or more of higher education is a way to prove that Some Invisible characteristic that you could only get through college and you would only stick through it for four years if you actually had that Characteristic but it's not that college actually confers that on you. It's that it it allows you to create a Kind of a billboard that says you know I am X whatever the characteristic is that you'd like to demonstrate Another possibility is that college is simply a consumption good for higher income individuals that it's just if you've got enough resources available to you then you get to go and and Stay at a place for four years and Partaking all the social activities and maybe it's a kind of a chance to meet up with with people That are similar to you and some character in some way and you you can enjoy your four years on your parents dime maybe it's your parents dime, but It's just something that is a consumption good So you'll see different takes on college You have probably seen something like this or heard about something like this that if you go to college Your income will be higher After you graduate and it would have been if you had stayed with your high school diploma and and Simply entered the workforce as a high school graduate And so there is a correlation between higher education attainment and higher income so on this Graph here. This is the probability of being in an educational group for a given income level The data are a little bit old, but I think that the point remains true if you're in the $150,000 a year income level and up there's about an 80% chance that you have a college degree If not that then you there's about a 10% or so chance that you've got some college Whereas if you are in a lower income group like let's say 20 to $30,000 a year There is only about a 15 to 17% chance that you have a four-year college degree So there is a correlation pretty strong when it appears between Attaining a four-year degree or maybe more and and having a higher income You'll also see Data like this. This is a college the return on college education compared to alternative investments So this is the internal rate of return here on the vertical axis and you see about a 20% Rate of return to a an associate's degree a two-year degree about a 15% rate of return to a bachelor's degree and that Beats it appears things like the stock market AAA bonds gold long-term treasuries and housing So this is the kind of thing your parents tell you when they say you need to go to college Right, so what are you going to do if you don't go to college? You're you're not going to learn anything and your income will be low Well, again, there is a correlation here, but exactly what is what is going on? The Signaling idea I think is worth some consideration So let's let's think about how this works because the outcome of the signaling Hypothesis may look very similar to the outcome of the college as Conferring skills idea the human capital Idea because you end up with college graduates that have Higher incomes in both cases, but maybe for very different reasons So I don't know how effective this would be I came up with this a few days ago As I was working on refining this this talk and I thought you know a diagram is always nice so here you have the population made up of reds and blues and That's not Democrats and Republicans that I've sort of divided the population into people who do not have Some desirable characteristic in the workplace like let's let's say cognitive skills Okay, cognitive skills. Let's say so the reds do not have those skills and the blues do Okay, and I've put over here Motivated persevering intelligent. That's that's kind of the characteristics. We're looking for you want employers tend to want people who are motivated persevering and intelligent a Let's suppose.  So this is not necessarily a Problem it has a lot to do with opportunity costs, but so some people fail or drop out and they get dumped into this box Which is people who are perhaps motivated persevering and intelligent, but they're not certified as such and There are people who Chose for one reason or another not to go through the filtering process either because they didn't think that their chances of passing would be very great or Because they thought the cost was too high or because they had some better opportunities than spending four years sitting at desks listening to people try to convert them to Marxism so they So you have some blues that bypass the filter, but also some reds that bypass the filter save themselves however many thousands of dollars Tens of that hundreds of thousands of dollars on on education and they wind up in the same box So you have people with a signal and people without a signal and if you're an employer and You value perseverance motivation intelligence Then you might go shopping for employees among college graduates. This may explain why employers often require a college degree Now that's changing and we'll talk about that a little bit this is the way that that a Higher education might function as an effective signal, but what's happened is The government especially since World War two has become increasingly involved in higher education Partly through the GI bill and later through more and more subsidies and you can go back before World War two And you find land-grant universities that were that were subsidized by government and other state institutions that that are That are beneficiaries of taxpayer dollars, so you can find this going back a long way But it seems that in recent years the level of subsidization of higher education has increased. So what's that done? That changes the situation a bit. So here you have your population and You have now tax dollars extracted by force from the population and They are turned into subsidies to distort the decision that a person makes between going to college or not going to college and So you now