Elocism posted:

---

libtards have turned college into another significant advantage for the rich

---

Manegarm posted:

---

I'm going back to University this fall and I do not have to worry about this crap, because it's all paid for by the government.. Now this also means that if I've finished about half a year worth of courses I can apply to any EU nation and study there instead.. Or the US and I'll just have to pay the plane ticket

Now if I was poor this would be pretty damn awesome because it would mean that I could go to school either way and better myself and become middle class, instead of being stuck in a ghetto with no future but drugs and crime. Our system means that we can take a resource and not squander it and there is one less poor person that will cost our state a shitload of money.

Too bad your system is broken and only caters to those who have, and it seems to be putting Cabby in the poorhouse. I can't but smirk

---

cabbyman posted:

---

Searching for college for my daughter and it is stupid how much these places want.

I get a financial aid offer letter and they're all "WE'RE GIVING YOU $23,000 IN AID!" and I'm like "WELL ALLLLLLLLLRIGHT!" and then the letter goes on to say that after that there is a balance of $18,000 per year and how would I like to pay for that?

$41,000/year for college? Sorry guys. I don't think so.

Looks like the first two years of college will be taken at an extension close to home.

---

Szerek posted:

---

It won't be long now until healthcare and college education is only for wealthy people. We are marching, once again, towards the lords and the serfs. Guess which category many of use fall into.

---

Kjarhall posted:

---

So Cabby came thisclose to going on welfare huh?

---

cabbyman posted:

---

Kjarhall posted:

---

So Cabby came thisclose to going on welfare huh?

---

---

Manegarm posted:

---

I'm going back to University this fall and I do not have to worry about this crap, because it's all paid for by the government..

---

Bjorvald posted:

---

Manegarm posted:

---

I'm going back to University this fall and I do not have to worry about this crap, because it's all paid for by the government..

---

And who pays for the government? You?

---

Seething199 posted:

---

not a fan of the community college approach. i realize that may be the only option if finances are an issue. but the level of education is dramatically lower and you're going with a bunch of retarded stoners //.

---

Seething199 posted:

---

not a fan of the community college approach. i realize that may be the only option if finances are an issue. but the level of education is dramatically lower and you're going with a bunch of retarded stoners that will sap your desire to keep the wheels on and finish a 4 year degree.

---

Seething199 posted:

---

but the level of education is dramatically lower [at community colleges]

---

Seething199 posted:

---

but the level of education is dramatically lower and you're going with a bunch of retarded stoners

---

Fist_de_Yuma posted:

---

I went to Community college for two years.

---

Fist_de_Yuma posted:

---

Yes, government has causes prices to skyrocket. Shame.

---

-Espiritu- posted:

---

when the gubmint pays for something, the price goes up.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Seething199 posted:

---

but the level of education is dramatically lower [at community colleges]

---

I don't think this is true at all as a rule. In a lot of cases community college classes are smaller so you get more one on one time. I'm not at all sure an introductory class taught by a community college professor to 15 students is worse than an introductory class taught by an uninterested 4 year college professor to 90 students.

The big difference is social, not educational. By going the community college route you miss out on the first 2 years of the 4 year college experience.

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

-Espiritu- posted:

---

when the gubmint pays for something, the price goes up.

---

this .. But don't worry, just like housing prices. .. The bubble will pop and then it will soon be afordable again

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

-Espiritu- posted:

---

when the gubmint pays for something, the price goes up.

---

this .. But don't worry, just like housing prices. .. The bubble will pop and then it will soon be afordable again

---

You're doubling down on the stupid.

One of the major reasons that state college tuitions are increasing is because states are cutting funding to state colleges.

Then again, it isn't "states" which were funding at higher levels than now, it's taxpayers. So taxpayers are actually not funding higher education at levels they used to osomethe.

And then people are complaining about tuition going up. Because they have to have it both ways.

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

You're doubling down on the stupid.

One of the major reasons that state college tuitions are increasing is because states are cutting funding to state colleges.

Then again, it isn't "states" which were funding at higher levels than now, it's taxpayers. So taxpayers are actually not funding higher education at levels they used to osomethe.

And then people are complaining about tuition going up. Because they have to have it both ways.

---

you denial, is very painful to watch

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

[quote=-Espiritu-]when the gubmint pays for something, the price goes up.

---

this .. But don't worry, just like housing prices. .. The bubble will pop and then it will soon be afordable again

---

You're doubling down on the stupid.

One of the major reasons that state college tuitions are increasing is because states are cutting funding to state colleges.

Then again, it isn't "states" which were funding at higher levels than now, it's taxpayers. So taxpayers are actually not funding higher education at levels they used to osomethe.

And then people are complaining about tuition going up. Because they have to have it both ways.

---

Cawlin posted:

---

I was going to post about this (bold part) myself but chose not to. Since you opened that can of worms though I will chime in and say that yes, you miss out on 2 years of the "college experience" - and to be honest - I think that's a good thing nowadays. The "college experience" at $45k a year doesn't seem to be worth it, all things considered.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

I was going to post about this (bold part) myself but chose not to. Since you opened that can of worms though I will chime in and say that yes, you miss out on 2 years of the "college experience" - and to be honest - I think that's a good thing nowadays. The "college experience" at $45k a year doesn't seem to be worth it, all things considered.

---

I don't disagree. The "college experience" is a luxury you pay a huge premium for. Depending on your finances, that may not be worth it. For most middle class kids it probably isn't.

And honestly, it's always been that way. Fancy private 4 year colleges have always been about "the college experience" and not about actually learning stuff. Throughout 95% of human history university education has been something for rich kids who don't need to support themselves.

These days it is for rich kids for don't need to support themselves and anyone else willing to take out big loans.

I have a hard time seeing that as a step backwards.

The real problem is not that fancy private 4 year colleges cost an arm and a leg. The real problem is that the more afforable options - state colleges and community colleges - are getting cut out of existance by neanderthal state legislatures that can't think more than five minutes into the future.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

I was going to post about this (bold part) myself but chose not to. Since you opened that can of worms though I will chime in and say that yes, you miss out on 2 years of the "college experience" - and to be honest - I think that's a good thing nowadays. The "college experience" at $45k a year doesn't seem to be worth it, all things considered.

---

I don't disagree. The "college experience" is a luxury you pay a huge premium for. Depending on your finances, that may not be worth it. For most middle class kids it probably isn't.

And honestly, it's always been that way. Fancy private 4 year colleges have always been about "the college experience" and not about actually learning stuff. Throughout 95% of human history university education has been something for rich kids who don't need to support themselves.

These days it is for rich kids for don't need to support themselves and anyone else willing to take out big loans.

I have a hard time seeing that as a step backwards.

The real problem is not that fancy private 4 year colleges cost an arm and a leg. The real problem is that the more afforable options - state colleges and community colleges - are getting cut out of existance by neanderthal state legislatures that can't think more than five minutes into the future.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Elocism posted:

---

libtards have turned college into another significant advantage for the rich

---

yeah, it was really "libtards" that did that.

---

Koneg posted:

---

Unless you think the meteoric rise in tuition fees didn't have something to do with the government wringing its hands and crying "We must give the widdle ones college edumakashuns! Let's guarantee the loans and give lots of grants!"

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Real costs paid by middle class parents to send their kids to fancy private 4 year colleges have not changed all that much.

---

Koneg posted:

---

I guess you skipped the course in college that tells you what happens to an economic system when you suddenly inject a lot of easily obtainable cash into it?

---

Koneg posted:

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Real costs paid by middle class parents to send their kids to fancy private 4 year colleges have not changed all that much.

---

Uh, I don't really know how to respond to such silliness.

---

I guess you skipped the course in college that tells you what happens to an economic system when you suddenly inject a lot of easily obtainable cash into it?

Groucho48 posted:

---

I guess you skipped the course in college that tells you what happens to an economic system when you suddenly inject a lot of easily obtainable cash into it?

Why, many low cost options spring up to take advantage of the large supply. Isn't that how markets work?

---

Koneg posted:

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Real costs paid by middle class parents to send their kids to fancy private 4 year colleges have not changed all that much.

---

Uh, I don't really know how to respond to such silliness.

---

reesescups posted:

---

Koneg posted:

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Real costs paid by middle class parents to send their kids to fancy private 4 year colleges have not changed all that much.

---

Uh, I don't really know how to respond to such silliness.

---

You are going to have to use smaller words Yuki...

---

Koneg posted:

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Real costs paid by middle class parents to send their kids to fancy private 4 year colleges have not changed all that much.

---

Uh, I don't really know how to respond to such silliness.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Koneg posted:

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Real costs paid by middle class parents to send their kids to fancy private 4 year colleges have not changed all that much.

---

Uh, I don't really know how to respond to such silliness.

---

What part of "real costs" don't you understand?

We'll just continue using my example:

Stanford tuition in 1990: 15k Room and board: 5k. Total: 20k/year.

Stanford tuition now: 40k, room and board 12k, total: 52k.

My brother's real yearly cost with my parents making 80k/year: about 25k.

My brother would have got some financial aid in 1990, but not much. Probably not more than about 5k, and even that is probably generous. So say his real costs in 1990 would ahve been 15k.

Inflation from 1990 to 2011: about 80%.

15k x.1.8= 27k.

ZOMG!

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Koneg posted:

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Real costs paid by middle class parents to send their kids to fancy private 4 year colleges have not changed all that much.

---

Uh, I don't really know how to respond to such silliness.

---

What part of "real costs" don't you understand?

We'll just continue using my example:

Stanford tuition in 1990: 15k Room and board: 5k. Total: 20k/year.

Stanford tuition now: 40k, room and board 12k, total: 52k.

My brother's real yearly cost with my parents making 80k/year: about 25k.

My brother would have got some financial aid in 1990, but not much. Probably not more than about 5k, and even that is probably generous. So say his real costs in 1990 would ahve been 15k.

Inflation from 1990 to 2011: about 80%.

15k x.1.8= 27k.

ZOMG!

---

Cawlin posted:

---

When you don't factor in debt taken on by the student in the form of student loans, your "real cost" figures aren't really "real" now are they?

Students getting out of college now are doing so with FAR FAR greater debt relative to their earning potential than students getting out of college were 20 years ago.

Debt matters - even if it's relatively low interest debt, it still matters.

Now again, Penn State's increases are nowhere near the same as those private schools over the same ~20 years.

Penn State = $7k in 1988---~$18k in 2010
My school = $11k in 1988---~$45k in 2010

---

Elocism posted:

---

i like how everyone is assuming college costs are appropriate, its just a decrease in funding that is the problem

libtard institutions couldnt possibly be raping people on the costs

---

Cawlin posted:

---

When you don't factor in debt taken on by the student in the form of student loans, your "real cost" figures aren't really "real" now are they?

---

reesescups posted:

---

Seething199 posted:

---

but the level of education is dramatically lower and you're going with a bunch of retarded stoners

---

Fist_de_Yuma posted:

---

I went to Community college for two years.

---

It's all starting to make sense...

---

Fist_de_Yuma posted:

---

reesescups posted:

---

Seething199 posted:

---

but the level of education is dramatically lower and you're going with a bunch of retarded stoners

---

Fist_de_Yuma posted:

---

I went to Community college for two years.

---

It's all starting to make sense...

---

Swing and a miss you ignorant fool. I guess you missed the part where I got a degree from NAU. GPA was 3.8. Now go troll someone else.

---

Groucho48 posted:

---

Government support for higher education has been going down for a few years.

---

Cawlin posted:

---

the logical next question is how to stop it and what to do to reverse it.

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

the logical next question is how to stop it and what to do to reverse it.

---

Abolish the Dept. of Education, all the education mandates and regulations, and Sallie Mae .. allow competing currencies so that people can use money that has good purchasing power

---

Cawlin posted:

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

the logical next question is how to stop it and what to do to reverse it.

---

Abolish the Dept. of Education, all the education mandates and regulations, and Sallie Mae .. allow competing currencies so that people can use money that has good purchasing power

---

I don't think that will stop the pressure to get a college degree as a baseline though.

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Abolish the Dept. of Education, all the education mandates and regulations, and Sallie Mae .. allow competing currencies so that people can use money that has good purchasing power

---

I don't think that will stop the pressure to get a college degree as a baseline though.

---

It would reform what a degree is while making it more affordable by forcing those colleges who existed only on the taxpayer's dime to either change and compete or close

---

Seething199 posted:

---

not a fan of the community college approach. i realize that may be the only option if finances are an issue. but the level of education is dramatically lower and you're going with a bunch of retarded stoners that will sap your desire to keep the wheels on and finish a 4 year degree.

