> Besides, I think the comment you were replying to was really about the almost complete absence of post-secondary "technical education" in the USA, in particular when compared to countries like Germany.
Are these two different phenomena? If there are more glaziers in Armenia than there are in America, is that because Armenia sends the message "glaziers are winners" and America says "glaziers are losers", or because America sends the message "no matter who you are, you're a winner, and therefore you shouldn't be a glazier" while Armenia is fine with telling its losers that maybe winning isn't for them and they should consider being a glazier?
In a country that sends a clear message that "being a plumber is an important and rewarding job with above-median-income job", more people will entertain aspirations to become a plumber.
In a country that sends the message "being a plumber means you're fairly stupid, have no other talents and are doing a nasty, dirty usless job", people won't aspire to being plumbers.
Note that in the US at least, experienced & skilled plumbers are paid above median income (in some cases, a lot above median).
> Note that in the US at least, experienced & skilled plumbers are paid above median income (in some cases, a lot above median).
Something analogous is true in India, where men are willing to take substantial pay cuts (~50%) in order to hold a white-collar job instead of a blue-collar job. They do that because women don't want to marry blue-collar workers.
Focusing on income levels in marketing to the men would seem to be misplaced.
Are these two different phenomena? If there are more glaziers in Armenia than there are in America, is that because Armenia sends the message "glaziers are winners" and America says "glaziers are losers", or because America sends the message "no matter who you are, you're a winner, and therefore you shouldn't be a glazier" while Armenia is fine with telling its losers that maybe winning isn't for them and they should consider being a glazier?