User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 10:37:55 AM EDT
[#1]
if anyone thinks that a (useful) degree is anything except proof that you can perform...you are smokin crack.
sure, do you learn a few things, yes. do you learn enough to justify the cost? no. you pay the cost because you want the job afterwards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 10:39:05 AM EDT
[#2]
Allowed not created
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 10:46:21 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
if anyone thinks that a (useful) degree is anything except proof that you can perform...you are smokin crack. sure, do you learn a few things, yes. do you learn enough to justify the cost? no. you pay the cost because you want the job afterwards. That IS the justification for the cost. If you are trying to justify the cost because you learned something you should save yourself a lot of money and go to a library. That is how we end up with people graduating with worthless degrees and saddled in debt - they thought it would be worth the cost to get the education. Guess what - it isn't. The job is the ONLY thing that financially justifies going to college. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 10:47:51 AM EDT
[#4]
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO.
Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 10:57:05 AM EDT
[#5]
For me to advance further in my career as a law enforcement officer I need a degree. Simple as that... no degree no advancement. So I'm getting a degree in Political Science so if Inever burn out of being a cop I can go into teaching government and civics in high school. My plan is if I can in the long run get a phd and after retirement as a cop (20-30 years from now) maybe teach in a university.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 10:57:31 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. That's how I've always considered it. The declining middle class is in a panic to have their kids get degrees, regardless of whether it will help them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:00:35 AM EDT
[#7]
If one assumes that people get a university degree as a pathway to a job and not for the joy of learning, there is a education bubble.
That bubble is the number of BA/BS, MA/MS, and Ph.D. degrees being granted far in excess of the available jobs. Part of the reason for this is the push by adviser's that most people in high school need to go to college. Whether they have the academic aptitude for this is not being considered apparently. The increased number of college degree-bearing applicants results in the inflated requirement in the minds of HR people for a BA/BS as an entry into many jobs that previously needed just a high school diploma (back when it was worth more than the paper it was printed on). This causes a positive feedback resulting in more high school graduates being pushed towards college. The enormous debt incurred is just a consequence of increased attendance and the tuition inflation caused by the educational complex and a further positive feedback to college costs by Federal student loans. I would estimate (based on my students) that about 15-20% of people in college do not have the real desire or aptitude to graduate hence the grade inflation and creation of fluff degrees to allow some to graduate with a degree. (e.g. B.A. in Hotel Management). |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:05:01 AM EDT
[#8]
A kid that used to work for me stopped by a few weeks ago. I hadn't seen him since he left for dentistry school. During our visit I asked how much debt he was facing. He said roughly $410K. My jaw about hit the floor. This was just for dentistry school. He had a full ride for undergrad.
Sure, he's now a dentist and will make good money but that much debt is staggering to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:06:02 AM EDT
[#9]
Interesting article. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:14:33 AM EDT
[#10]
Just read the article, and the amount of bullshit in it is stunning. They bring up disparate impact as the corner-stone of their argument, but conveniently fail to mention that disparate impact is NOT illegal or discriminatory if it is clearly job-related, which invalidates the entire point of the article.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:20:30 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. That's where he takes it in the article. There's very little discussion of the actual cost of a college education. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:22:42 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's where he takes it in the article. There's very little discussion of the actual cost of a college education. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. That's where he takes it in the article. There's very little discussion of the actual cost of a college education. I was just responding to the OP at that point.  once I read the article I realize he WAS in fact talking about the "education bubble" and so I agree with that use of the term.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:25:41 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just read the article, and the amount of bullshit in it is stunning. They bring up disparate impact as the corner-stone of their argument, but conveniently fail to mention that disparate impact is NOT illegal or discriminatory if it is clearly job-related, which invalidates the entire point of the article. No. They're citing disparate impact as the reason the supreme court found in favor of the plantiff in the case they reference. "The Supreme Court wasn’t buying it. This was North Carolina after all. The court compared the tests to Aesop’s fable of the Fox and the Stork, in which a fox offers a dish full of milk to a stork, whose beak prevents it from satisfying its thirst. The implication that black and white workers were of a different species did not strike any of the justices as racist, unlike the objective tests. Griggs found that if blacks failed to meet a standard at a higher rate than whites the standard itself was racist—a legal doctrine known as disparate impact." Unless I'm missing something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:27:21 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just read the article, and the amount of bullshit in it is stunning. This an accurate analysis. "Bubble" in this case is a myth created and fostered by the dem/soc/lib/comm/marx party apparacheks to transfer blame of the shit economy onto yet another straw man. The real problem is that FAR too many people - parents and irresponsible children - failed to do proper due diligence and cost benefit analysis BEFORE scribbling ink onto a loan obligation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:32:03 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. They're citing disparate impact as the reason the supreme court found in favor of the plantiff in the case they reference. "The Supreme Court wasn’t buying it. This was North Carolina after all. The court compared the tests to Aesop’s fable of the Fox and the Stork, in which a fox offers a dish full of milk to a stork, whose beak prevents it from satisfying its thirst. The implication that black and white workers were of a different species did not strike any of the justices as racist, unlike the objective tests. Griggs found that if blacks failed to meet a standard at a higher rate than whites the standard itself was racist—a legal doctrine known as disparate impact." Unless I'm missing something. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just read the article, and the amount of bullshit in it is stunning. They bring up disparate impact as the corner-stone of their argument, but conveniently fail to mention that disparate impact is NOT illegal or discriminatory if it is clearly job-related, which invalidates the entire point of the article. No. They're citing disparate impact as the reason the supreme court found in favor of the plantiff in the case they reference. "The Supreme Court wasn’t buying it. This was North Carolina after all. The court compared the tests to Aesop’s fable of the Fox and the Stork, in which a fox offers a dish full of milk to a stork, whose beak prevents it from satisfying its thirst. The implication that black and white workers were of a different species did not strike any of the justices as racist, unlike the objective tests. Griggs found that if blacks failed to meet a standard at a higher rate than whites the standard itself was racist—a legal doctrine known as disparate impact." Unless I'm missing something. From Burger's majority opinion: The facts of this case demonstrate the inadequacy of broad and general testing devices, as well as the infirmity of using diplomas or degrees as fixed measures of capability. History is filled with examples of men and women who rendered highly effective performance without the conventional badges of accomplishment in terms of certificates, diplomas, or degrees. Diplomas and tests are useful servants, but Congress has mandated the common sense proposition that they are not to become masters of reality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:42:32 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. They're citing disparate impact as the reason the supreme court found in favor of the plantiff in the case they reference. "The Supreme Court wasn’t buying it. This was North Carolina after all. The court compared the tests to Aesop’s fable of the Fox and the Stork, in which a fox offers a dish full of milk to a stork, whose beak prevents it from satisfying its thirst. The implication that black and white workers were of a different species did not strike any of the justices as racist, unlike the objective tests. Griggs found that if blacks failed to meet a standard at a higher rate than whites the standard itself was racist—a legal doctrine known as disparate impact." Unless I'm missing something. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just read the article, and the amount of bullshit in it is stunning. They bring up disparate impact as the corner-stone of their argument, but conveniently fail to mention that disparate impact is NOT illegal or discriminatory if it is clearly job-related, which invalidates the entire point of the article. No. They're citing disparate impact as the reason the supreme court found in favor of the plantiff in the case they reference. "The Supreme Court wasn’t buying it. This was North Carolina after all. The court compared the tests to Aesop’s fable of the Fox and the Stork, in which a fox offers a dish full of milk to a stork, whose beak prevents it from satisfying its thirst. The implication that black and white workers were of a different species did not strike any of the justices as racist, unlike the objective tests. Griggs found that if blacks failed to meet a standard at a higher rate than whites the standard itself was racist—a legal doctrine known