have more people going to this filter process Notice the arrow is larger. It's not nice. So So then you have more people in going through this filter Some of whom pass some of whom fail as as before and then perhaps fewer people people choosing to bypass the The filter because if somebody else is paying your your costs, then your your decisions might might change There are some scholars who've argued that this is this is a wasteful process. I tend to agree if you encourage people to Go to college through either subsidizing the institution which then starts shopping around for more students to justify the Per-student subsidies they're receiving or you subsidize the student directly You're encouraging more students to go to school. So you're encouraging more people to try to Gain this this signal this this billboard that says I am Motivated intelligent persevering and so forth And you'll notice the way I've created this in The first diagram we have only blues that made it through the filter now you've got people who are motivated persevering intelligent early certified as such and You've also got people who are certified motivating intelligent motivated intelligent persevering who are not Motivated intelligent or persevering But they've got the degree anyway Okay, there are a lot of universities that are Accepting students with lower and lower admissions requirements Because the subsidies from the government are tied to the number of students they have So their incentives are Open the door wider take students collect their subsidies Certify them even if they don't in fact have the characteristics That employers happen to have been used Happen to be looking for Brian Kaplan has a Recent book Think it came out in January or February Arguing that This this subsidization of higher education is socially wasteful He says what we're doing is we're not just ranking people We're ranking people and then we're encouraging them to go into more and more education higher education Which is useless from the point of view of creating this the signal He says since the status quo is supported by hundreds of billions of dollars of subsidies were probably Underusing alternative certification methods like apprenticeships testing Boot camps and and so on So there are other ways to certify yourself as having desirable Employment characteristics So he goes on to say that signaling explains why students are far more concerned about grades and actual learning They want easy a's not professors who teach lots of job skills Signaling explains why cheating pays a successful cheater profits by impersonating a good student Signaling explains why students readily forget course material the day after the final exam Once you've got the good signal in your transcript. You can usually safely forget whatever you learned Now most of you probably are in an institution of higher education. I'm sure that's not true of you you retain Everything that you've learned right So it doesn't it has a very long half-life for you All right Kaplan goes on to say that we need far less Education meaning schooling. Okay, there are other ways to get education Murray Rothbard wrote a book back in the 1970s Called Education free and compulsory and I think he was mostly talking about Secondary education primary and secondary education not so much higher education But he he made this point that education is not just schooling you can gain an education in other ways outside of formal Processes anyway Kaplan goes on to say that the cleanest way to get far less Education is to sharply cut government education spending Employers will no longer expect you to have the education you can no longer afford in other words spending cuts will cause Credential deflation You'll once again be able to get low and middle skill jobs with a high school degree or less There's no point in having a Four-year college degree if you're in if you're going to be working at a coffee place And we we actually have a lot of people with four-year degrees who are working in skill and working in jobs that have no call for The skills that are allegedly obtained in that four-year period Isn't that you've just wasted four years and racked up some student loans for what? There's no point So Kaplan says there's little sign that education causes much enlightenment or civic understanding This is in response to the argument that well, you know, maybe this is not just for the workplace Maybe this is because college allows people to be more enlightened individuals and they become better citizens whatever that means and They they become more knowledgeable about how to interact with each other and so they become, you know, better people But he says even at top schools most students are intellectually and culturally apathetic and most professors are uninspiring I Recommend that you take a look at this article published about a year ago by Jonathan Newman Jonathan here There he is Great great piece on Mises wire About why college degrees are becoming useless He says in that piece that graduates are displaying little to no improvement in critical thinking skills He says that some of the most prestigious flagship universities test results indicate the average graduate shows little or no improvement in critical thinking over four years Employers are beginning to discount this degree signal as Well, Google doesn't care if potential hires have a college degree They look past academic credentials for other characteristics that predict job performance for example. They had a billboard I think in maybe San Francisco or something that had a Quantitative kind of problem or a mathematical problem and they said if you can solve this call us essentially and So they're they're filtering, but they're not doing it through a college or university and So that that that may become more widespread we may see Employers looking past your credentials recognizing