CNN’s campaign coverage, in addition to both parties’ national conventions these past two weeks, has made it increasingly obvious that this election “is all about the economy.”
But unlike the presidential candidates, the greater majority of the voting electorate does not have access to chief economists who can help inform decisions about monetary policy in America. Thus, the rest of the noneconomics majors are forced to rely on one class of economics in high school, if that, to make fiscal political choices.
There are some among us who have a deep understanding of the financial meltdown that dropped us into the recession we’re struggling to climb out of, but many college students and young voters are lost in the complexity of the subject.
When it comes to speculation on derivatives, or the intricate details of the Simpson Bowles Commission, we could use help; in the generation we live in, our education ought to provide us with the ability to make informed decisions about the future of America’s economic policies.
The University of Minnesota should make learning about the melding of economics and government more accessible. Classes on federal economic policy and theory exist, but they are often upper-level courses whose prerequisites include a hefty number of preliminary economics and statistics credits.
Job markets, mortgage rates, investment portfolios; these are all important factors in the transition to the post-college world, and they are all deeply connected to the strength and patterns of economic development. It’s important that we are well-versed enough to understand which candidate’s policies we agree with and which ones don’t make sense.
Our generation can’t afford to be ignorant of future potential financial catastrophes.