as disparate impact." Unless I'm missing something. The article is making the argument that the court ruling (and the concept of disparate impact) made it so difficult for companies to do testing, that they instead ended up relying on college degrees to "weed out" the people that SCOTUS prevented them from weeding out, creating the huge demand for college degrees. It's total bullshit, because disparate impact is FINE, and perfectly legal, as long as your company's test is of job-related skills/abilities, which would seem to be exactly what companies need. The typical example is something like firefighting. If a FD has a test that involves dragging a heavy weight up some stairs, there WILL BE disparate impact, in that women (a protected class according to civil rights law) are far more likely to fail to meet the testing standard. However, this disparate impact is perfectly legal, since a fire department can convincingly show that being able to carry a heavy weight up stairs is a job-relevant skill.. In that case, you have "discrimination" against a protected class, but it's perfectly fine. If the same fire department were to give an objective test of math and geometry for promotion and blacks (also a protected class under civil rights law) failed to meet the standard at a much higher rate than whites, that would also be an example of disparate impact, even if it's an objective test and there was no intent to discriminate. However, if the fire department cannot demonstrate how math and geometry skills are critical job-related skills, then such a test/standard WOULD be illegal. That's a very important distinctions, which the article completely side-steps, and seriously undermines their claim that the SCOTUS ruling made it so difficult for companies to test specific job aptitude. In fact, their argument is total bullshit, because if they are testing job-relevant skills, then disparate impact and discrimination doesn't matter, and is completely legal. It's only a problem when the tests and standards are broad and unrelated to the specific job. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:49:32 AM EDT
[#17]
More discussio here: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/197138/#respond
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:52:15 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. ETA my argument still stands, but I also agree with your fleshed out argument in further posts. We're talking about two different sides of the same coin |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:53:30 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The article is making the argument that the court ruling (and the concept of disparate impact) made it so difficult for companies to do testing, that they instead ended up relying on college degrees to "weed out" the people that SCOTUS prevented them from weeding out, creating the huge demand for college degrees. It's total bullshit, because disparate impact is FINE, and perfectly legal, as long as your company's test is of job-related skills/abilities, which would seem to be exactly what companies need. The typical example is something like firefighting. If a FD has a test that involves dragging a heavy weight up some stairs, there WILL BE disparate impact, in that women (a protected class according to civil rights law) are far more likely to fail to meet the testing standard. However, this disparate impact is perfectly legal, since a fire department can convincingly show that being able to carry a heavy weight up stairs is a job-relevant skill.. In that case, you have "discrimination" against a protected class, but it's perfectly fine. If the same fire department were to give an objective test of math and geometry for promotion and blacks (also a protected class under civil rights law) failed to meet the standard at a much higher rate than whites, that would also be an example of disparate impact, even if it's an objective test and there was no intent to discriminate. However, if the fire department cannot demonstrate how math and geometry skills are critical job-related skills, then such a test/standard WOULD be illegal. That's a very important distinctions, which the article completely side-steps, and seriously undermines their claim that the SCOTUS ruling made it so difficult for companies to test specific job aptitude. In fact, their argument is total bullshit, because if they are testing job-relevant skills, then disparate impact and discrimination doesn't matter, and is completely legal. It's only a problem when the tests and standards are broad and unrelated to the specific job. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just read the article, and the amount of bullshit in it is stunning. They bring up disparate impact as the corner-stone of their argument, but conveniently fail to mention that disparate impact is NOT illegal or discriminatory if it is clearly job-related, which invalidates the entire point of the article. No. They're citing disparate impact as the reason the supreme court found in favor of the plantiff in the case they reference. "The Supreme Court wasn’t buying it. This was North Carolina after all. The court compared the tests to Aesop’s fable of the Fox and the Stork, in which a fox offers a dish full of milk to a stork, whose beak prevents it from satisfying its thirst. The implication that black and white workers were of a different species did not strike any of the justices as racist, unlike the objective tests. Griggs found that if blacks