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Groucho48 posted:

---

Government support for higher education has been going down for a few years.

---

No it hasn;t ... Sallie Mae is pretty much the only student loan market in town now

---

Cawlin posted:

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

[quote=Brother_Tempus]Abolish the Dept. of Education, all the education mandates and regulations, and Sallie Mae .. allow competing currencies so that people can use money that has good purchasing power

---

I don't think that will stop the pressure to get a college degree as a baseline though.

---

It would reform what a degree is while making it more affordable by forcing those colleges who existed only on the taxpayer's dime to either change and compete or close

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Groucho48 posted:

---

Government support for higher education has been going down for a few years.

---

No it hasn;t ... Sallie Mae is pretty much the only student loan market in town now

---

I didn't want this little gem to go unnoticed

Are you saying that Sallie Mae is a government agency?

---

The Student Loan Marketing Association was originally created in 1972 as a government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) and began privatizing its operations in 1997, a process it completed at the end of 2004 when Congress terminated its federal charter, ending its ties to the government. The company remains the country's largest originator of federally insured student loans. Through its specialized subsidiaries and divisions, Sallie Mae also provides debt management services as well as business and technical products to a range of business clients, including colleges, universities and loan guarantors.

Ashmaele posted:

---

Sallie Mae has been a private company

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

It would reform what a degree is while making it more affordable by forcing those colleges who existed only on the taxpayer's dime to either change and compete or close

---

And then, just as we see now, businesses will complain that there aren't enough "qualified applicants" for them to fill their positions and that they need to import labor (at 1/3rd the usual wage) from overseas...

---

You are now comparing apples and oranges, the thread is about education not immigration policy

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Sallie Mae has been a private company

---

As much as Fannie and Freddie were befor they failed. As soon as Sallie fails, back to the government that created it, it will go

---

Groucho48 posted:

---

We'd end up with the English system of "public" colleges, like Oxford and Cambridge, for the elite, and no name private colleges for everyone else. With all the power jobs going to the Oxford and Cambridge grads. It's already something like that, with Ivy League colleges, but, total lack of government funding would pretty much guarantee that only high income folks could send their kids to college.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Well, sort of. Smart poor people have always got charity scholarships to attend Harvard and Yale. But back in the day charity scholarships would have made up 5% of the class, with 95% of the class being rich kids.

But we wouldn't go back to that even if government loan funding dried up. The top private schools these days could afford to continue to be need-blind even without federal loans. What would probably happen is they'd raise sticker price even more, and use the money to pay for the difference. Tuition would probably go up about 10k, but the only people who would actually pay the increase would be the rich ones, with the money used to subsidize charity scholarships.

---

eodoll posted:

---

it is still the case that the expensive schools are filled with rich kids.

edit: also the only benefit to those schools is for your first job when you have no experience.. thats the only time an employer looks at what school you went to instead of what you did at your last job and how important you were at your previous job. it seems like a big waste of money to get such an expensive efucation.

---

Cawlin posted:

---

It's like an arms race, except with fkn degrees.

---

Cawlin posted:

---

This whole stupid college bubble is as related to the presence of "cheap" loans without qualification as it is related to the downward pressure on wages in an ever increasing number of markets.

---

eodoll posted:

---

for business/finance school probably really helps.

are the majority of ivy league students studying finance related curriculums?

---

theredkay1 posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

This whole stupid college bubble is as related to the presence of "cheap" loans without qualification as it is related to the downward pressure on wages in an ever increasing number of markets.

---

The term 'bubble' doesnt make much sense when referencing college costs. College degrees are still pretty valuable. I havent really seen evidence that the cost of college is way out of line with the return on investment.

College is more expensive than it was, but the charged term 'bubble' is misleading as college costs really do not resemble the housing bubble, the dot-com bubble or the tulip bubble.

Something that always seems unexplored is the supply side of the equation. Rising revenues should pull more investment into the industry. Why isnt that keeping up?

