4 ms·

I absolutely agree with the article stating that vast amounts of students borrowed on the "premise ... that virtually every degree — regardless of the school or

I absolutely agree with the article stating that vast amounts of students borrowed on the "premise ... that virtually every degree — regardless of the school or the major — could more than pay for itself because college graduates would command premium incomes". That's driven home in the previous paragraph: "The treatment led him to study Chinese medicine after graduation and become a licensed acupuncturist himself in 2004. He had already racked up $45,000 in college debt; acupuncture school required more." When I went to college (2001-2005) the thought process was "borrow as much as you can, you'll get a good job straight out of college and no one can repo your college degree". I had the head of the financial aid department tell me that borrowing the max every year was fine and dandy and I should keep doing it because my degree wasn't like a car that could be repossessed. So I graduated $38K in debt and spent maybe half of that on actual school with the rest going towards stupid shit that 20 year olds spend too much money on.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mfoy_ 11y ago
Isn't there an inherent economic fallacy in the idea that "virtually every degree - regardless of the school or the major - could more than pay for itself because college graduates would command premium incomes"? If everyone has a bachelor's degree, how is everyone going to command a premium income?
- sliverstorm 11y ago
  It's an arms race. The ones early out the gate really do reap huge benefit but the system eventually equalizes.
- at-fates-hands 11y ago
  >> If everyone has a bachelor's degree, how is everyone going to command a premium income? Then it becomes a starting point, not an end point. Most businesses, when faced with a deluge of BA's, will start to look for people with master degrees. Same thing if they have a highly sought after position and get a deluge of people with masters, then they look for PhD candidates. This becomes an issue when you have a BA in a field where a majority of people have master degrees. I had several roommates who were engineering and CS graduates. At the time, the economy was shit (early 2000's) and they went back for their masters. Most said it was because when the economy finally bounced back, they would have a leg up on the people they were competing with. The only problem they found was as the economy recovered, they had more opportunities with a masters degree, but many were hired at the salary level of an entry level engineer.
- bradleyjg 11y ago
  Everyone doesn't have a bachelor's degree. About 1/3 of 25-29 year olds have one. It is true that the advice you cite couldn't apply to all conceivable scenarios, but if given in a specific time and place it could very well be correct. As I see it the problem is that it is actually correct at the present time. And despite the vast bulk of private schools claiming to be charitable organizations they act like rapacious capitalists. That being the case we can look at the equilibrium for firms in their positions, which is to capture virtually all of the surplus. That is exactly what they are in the process of doing. There's probably several different governmental solutions possible, and by all means if you are interested in this issue you should pursue them. But if you want to do something on a personal level, consider forgoing the use of a degree as a proxy in hiring. Just look for whatever ultimate skills and attributes you are interested in directly. This will have a cost to you, the signal is not totally empty, but if adopted on a widespread basis it will have the salutary effect of making colleges live and die on their direct contribution rather than resting on their credentialist laurels.
- rconti 11y ago
  That's exactly the problem. An undergrad degree is the new "minimum education".
  - eimai134 11y ago
    The the more people that go to college, the less rigorous the material is.
- eimai134 11y ago
  Very true - especially when some of the people graduating with bachelor's degrees are practically illiterate (I know, they have worked for me). Soon it will require a master's degree to demand a middle-class salary - it's about at that point now (outside of tech at least).
matwood 11y ago
> "premise ... that virtually every degree — regardless of the school or the major — could more than pay for itself because college graduates would command premium incomes" I'm curious when this started. I graduated from undergrad in Dec. '99. At no point was I told the above. My parents had always pushed for MD/lawyer/engineer with business as a fallback. Keep in mind they were none of those things, and as a family we understood hardship. Maybe that is part of the equation? When I originally started pre-med the potential salary at the time certainly drove my choice. I found programming as a side elective and switched majors the next semester. Even though I love technology and programming if the salaries didn't match up it would have remained a hobby and not something I majored in.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
ZanyProgrammer 11y ago
It does make sense, from the perspective of the "Old Economy Steve" meme. The world really was different for Baby Boomers, and there's more than a grain of truth that a BA in any subject would be your (upper) middle class meal ticket. Of course that was due to the post war economic boom and a society in which inequality wasn't so sharp as it is today.
- saint_fiasco 11y ago
  Not only was inequality less sharp, the inequality was also in favor of people with college degrees.
- tsotha 11y ago
  >The world really was different for Baby Boomers, and there's more than a grain of truth that a BA in any subject would be your (upper) middle class meal ticket. I'm not sure I buy that. In the mid '80s my dad's secretary had a graduate degree in marine biology, and the attitude was "Yes, she has a graduate degree and she's working as a secretary. But what do you expect? Marine Biology." The past wasn't as comfortable as people make it out to be.
  - CapitalistCartr 11y ago
    Yeah, they have the time period off. It wasn't so much us Baby Boomers as the prior gen, after the War, that experienced that in 46-72 time period. When too many of us Boomers tried to follow their lead, it didn't work out so well. The prosperous era of 82-07 was far less egalitarian than 46-72.
ryanackley 11y ago
Completely different experience from me. I went to a public university, maybe that's why? Although, my friends who went to private schools seemed to be aware of the limits of the salary of their chosen salary and borrowed accordingly. Note that the stafford loan pamphlet had warnings to this effect and still does[1]. Is it too harsh to say that this sounds a lot like people not taking responsibility for their own financial mistake? [1] https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/federal-loan-programs.pdf https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/federal-loa...
- jacobolus 11y ago
  You can “say that this sounds like people not taking responsibility” all you want, but that doesn’t make the problem go away. When there’s a society-wide systemic “failure to take responsibility”, it becomes everyone’s problem, and trying to blame individuals accomplishes nothing except to make whoever is doing the blaming feel smug.
- ryuker16 11y ago
  Ehh, popular USA advice is to follow your passion. Mind you, everybody min maxing the money majors ends up ironically creating the same scenario . Practical money making majors are the top choice in poor countries which in turn lowers pay rates. More engineers =/= more engineering jobs.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

mfoy_ 11y ago

Isn't there an inherent economic fallacy in the idea that "virtually every degree - regardless of the school or the major - could more than pay for itself because college graduates would command premium incomes"? If everyone has a bachelor's degree, how is everyone going to command a premium income?

