Too many students than can be supported in the educational commons from interested society.

It is in the interest of society as a whole to have a better-educated population. That means support for individuals being educated must come from all members of society -- in other words, it's a government domain funded through taxes. Absent common support, the interests of specific groups, mostly corporate shareholders expecting fat quarterly results, will come to dominate.

It is in the interest of "society" because a better educated population can pay more taxes than a non educated population. If you do not have increased job prospects after successfully going to university then you are actually a net negative to society because not only was your education expensive, it also took away 5 working years from you.

If a more educated population was better then we would keep accumulating more degrees until we die instead of working.

Don't confuse value to society with taxes. Rich people are valuable and they pay no taxes so there is obviously a poor or no correlation.

Also, don't confuse a degree with education. Apprenticeships and technical training are also education.

That is your opinion, not a fact. Meanwhile in NL we have to import carpenter/plumber/drywall laborers, because ... we discourage choosing such a career for our own population and don't provide the education anymore. In the not so distant past, we did.

What a lot of software 'engineers' in NL rather don't see is that you can make a very very healthy living as a 'drywaller' ( not a native speaker, can't find the word ). You can easily make more than as a software dev.

The general population just is not as malleable ( Dutch: maakbaar? ) as boomers would like to believe. So at the bottom we have an entire cohort who used to work in factories or the building industry, who rely on financial support.

The first 'food bank' in NL was started in 2000. Why?

People tend to run away from physical, backbreaking work.

It's hard to do this kind of job when you're 50 or 60 and with physical work the risk of death or injury is also higher.

Plus it's harder to move up the financial and social ladder.

Ah, well, this might help to explain to said cohort that instead of having a vocational training, they should study to become an Ethical AI scientist.

We should not forget their predicament is in their own making after all. It definitely sleeps better.

The bad news for your approach is that these people still have to be integrated in society, they don't just vanish upon graduating "Ethical AI".

Wasn't his suggestion that you should look for jobs that are actually in demand (someone still has to do physical labor) and don't necessarily require higher education?

Yeah, but you still need some qualifications for those. I don't think you can just apply for a welding position as J. Random, off the street.

Pardon my ignorance, but what does integrated in society actually mean?

If they can't find jobs or fall on hard times because of it, they still need to be helped. Shelter, food, etc.

Then maybe we, as a culture, should work harder on not looking down on people who do the actual labor of keeping civilization afloat.

Well, good luck with that.

It's pretty much universal that people appreciate some kinds of work and look down on others.

Mike Rowe did a lot of good work promoting more respect for traditionally looked-down-upon jobs. It is just a matter of changing cultural narrative.

Not really. People look down on jobs that pay less for the cost in work and health.