Denmark Bans Multiple College Degrees

[Great Nepal]

Dumb, dumb, and dumb. Getting multiple degrees is almost necessary in some fields, in particular some of the hard science specialties. If this doesn't get amended or overturned quickly, I can see plenty of people leaving the country in pursuit of higher education elsewhere.

Honestly though, why don't they grant a blanket exception to everyone to let them pay for their own education? I find it strange that the government wouldn't allow that, unless there's another underlying cause here.

They have, and they have granted exemption for people whose degree have become obsolete, and for people who want to pursue degree in areas with high demand. Also it only affects someone if they decide to do same, or lower level of qualification than the highest one they have. Even the article itself, despite being rather misleading on facts says it only affects ~1540 students a year.

[Arlenton]

Given the government has to pay for it, it seems like a good idea.

Though I don't really support government paying for college in the first place.

[Aclion]

I don't care if the Danish government runs the country into the ground as long as they keep the Lego and butter cookies coming.

I fear that if they implode enough then the Legos will be sold to the PRC.

Good, they won't have to make bridges out of trash anymore.

[Pope Joan]

What if you are dissatisfied with your career as an organist and want to become a programmer? Are you stuck where you're at?

[The Conez Imperium]

Free education shouldn't come with any strings attached,

Free education should most definitely come with strings attached. Would you want to give free education to, for instance, people who have just arrived from another EU country, and have every intention to immediately move back once they get their papers?

For me, it's short sighted especially considering that you can't even get a degree if you pay for college yourself in most cases.

It's a socialist country in Europe. They probably don't even realize that such a thing exists.

"Pay for education? Out of your own pocket? Who and why would possibly spend their own money on that?"

That's how it generally works in Europe...people move to other countries to study and I find its an fantastic opportunity. I know Germans who have studied in France and French who have studied in Germany. Though it might be different as they have done the Abitur/BI or a cross matriculation.

[The Conez Imperium]

When it comes to government funded education, I can see the rationale for this - particularly since they have dispensation for those with health reasons or where their original education became economically obsolete.

I'm a little puzzled why they can't finance their own education, however. Seems to me the government shouldn't care about that.

Because student loans create debt, and there is incentive to be had in keeping students out of debt so they can concentrate on their careers, and better yet stay in the country and contribute.* People in Denmark can finance their own education, and a student loan scheme does exist however. I wish governments cared a lot more about student debt, rather than allowing a debt mountain the way the US government does.

*High student debt can mean a lot of times that students have to leave the state or country rather than settle for less at home.

I don't think students in EU have debts like students in the United States do since university education is heavily subsidised. If not, there debts would be very small considering that university cost aren't that enormous.

[Forsher]

Not that the article says the first thing... although it is definitely suggestive of the latter.

It most certainly does say the first thing. EU citizens get free university tuition in Denmark.

No, it really, really does not. Well, it uses the words but then, immediately, contradicts them.

The Danish parliament on Monday passed a bill that will bar students from taking a second university degree.

The bill restricts individuals who already have a higher education degree from pursuing a degree in another field at the same or a lower level.

What you cannot do, then, is complete, say, a BA in English and then attempt a BSc in Maths. You could, however, move from the BA in English to a MSc in maths (but I assume very few people would meet the pre-reqs for this). More realistically, and this is what a friend of mine is considering, you could do a BA in politics and then an MPP (master of public policy)... assuming these options are possible in Denmark.

[Greed and Death]

When it comes to government funded education, I can see the rationale for this - particularly since they have dispensation for those with health reasons or where their original education became economically obsolete.

I'm a little puzzled why they can't finance their own education, however. Seems to me the government shouldn't care about that.

Maybe the fear that richer people will get multiple degrees to standout more in the job market.

They can still go abroad but then the education will not be in Danish.

[Greed and Death]

What if you are dissatisfied with your career as an organist and want to become a programmer? Are you stuck where you're at?

yeah basically be an organist or get a masters in playing the Organ.

[Scandinavian Nations]

That's how it generally works in Europe...

I know... free stuff works fantastic for the people getting free stuff. Then they get older and discover it wasn't free after all, just on someone else's dime. What you don't want to be is the one stuck disproportionately paying the bill.

[Great Nepal]

That's how it generally works in Europe...

I know... free stuff works fantastic for the people getting free stuff. Then they get older and discover it wasn't free after all, just on someone else's dime. What you don't want to be is the one stuck disproportionately paying the bill.

It works far better compared to a system which ties ability to pay with academic ability; and ability to pay with right to have healthcare - regardless of the payer which incidentally is never you, it is always the government.

[Ostroeuropa]

It's fairly incoherent when you consider the supposed values behind free education. Bettering the citizens and whatnot.

Banning them taking the same degree again for a few years might make sense, but what if I want to run a spectrum and study various forms of science or sociology to try and construct unifying theories and stuff?
Beyond that, what if I simply want to learn more about the universe and obtain knowledge for its own sake, not for the sake of capital?

It seems to be a move that only makes sense in austerity terms, in which case, why have free education at all?

[Great Nepal]

It's fairly incoherent when you consider the supposed values behind free education. Bettering the citizens and whatnot.

Banning them taking the same degree again for a few years might make sense, but what if I want to run a spectrum and study various forms of science or sociology to try and construct unifying theories and stuff?
Beyond that, what if I simply want to learn more about the universe and obtain knowledge for its own sake, not for the sake of capital?

It seems to be a move that only makes sense in austerity terms, in which case, why have free education at all?

Then they can pay for it out of their own pockets; this is pretty common rule - one we have in UK as well, government funds education as long as the expected degree is not of equal or lower standard than the highest one someone already holds.

[I didnt vote for Trump]

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201612201048799443-denmark-students-university-degree/



So from that quote, if it turns out to be true, the only people who will find themselves well and truly hard done by this are those who want to transfer from one field into another with worse employment prospects AND who can't pay for it themselves.

I did read that article, and to be honest, the idea of granting exemptions simply because the government wants more people going into certain occupations rather than a person wanting a career change is a little disquieting to me.

It makes perfect sense to me. It's not exactly desirable to have 50,000 people leaving university with marketing degrees and trying to fit them all into 10,000 marketing graduate jobs.

[Forsher]

I did read that article, and to be honest, the idea of granting exemptions simply because the government wants more people going into certain occupations rather than a person wanting a career change is a little disquieting to me.

How so? You create an incentive, for people looking to change, for something that is decided to be, in theory, socially useful. The individuals involved still make a choice and still have to be interested enough to choose it.

It makes perfect sense to me. It's not exactly desirable to have 50,000 people leaving university with marketing degrees and trying to fit them all into 10,000 marketing graduate jobs.

Correction... it wouldn't be desirable if we have 50,000 people with marketing degrees and marketing was the only thing they could apply their education to.

Encouraging people into programmes that are "scarce" is infinitely preferable to discouraging people from ones which are "full", if this means some people end up working "outside their field" that's okay as long as they're not permanently underemployed.

[MERIZoC]

It's fairly incoherent when you consider the supposed values behind free education. Bettering the citizens and whatnot.

Banning them taking the same degree again for a few years might make sense, but what if I want to run a spectrum and study various forms of science or sociology to try and construct unifying theories and stuff?
Beyond that, what if I simply want to learn more about the universe and obtain knowledge for its own sake, not for the sake of capital?

It seems to be a move that only makes sense in austerity terms, in which case, why have free education at all?

Because the Danes are overall pretty happy with free education, so the liberals cant push too far or there would be backlash.