Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:38 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
Anything else you've said outside of those words of the actual question are spin.
You are quite correct that what is said, apart from the actual question is spin. Unfortunately, you offered the cite as proof that
Quote:
I know the GOP does not agree with this. "I love the poorly educated!" and all that.

It's ok to just own that your party does not want American citizens to be educated.
Since the actual question did not ask "do you love the poorly educated?" nor "do you want American citizens to be educated?", you are engaged, not very convincingly, in spin.
Quote:
I would ask that you not try to put words in my mouth or tell me what I would say in your imagination.
This from the poster who claimed
Quote:
you guys think college and education are bad things.
If you want to be taken seriously, argue seriously. Explain, for example, why it shows that we hate our children because we don't want to increase the deficit with Warren's hair-brained schemes. Or else just give us more "fuck the deficit because art is good" and "I'm not saying this is a good idea but if you criticize it you want children to suffer" or some other non-serious misrepresentations.

Regards,
Shodan
  #102  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:39 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
... I don't trust the government to decide what knowledge I'm allowed to access or acquire.
No one at all is suggesting that the government should get to decide "what knowledge [you are] allowed to access or acquire". They're suggesting the government should be more judicious in which knowledge acquisition they should finance.
  #103  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:45 PM
Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
If you have us, collectively pay for it, then you ARE trusting the government to decide...unless, again, we just basically go with anything anyone wants to study, here is some money. The thing is, I don't agree that every subject anyone would want to study is a benefit to society. Personally, I think mainly the engineering, science and the tech related stuff are beneficial, but that's just me. But I think there are things that most in this thread WOULD agree are bullshit that society shouldn't pay for. If an individual wants to study that shit, well, it's their dime. But who decides what is or isn't beneficial, or what the limits are? You? Me? Our politicians? It's an issue and one I think you and others are glossing over in these types of discussions.

I don't know if college should be 'free'. That seems...wrong to me. I don't know if the education would be as valued if it was a gift anyone could get anytime. By the same token, I agree with some of your point...an educated society is a better society. I think it should be, at best, a combination of our collective society chipping in some dough for part of an education (which would need to be defined wrt what we, collectively, want to pay for) and part of it should come from the person who wants that education...that way, everyone has some skin in the game, so to speak. The details are irrelevant at this point, but I don't think that the US collectively taking on $1.4 trillion is something to take lightly, and, frankly, it doesn't solve anything unless there are plans to rectify the core issues, as all it would do is give a loan now to folks who have already taken the classes...it won't do shit to folks taking future classes. Saying we'd just pay for that too means we are talking about taking on half a trillion dollars or more additional spending every year, which doesn't seem...optimal...either.
The problem is not everybody has aptitude in engineering, science and the tech related stuff. What about people that are good at stuff in different areas? We pay for the tech kids, but fuck the arts kids? Where do you think Art Teachers come from? Ideally people would be able to pursue the knowledge that they are interested in and have a talent for and then society would benefit from those talents.

When I was in college 20 years ago studying computer science, there were a lot of students in my classes that were clearly only there because everyone said you gotta go into computers, that's where all the jobs are! But they had no real interest in the subject, had no desire to figure out how to solve the problems we were assigned to us, and I doubt had much ability to code when or if they graduated.

Chasing the degrees du jour is not the best plan either, because that changes. The degree that looks the most promising can completely go the other direction before you graduate. For me the dot com bubble burst in my senior year. I ended up with a great tech career eventually, but a lot of those kids that were only there for the jobs being promised were sorry when there weren't any then and they now had a degree in something they weren't even interested in.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #104  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:46 PM
Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
No one at all is suggesting that the government should get to decide "what knowledge [you are] allowed to access or acquire". They're suggesting the government should be more judicious in which knowledge acquisition they should finance.
So they only want to decide what knowledge poor people are allowed to access or acquire?
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #105  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:47 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,291
Free college. Free healthcare.

Where will they find all that money?
  #106  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:50 PM
Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
You are quite correct that what is said, apart from the actual question is spin. Unfortunately, you offered the cite as proof that Since the actual question did not ask "do you love the poorly educated?" nor "do you want American citizens to be educated?", you are engaged, not very convincingly, in spin. This from the poster who claimed

If you want to be taken seriously, argue seriously. Explain, for example, why it shows that we hate our children because we don't want to increase the deficit with Warren's hair-brained schemes. Or else just give us more "fuck the deficit because art is good" and "I'm not saying this is a good idea but if you criticize it you want children to suffer" or some other non-serious misrepresentations.