that these credentials don't mean as much as they used to There's also a substantial amount of grade inflation Marcella bombardieri think I'm pronouncing that correctly says that at Yale 62 percent of the grades are in a range Arthur Levine found in a National survey that 41 percent of students had grade point averages of a minus or higher in 2009 compared to just seven percent in 1969 Everybody gets an A So what does an A mean anymore? What is? Graduating with honors magna cum laude or summa cum laude or what does that mean anymore? If you're if you're If you have these honors you and everybody else so what it's not a signal as much So there's another argument that education higher education maybe apart from whatever it does to allow you better opportunities in the workforce There are some that say well it it it lowers up. That's mainly for humor There's some to say it's It's it'll reduce crime Because people who are college graduates don't commit crimes as much as people who are not college graduates Randall Holcomb says This is wrong-headed it he says this is Inefficient people who are not going to turn into criminals anyway are enticed into gaining a higher education certification when they wouldn't have turned into criminals had they just Kept their high school diploma and gone into the workforce with just that So he says a more efficient policy would target criminal activity about punishing the criminal activity rather than trying to get people to Have a college degree on the on the idea that this is going to increase their incomes And and make them not become criminals So there was a study There have been a number of studies on this obviously, but Andrew Norton from Australia Looked at this recently and he said you know graduates are Likely college graduates are likely to have quite low conviction rates He says in 2009 only 14 percent of 25 to 34 year old prisoners had completed year 12 Compared to 63 percent of the general population But he says it seems more plausible that graduates are people who are always At relatively low risk of offending regardless of whether whether or not they pursued higher education This low risk would be a function of better socialization And the ability to earn a reasonable income without breaking the law Education is likely to have whatever Preventive effects is going to have well before higher education You heard that of that book whatever I needed to know I learned in kindergarten Well, maybe not quite kindergarten, but a lot of what you need for Becoming a productive person is is gained well before higher education My grandfather on my mother's side quit school after eighth grade That was not as uncommon in his generation as it may be now, but he did he did fine, you know, he Did he was very productive person very hard worker and he did very well for himself with just his eighth grade education That was for what he needed to do. That was sufficient Norton goes on to say that if you look at the connections in Australia at least between Education and crime you see this Okay, so up until about 2001 if you were trying to make the argument that more higher education means less crime You'd have a Bit of a problem Because we see that the blue here is crimes per hundred thousand people and then the Kind of purplish line here is the higher education attainment rate so We see the the correlation going in both directions. There's a positive correlation and a negative correlation. So It it there are some other factors Involved in crime rates, you can't just point to higher education and say well, you know All we need to do is get people and we're better educated and then we'll solve our problem So he says a third factor at least partly explains both trends He says the collapsing labor market Opportunities for men with little education over the past 30 or 40 years made both crime and higher Education more profitable relative to the alternative of welfare and insecure jobs So crime and higher education both increased It's not it's not as simple as just throwing dollars at higher education and expecting crime to to decline He says there's no direct relationship between crime and higher education if you increase higher education You're not going to get a reduction in crime a Second crisis is that government subsidies are backfiring Intuition is increasing future earnings are decreasing. This is again from Jonathan Newman's piece on Mises dot org According to Doug French College tuition and fees have increased 1,120 percent since records began in 1978 and the rate of increase in college costs have been has been four times Faster than the increase in the CPI you see that here The red is public four-year institutions the blue is the consumer price index. We're seeing a huge increase in tuition relative to prices in general and If you look at this This is the ratio of average tuition and required fees for all four-year degree granting institutions relative to median household income from 1969 to 2012 and 1969 up until the early 1980s tuition and fees was about eight or nine percent of your median household income and Then we got a Steady increase So that in 2012 it was consuming over a quarter of the median households income So it's become less and less affordable and we can see this also if we look at the Delinquencies on student loans So these are student loan or not just student loans, but all kinds of loans. They're balances that are three months or more delinquent in 2004 going through about first quarter of last year and You can see the you know credit cards are this dark blue line here kind of an increase here due to the last recession and Then a decrease as we had some economic recovery The student loans are this this darker red line here and we can see that They've become a real problem, especially after about 2012 The Delinquencies on student loan balances have increased and these are particularly