failed to meet a standard at a higher rate than whites the standard itself was racist—a legal doctrine known as disparate impact." Unless I'm missing something. The article is making the argument that the court ruling (and the concept of disparate impact) made it so difficult for companies to do testing, that they instead ended up relying on college degrees to "weed out" the people that SCOTUS prevented them from weeding out, creating the huge demand for college degrees. It's total bullshit, because disparate impact is FINE, and perfectly legal, as long as your company's test is of job-related skills/abilities, which would seem to be exactly what companies need. The typical example is something like firefighting. If a FD has a test that involves dragging a heavy weight up some stairs, there WILL BE disparate impact, in that women (a protected class according to civil rights law) are far more likely to fail to meet the testing standard. However, this disparate impact is perfectly legal, since a fire department can convincingly show that being able to carry a heavy weight up stairs is a job-relevant skill.. In that case, you have "discrimination" against a protected class, but it's perfectly fine. If the same fire department were to give an objective test of math and geometry for promotion and blacks (also a protected class under civil rights law) failed to meet the standard at a much higher rate than whites, that would also be an example of disparate impact, even if it's an objective test and there was no intent to discriminate. However, if the fire department cannot demonstrate how math and geometry skills are critical job-related skills, then such a test/standard WOULD be illegal. That's a very important distinctions, which the article completely side-steps, and seriously undermines their claim that the SCOTUS ruling made it so difficult for companies to test specific job aptitude. In fact, their argument is total bullshit, because if they are testing job-relevant skills, then disparate impact and discrimination doesn't matter, and is completely legal. It's only a problem when the tests and standards are broad and unrelated to the specific job. What's interesting to me is the article actually does bring up a good point about companies having come to rely on colleges to determine a candidate's aptitude, largely divesting themselves of having to evaluate those candidates based on their individual merits (the line "a country defined by credentials rather than merit" resonates). However, I think this is more likely to be attributed to businesses simply trying to streamline the hiring process while giving them an avenue to deflect liability in the event an employee does not perform to expectations rather than that particular supreme court case creating an environment in which businesses find aptitude testing to be prohibitive from a discrimination liability standpoint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:55:36 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:56:05 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. That was my take on the piece as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:59:32 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That was my take on the piece as well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. That was my take on the piece as well. The author basically ignores any discussion of the monetary costs of college, and the potential deleterious effect on the economy in that article. He almost exclusively discusses the value-inflation of the degree itself and the effect of that phenomenon on society. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:59:44 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really. If that was the case universities would be self funding. Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:01:28 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:03:08 PM EDT
[#25]
I thought I hadheard that part of the issue was when job applicant testing was eliminated because...racism or whatever.
So now many companies are only looking at grads with degrees as a way to weed out the app pool. So then everyone needs a degree in order to get even considered as an applicant. There's your demand.... Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:04:48 PM EDT
[#26]
[pissinginthewind]You people should really try reading the article before commenting on it.[/pissinginthewind]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:09:57 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
[pissinginthewind]You people should really try reading the article before commenting on it.[/pissinginthewind] I read it and I got what he said, I disagree with some of his conclusions much like DK-Prof. The "real bubble" to me however, is the do gooders in congress decided that denying anyone a shot at a college degree was whatever flavor of "ism" was popular at the time. Thus they underwrite the loans, just like fannie mae and freddie mac with subprime housing. Most everyone knows the ins and outs of that now, so it's pretty simple to understand my argument. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:14:35 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read it and I got what he said, I disagree with some of his conclusions much like DK-Prof. The "real bubble" to me however, is the do gooders in congress decided that denying anyone a shot at a college degree was whatever flavor of "ism" was popular at the time. Thus they underwrite the loans, just like fannie mae and freddie mac with subprime housing. Most everyone knows the ins and outs of that now, so it's pretty simple to understand my argument. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
