Should Governmental Entities & Universities Compete for Attractive /Qualified Applicants to Become a Part of Their Businesses?

It is this writer's belief that our society or more frankly, "our world" is in a detrimentally state of communicative decay. As such, we should not find the continuing deplorable manner of our matriculating institutions appalling without competitiveness. Governmental entities and universities should compete for the most attractive and qualified students irrespective of background to improve conditions of their individual businesses. Even though it might be hard to admit that we have been living in a world that strives off capitalism and global interdependence, which essentially adds up to a world that is dependent on competition—we need to remember that competition is based on a Darwinism concept is a desirable concept for challenges and survival. Now, as attractive as this prospect might sound I am still inclined to believe that irrespective of what happens, or who the competitive edge goes to in our sordid and manically depressive world, there will always be a struggle where minority candidates are considered because of bigotry and quotas. Competing for attractive / qualified candidates do not equate in a just manner to minorities when you have subjectivity / subjective humans overseeing the entirety of any issue. “Qualified” and “Competitiveness” will always be subjectively instead of objectively decided. For example, the Ivy League universities within the United States—at least some of them have decided to reduce the fiduciary burdens of educational attainment on individuals/students who are from lower income backgrounds. Even though this is a great stride though well overdue, it is imperative to note that there are still some of us who have attained graduate degrees without much occupational progress and still struggle exponentially because of inabilities to repay loans in a job market that excludes us for many diverse factors. Hopefully, reducing financial liabilities for destitute individuals will permit these universities to recruit students solely on qualifications and not legacy or financial status—thus giving poorer students a fighting chance to reach their aspirations. Though, the government is not essentially providing any necessary competitive edge for students who are more than qualify to assume certain competitive roles to change the current disdain we continue to experience. Let us keep in mind that competitiveness does reduce the reliance on financial status being priority in recruiting qualified individuals to fill a position. So, realistically speaking, it is difficult to state or presume the effects of such proposition without further commitment to retaining the services of such qualified applicants upon the completion of their educational matriculation. As with all things, there are usually three ideas or postures put forward to discuss the implications of any controversial propositions (pros, moderate, cons / perspective 1, fact, perspective 2). Our world has become such a mutually exclusive decision point on issues of importance that we now rely on a "Simon Cowell" type American Idol fallacy to determine decision making finality based on votes and not necessarily intellect. This being the case, there are currently no guarantees that any propositions or lack thereof, irrespective of what the topic might be and who the propositions are supposed to benefit, will actually last without one contention or another discussing the prejudicial or discriminatory effect on one party or another. To that end, we need to commence the acceptance of the reasonable perspective that “those who are able to make changes are usually excluded from influencing propositions of which we now speak”.