Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Ripping Off Young America: The College-Loan Scandal


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#31 kill3r7

kill3r7

    MiNd ThE GaP

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 20 August 2013 - 05:02 PM

This assumes that people with graduate degrees are filling entry level jobs formerly held by undergraduate degree holders. What you happen to be ignoring is that during the recession, most companies laid off their workforce and those that remained ended up picking up the slack. If you can get 100 workers to do the work of 200 and maintain an acceptable level of profitability, why bother hiring more people? 

You hit the nail on the head. Companies today know how to run "leaner" compared to 5-6 years ago. I know of companies that have teams of 25-30 people work on projects that previously would require 100 people, plus additional contract/temp workers. Companies today know they can demand more and we seem eager to please. That's why I scratch my head every time I hear an economist on TV talking about how once the economy picks up the jobs will return. IMO there is no chance these companies revert back to their old "gluttonous" ways. Recent college grads definitely have an uphill battle ahead of them but through hustle, networking and lots of luck they'll succeed and be better off for it.  I still believe that an individual is better suited to face today's economy equipped with a college degree vs not having one. 


Xecutioner
CML

#32 Blaster man

Blaster man

Posted 22 August 2013 - 12:27 PM

This from a survey of the 100 most popular majors.

 

http://www.cbsnews.c...ployment-rates/

College majors with the highest unemployment

  • 1. Clinical psychology 19.5%
  • 2. Miscellaneous fine arts 16.2%
  • 3. United States history 15.1%
  • 4. Library science 15.0%
  • 5. (tie) Military technologies; educational psychology 10.9%
  • 6. Architecture 10.6%
  • 7. Industrial & organizational psychology 10.4%
  • 8. Miscellaneous psychology 10.3%
  • 9. Linguistics & comparative literature 10.2%
  • 10. (tie) Visual & performing arts; engineering & industrial management 9.2%
  • 11. Engineering & industrial management 9.2%
  • 12. Social psychology 8.8%
  • 13. International business 8.5%
  • 14. Humanities 8.4%
  • 15. General social sciences 8.2%
  • 16. Commercial art & graphic design 8.1%
  • 17. Studio art 8.0%
  • 18. Pre-law & legal studies 7.9%
  • 19. Materials engineering and materials science and composition & speech (tie) 7.7%
  • 20. Liberal arts 7.6%
  • 21. (tie) Fine arts and genetics 7.4%
  • 22. Film video & photography arts and cosmetology services & culinary arts (tie) 7.3%
  • 23. Philosophy & religious studies and neuroscience (tie) 7.2%
  • 24. Biochemical sciences 7.1%
  • 25. (tie) Journalism and sociology 7.0%

 

http://www.cbsnews.c...ployment-rates/

College majors with lowest unemployment rates

  • 1. Medical technology technician 1.4%
  • 2. Nursing 2.2%
  • 3. Treatment therapy professions 2.6%
  • 4. Medical assisting services 2.9%
  • 5. Agriculture production & management 3.0%
  • 6. Industrial production technologies 3.1%
  • 7. Pharmacy 3.2%
  • 8. Communications & disorders sciences 3.3%
  • 9. Elementary education 3.6%
  • 10. Special needs education 3.6%
  • 11. Miscellaneous education 3.7%
  • 12. Mechanical engineering 3.8%
  • 13. High school teacher 3.8%
  • 14. Theology & religious vocations 4.1%
  • 15. Management info systems & statistics 4.2%
  • 16. General education 4.2%
  • 17. Health & medical administrative services 4.3%
  • 18. Transportation science & technologies 4.4%
  • 19. Finance 4.5%
  • 20. Physics 4.5%
  • 21. PE/health education 4.5%
  • 22. Criminal justice and fire protection 4.7%
  • 23. PE/Park & Recreation 4.8%
  • 24. Civil engineering 4.9%
  • 25. (tie) Electrical engineering; environmental science; math 5%

 

 

Some of the majors that didn't make the list of the 100 most popular majors also enjoy low unemployment. In fact, if you're an astrophysicist or geophysics engineer, you apparently don't have to worry at all about finding a job. Here are five less popular majors, all requiring advanced math skills, that enjoy low unemployment:

  • Astrophysics/astronomy 0%
  • Geological and geophysics engineering 0%
  • Physical science 2.5%
  • Geosciences 3.2%
  • Math/computer science 3.5%


#33 Confucius

Confucius

    Corporate Shill

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 August 2013 - 01:56 PM

I got a 2.5 in miscellaneous fine arts!  Why can't I get a job!  I shouldn't have to pay back this loan!


Ees7Y.jpg


I'm 100% shocked that books still exist in today's day and age. I thought they'd be out by now. They make up like 1% of today's entertainment and unless you're 60 or older, stray away from books and start emersing yourself with real entertainment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Codes for Free / Codes for Trade


#34 willardhaven

willardhaven

    Thief of Life

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 August 2013 - 03:39 PM

To be fair, these are kids who may or may not have college-educated parents.

 

My parents never went to college so to them college = great career. I would have made more money going into a trade union than going to school.

 

I think people conflate college and job training. These are two very distinct things. If you majored in art, you should understand the field. If you want to make art into a career you have to learn to run a small business and how to network. An art major can still find lucrative employment, although it might not be a 9-5.
 


PaulManda.png


#35 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 23 August 2013 - 03:23 AM

Food for thought: If potential students didn't have such easy access at free (for now) money, would tuition rates be so high?

You can't charge thousands of dollars for tuition if it means you have little-to-no students because they can't pay it.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#36 kill3r7

kill3r7

    MiNd ThE GaP

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 23 August 2013 - 03:44 AM

To be fair, these are kids who may or may not have college-educated parents.

My parents never went to college so to them college = great career. I would have made more money going into a trade union than going to school.

I think people conflate college and job training. These are two very distinct things. If you majored in art, you should understand the field. If you want to make art into a career you have to learn to run a small business and how to network. An art major can still find lucrative employment, although it might not be a 9-5.


For decades college education was reserved for the privileged. Prior to WWII only a small percentage of the population attended college. Hence why our parents' generation stills views college through rosé colored glasses and sees it as a way out. For them a college degree still holds a certain level of prestige. I can't say they are completely wrong considering the perception/stigma that exists between college grads vs non grads.

I do not believe that education is a bad thing. It's probably true that some folks shouldn't attend college but the vast majority of college grads are better of for getting a college degree.


Xecutioner
CML

#37 Blaster man

Blaster man

Posted 23 August 2013 - 02:44 PM

If you look at those lists of employment/unemployment by major, I think what it shows is that as a society we've all become privileged.  100 years ago people would have taken the best paying job with the best employment prospects.  These days people want to do what they enjoy and (for lack of better terms) follow their dreams.  When so many people are taking pyschology as their major that 20% of them can't find work of any kind after graduation, something is wrong. 

 

Perhaps the government should target loans and especially grants at areas that need workers and have the lowest unemployment rate.  Maybe everyone can't handle geophysics engineering?  How many have tried and how many don't want to do engineering because they heard it's hard or because of some nerd stigma.  The same thing for computer science.  Do people want to get out of school with close to a 100% chance of finding a good paying job or not?  There's negative steriotypes about many of these fields and because of that people don't want to pursue them - espcially getting started with a couple of classes in high school with it's greater social pressures.  Maybe they should force everyone to take an entry level computer programming class in high school along with english, history, phys ed, etc. 



#38 Confucius

Confucius

    Corporate Shill

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 23 August 2013 - 03:33 PM

"Last year, 33.5 percent of Americans ages 25 to 29 had at least a bachelor’s degree, compared with 24.7 percent in 1995, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. In 1975, the share was 21.9 percent."

 

See the problem here?  In our parent's generation, having a college degree meant something.   Where do you think those extra 11% of college grads go?  The ivy leagues aren't admitting 50k students a year.  They go to these podunk colleges (yeah yeah call me an elitist)  which while they might be getting good educations, don't justify the ROI.   So you have all these college grads who think a bachelor's degree means big bucks but it doesn't because of all these people with degrees.  11% is not just 11%, the population has grown too.

 

Colleges should be harder to get into but loans and grants should be more readily available to those who need it.

 

It's the longtail that's killing everyone. 


Ees7Y.jpg


I'm 100% shocked that books still exist in today's day and age. I thought they'd be out by now. They make up like 1% of today's entertainment and unless you're 60 or older, stray away from books and start emersing yourself with real entertainment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Codes for Free / Codes for Trade


#39 Billytwoshoes

Billytwoshoes

    Perpetually behind the times

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:42 PM

I'll try to keep my anecdotal story short:

 

I graduated in 2006 with my bachelors in electrical engineering, when my freshman year state university tuition was around $3K annually (I know, pretty cheap by today's standards).  During my last year, the tuition went up to around $5K, and last I heard its around $10K.  That is a pretty big jump in tuition costs in only a decade, but even then I still think $10K is manageable without taking out massive loans.

 

At 16 I started working, started saving, not necessarily for college, but just because I thought you should.  By the time I was 18, I had around $15-20K in the bank.  I was just working at a local grocery store, but I made sure I wasn't doing piddly 8-10 hours a week work shifts, but I tried to work at least 20 hours a week, usually around 30.  It's high school, kids have the time, the classes are not that stressful, and I think all teens should get some early work experience in.

 

So for starters on my opinion, teenage kids (and likewise parents to teach them) need to get out there when they can and work wherever they can.  I don't want to hear stories of how hard it is to find a job (or even how hard high school is while working, really, it isn't at all), at that age, even nowadays there is still some job out there to earn money.  Do it now while you don't have to worry about rent living with your parents, and actually start saving now.

 

What I had saved at 18, I was good enough to go, but even then I started looking into all scholarship options.  Now I'm not sure how it is today, but back then I was awarded at least one scholarship for just applying (not many people knew about it, and it was open to everyone), and another for doing a short interview (which there were only 3 applicants!) and was selected.  For the first two years I had an extra $2,000 a year in scholarships to spend on books or whatever else.  It may not be as lucrative today, but you won't know if you don't try.  Quick fact, a Ctrl+F of that article brings up 63 loan instances, but 0 scholarship mentions.  :-k

 

And finally, yes, it is an option to live at home with your parents, which was how I was able to save even more money while still working 25-40 hours a week while going to college (40 hours wasn't my choice though).  If its only a 10-20 mile drive, it would still be much cheaper if you have the option to save more money even accounting for gas.  If your intended school is farther than that, consider an alternative that is closer.  Who cares if you live with your mom and / or dad until you are 22, you'll be able to move out when you are ready with more funds than those who craved independence at a cost of much higher debt.

 

The points the article bring up are valid, the system is pushing a lifestyle on impressionable teens that were not given proper parental guidance, and kids are sold on living their dreams with their bachelors in tow.  Costs have gone up more than they should, for a qualification that is become less and less optional.  There is just more complaining in the article than there are solutions given, placing more of the emphasis on what the system can do for them, rather than giving valuable advice for teens to better themselves in the somewhat broken situation.  I feel both positions are equally important.

 

Plus, I know its Rolling Stone, but quoting vodka guzzling and weed peddling sources is a bit unsavory, just saying.  Sorry for the long post, but to be fair it was a long article to read.



#40 Blaster man

Blaster man

Posted 23 August 2013 - 08:25 PM

I'll try to keep my anecdotal story short:

 

I graduated in 2006 with my bachelors in electrical engineering, when my freshman year state university tuition was around $3K annually (I know, pretty cheap by today's standards).  During my last year, the tuition went up to around $5K, and last I heard its around $10K.  That is a pretty big jump in tuition costs in only a decade, but even then I still think $10K is manageable without taking out massive loans.

 

At 16 I started working, started saving, not necessarily for college, but just because I thought you should.  By the time I was 18, I had around $15-20K in the bank.  I was just working at a local grocery store, but I made sure I wasn't doing piddly 8-10 hours a week work shifts, but I tried to work at least 20 hours a week, usually around 30.  It's high school, kids have the time, the classes are not that stressful, and I think all teens should get some early work experience in.

 

So for starters on my opinion, teenage kids (and likewise parents to teach them) need to get out there when they can and work wherever they can.  I don't want to hear stories of how hard it is to find a job (or even how hard high school is while working, really, it isn't at all), at that age, even nowadays there is still some job out there to earn money.  Do it now while you don't have to worry about rent living with your parents, and actually start saving now.

 

What I had saved at 18, I was good enough to go, but even then I started looking into all scholarship options.  Now I'm not sure how it is today, but back then I was awarded at least one scholarship for just applying (not many people knew about it, and it was open to everyone), and another for doing a short interview (which there were only 3 applicants!) and was selected.  For the first two years I had an extra $2,000 a year in scholarships to spend on books or whatever else.  It may not be as lucrative today, but you won't know if you don't try.  Quick fact, a Ctrl+F of that article brings up 63 loan instances, but 0 scholarship mentions.  :-k

 

And finally, yes, it is an option to live at home with your parents, which was how I was able to save even more money while still working 25-40 hours a week while going to college (40 hours wasn't my choice though).  If its only a 10-20 mile drive, it would still be much cheaper if you have the option to save more money even accounting for gas.  If your intended school is farther than that, consider an alternative that is closer.  Who cares if you live with your mom and / or dad until you are 22, you'll be able to move out when you are ready with more funds than those who craved independence at a cost of much higher debt.

 

The points the article bring up are valid, the system is pushing a lifestyle on impressionable teens that were not given proper parental guidance, and kids are sold on living their dreams with their bachelors in tow.  Costs have gone up more than they should, for a qualification that is become less and less optional.  There is just more complaining in the article than there are solutions given, placing more of the emphasis on what the system can do for them, rather than giving valuable advice for teens to better themselves in the somewhat broken situation.  I feel both positions are equally important.

 

Plus, I know its Rolling Stone, but quoting vodka guzzling and weed peddling sources is a bit unsavory, just saying.  Sorry for the long post, but to be fair it was a long article to read.

It sounds like you had a good opportunity and I do agree with you that more people should attend a college/university closer to home.  Fact is, dorms are outrageously expensive and college practically force freshmen into them if they don't live close by.  Clearly your story brings up some good points on what's going wrong these days and frankly you can rent an apartment in some pretty expensive cities for what they charge for dorm rooms - especially when you consider it's usually 2 people paying that rate for a single room!

 

That aside there are definitely people in situations that don't have a lot of options other than living in a dorm on campus.  Some folks live in rural America, I have family that live in a county that has less than 10,000 people in it.  There's a single high school for the entire county, no college or universities, and most people have to drive to work.  So if they were even able to find a job in high school (keeping in mind it took them 2 hours to get to school and back), they'd have to have a car and car insurance.



#41 Confucius

Confucius

    Corporate Shill

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 23 August 2013 - 11:09 PM

I'd want my kids to go at least 5 hours away for college. College is a wonderful time and I don't want them missing out on all the aspects of college life by coming home all the time or having to commute. But that's just personal preference.

Ees7Y.jpg


I'm 100% shocked that books still exist in today's day and age. I thought they'd be out by now. They make up like 1% of today's entertainment and unless you're 60 or older, stray away from books and start emersing yourself with real entertainment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Codes for Free / Codes for Trade


#42 Billytwoshoes

Billytwoshoes

    Perpetually behind the times

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 24 August 2013 - 12:59 AM

Fact is, dorms are outrageously expensive and college practically force freshmen into them if they don't live close by.

