Is the professor right?

Generally speaking, it can be judged that what the professor said should be: study hard and make more money in the future. From a certain media, the professor said: Young people study to make money, and money will dominate everything in the future.

In the comment area, people support students and criticize professors, but what I want to ask is, is the professor wrong?

Not for money, but for what?

Society itself is a utilitarian society, full of interests everywhere. Money and no money are completely different worlds. If the professor's statement belongs to bad values, what kind of values are correct?

Let's just say, what is the effort for? I thought it was just to make money. Looking for a job depends on salary. No one said to find a job with a monthly salary of 1500, and then hide in a dark room to eat instant noodles, facing the mobile phone: for the sake of faith, you can't be corrupted by money.

Nowadays, most young people are rushing for a living, buying a house and a car, and paying off their mortgage and car loan.

Buying a house should also consider the school district. Considering these educational resources, the better the school district, the higher the house price. The old people at home need money to support and treat diseases. If they want better medical resources, better medical resources are more expensive.

A while ago, the epidemic prevention was just released, and many elderly people entered the ICU after getting sick. Knowing a few friends, the elderly at home spend tens of thousands of dollars a day, and those who have no money at home can only resign themselves to fate. At this moment, if you have no money, you will die. It's that simple. It seems that it didn't take long for everyone to forget it so quickly.

Living in this society, everything costs money, so breathing costs nothing, but when you are sick, breathing costs money.

What people should consider is how to get money. The simplest and most direct way is to read more books, study hard, get into a good university, improve your academic qualifications, and then either start your own business or find a good job, so that you can earn money.

Don't say that learning is not important, and company recruitment also depends on academic qualifications. There are still a few people who can make money without education, and there are more people with high education, and few of them are not doing well. I chatted with a classmate during the Spring Festival and told me that they were all masters of 985/2 1 1. The salary in the company can't be better, so what are you doing in that company? Still making money.

Learning is to make money, which is written in the textbook. The school will instill in you a sentence: knowledge changes fate, and learning makes the future.

This is obvious. Only by studying hard can we change our destiny and have a future.

How did fate change? Make money and achieve a class leap. People are divided into three classes, and the rich and the poor are different people. Rich people live in villas and drive luxury cars, and children go to aristocratic schools. Where are the people who have no money? In order to buy a house, I have to work hard, worry about my livelihood, rack my brains for the problem of children's school district, and try my best.

The vast majority of young people have no background and come from ordinary families. Don't you have to work hard to make money if you want to achieve a class leap? Study hard and improve yourself. What about those who have no education? You need to learn more and improve your ability to earn money.

To put it simply, it is true that studying hard is to live well in the future. This is not a wrong value, as long as you have this money, the source is legal, you don't commit a crime, you have no conscience, and the money is clean. This is the correct value.