problematic for borrowers because you cannot discharge these debts with bankruptcy Unlike some other kinds of debt the people who are most Adversely affected by these are people who went to college for a while and Then they quit Before they finished so they don't have their degree so they don't have that signal Doesn't matter if you went to three point nine years of college and then left your employer is not going to assume that you have You know almost all of your education and they're not going to treat that the same way they do somebody that actually finished Okay, that doesn't show that perseverance That they are looking for Yes, actually a little more than 10% maybe 11 or 12, but yeah, that's that's That's my understanding yes This is from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York We can investigate see if maybe there's some more recent numbers on this for the last year, but But yeah, I mean so if you quit Partway through your education. You still got to pay those loans back, but you don't have the higher income necessary to Make that more possible for you William Bennett in 1987 Said that increases in financial aid Have enabled colleges and universities to raise their tuitions So this has become known as the Bennett hypothesis and there have been some studies Fairly recent studies looking at whether or not this is true now. I don't have a lot of time left So I'm going to go through this Fairly quickly if you are interested in the details of the studies I can talk with you afterward and maybe send you my slides or something you can get these these papers So there's the 2007 study here Looking at the response of university tuition to federal grants and aid like the Pell grants This one says Little evidence of the Bennett hypothesis for in-state tuition for public universities, but for private universities a nearly one-for-one Relationship between increases in Pell grants and increases in tuition and Out of state tuition seems to behave this in a way similar to in-state tuition Nicholas Turner 2012 Intended cost reductions of tax-based federal student aid are substantially offset by institutional price increases For a sample of four-year colleges and universities Tax-based aid crowds out institutional aid roughly dollar for dollar In other words the out-of-pocket cost for students is not Improving simply because the government is throwing more money into higher education. We'll talk about where the money is going in a minute Selene and golden 2013 does federal student aid raise tuition new evidence on for-profit colleges Basically the answer is yes about 78 percent higher Tuition in places that are eligible to participate in federal student aid programs 2017 Luca Nadal and Shin Passed through effective tuition on changes of student loan maximums about 60 cents on the dollar smaller But positive effects for unsubsidized federal loans Gordon and Hedlund 2017 Accounting for the rise in college tuition. This is a chapter in an NBER book saying basically the demand side shocks Which are subsidized student loan availability caused tuition to jump by 91 percent All other changes Except those we see increases in tuition by only about 14 percent So we basically saying look that the main thing that's driving tuition Up is that we're getting subsidized student loan availability. There are other things that might drive up tuition, but That seems to be a very important one. Now where is that money going? Okay? Well If you walked around the campus over here, you probably saw some of the construction there's been construction that My college and most colleges and universities you'll see this kind of thing Perhaps some of you have seen that how many of you who are in college right now Have seen construction on your campus in the last year Okay all right, so Dormitories campus amenities administration buildings administration salaries Princeton we've got somebody from Princeton here. Is that student here in the room? There we go $136 million on a student dorm with leaded glass windows and a cavernous oak dining hall you live in that dorm No, it's really nice. You see It should be $300,000 per bed per bed. I Expect a butler if I'm going to stay in that building Since 2000 NYU has provided 90 million dollars in loans many of them zero interest and forgivable to Administrators and faculty why to buy houses and summer on homes on fire island in the Hamptons very nice Ohio State President Gordon Gee earned nearly two million dollars in compensation last year living in a nearly 10,000 square foot tutor mansion On a 1.3 acre estate $673,000 my house would be $673 in art decor and $532 shower curtain in a guest bathroom Private jet all the rest the University of California employs about 2,400 people just in its president's office Richard Vetter Says No, we have 30% of the adult population with college degrees and according to the Department of Labor only 20% of so or so of jobs require college degrees We have a hundred and fifteen thousand five hundred janitors in the United States with bachelor's degrees or more Why are we encouraging more people to go to college under these circumstances? He says basically, you know in the housing market we through the Federal Reserve created these lower Interest rates so that people could go out and buy houses and now we're creating similar incentives for people to go to school and Why do we expect different results? Let me talk a little bit about for-profit education This is not new some people act like it is it's not In 1897, which was not the first time we saw For-profit education on the scene more than 92% of college college students were enrolled at for-profit institutions Some of these were good some of those were bad Same kind of situation I think today except that today There has been this gusher of Federal money made available to for-profit schools and they like the banks during the housing bubble