Regards,
Shodan
I cited and quoted a poll. Your spin tried to make the results seem opposite of what the very simple question asked.

It's really rich coming from you to argue seriously. Especially when you try to twist the things I say that way.

I think I'm done with you. This is not going to be a productive use of time.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #107  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:52 PM
Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Free college. Free healthcare.

Where will they find all that money?
Why don't you ask the countries that actually offer these things where they get the money to do it.

Or just continue to wonder. Up to you.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #108  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:55 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
The problem is not everybody has aptitude in engineering, science and the tech related stuff. What about people that are good at stuff in different areas? We pay for the tech kids, but fuck the arts kids? Where do you think Art Teachers come from? Ideally people would be able to pursue the knowledge that they are interested in and have a talent for and then society would benefit from those talents.

When I was in college 20 years ago studying computer science, there were a lot of students in my classes that were clearly only there because everyone said you gotta go into computers, that's where all the jobs are! But they had no real interest in the subject, had no desire to figure out how to solve the problems we were assigned to us, and I doubt had much ability to code when or if they graduated.

Chasing the degrees du jour is not the best plan either, because that changes. The degree that looks the most promising can completely go the other direction before you graduate. For me the dot com bubble burst in my senior year. I ended up with a great tech career eventually, but a lot of those kids that were only there for the jobs being promised were sorry when there weren't any then and they now had a degree in something they weren't even interested in.
Again, if you want to take basket weaving or acupuncture or whatever, you can do that...no one is stopping you. But why should society pay for it? It's when you are putting society on the hook to pay for it that it's really an issue. Do you want to pay for someone to get a theology degree? How about a degree in climate science skepticism or anti-vax studies? Yeah, those aren't real things, but if we pay for anything for anyone then people are going to take things that many will find objectionable.

I agree that chasing degrees that are useful today might not be useful tomorrow, but that brings up another can of worms when you are asking society to be on the hook for this stuff or paying off the loans on people who have gone after degrees that aren't really applicable. What, exactly, are you proposing we pay for? Everything? Anything? No limits? If not, then I'm unsure why you are arguing as you are. If you are good with anything and everything, well...that is going to be a tough sell I think, if we are talking about 'free' education (which might not even be constrained to just degrees...why not certifications and other studies? Where do you draw the line?).

As for loan forgiveness, I'd rather see the efforts go into fixing the system first, THEN talk about loan forgiveness afterwards, when we have a clear idea what the system should be doing (and, more importantly, shouldn't be doing that it's doing today and that is causing the issues).
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #109  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:56 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
So they only want to decide what knowledge poor people are allowed to access or acquire?
Not at all. You are erroneously equating "access or acquire" with finance / subsidize / pay for.

For an analogy: I want you free to purchase whatever home you like. I don't want the government to finance whatever extravagant purchase you may settle on.
  #110  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:13 PM
Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,664
You guys do know that there are countries that do this now, right? You make it seem like this is some crazy impossible idea, yet it actually exists right now. Why don't you ask them how horrible it is for every citizen to be able to pursue the education they want.

https://www.independent.co.uk/studen...-a7457576.html
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #111  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:19 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
Why don't you ask the countries that actually offer these things where they get the money to do it.

Or just continue to wonder. Up to you.
In general, they have higher taxes and a lower military budget.
  #112  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:24 PM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
The high cost of college has nothing to do with it? 65% of the country wouldn't get a 4 year degree if it were affordable?
College costs have been steadily increasing since long before 2010. The number of high school students has been flat since 2006 and is expected (by ED's NCES) to remain so. The rate of enrollment is also expected to stay flat, although I don't know how NCES predicts this. This is despite rising tuition.

While I'm sure people forgo college due to cost, 65% of the county not getting a 4 year degree is also consistent with 65% of the country not being "college ready". We already have some large percentage of students requiring remedial classes.

You mentioned Ohio State. Ohio has about the same number of students graduating from high school per year now as it did a decade ago. And that number is expected to decrease. Yet, per OSU's Enrollment Services office (oesar.osu.edu), they had 36k undergrads enrolled at the Columbus campus in 2000. Now it's 47k. These data do not support your conclusions about their tuition practices.
  #113  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:27 PM
begbert2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludovic View Post
Of all the things that aren't blatantly ridiculous, student loan forgiveness is one of the worse things I can think of to spend our money on, ranking behind most reparations, which I am not even in favor of. It would be an additional several trillion over the long haul coming out of nowhere. Healthcare and even a UBI would be a better use of our tax money (I say healthcare because while actually a net saver, it would look like it cost money because taxes would have to go up a little bit even if the country as a whole saves money.) With regards to the HBCU, I wonder if that money wouldn't be better spend on underperforming high and primary schools, to make underprivileged children better prepared for college.