sliverstorm 11y ago
It's an arms race. The ones early out the gate really do reap huge benefit but the system eventually equalizes.
at-fates-hands 11y ago
>> If everyone has a bachelor's degree, how is everyone going to command a premium income? Then it becomes a starting point, not an end point. Most businesses, when faced with a deluge of BA's, will start to look for people with master degrees. Same thing if they have a highly sought after position and get a deluge of people with masters, then they look for PhD candidates. This becomes an issue when you have a BA in a field where a majority of people have master degrees. I had several roommates who were engineering and CS graduates. At the time, the economy was shit (early 2000's) and they went back for their masters. Most said it was because when the economy finally bounced back, they would have a leg up on the people they were competing with. The only problem they found was as the economy recovered, they had more opportunities with a masters degree, but many were hired at the salary level of an entry level engineer.
bradleyjg 11y ago
Everyone doesn't have a bachelor's degree. About 1/3 of 25-29 year olds have one. It is true that the advice you cite couldn't apply to all conceivable scenarios, but if given in a specific time and place it could very well be correct. As I see it the problem is that it is actually correct at the present time. And despite the vast bulk of private schools claiming to be charitable organizations they act like rapacious capitalists. That being the case we can look at the equilibrium for firms in their positions, which is to capture virtually all of the surplus. That is exactly what they are in the process of doing. There's probably several different governmental solutions possible, and by all means if you are interested in this issue you should pursue them. But if you want to do something on a personal level, consider forgoing the use of a degree as a proxy in hiring. Just look for whatever ultimate skills and attributes you are interested in directly. This will have a cost to you, the signal is not totally empty, but if adopted on a widespread basis it will have the salutary effect of making colleges live and die on their direct contribution rather than resting on their credentialist laurels.
rconti 11y ago
That's exactly the problem. An undergrad degree is the new "minimum education".
- eimai134 11y ago
  The the more people that go to college, the less rigorous the material is.
eimai134 11y ago
Very true - especially when some of the people graduating with bachelor's degrees are practically illiterate (I know, they have worked for me). Soon it will require a master's degree to demand a middle-class salary - it's about at that point now (outside of tech at least).

matwood 11y ago

> "premise ... that virtually every degree — regardless of the school or the major — could more than pay for itself because college graduates would command premium incomes" I'm curious when this started. I graduated from undergrad in Dec. '99. At no point was I told the above. My parents had always pushed for MD/lawyer/engineer with business as a fallback. Keep in mind they were none of those things, and as a family we understood hardship. Maybe that is part of the equation? When I originally started pre-med the potential salary at the time certainly drove my choice. I found programming as a side elective and switched majors the next semester. Even though I love technology and programming if the salaries didn't match up it would have remained a hobby and not something I majored in.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

ZanyProgrammer 11y ago

It does make sense, from the perspective of the "Old Economy Steve" meme. The world really was different for Baby Boomers, and there's more than a grain of truth that a BA in any subject would be your (upper) middle class meal ticket. Of course that was due to the post war economic boom and a society in which inequality wasn't so sharp as it is today.

saint_fiasco 11y ago
Not only was inequality less sharp, the inequality was also in favor of people with college degrees.
tsotha 11y ago
>The world really was different for Baby Boomers, and there's more than a grain of truth that a BA in any subject would be your (upper) middle class meal ticket. I'm not sure I buy that. In the mid '80s my dad's secretary had a graduate degree in marine biology, and the attitude was "Yes, she has a graduate degree and she's working as a secretary. But what do you expect? Marine Biology." The past wasn't as comfortable as people make it out to be.
- CapitalistCartr 11y ago
  Yeah, they have the time period off. It wasn't so much us Baby Boomers as the prior gen, after the War, that experienced that in 46-72 time period. When too many of us Boomers tried to follow their lead, it didn't work out so well. The prosperous era of 82-07 was far less egalitarian than 46-72.

ryanackley 11y ago

Completely different experience from me. I went to a public university, maybe that's why? Although, my friends who went to private schools seemed to be aware of the limits of the salary of their chosen salary and borrowed accordingly. Note that the stafford loan pamphlet had warnings to this effect and still does[1]. Is it too harsh to say that this sounds a lot like people not taking responsibility for their own financial mistake? [1] https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/federal-loan-programs.pdf https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/federal-loa...

jacobolus 11y ago
You can “say that this sounds like people not taking responsibility” all you want, but that doesn’t make the problem go away. When there’s a society-wide systemic “failure to take responsibility”, it becomes everyone’s problem, and trying to blame individuals accomplishes nothing except to make whoever is doing the blaming feel smug.
ryuker16 11y ago
Ehh, popular USA advice is to follow your passion. Mind you, everybody min maxing the money majors ends up ironically creating the same scenario . Practical money making majors are the top choice in poor countries which in turn lowers pay rates. More engineers =/= more engineering jobs.