have acted and In accord with the incentives created for them So in 2016 while 15% of for-profit student borrowers on a federal loan have defaulted since 2013 7% of students at private schools and 11.3% of borrowers at public universities defaulted in the same time period for-profit education giants and some of them are Truly large or Were large some of them like University of Phoenix have Shriveled up and and I don't know if University of Phoenix. I it is still around I saw an ad for them recently so they're still around but a Ghost of its former self as I understand so So what happened I mean they grew fat on a steady diet of government credit My cleverly maneuvering their way through a vast field of regulatory landmines to take advantage of federal aid programs aimed at helping those they ultimately hurt students so Here is the percentage defaulting of student loans within three years is the dark green bar there 21% for for-profit institutions compared to say 16% for non-profit two years and 6% for non-profit four years Now Many people have looked at this and they've said oh well obviously the problem is their for-profit See what happens when the market gets involved in higher education? Evil profit-seeking people. I mean what so they say well, you know, that's that's the problem so AG Smith and another Mises dot org article that you can take a look at I encourage you to Said as expected many have ignorantly aimed their weaponry at the profit motive Instead of unleashing their fury on the root cause government interference in the market so We've we do see that for-profit institutions seem to have generated more Graduates that have trouble repaying their student loans or maybe just former students who have who have not been able to repay their their student loans as quickly part of the Reason for this is that they're reaching a different kind of student Typically They're reaching people who are often part-time Because they've got a lot of other things going on in their life. They've got Employment full-time employment. They've got families. They've got maybe health problems. They've got a lot of things going on and Those things by themselves are going to compromise their ability to pay any kind of debt But maybe especially student loan debt and so we if you get students that are Already kind of financially compromised Coming in the door. Why would we be surprised to see them financially compromised once they Leave the institution and yet what's happening is we're blaming the institution itself rather than Looking at the student loan availability that is encouraging them to take that route in the first place so You know you look back at the housing market crisis and I talked to students today who? weren't really thinking about finance when the housing market bubble occurred there they were you know eight years old or something when it happened and Yet their their impression of it is well the banks just got greedy and That's why we had the housing market crisis and I say look I Greed is probably not the best explanation of this I point them to Tom Woods book meltdown and some other resources and I say look Banks are responding to Not that the banks are not without not that they are without guilt But they are responding to incentives created by the Federal Reserve Annie Mae Freddie Mac and all the other kind of interventions The government had provided to shove people or at least induce people to take out loans Who were not good credit risks? I think the same thing has happened here and the for-profit institutions have Have more than the other kinds of colleges and universities Received those applications from those credit compromised individuals So Smith says a market has natural mechanisms for punishing credit abusers Unfortunately much the dismay of the American taxpayer such mechanisms are not intrinsic in federal financial aid Where everyone enjoys equal status regardless of their ability to satisfy debt related obligations? Doesn't matter. I mean what your previous Situation is or what your degree choice is or anything else that might indicate something about your future ability to repay Federal financial aid is intentionally blind to that kind of thing and it ends up creating some real problems I'm going to skip over some of this since I only have a couple of minutes left You like that Let me just move on to my third crisis very very quickly some of you have seen this stuff already Colleges and universities turning into Shouting matches and so forth students occupying administrative buildings and making demands that certain people not speak on campus There's a lot of this If you haven't heard about this then Feel free to talk with me afterward. I'll fill you in on some of the examples of this the sort of thing but So a 2017 study of college students said some students say shouting down speakers and using violence is sometimes acceptable Not a majority, but it doesn't take a majority to really create a problem 90% students of college students say it is never acceptable to use violence to prevent some from speaking but 10% say it is sometimes acceptable Wow 37% believe it is sometimes acceptable to shout down speakers. This is disturbing Is it it's Now again, I don't have a lot of time so I'm going to cut to the chase here and Skip through some of this stuff here Yeah, Murray Rothbard in ethics of liberty One of his more influential works I think said let's look at this human right of free speech Freedom of speech is supposed to mean the right of everyone to say whatever he likes, but the neglected question is where? Where does a man have this right? He certainly does not have it on property on which he is trespassing In short, he has this right only either on his own property or on the property of someone who has agreed To allow him on the premises in fact then there is no such thing as a separate right to free speech There