That said we could use more subsidies for state and local colleges and trade schools.
Is student loan forgiveness actually an expenditure? (Presuming that the person who is owed the money does the forgiving.) It's money that doesn't really exist anymore - the student doesn't have it; the government doesn't have it. It's just a promise that the student will eventually pay the government something later; if the government shrugs and forgets about it then that doesn't change anybody's balances now.
  #114  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:40 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Is student loan forgiveness actually an expenditure? (Presuming that the person who is owed the money does the forgiving.) It's money that doesn't really exist anymore - the student doesn't have it; the government doesn't have it. It's just a promise that the student will eventually pay the government something later; if the government shrugs and forgets about it then that doesn't change anybody's balances now.
Of course it is. Student loans are typically actually originated by private banks, subject to certain Federal guidelines and requirements. They're guaranteed by the government, so the banks aren't on the hook if the student defaults.

But if the Federal government has to pay all the banks off for all the loans they have outstanding- it's as if all the people with loans simultaneously defaulted, leaving the Federal government holding the bag. Minus the negative hits to everyone's personal credit of course.
  #115  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:42 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Is student loan forgiveness actually an expenditure? (Presuming that the person who is owed the money does the forgiving.) It's money that doesn't really exist anymore - the student doesn't have it; the government doesn't have it. It's just a promise that the student will eventually pay the government something later; if the government shrugs and forgets about it then that doesn't change anybody's balances now.
Yes. It is a Account receivable, money expected to come in. It changes the amount expected to come in, and also when it is paid, the amount received.

And of course, even Student Loan forgiveness was a thing, why shoudl anyone even try to pay off their student loans? Why not just enroll , take out $50000 in loans, drop out, spend the $ and have the loan forgiven?

It's really a not well thought out idea.

However, what is driving the current student loan problem is two things:
1. Loans made for bogus diploma mills "colleges". The GOp doesnt want to crack down on these because by and large they are making Republicans a lot of money.

2. The fact that they changed the Chapter 7 laws to exclude student loans.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfri.../#c19d23c44f8b
Were Student Loans Ever Dischargeable In Bankruptcy?

Yes. Prior to 1976, you could discharge your student loans in bankruptcy.

Congress then changed the law: student loans were dischargeable if they had been in repayment for five years. Subsequently, that period was extended to seven years.

In 1998, Congress removed dischargeablility except if a debtor could show that paying back the student loans would create an undue hardship. In 2005, Congress extended this protection to private student loans.


So all Congress has to do is change the law back to student loans would dischargeable if they had been in repayment for five (or seven) years.

Thus borrowers who were truly insolvent can get their student loan discharged, just like any other debt.

We dont need a mass student loan forgiveness program. We just have to let the bankruptcy courts work like they are supposed to without Congress meddling in them to serve special interests. Just Repeal the bad Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. That's all they have to do.
  #116  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:43 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Is student loan forgiveness actually an expenditure? (Presuming that the person who is owed the money does the forgiving.) It's money that doesn't really exist anymore - the student doesn't have it; the government doesn't have it. It's just a promise that the student will eventually pay the government something later; if the government shrugs and forgets about it then that doesn't change anybody's balances now.
I don't know about "actually" an expenditure, but it's not uncommon for the federal government to treat foregoing future receipts as an expenditure. For example, the Joint Committee on Taxation's "Estimates Of Federal Tax Expenditures For Fiscal Years 2017 - 2021" says:

Quote:
Tax expenditures are defined under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (the “Budget Act”) as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” Thus, tax expenditures include any reductions in income tax liabilities that result from special tax provisions or regulations that provide tax benefits to particular taxpayers.
If foregoing the revenue the federal government would have received had they not allowed so many people to deduct so much of the SALT expenses for so long is properly viewed as a tax "expenditure", I have a hard time seeing how the federal government potentially foregoing all the student loan repayment and interest revenue that's supposed to be coming their way is properly viewed as anything but an "expenditure".
  #117  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:47 PM
slalexan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
Hell we have a poster in this thread who admitted to taking out tens of thousands of dollars in debt to get an out-of-state chemical engineering degree instead of opting for cheaper options. If people respond to rising prices by just accepting them and borrowing more, then there's no pressure to stem the rise.
Ouch. Thanks for that.