Very true, my local state university (the one I attended) has been ripping up some of parking lots and replacing them with dorms in the past few years, definitely trying to push the "freshman experience", which they profit off of heavily.

 

 

 

That aside there are definitely people in situations that don't have a lot of options other than living in a dorm on campus.  Some folks live in rural America, I have family that live in a county that has less than 10,000 people in it.  There's a single high school for the entire county, no college or universities, and most people have to drive to work.  So if they were even able to find a job in high school (keeping in mind it took them 2 hours to get to school and back), they'd have to have a car and car insurance.

Good points, honestly in rural areas nowadays it would be very expensive to go to a traditional university, I guess you have to bank more on scholarships and hopefully minimize the loans.

 

 

 

It sounds like you had a good opportunity and I do agree with you that more people should attend a college/university closer to home.

I do admit that I had some good opportunities not everyone has (and I feel blessed for them), but I don't think I had that unique of a situation.  Around half of the US population live in as urban or more urbanized area with at least one university close by, some with much better public transportation.  I personally think we just have a hard time as a country cementing the mindset to save more and live at or beneath your means.  Can't really blame teenagers for blindly following these loans, when they see their parents rack up credit card debt and get into 40+ year mortgages on homes they can't afford.

 

Not trying to sound judgmental here, but that's just my take on the way a good portion of the US handle their finances.

 

I'd want my kids to go at least 5 hours away for college. College is a wonderful time and I don't want them missing out on all the aspects of college life by coming home all the time or having to commute. But that's just personal preference.

I completely understand this, if my kids want to get away from us, I'd support that.  I'd offer a most cost effective solution at home, and let them decide which lifestyle is more important to them.  I'd gladly help out with part of their finances (hopefully I can when that time comes...), but in terms of the total costs, they have to figure out how to make that happen.  Whether or not they would turn to loans is their decision, but not one I would openly support.  

 

At least that is better than some parents who will pay all of their kids college bills without question, not really a good start to their aspiring independence. Hopefully I would of been a good enough parent that they would make the right choice for themselves.



#43 mrsilkunderwear

mrsilkunderwear

    Just Do It.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 24 August 2013 - 05:44 AM

Interesting article in regards to education:

http://online.wsj.co...cleTabs=article



#44 Confucius

Confucius

    Corporate Shill

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 24 August 2013 - 01:53 PM

Interesting article in regards to education:
http://online.wsj.co...cleTabs=article


No it's not.

Ees7Y.jpg


I'm 100% shocked that books still exist in today's day and age. I thought they'd be out by now. They make up like 1% of today's entertainment and unless you're 60 or older, stray away from books and start emersing yourself with real entertainment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Codes for Free / Codes for Trade


#45 mrsilkunderwear

mrsilkunderwear

    Just Do It.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 24 August 2013 - 07:34 PM

No it's not.

k cool. 



#46 Confucius

Confucius

    Corporate Shill

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 24 August 2013 - 10:40 PM

Calling that an article implies some sort of journalism. It's an opinion piece that's about as valid as a slidecage post.

Ees7Y.jpg


I'm 100% shocked that books still exist in today's day and age. I thought they'd be out by now. They make up like 1% of today's entertainment and unless you're 60 or older, stray away from books and start emersing yourself with real entertainment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Codes for Free / Codes for Trade


#47 egofed

egofed

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 25 August 2013 - 05:30 PM

Interesting article in regards to education:

http://online.wsj.co...cleTabs=article

Actually I believe this article nails it on the head. A true free market college education without gov't backed loans would be much cheaper. Like Bob said, tuition would come down if no one was attending. We have artificially inflated prices through tax payer backed, easy to get loans. Screw with the free market and watch shit go haywire, then complain about it when it does. Our modis operandi for quite a while now....



#48 Blaster man

Blaster man

Posted 25 August 2013 - 08:28 PM

Actually I believe this article nails it on the head. A true free market college education without gov't backed loans would be much cheaper. Like Bob said, tuition would come down if no one was attending. We have artificially inflated prices through tax payer backed, easy to get loans. Screw with the free market and watch shit go haywire, then complain about it when it does. Our modis operandi for quite a while now....

Yes the prices would come down but that doesn't do much for those people that come from an extremely poor background and don't have any way to fund their education.



#49 mrsilkunderwear

mrsilkunderwear

    Just Do It.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 25 August 2013 - 09:57 PM

Yes the prices would come down but that doesn't do much for those people that come from an extremely poor background and don't have any way to fund their education.

Are we therefore obligated to take care of those people? Is it a role of a federal government to take care of our education? Personally I would not care if this happened on a state level. 



#50 Blaster man

Blaster man

Posted 25 August 2013 - 10:13 PM

Are we therefore obligated to take care of those people? Is it a role of a federal government to take care of our education? Personally I would not care if this happened on a state level.

Most people don't want a permanent underclass of people. What most right wing folks don't seem to get is that the extreme poor dont have disposable income to buy the products their companies produce. It's part of the reason the economy is barely improving, too many low wage jobs are being created.

Edit:
Speaking of which, I'm not sure how closely you guys follow the stock market but Walmart had declining earnings. Wages of he poor are on the decline to the point that Walmart is becoming too expensive to shop at. Part of this has to do with the just on time work schedules meant to reduce worker hours and which also limits them to a single low wage job due to unpredictable hours.
http://www.finalcall...le_100696.shtml

#51 mrsilkunderwear

mrsilkunderwear

    Just Do It.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 25 August 2013 - 10:52 PM

Most people don't want a permanent underclass of people. What most right wing folks don't seem to get is that the extreme poor dont have disposable income to buy the products their companies produce. It's part of the reason the economy is barely improving, too many low wage jobs are being created.

Edit:
Speaking of which, I'm not sure how closely you guys follow the stock market but Walmart had declining earnings. Wages of he poor are on the decline to the point that Walmart is becoming too expensive to shop at. Part of this has to do with the just on time work schedules meant to reduce worker hours and which also limits them to a single low wage job due to unpredictable hours.
http://www.finalcall...le_100696.shtml

Yeah I happen to be one of those people but nonetheless we are not required to help others with their education. If I had lots of money then I would start scholarship programs for the needy which would be a voluntary act. In the meantime I would prefer if the government took their hand out of my pocket to hand the money to someone else without my consent.  

 

You point in regards slow growth in the economy is out of place. As you said the problem is with low wage jobs being created therefore education has nothing to do with it considering today it is easier to graduate thanks to government subsidies. Do not make it a right vs left issue, because it is not. You do not want to go there.  



#52 Confucius

Confucius

    Corporate Shill

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 25 August 2013 - 11:17 PM

wait, you're part of the poor and you're against educational loans?


Ees7Y.jpg


I'm 100% shocked that books still exist in today's day and age. I thought they'd be out by now. They make up like 1% of today's entertainment and unless you're 60 or older, stray away from books and start emersing yourself with real entertainment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Codes for Free / Codes for Trade


#53 Blaster man

Blaster man

Posted 25 August 2013 - 11:35 PM

Yeah I happen to be one of those people but nonetheless we are not required to help others with their education. If I had lots of money then I would start scholarship programs for the needy which would be a voluntary act. In the meantime I would prefer if the government took their hand out of my pocket to hand the money to someone else without my consent.  

If you're low wage then the government isn't sticking "it's hand" into your pocket.  Sure these loans are piling up but at the end of the day they're still loans and not give-away's which is a big difference.  If the government stopped subsidizing things with give-away's, we'd almost certainly see some kind of turmoil in the country.  Believe it or not, the food in this country is extremely cheap because of government subsidies in the farm bills.  For example:

http://www.businessi...lk-cliff-2013-6

 

You point in regards slow growth in the economy is out of place. As you said the problem is with low wage jobs being created therefore education has nothing to do with it considering today it is easier to graduate thanks to government subsidies. Do not make it a right vs left issue, because it is not. You do not want to go there.  

I know it's hard to understand but they're actually related.  As the low end labor market becomes tight, wages go up along with working conditions.  If one low wage job has a just on time work schedule and another does not, the labor would naturally move to the job that does not have it which would force the other employer to stop doing it or increase wages to compensate.  The more low skilled people in the labor market, the more those jobs can take advantage of their workers in terms of both wages and hours. 

 

As for "right vs left issue", please show me one person on the left that wants to eliminate government student loans and I'll show you 10 on the right.  You'll run out of people wayyyy before I do.



#54 mrsilkunderwear

mrsilkunderwear

    Just Do It.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 August 2013 - 12:29 AM

If you're low wage then the government isn't sticking "it's hand" into your pocket.  Sure these loans are piling up but at the end of the day they're still loans and not give-away's which is a big difference.  If the government stopped subsidizing things with give-away's, we'd almost certainly see some kind of turmoil in the country.  Believe it or not, the food in this country is extremely cheap because of government subsidies in the farm bills.  For example:

http://www.businessi...lk-cliff-2013-6

 

I know it's hard to understand but they're actually related.  As the low end labor market becomes tight, wages go up along with working conditions.  If one low wage job has a just on time work schedule and another does not, the labor would naturally move to the job that does not have it which would force the other employer to stop doing it or increase wages to compensate.  The more low skilled people in the labor market, the more those jobs can take advantage of their workers in terms of both wages and hours. 

 

As for "right vs left issue", please show me one person on the left that wants to eliminate government student loans and I'll show you 10 on the right.  You'll run out of people wayyyy before I do.

I am the person who does not want underclass of people. I am not rich nor am I poor. These loans are being lent by the government and not me, yet the money is mine. We gain nothing from it and instead there are more problems being created, like a student debt bubble which is looming over our heads. What do you think will happen when it will burst? Do you even care? I appreciate your links about food subsidies but I already know that. Obviously this is a problem when most of the nation is now dependent on some sort of aid. I would like to make this does not happen, as it only leads to more problems. I know if these entitlements are cut off then we will experience major turmoil, yet I find it necessary. 

 

You have just described basic supply and demand. If there is constant demand, yet the supply of low skilled workers decreases therefore this would lead to increase in wages of attract potential employees. Yet this is not what troubles us, it is the lack of good jobs. You touched upon it, we agree that good jobs are not being created fast enough and instead it is part time jobs or full time with extremely low potential for growth. 

 

You brought up right wingers when you were talking about them not understanding that the poor do not have disposable income which would be used to buy their products, not eliminating education subsidies. I disagree as these people, I am sure, completely understand that poor will not be able to buy their products. Nonetheless they are against it as it is not their responsibility to look out for less fortunate. I agree with that, yet I would love to help and do when I am able. 



#55 egofed

egofed

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 August 2013 - 01:41 AM

I don't want the gov't to subsidize ANY private enterprise. All we do is Fuck up the free market. As far as an underclass, a high school degree is free, what you do from then on should be squarely on your own shoulders. If private entities wish to loan college money, great, but the gov't should concern itself with the BASICS of defense and Constitutionally recognized powers. We took a great idea and blew it up into a bloated, inefficient, and corrupt mockery of itself.  Maybe if the purse strings of tax payer money were much tighter, then we wouldn't have so much corruption and cronyism. Life is never gonna be fair, no matter how much you regulate it. What if you have stupider parents than I did? The gov't is supposed to balance it all out somehow??? We should guarantee a baseline of equal opportunity ("free" high school), everything else is personal effort and luck. Someone on here once argued that merit had very little significance versus social position when measuring a person's achieved status. Maybe we should debate that again.....



#56 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 26 August 2013 - 04:52 AM

Yes the prices would come down but that doesn't do much for those people that come from an extremely poor background and don't have any way to fund their education.


From the sounds of it, the current plan of providing them loans that they'll never afford to be able to play back isn't really helping them (or anyone else) either.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#57 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 August 2013 - 05:01 AM

Yes the prices would come down but that doesn't do much for those people that come from an extremely poor background and don't have any way to fund their education.

 

You can become successful off of a solid high school education. The problem lies that culturally we have brainwashed people into believing that they need to go to college to be successful which is not true. Hard work and an idea will go much further then diplomas and a sense of entitlement. I can't even begin to explain to you the number of college educated morons I used to work with that would bitch and moan that they didn't fast track up the corporate ladder and how unfair life was because people with less education and fewer degrees were advancing at a quicker rate.



#58 kill3r7

kill3r7

    MiNd ThE GaP

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 August 2013 - 10:45 AM

You can become successful off of a solid high school education. The problem lies that culturally we have brainwashed people into believing that they need to go to college to be successful which is not true. Hard work and an idea will go much further then diplomas and a sense of entitlement. I can't even begin to explain to you the number of college educated morons I used to work with that would bitch and moan that they didn't fast track up the corporate ladder and how unfair life was because people with less education and fewer degrees were advancing at a quicker rate.


People with college degrees make more money in total and/or per capita. There will always be outliers in either group but the exception doesn't make the rule.
Xecutioner
CML

#59 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 August 2013 - 11:08 AM

People with college degrees make more money in total and/or per capita. There will always be outliers in either group but the exception doesn't make the rule.

 

Of course they will make more money. But at what cost? 

 

Do you think someone making a few thousand less each year but at no point is crushed under the debt of student loans is going to have a lesser quality life then someone making slightly more money but can't get out from under 50-100,000 in student loan debt?



#60 Blaster man

Blaster man

Posted 26 August 2013 - 11:24 AM

I don't want the gov't to subsidize ANY private enterprise. All we do is Fuck up the free market. As far as an underclass, a high school degree is free, what you do from then on should be squarely on your own shoulders. If private entities wish to loan college money, great, but the gov't should concern itself with the BASICS of defense and Constitutionally recognized powers. We took a great idea and blew it up into a bloated, inefficient, and corrupt mockery of itself.  Maybe if the purse strings of tax payer money were much tighter, then we wouldn't have so much corruption and cronyism. Life is never gonna be fair, no matter how much you regulate it. What if you have stupider parents than I did? The gov't is supposed to balance it all out somehow??? We should guarantee a baseline of equal opportunity ("free" high school), everything else is personal effort and luck. Someone on here once argued that merit had very little significance versus social position when measuring a person's achieved status. Maybe we should debate that again.....

To be fair, my farm bill example was simply to show that it's an actual "hand out" and not a loan.  The only people that would actually want to eliminate food subsidies are those that don't understand why they're in place.  If you're against the government subsidizing ANYTHING then you obviously don't understand why they're in place or you simply don't care if people are starving.  You really need to look back at history and see what happened in the past and why they're there because you can't predict mother nature with enough accuracy to ensure there's a stable and cost effective food supply for 300+ million people without government intervention.

 

Of course they will make more money. But at what cost? 

 

Do you think someone making a few thousand less each year but at no point is crushed under the debt of student loans is going to have a lesser quality life then someone making slightly more money but can't get out from under 50-100,000 in student loan debt?

Based on the example you propose, of course not.  That said, why are you suggesting all college grads on make slightly more than non college grads?  Additionally, when you look 5 years later and the guy at the low wage job, he's making the same money while the guy with the college degree is probably making 50%-100% more than he is or in some cases 3-4 times the low wage salary if they went into engineering or some other high demand field.  Throw in a couple of kids and the guy with the low wages is really struggling in comparison to the college grad with a couple of kids.  Yes 100k in student loan debt is too much.  Something should be done to bring down costs at the colleges that charge the highest rates though I think those are typically private colleges that do that.