is only a man's property right The right to do is he wills with his own or to make voluntary agreements with other property owners in short a Person does not have a right to freedom of speech What he does have is the right to hire a haul and address the people who enter the premises He does not have a right to freedom of the press What he does have is the right to write or publish a pamphlet and to sell that pamphlet to those who are willing to buy it Or give it away to those who are willing to accept it Thus what he has in each of these cases is property rights There is no extra right of free speech or free press beyond the property rights that a person may have in any given case so What about this fire in a crowded theater, you know, I have the right to free speech that allows me to shout fire in a crowded theater No, because the theater owner did not grant me that right to falsely I should qualify Shout fire in a crowded theater It's the theater owners theater and the theater owner is there to project a movie and all the other people Have the right to enjoy that movie because that's what they paid for So if I go to an event and there's some controversial speaker and I want to hear what the speaker has to say People who come in and shout down the speaker violating my property right which I obtained By gift or purchase from the owner of the venue that's the real problem with some of these things and I'll leave you with that since I'm out of time. Thank you very much


One of the critical questions to ask when reading a medical journal article is who funded the study? In most journals, researchers are required to identify their sources of funding, so what's the problem? Well, researchers can obscure the true origin of financial support. They can hide it, disguise it, or even longer the money through a front group. Case in point, a study downplaying the risks of lung cancer funded in part by the Foundation for Lung Cancer Early Detection Prevention and Treatment. That doesn't sound so bad until you realize it's underwritten by millions from a tobacco company. See, there's no obligation to disclose a funding source of funding. This allows companies to evade financial disclosure requirements and make it harder to follow the money trail. But why does the funding source matter? Every single one of eight reviews covering over 1,000 studies found that research funded by industry is more likely to make conclusions that are favorable to industry. For example, why do some review articles and the health effects of secondhand smoke reach different conclusions than others? The only factor was whether an author was affiliated with the tobacco industry. This is a disturbing finding. It suggests that, far from conflict of interest being unimportant in the objective and pure world of science, it may be the main factor determining the result of many studies. Not that you'd know, because 77% of authors failed to disclose the sources of funding. And that's another problem. The responsibility to disclose funding sources is left entirely up to the authors. So how many researchers divulged the truth? Evidently a law was passed in Denmark requiring physicians to register anytime they worked with industry, which allowed researchers to cross-reference the studies they published to see how honest they were and 48% of the time. The conflicts of interest were not disclosed, reinforcing the perception that physicians simply don't take conflict of interest seriously, or at least Danish physicians. What about the US? We didn't know until this study was published. Historically, there's been no means of confirmation or verification when an American doctor said they had no conflicts of interest. But then, in 2007, hip and knee replacement companies were forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in fines for giving orthopedic surgeons illegal kickbacks. Many orthopedic surgeons made decisions predicated on how much money they could make, choosing which device to implant by going to the highest bidder. We expect doctors to make decisions based on what's in the best interest of their patients, said the Department of Justice, not the best interests of their bank accounts. And part of the settlement was that they would have to make public all the payments they made to physicians. The release of those records offered a rare opportunity to see if physicians were telling the truth on disclosure forms, and, lo and behold, more than half of payments were not disclosed, totaling millions of dollars. Now this was for surgeons and medical device companies. What about doctors and drug companies? The same thing happened where drug companies were forced to disclose who they were paying off. They looked at the publications of the doctors that got the most money, at least $100,000, and they were worse than the surgeons. In 69% of the cases, they failed to disclose their industry ties. The problem is that we just assume researchers are going to be honest and tell the truth, but these findings suggest that the accuracy and completeness of conflict of interest disclosures cannot be assumed. So even when a paper says no conflict of interest, who knows if it's really true? Longtime editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine wrote a scathing piece on drug companies and doctors who failed to disclose hundreds of thousands of dollars from drug companies like GlaxoSmithKline, which had been fined literally billions of dollars for things like bribes and suppressing data. When they got results that were commercially unacceptable, they just buried them. Billions in fines, but for drug companies, that may just be the cost of doing business. As reprehensible as many drug industry practices are, the medical profession may be even more culpable. I mean, you expect drug companies to prioritize the bottom line, but maybe we should expect more from the healing profession.