[pissinginthewind]You people should really try reading the article before commenting on it.[/pissinginthewind] I read it and I got what he said, I disagree with some of his conclusions much like DK-Prof. The "real bubble" to me however, is the do gooders in congress decided that denying anyone a shot at a college degree was whatever flavor of "ism" was popular at the time. Thus they underwrite the loans, just like fannie mae and freddie mac with subprime housing. Most everyone knows the ins and outs of that now, so it's pretty simple to understand my argument. I agree, but I think it's a little deeper than just easy loans. There's a societal insistence that "everybody not only deserves to go to college, but in fact should go to college no matter what" that is clearly completely ridiculous, yet apparently inescapable. This is obviously facilitated and perpetuated by easy loans, but I don't think they created the situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:15:39 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
if anyone thinks that a (useful) degree is anything except proof that you can perform...you are smokin crack. sure, do you learn a few things, yes. do you learn enough to justify the cost? no. you pay the cost because you want the job afterwards. lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:23:34 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really. If that was the case universities would be self funding. Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. The "bubble" is the .gov underwritting of the loans, guaranteeing they will be issued, much like the subprime housing crisis. Thus they massively overcharge for education making it virtually impossible to get the eduactaion without the loan. Eventually those loans will be defaulted upon in such a number that, the "bubble" will burst (or more likely considering the amount of money we're talking here the whole economy). The more you know. Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. If you paid administrators what they were worth, 90% of them would be hooking or thieving in a month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:26:49 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:28:39 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This an accurate analysis. "Bubble" in this case is a myth created and fostered by the dem/soc/lib/comm/marx party apparacheks to transfer blame of the shit economy onto yet another straw man. The real problem is that FAR too many people - parents and irresponsible children - failed to do proper due diligence and cost benefit analysis BEFORE scribbling ink onto a loan obligation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just read the article, and the amount of bullshit in it is stunning. This an accurate analysis. "Bubble" in this case is a myth created and fostered by the dem/soc/lib/comm/marx party apparacheks to transfer blame of the shit economy onto yet another straw man. The real problem is that FAR too many people - parents and irresponsible children - failed to do proper due diligence and cost benefit analysis BEFORE scribbling ink onto a loan obligation. Little Johnny can be ANYTHING he wants to be with proper schooling, STOP TRYING TO TELL ME OTHERWISE! Yeah, that's my Johnny, in the corner talking to himself and eating the moulding. That fucker's gonna pay my mortgage once he's done with lawyer school. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:31:51 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree, but I think it's a little deeper than just easy loans. There's a societal insistence that "everybody not only deserves to go to college, but in fact should go to college no matter what" that is clearly completely ridiculous, yet apparently inescapable. This is obviously facilitated and perpetuated by easy loans, but I don't think they created the situation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[pissinginthewind]You people should really try reading the article before commenting on it.[/pissinginthewind] I read it and I got what he said, I disagree with some of his conclusions much like DK-Prof. The "real bubble" to me however, is the do gooders in congress decided that denying anyone a shot at a college degree was whatever flavor of "ism" was popular at the time. Thus they underwrite the loans, just like fannie mae and freddie mac with subprime housing. Most everyone knows the ins and outs of that now, so it's pretty simple to understand my argument. I agree, but I think it's a little deeper than just easy loans. There's a societal insistence that "everybody not only deserves to go to college, but in fact should go to college no matter what" that is clearly completely ridiculous, yet apparently inescapable. This is obviously facilitated and perpetuated by easy loans, but I don't think they created the situation. You're missing my point. Society can insist alot of things, everybody deserves a home for example. That creates the problem and causes hardship for some. When .gov gets involved though, look out things are guranteed to go tits up and cause hardship for everyone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:33:30 PM EDT
[#34]
"If you go to college and get a degree, you'll get a good job and live a good life" - this is what we're essentially telling our children.
