If you haven’t already listened to the full UnHerd interview with economic historian Niall Ferguson, you should. Interviewed for the audio-documentary ‘Capitalism on a knife-edge’, he makes the counter argument that capitalism is not, in truth, in crisis. What really caught my attention, however, was his attack on education policy. Forasmuch as greedy bankers and big bucks lobbying make for shocking headlines, it is “the failures of public policy” that are in fact the greatest threat to capitalism.
Ferguson’s argument is simple: as the demand for low skilled labour declines, education provision is not keeping up (which means workers are struggling in insecure jobs with stagnating wages).
“Educational systems in the developed world are really doing quite badly, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom, and I think it’s important to recognise that failures to equip the population, and particularly young people, for the 21st century should not be blamed on capitalism or globalisation.”
He’s right; although schooling is just one of the building blocks of a 21st century workforce – on the job training and adult skills provision are also important. As Ferguson highlights, despite relatively high expenditure (see the graph below), neither the US or UK perform particularly well in international education league tables. Using the international PISA assessment, the two nations are middling, with Singapore, Japan and Estonia at the top.1 In a globally competitive world – and one in which demand for high skills and higher education is increasing2 – the US and the UK are falling behind.
In reality, of course, there are many factors outside of school quality that determine a child’s life chances (and earning potential) – from local labour markets to family structures – but you only have to look at the wage premium for workers with college degrees to see education matters. So, what can we learn from top performing Singapore? Quite a bit. They have, for example, a much greater focus on the depth, rather than breadth, of a student’s learning; on creative thinking and developing life-long learning skills. They also look ahead to ensure the education and skills being provided will match the future economic needs of the country.3 Both the UK and US, while developing aspects of this in recent years, have some way to go to emulate this model.
But if failing to equip young people to participate fully in the labour market is a big public policy failure, so too is allowing so many workers to drop out of it.
Labour market participation matters for economic growth
In America, between 1960 and 2016, growth in the labour force contributed an average 1.4% to annual economic growth, which averaged 3.2% overall during the period (largely down to the huge increase in women entering the workforce). In contrast, over the coming decade, the US Congressional Budget Office predicts that growth will be “constrained” by a much slower expansion in the workforce – contributing just 0.5% annually.4 It’s largely due to America’s ageing population, but it also reflects the declining participation of males, predominantly those with low qualifications.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe