Secondly, employers need to clarify their statements about needing a skilled workforce. Do they want people who can walk in on the first day and do everything with minimal supervision, or are they willing to train people? Because most people, even with the “right” degrees (mostly STEM majors), need training. And if those younger college grads don’t need training in the actual skills required to do the work, they do need mentors. I’m wary of employers who want skilled labor but refuse to offer fair pay, reasonable benefits, and offer little job training, security, or leadership. Finally, I want employers to stop offering unpaid internships if they are only going to post employment ads that say they are seeking people with only “paid work experience.”

When placemaking discussions occur, most urbanists usually fall in line with Richard Florida’s creative class thesis, which in itself is a problematic if only for encouraging towns to gentrify (rather than helping those marginalized by institutionalized bias) and Florida’s refusal to comment on whether or not he is, in fact, encouraging a merge between urbanism and the culture industry. (See Martha Rosler’s three-part series in the online journal e-flux for more.)

All that being said, I agree that Michigan needs to start investing in higher education. I just don’t agree it should be to attract a “skilled workforce” and contribute to a bottom line of net profits but because education, intellectual curiosity, and a well-read population ultimately benefit everyone. It just comes down to what people want from an education and what they think an educated labor force will do, and what it actually does.