We're leaving out an ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL component... "... and get a degree IN SOMETHING USEFUL..." We're telling our kids to "chase their dreams", without preparing them for the fact that the real world doesn't pay you for dreams. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:35:12 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I graduated debt free at 26. It's doable. It sucks and isn't fun, but you leave with a degree and a solid resume with real job experience on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd I appluad your success. Doesn't change the fact that the market is out of balance i.e. a "bubble" due to an influx of cheap money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:39:25 PM EDT
[#36]
It all began when the gov started giving out student loans. The universities got greedy from all the free money and hiked tuitions exponentially since then.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:42:07 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're missing my point. Society can insist alot of things, everybody deserves a home for example. That creates the problem and causes hardship for some. When .gov gets involved though, look out things are guranteed to go tits up and cause hardship for everyone. Well, I guess it's a question of which came first. The insistence that everybody should go to college, or cheap and easy student loans? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:42:39 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I appluad your success. Doesn't change the fact that the market is out of balance i.e. a "bubble" due to an influx of cheap money. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd I appluad your success. Doesn't change the fact that the market is out of balance i.e. a "bubble" due to an influx of cheap money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 12:52:51 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know if I'd call the money "cheap" for the consumer considering it's non-dischargable debt and many people that take out loans do so for a degree that isn't worth it. Consumer credit in this country is all kinds of messed up, but as long as nobody pays the piper can you blame them for requesting a song? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd I appluad your success. Doesn't change the fact that the market is out of balance i.e. a "bubble" due to an influx of cheap money. I use cheap money the same way I would regarding credit cards. Used properly, like myself and many of my classmates who got solid degrees (I was accounting a ton of my friend s were CE and EE) it more than pays for itself and there are little to no qualifications for getting said money But Somebody will pay the piper, somebody always pays the piper. Also can I blame people for being stupid and irresponsible? I most certainly can ETA failed to make my full point regarding cheap. You don't pay a dime till 6 months after you graduate. That's pretty damn cheap don't ya think. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 1:02:45 PM EDT
[#40]
150k in student loans for a BA in underwater basket weaving
About sums it up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 1:02:46 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, I guess it's a question of which came first. The insistence that everybody should go to college, or cheap and easy student loans? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You're missing my point. Society can insist alot of things, everybody deserves a home for example. That creates the problem and causes hardship for some. When .gov gets involved though, look out things are guaranteed to go tits up and cause hardship for everyone. Well, I guess it's a question of which came first. The insistence that everybody should go to college, or cheap and easy student loans? Like I said the insistence that people should go to college came first. It has been made extraordinarily worse by government intervention. The hilarious thing about this problem is that .gov intervention is what caused high school diplomas to become useless in the first damn place. That is on two levels 1) Free trade agreements, tariff policy, overzealous EPA rulings, and taxation caused the industrial job loss we now have to fill somehow 2) Lowering high school standards to the lowest common denominator and deemphasis of trade schools |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:06:21 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I graduated debt free at 26. It's doable. It sucks and isn't fun, but you leave with a degree and a solid resume with real job experience on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd I don't know when you went to college but you don't seem to realize that even the "cheap" colleges are 20k+ a year and it increases rather steeply from there. How many 18-19 year olds have that kind of income? Especially in an economy that has hit that age group the hardest? I know plenty of teens who are hard workers but when you are only making $8 an hour it's going to be tough without loans. It was doable when college was 10k a year, but the number of high school grads who can pay 20-30k a year without any debt or outside help is laughably low. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:12:09 PM EDT
[#43]
Federally guaranteed student loans created the student debt bubble. Take away the loans and enrollment will decline. Given time, tuition will decline too as colleges/universities shrink. I've already seen colleges merge departments and reduce staff as cost saving measures.