The reasons I went to this specific college was that they gave me what I felt were the best options for college. I had family there and would not have to pay for housing. I would have support there even though I was away from my immediate family. The colleges "close" to my family weren't close enough to live with them without a car of my own and I wouldn't have been able to major in Chemical Engineering. Even though I was out-of-state, the admissions assured me that I could get in-state tuition (saving many tens of thousands) if I did a few things.

I understand what you are saying about the market and the fact that there isn't any pressure to stem the rise in cost. However, I dislike the implication that I was stupid in "just" accepting their higher costs. Once you start college, you are very much incentivized to finish, lest you be left with nothing.
  #118  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:48 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
Of course it is. Student loans are typically actually originated by private banks, subject to certain Federal guidelines and requirements. They're guaranteed by the government, so the banks aren't on the hook if the student defaults.

But if the Federal government has to pay all the banks off for all the loans they have outstanding- it's as if all the people with loans simultaneously defaulted, leaving the Federal government holding the bag. Minus the negative hits to everyone's personal credit of course.
That's the way it used to work. Since ObamaCare, the federal government is loaning the money themselves. Banks aren't involved in the process really at all anymore (which came as a bit of a surprise to Maxine Waters too, I think, so don't feel bad)
  #119  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:52 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
That's the way it used to work. Since ObamaCare, the federal government is loaning the money themselves. Banks aren't involved in the process really at all anymore (which came as a bit of a surprise to Maxine Waters too, I think, so don't feel bad)

Private student loans still exist.


https://www.discover.com/student-loans/private.html
  #120  
Old 04-23-2019, 03:53 PM
UCBearcats is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 689
How about helping the job market and increased pay for those who graduate? The average middle class person has virtually stagnant pay over the last several decades. The 1% is getting all of the wealth created during that time. If wages increased, then repayment would not be an issue.

Last edited by UCBearcats; 04-23-2019 at 03:54 PM. Reason: Additional words
  #121  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:03 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Private student loans still exist.


https://www.discover.com/student-loans/private.html
You're right, but I don't think those private student loans are "guaranteed by the government" and actually are dischargeable in bankruptcy, which is why they are credit-based and oftentimes require a co-signer. The FFEL Program that bump was talking about ended in 2010:

Quote:
The Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program was a system of private student loans which were subsidized and guaranteed by the United States federal government. The program issued loans from 1965 until it was ended in 2010. Similar loans are now provided under the Federal Direct Student Loan Program, which are federal loans issued directly by the United States Department of Education.

The FFEL was initiated by the Higher Education Act of 1965 and was funded through a public/private partnership administered at the state and local level. In 2007-08, FFEL served 6.5 million students and parents, lending a total of $54.7 billion in new loans (or 80% of all new federal student loans). Since 1965, 60 million Americans have used FFEL loans to pay for education expenses. Following the passage of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 on January 5, 2010 the program was terminated, and no subsequent loans were permitted to be made under the program after June 30, 2010.
  #122  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:04 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by UCBearcats View Post
How about helping the job market and increased pay for those who graduate? The average middle class person has virtually stagnant pay over the last several decades. The 1% is getting all of the wealth created during that time. If wages increased, then repayment would not be an issue.
The root cause is guaranteed money. It’s a lot like the housing bubble. Uncreditworthy people getting too much money for a particular asset class leads to inflation in that asset class. This cheap and easy money is a bad economic idea but it was made reality because of the politics of pandering.
  #123  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:14 PM
UCBearcats is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
The root cause is guaranteed money. It’s a lot like the housing bubble. Uncreditworthy people getting too much money for a particular asset class leads to inflation in that asset class. This cheap and easy money is a bad economic idea but it was made reality because of the politics of pandering.
So it is ok for billionaires to become multimillionaires without increasing the wages of those who do the work?
  #124  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:21 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by UCBearcats View Post
So it is ok for billionaires to become multimillionaires without increasing the wages of those who do the work?
Do we live in a world where labor is global? Yes we do. Do we live in a world where there is a black market for domestic labor be it migrant or otherwise? Yes we do. Do we live in a world where capital can go to China in a blink of an eye? Yes we do. Good luck with living wage by fiat.

And billionaire to multi millionaire is a downgrade.
  #125  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:22 PM
slalexan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You're right, but I don't think those private student loans are "guaranteed by the government" and actually are dischargeable in bankruptcy, which is why they are credit-based and oftentimes require a co-signer.
Private student loans are just as difficult to discharge via bankruptcy as federal student loans. Federal student loans tend to have protections like a fixed interest rate and repayment options for when repayment is really difficult. Private student loans do not have those protections but are still covered by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005.

I find my federal loans have been really easy to keep up with. I will pay them all off soon and on schedule. Private loans are where a lot of the bad stuff people associate with student loans came from.

That said, I don't think I can entirely support a proposal to forgive student loan debt. I carry a lot of it and it really has made of a lot of challenges. However, I don't think it is a high enough priority at the government level. I think our attention should be directed toward leveling the playing field for students in underfunded primary and secondary schools. Or like, fixing our carbon emissions. Things like that.

(I have dreamt many a time of a catastrophic fire at Sallie Mae's headquarters ruining all of their files so that they forget I owe them money. But, alas, 'tis but a dream.)
  #126  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:24 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
College costs have been steadily increasing since long before 2010. The number of high school students has been flat since 2006 and is expected (by ED's NCES) to remain so. The rate of enrollment is also expected to stay flat, although I don't know how NCES predicts this. This is despite rising tuition.

While I'm sure people forgo college due to cost, 65% of the county not getting a 4 year degree is also consistent with 65% of the country not being "college ready". We already have some large percentage of students requiring remedial classes.

You mentioned Ohio State. Ohio has about the same number of students graduating from high school per year now as it did a decade ago. And that number is expected to decrease. Yet, per OSU's Enrollment Services office (oesar.osu.edu), they had 36k undergrads enrolled at the Columbus campus in 2000. Now it's 47k. These data do not support your conclusions about their tuition practices.
Per this cite, undergraduate admissions have risen from 5,861 in 1997 (close to when I started there) to a whopping 7,851 in 2018. During that same period, the number of international students has nearly doubled -- they don't have a breakout for that by year but based on an anecdotal look around campus and how the population differs from when I was there, it wouldn't surprise me if half of that 2000 student increase was padding their coffers with wealthy international students who are required to pay full price.

According to this, tuition in that same period has more than doubled. With 125,000 high schoolers graduating in the state every year, the largest university in the country could only find an additional 1% of them who were college ready?

It occurs to me after typing all of that out that we don't disagree -- you said enrollments have remained flat since 2010, and I accept that. Presumably we both agree that tuitions have increased dramatically. We both agree that colleges have students over a barrel and can apparently charge what they want.

I think that's because there are lots of people who they're turning away, to send to for-profit degree mills, or community colleges. The remainder are willing to pay their exorbitant fees. I think if the supply of "big state school" quality 4 year colleges were increased, there would be a lot of empty seats unless they dropped prices. I'm not sure how we find data to prove this either way, though.
  #127  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:26 PM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by UCBearcats View Post
The average middle class person has virtually stagnant pay over the last several decades.
This isn't true.
  #128  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:26 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by UCBearcats View Post
So it is ok for billionaires to become multimillionaires without increasing the wages of those who do the work?
Depends. What is causing the increase in productivity and profitability? Is it the workers themselves or is it the investment and technology? In the modern world, straight manufacturing type low skilled labor is fairly cheap and with automation it's becoming less relevant. Knowledge and specialized skills are the things that are valued. So, you'd have to look at who's wages are flat verse who's are increasing, and why that is...and it's generally more complicated than a mustache twirling billionaire going muhahahahhaha!!! while lighting his fine Cuban cigars on the backs of the peasantry. But the short answer is, depending on what labor we are talking about, having a static wage might be the best case...the alternative being having that job done by a robot or expert system, or be outsources or offshored to a labor market that's a lot cheaper.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #129  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:30 PM
begbert2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,393
In any case there's not a lot the government can do about the rich getting richer short of taxation (or seizing control of the means of production, I suppose), and taxation at least is off the table because if we taxed the rich more our country would maybe fail to implode.
  #130  
Old 04-23-2019, 04:32 PM
UCBearcats is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Do we live in a world where labor is global? Yes we do. Do we live in a world where there is a black market for domestic labor be it migrant or otherwise? Yes we do. Do we live in a world where capital can go to China in a blink of an eye? Yes we do. Good luck with living wage by fiat.

And billionaire to multi millionaire is a downgrade.
My mistake, I meant multi billionaires.
  #131  
Old 04-23-2019, 05:05 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
The problem is not everybody has aptitude in engineering, science and the tech related stuff. What about people that are good at stuff in different areas? We pay for the tech kids, but fuck the arts kids? Where do you think Art Teachers come from? Ideally people would be able to pursue the knowledge that they are interested in and have a talent for and then society would benefit from those talents.
Society does not have an equal need for all talents. The government spends more money on building bridges and airplanes than it does on filmmaking or murals, so it's not unreasonable that it would also promote the education of engineers over artists.

We are not so far up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs that the government should be funding people's self-fulfillment.

Does that mean that the government should not fund art at all? No, probably not. But there's a reason that the budget for the National Endowment for the Arts is dwarfed by more practical concerns, and it's not because we don't like the arts kids.

Also, the idea that we need to fund art students so that we'll have someone to teach art is pretty circular. Like, I get what you're saying, but there are better arguments out there.
  #132  
Old 04-23-2019, 06:22 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
This isn't true.
I think UCBearcats is getting support from what Pew research found recently:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...d-for-decades/
Quote:
For most U.S. workers, real wages have barely budged in decades
Quote:
After adjusting for inflation, however, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power it did in 1978, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms average hourly earnings peaked more than 45 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 had the same purchasing power that $23.68 would today.

A similar measure – the “usual weekly earnings” of employed, full-time wage and salary workers – tells much the same story, albeit over a shorter time period. In seasonally adjusted current dollars, median usual weekly earnings rose from $232 in the first quarter of 1979 (when the data series began) to $879 in the second quarter of this year, which might sound like a lot. But in real, inflation-adjusted terms, the median has barely budged over that period: That $232 in 1979 had the same purchasing power as $840 in today’s dollars.
  #133  
Old 04-23-2019, 06:51 PM
slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Again, if you want to take basket weaving or acupuncture or whatever, you can do that...no one is stopping you. But why should society pay for it? It's when you are putting society on the hook to pay for it that it's really an issue. Do you want to pay for someone to get a theology degree? How about a degree in climate science skepticism or anti-vax studies? Yeah, those aren't real things, but if we pay for anything for anyone then people are going to take things that many will find objectionable.

I agree that chasing degrees that are useful today might not be useful tomorrow, but that brings up another can of worms when you are asking society to be on the hook for this stuff or paying off the loans on people who have gone after degrees that aren't really applicable. What, exactly, are you proposing we pay for? Everything? Anything? No limits? If not, then I'm unsure why you are arguing as you are. If you are good with anything and everything, well...that is going to be a tough sell I think, if we are talking about 'free' education (which might not even be constrained to just degrees...why not certifications and other studies? Where do you draw the line?).
If we set up a system where the federal government will pay for degrees in X, Y, and Z, but not P or Q, then isn't that basically the federal government picking winners and losers? The students with aptitude in X/Y/Z benefit, and so do the programs that teach X/Y/Z, the professors who work in those programs, and the whole economy around X/Y/Z, to the detriment of the economy surrounding P/Q. How is that any different than the feds creating policies to favor coal over natural gas, or electric cars over gas-powered, or any number of other economic decisions favoring one side versus another?

Is the government's track record really that good that we trust them to pick the winners accurately?

In modern America, most people will change careers several times; the days of going to work at one company at age 18 or 22 and working there continuously at the same job until retirement are long gone. Taking college courses solely as "job training" ignores this fact. A GOOD college education (not that they are all good) teaches you how to think, how to weigh evidence, how to summarize an argument, and how to write your conclusions. For example, mass media and communications regularly make the list of low-pay, high-unemployment majors, but the ability to write well and to communicate messages are sought-after skills, and the right set of internships and leads can result in a very good job. You can learn those skills in any number of different majors, and the reading/writing/summarizing/distilling skills you learned getting a philosophy degree will be valuable long after the computer science world has moved on from whatever language you learned in those classes. (In fact, comp sci is an excellent example of a changing world: the routine coding is increasingly done in India and China, so the skills most sought in the American job market are things such as business analysis and project management, which involve a lot more "soft skills.")
  #134  
Old 04-23-2019, 07:06 PM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Per this cite, undergraduate admissions have risen from 5,861 in 1997 (close to when I started there) to a whopping 7,851 in 2018.
Yes, whopping. That's a 34% increase.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
During that same period, the number of international students has nearly doubled -- they don't have a breakout for that by year
But they do for the years I mentioned above. Of the 11k new Columbus undergrad seats created, only about 2500 went to international students.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
but based on an anecdotal look around campus and how the population differs from when I was there
Oh please do tell us more. How do people look? Less "American"? More . . . brown, perhaps? Something about their eyes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
it wouldn't surprise me if half of that 2000 student increase was padding their coffers with wealthy international students who are required to pay full price.
Looks like it might be a quarter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
According to this, tuition in that same period has more than doubled. With 125,000 high schoolers graduating in the state every year, the largest university in the country could only find an additional 1% of them who were college ready?
This question is nonsensical. We had a poster a few years back who thought we could solve... something, by cloning famous schools like Harvard and closing the others? Was that you?
  #135  
Old 04-23-2019, 07:19 PM
monstro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,258
I'm a fan of the idea.

I know a lot of Boomers are poo-pooing the idea, but Boomers need to step back and remember that they will one day be financially dependent on Millennials. Over the the next decade, millions of Boomers will be retiring and downsizing. The few that are lucky have liquid assets, but a shitload do not. All their savings are tied up in brick and mortar. Are Millennials going to be buying up big-ass suburban homes if they are juggling student loan debt AND outrageous rental costs? So I think forgiving at least some portion of student loan debt will benefit everyone.

How many Boomers and Gen Xers are subsidizing their kids' living expenses because of student debt? Lots of 20-somethings are living at home so they can throw their whole paycheck at their debt. Maybe that's not the worse thing in the world, but I gotta wonder about the opportunity costs on both sides.

That said, I don't think a blanket forgiveness program would be fair or wise (note: I have no idea if this is what Warren is proposing). I think someone who took out $300K to pay for two Ivy League degrees should not have their slate wiped just as clean as the person who who took out a $50K loan for undergrad at a state school.
  #136  
Old 04-23-2019, 07:27 PM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
I think UCBearcats is getting support from what Pew research found recently:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...d-for-decades/
There and elsewhere. I am familiar with the topic. But my pay package comprises more than my wage, as that article explains. And the pay of the "average person", over time, is not same as the as the average pay over time. The average person, i.e., an individual, sees year-over-year increases.

And that's before we get to demographic changes. Skilled boomers retiring and being replaced by new, less experienced workers. Immigration. Etc.

And then there's the matter of whether CPI accurately reflects changes in purchasing power. A simple sniff test is thinking about living in 19__ on $X vs the CPI-adjusted amount today.
  #137  
Old 04-23-2019, 07:52 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,730
A lot of thinking... for very little counter arguments or cites.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 04-23-2019 at 07:52 PM.
  #138  
Old 04-23-2019, 08:19 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
Oh please do tell us more. How do people look? Less "American"? More . . . brown, perhaps? Something about their eyes?
Yeah, most of them are Asian. Shocker. My wife and I participated in an outreach program through some Christian ministry to host international students attending OSU. We spent a lot of time with them, got to know several pretty well, are still friends with some. All from China, which may say more about the Christian ministry's connections overseas than the actual demographics.

But crucially, they were all wealthy. The university caters to them in terms of amenities because they pay full sticker, effectively subsidizing several Ohio residents each. But some of the cost of those amenities does get passed on to students who aren't wealthy. When I was there it was all dive bars and convenience stores, now I don't know how anyone can go there unless they're loaded. Rent has gone through the roof.

Last edited by steronz; 04-23-2019 at 08:20 PM.
  #139  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:25 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
When I was there it was all dive bars and convenience stores, now I don't know how anyone can go there unless they're loaded. Rent has gone through the roof.
As it is in many if not most college towns.
  #140  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:30 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
Why don't you ask the countries that actually offer these things where they get the money to do it.

Or just continue to wonder. Up to you.
Other countries dont have the assortment of private and public colleges spread all over the states like we do. Also colleges in other countries are not funded the same way as different ones here. For example some states subsidize colleges more heavily, some colleges have massive endowments, some like our local community college, have local taxpayer money.

Also in Europe money doesnt go to college football teams.
  #141  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:47 PM
Chisquirrel is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,447
Well, it's good to see conservatives care about government spending and national debt again. I was getting nervous, seeing as how they seemed to enjoy skyrocketing the deficit the last couple years.
  #142  
Old 04-23-2019, 11:15 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
The reason this is bad idea is not just that it is a waste of money and a subsidy to the upper middle class, but that it fundamentally misunderstands what college is.

For about 5-10% of students college is about education and the acquiring of knowledge that will help them be more productive. For the rest of the students it is about certification of the fact that you are smart and conscientiousness and thus will be a better worker. The more people get a certification then the weaker the signal the certification sends. Before WW2 only a quarter of the population graduated high school so that was a good signal that you were smart and motivated. Now 80-90% of the population graduates high school so all it signals is that you are not the lowest in intelligence and motivation. Rates of college graduation are about what rates of high school graduation were and rates of advanced degrees are about what college graduation were.

From an individual perspective it is worth it to be certified and graduate college because it sets you apart from other job seekers. From a societal standpoint all the money spent to certify who the top job seekers are is a waste. Senator Warren's loan scheme would make everything worse, it would increase the cost of college while making the signal sent by college attendance. It would encourage people to spend less time in productive work and more time trying to get credentialed.
The result is not increased prosperity but credential inflation, more young people wasted a decade of their lives to get credentials.
Agreed. Implicit in these government programs like student loans is the idea that because (when they were enacted) people with college degrees got the best jobs and that the reason some people didn't go to college was because they couldn't afford it, if we just give them a way to afford it, then everyone will go to college and everyone (or nearly everyone) will have good professional jobs.