---

eodoll posted:

---

my sister is a lawyer - she didnt go to a top tier school. she works as a staff lawyer so she doesnt need to get billable hours. she gets paid in the 200k range with a company car. is perkins coie considered big law? i work with their lawyers, my sister referred to them as 'expensive'. anyway, what ive gathered about the law profession is that its like a pyramid scheme; you need to find clients and then try to become a partner and start skimming from all the clients other lawyers bring to the firm.

---

eodoll posted:

---

edit: also the only benefit to those schools is for your first job when you have no experience.. thats the only time an employer looks at what school you went to instead of what you did at your last job and how important you were at your previous job.

---

Cawlin posted:

---

theredkay1 posted:

---

The term 'bubble' doesnt make much sense when referencing college costs. College degrees are still pretty valuable. I havent really seen evidence that the cost of college is way out of line with the return on investment.

College is more expensive than it was, but the charged term 'bubble' is misleading as college costs really do not resemble the housing bubble, the dot-com bubble or the tulip bubble.

Something that always seems unexplored is the supply side of the equation. Rising revenues should pull more investment into the industry. Why isnt that keeping up?

---

We can mince around the semantics of it all day and night, but that's unimportant really. The bottom line is that the debt to prospective income ratio for college graduates is getting worse, and it's getting worse on both sides of the equation. Debt is growing on average, and the average prospective wage for recent grads is dropping... it's a double whammy.

Bottom line, yes a college degree is decreasing in REAL value in the job market - by virtue of a lot of factors, but that's just the truth of it.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

eodoll posted:

---

edit: also the only benefit to those schools is for your first job when you have no experience.. thats the only time an employer looks at what school you went to instead of what you did at your last job and how important you were at your previous job.

---

Yeah, that actually is what you said. If it isn't what you meant that's your fault, not mine.

---

theredkay1 posted:

---

Cawlin posted:

---

theredkay1 posted:

---

The term 'bubble' doesnt make much sense when referencing college costs. College degrees are still pretty valuable. I havent really seen evidence that the cost of college is way out of line with the return on investment.

College is more expensive than it was, but the charged term 'bubble' is misleading as college costs really do not resemble the housing bubble, the dot-com bubble or the tulip bubble.

Something that always seems unexplored is the supply side of the equation. Rising revenues should pull more investment into the industry. Why isnt that keeping up?

---

We can mince around the semantics of it all day and night, but that's unimportant really. The bottom line is that the debt to prospective income ratio for college graduates is getting worse, and it's getting worse on both sides of the equation. Debt is growing on average, and the average prospective wage for recent grads is dropping... it's a double whammy.

Bottom line, yes a college degree is decreasing in REAL value in the job market - by virtue of a lot of factors, but that's just the truth of it.

---

Well, words mean things. I think the term 'bubble' misrepresents the issue and we shoudl avoid it here since we can use other words that are more accurate descriptors.

The average yearly income differential in HS and college graduates was over $20,000 in 2010. Thats alot. That kind of return implies the cost of college should be much, much larger than it is today.

I think we are handling college costs wrong but its worth noting that kids are still getting a really good deal.

---

reesescups posted:

---

I think one think that Eodoll (depending on his engineering field) hasn't realized yet - is that even high level engineering jobs are being off shored to the lowest bidder. This leaves a top heavy engineering staff on shore to manage the off shoring activities. This shrinks the engineering positions available on shore, which in turn allows for and creates a 'network' of qualified 'Good Ole Boys'. But Engineering is unique in that results and schedules matter a bit more than in other fields (generally speaking).

---

Cawlin posted:

---

reesescups posted:

---

I think one think that Eodoll (depending on his engineering field) hasn't realized yet - is that even high level engineering jobs are being off shored to the lowest bidder. This leaves a top heavy engineering staff on shore to manage the off shoring activities. This shrinks the engineering positions available on shore, which in turn allows for and creates a 'network' of qualified 'Good Ole Boys'. But Engineering is unique in that results and schedules matter a bit more than in other fields (generally speaking).

---

There are a lot of unemployed white males in their 40s in the engineering disciplines that would like to argue with you about the (bolded) statement.

STEM disciplines are the next in the bread lines.

---

eodoll posted:

---

few companies put their best priducts offshore because they generally come back as a quality disaster and off schedule.

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

oh the irony is that the dedicated 99%ers are mad that their educations are not allowing them the access to be 1%ers

---