BTW, college is no longer the key to success. It only guarantees indentured servitude since student loans are not forgiven under bankruptcy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:15:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The language of "bubble" is not really correct/appropriate for the student loan situation, IMO. Bubbles are when prices of things (real estate, stocks, etc) are over-inflated and become over-valued (for a variety of reasons) leading to an inevitable collapse as prices eventually have to re-adjust to a more stable equilibrium. To be technical (and anal), the "bubble" is possibly in the perceived value of university degrees - which has in turn caused the student loan excesses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:16:36 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Federally guaranteed student loans created the student debt bubble. Take away the loans and enrollment will decline. Given time, tuition will decline too as colleges/universities shrink. I've already seen colleges merge departments and reduce staff as cost saving measures. BTW, college is no longer the key to success. It only guarantees indentured servitude since student loans are not forgiven under bankruptcy. Only if one chooses poorly 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:25:25 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know when you went to college but you don't seem to realize that even the "cheap" colleges are 20k+ a year and it increases rather steeply from there. How many 18-19 year olds have that kind of income? Especially in an economy that has hit that age group the hardest? I know plenty of teens who are hard workers but when you are only making $8 an hour it's going to be tough without loans. It was doable when college was 10k a year, but the number of high school grads who can pay 20-30k a year without any debt or outside help is laughably low. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless you are implying that we are paying educators and administrators more than the value they provide. Not my point at all. My father worked his way through college at the local power company. Came out debt free. You think I was able to do that lol. I wasn't. The cost of education has gone up in orders of magnitude faster than inflation. I don't have a problem with educators being paid, I have a problem with $30k + a year tuition, it's absurd I don't know when you went to college but you don't seem to realize that even the "cheap" colleges are 20k+ a year and it increases rather steeply from there. How many 18-19 year olds have that kind of income? Especially in an economy that has hit that age group the hardest? I know plenty of teens who are hard workers but when you are only making $8 an hour it's going to be tough without loans. It was doable when college was 10k a year, but the number of high school grads who can pay 20-30k a year without any debt or outside help is laughably low. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Two years ago at the age of 33 I completed my third college degree with 0 debt, it's doable. Going to some prestige college and living on campus makes it not doable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:26:54 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Only if one chooses poorly Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Federally guaranteed student loans created the student debt bubble. Take away the loans and enrollment will decline. Given time, tuition will decline too as colleges/universities shrink. I've already seen colleges merge departments and reduce staff as cost saving measures. BTW, college is no longer the key to success. It only guarantees indentured servitude since student loans are not forgiven under bankruptcy. Only if one chooses poorly There are a few professions that will pay. Paramedics (EMTs),nursing, medical doctors come to mind. Forget architecture since no one will be building anything, computer science (anything that can be outsourced will be outsourced), law (how many lawyers are unemployed right now; many law firms were breaking up in the '90s) or management (what's there to manage?). Some professions are dead end including political science, history, english, womens or other minority studies, dance, art, photography and even journalism (still need propagandist, but you have to compete against the freelancers) and if you get paid per piece, you starve. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:33:18 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are a few professions that will pay. Paramedics (EMTs),nursing, medical doctors come to mind. Forget architecture since no one will be building anything, computer science (anything that can be outsourced will be outsourced), law (how many lawyers are unemployed right now; many law firms were breaking up in the '90s) or management (what's there to manage?). Some professions are dead end including political science, history, english, womens or other minority studies, dance, art, photography and even journalism (still need propagandist, but you have to compete against the freelancers) and if you get paid per piece, you starve. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Federally guaranteed student loans created the student debt bubble. Take away the loans and enrollment will decline. Given time, tuition will decline too as colleges/universities shrink. I've already seen colleges merge departments and reduce staff as cost saving measures. BTW, college is no longer the key to success. It only guarantees indentured servitude since student loans are not forgiven under bankruptcy. Only if one chooses poorly There are a few professions that will pay. Paramedics (EMTs),nursing, medical doctors come to mind. Forget architecture since no one will be building anything, computer science (anything that can be outsourced will be outsourced), law (how many lawyers are unemployed right now; many law firms were breaking up in the '90s) or management (what's there to manage?). Some professions are dead end including political science, history, english, womens or other minority studies, dance, art, photography and even journalism (still need propagandist, but you have to compete against the freelancers) and if you get paid per piece, you starve. Don't believe everything you read, I have two STEM degrees and a non STEM degree and the non STEM degree took me into a management position making more than my STEM degrees. I also teach college on the side and I can tell you that current research and statistics show that college is still worth it and on AVERAGE a degree holder will still earn more in a lifetime than a non degree holder. ETA - http://lmgtfy.com/?q=college+is+still+worth+it |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 3:48:04 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are a few professions that will pay. Paramedics (EMTs),nursing, medical doctors come to mind. Forget architecture since no one will be building anything, computer science (anything that can be outsourced will be outsourced), law (how many lawyers are unemployed right now; many law firms were breaking up in the '90s) or management (what's there to manage?). Some professions are dead end including political science, history, english, womens or other minority studies, dance, art, photography and even journalism (still need propagandist, but you have to compete against the freelancers) and if you get paid per piece, you starve. That's not even close to true. Although, ironically, that's one field that doesn't really require the degree in the first place. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