The law of unintended consequences came into play and we are paying for it now. All it did was ratchet everything a step upward and inflate credentials, causing people to have crippling debt in the process.
  #143  
Old 04-24-2019, 04:06 AM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 22,641
I found this a rather good take on the plan and student loans in general today. ISTM it touches on both the positive assertions and negative comments posted in this thread thus far.

The important thing is that the cost of college today is far out of proportion to what it was not so long ago. The current situation is simply unsustainable on a societal level. Do I have any gripes about all the money I've paid off for my student loans? No, and I'm almost finished paying that off. Granted, I did not need to use student loans for all of my college education: I got MGIB, attended community college, and finally graduated from a state university. I also did take a number of courses while I was overseas both before and during military service. One could say that the majority of my education was paid for with other people's money, some of which I have spent the last fifteen years repaying. Yet, I still have no gripe if Senator Warren's plan is enacted.

I got an education, I got employment, and others deserve the same opportunity. As I said, the current system is unsustainable and, since it takes a double-miracle practically to have student loans discharged in bankruptcy, it will become even more unsustainable in the near future. This is not reparations. It's simply a move to make a college education what it purports to be.
  #144  
Old 04-24-2019, 06:10 AM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
A lot of thinking... for very little counter arguments or cites.
Anyone who needs a cite for basic-ass government data probably shouldn't be participating in the conversation. But I'll play. Which point do you disagree with? The pay vs wage point is covered in your Pew article -- real pay has increased faster than real wages. That's from your own link. Are you going to embarrass yourself by denying that individuals earn more money over time? That boomers are being replaced? Or are you going to claim that you'd rather live in 19__ on $X vs the CPI-adjusted amount today? Do tell, but maybe try "a lot of thinking" while you work it out. We've been over all these topics before, so I'm ready.
  #145  
Old 04-24-2019, 06:15 AM
monstro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,258
People keep making the moral hazard argument, but that shipped has already sailed with the bail-out of GM and big banks. I say it's now time for some "little guys" to get some help.
  #146  
Old 04-24-2019, 06:25 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
Anyone who needs a cite for basic-ass government data probably shouldn't be participating in the conversation. But I'll play. Which point do you disagree with? The pay vs wage point is covered in your Pew article -- real pay has increased faster than real wages. That's from your own link. Are you going to embarrass yourself by denying that individuals earn more money over time? That boomers are being replaced? Or are you going to claim that you'd rather live in 19__ on $X vs the CPI-adjusted amount today? Do tell, but maybe try "a lot of thinking" while you work it out. We've been over all these topics before, so I'm ready.
Ready to strawman like many others. In this case the point was purchasing power, of course that does not fit the conservative narrative so talking about an item that was already acknowledged like if that would counter it is reached for.
  #147  
Old 04-24-2019, 07:59 AM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Yeah, most of them are Asian. Shocker.
Asian doesn't mean foreign, shocker. They publish the number of Asian undergrads and the number of them who are out-of-state. Most are Ohio residents for enrollment purposes.
  #148  
Old 04-24-2019, 08:03 AM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Ready to strawman like many others. In this case the point was purchasing power, of course that does not fit the conservative narrative so talking about an item that was already acknowledged like if that would counter it is reached for.
The Trumpist narrative is one of doom and gloom and stagnation for the average Joe. My points counter that narrative. If you wish to challenge one of my points, let's hear it.
  #149  
Old 04-24-2019, 08:30 AM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,228
Re: the tuition side of the OP, I'm not necessarily opposed to increased or total tuition support, but it would have to be tied to a mechanism that controls cost and does not reduce quality. I don't think this is impossible but I'm not clever enough to come up with a plan that works in my head. I'm hoping some of you have some ideas.
  #150  
Old 04-24-2019, 08:40 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
The Trumpist narrative is one of doom and gloom and stagnation for the average Joe. My points counter that narrative. If you wish to challenge one of my points, let's hear it.
I already did challenge that, and it seems that it is peculiar to claim that Trump's narrative is of gloom when he himself talks about minorities and the poor doing better under him.

Again, not challenging your point, the point that I and the other poster made stands, per Pew, the purchasing power of most Americans has stalled. "After adjusting for inflation, however, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power it did in 1978"

Last edited by GIGObuster; 04-24-2019 at 08:41 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017