5 ms·

The problem with college is not that you have "significant debt". The problem is choosing majors and/or a career path that doesn't allow you to pay off that deb

by gist 10y ago

The problem with college is not that you have "significant debt". The problem is choosing majors and/or a career path that doesn't allow you to pay off that debt. My wife has "significant debt" from college and medical school (roughly 200k) that she will pay off over 20 to 30 years (or whatever it is). However she earns a good salary for what she does. As a result the cost of the education is similar to a cost of doing business. When I met her I had to loan her a few thousand dollars so she could make her rent (when she had just graduated and got her first job out of school). Now she does fine. Even with the loans. She choose the profession and was lucky to be able to graduate keeping in mind economic realities. Her ex husband on the other hand has debt from going to law school but was not able to land (for various reasons) a good job which allows him to pay off his debt (he is now living with his parents). Saying college is expensive (ok it is) is like saying buying a house with a 30 year mortgage is expensive. It depends on the details. Having to take out a loan to pay for something (college or a house) that you will use over a lifetime isn't really that outrageous. What is is not making the proper career choices or having some bad luck so that you can't pay back the money you have borrowed.

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
That is a great answer and illuminates the serious ups and downs with higher education. However, I have two points that prevent me from changing my views: 1: The ex husband is a great example of how someone can go into tremendous debt that cannot be discharged through bankruptcy and still come out with nothing. 2: The rapidly increasing price of higher education compounds the risk of making the wrong choice. A mistake that could tail you for decades could instead be with you to the grave.
- gist 10y ago
  Yeah but the devil is in the details. Look further and you find that the husband is the type of guy who did very well in school academically but lacks the initiative to be the person who keeps the good job after law school. To that point he got a job at a top firm but blew it. One reason was he didn't want to put in the extra hours (I think) and he wanted instead to play with his young kids. The hard working guy who wasn't just interested in being family guy (this was roughly 10 years ago btw) is probably still on a career path if not partner with that firm. See there is always a story behind all of this. My point is sure the game has gotten tougher but just because it is doesn't mean you blame the game you just outwork the other person.
  - rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
    A caring parent would have to assume that in many circumstances, their child could very well be that other person.
  - antisthenes 10y ago
    > My point is sure the game has gotten tougher but just because it is doesn't mean you blame the game you just outwork the other person. Sounds like a race to the bottom in the ever decreasing marginal productivity of labor in 21st century capitalism.
  - zardo 10y ago
    >My point is sure the game has gotten tougher but just because it is doesn't mean you blame the game you just outwork the other person. Of the system requires you be a bad parent, it is not sustainable.
shostack 10y ago
Key to this decision is also the ability to know what future demand for a given profession will be like, and have a realistic expectation of getting a job. Lawyers were misled by a lot of law schools, and their tuition skyrocketed. With automation impacting some aspects of that field, demand has dropped, and so several classes worth of students have been screwed. I'm not familiar with the medical field, but in theory the same thing could happen there. Nobody can see the future, so barring that, for many, taking on that level of extreme debt does not make sense.
- gist 10y ago
  > Lawyers were misled by a lot of law schools Generally a good idea to be skeptical of what someone selling you something is saying, right? I question whether any of these people who went to law school did much research or thinking (or if their counselors at schools did) in advance of such a major decision.
  - kamaal 10y ago
    Programming/Medicine is a little different, you get a good deal of exposure as to what the job basically is even before you start your education is. Other professions not so much. It would be hard to imagine for most people that a good deal of work in law wouldn't even happen in courts. Stuff like documentation and range of other things are hard to see while you are picking the course.
dv_dt 10y ago
So at 17 or 18, with little life experience, students are supposed to make a financed $160k ($40*4) investment which may decide their economic fate for 20-30 years? Even with the help of parents and advisors to make predictions that isn't a good policy for the general case. (For one parents and advisor’s are also often wrong). There are ways to achieve good outcomes in the current system, but that is not the same as systemically maximizing good outcomes for society at large. I think the most efficient way to do that is to go back to giving significant direct funding to public university systems so they can offer low to no tuition education options. This puts competitive pressure on private universities and would have an overall downward effect on tuitions.
- gist 10y ago
  > So at 17 or 18, with little life experience, students are supposed to make a financed Well a good start might be simply avoiding majors that you know will go nowhere, don't you think? Like music, art and certain liberal arts. Even when I went to school it was known to be hard to get a job in those fields. But yet people still choose them and tried to "follow their passion". My passion was to learn something where I could earn a living. And I am having plenty of fun doing that. Of course you can't predict the future. But you can certainly improve your chances by giving some thought to what is not a good choice and hasn't ever really been.
  - dv_dt 10y ago
    I'm sympathetic to what you're saying here. Sometimes I think the same. But ultimately I think it's premature optimization for society to directly build in economic earning value onto the cost of education. Maybe every major should show prospective students the typical earnings of that major as an indirect influence - but I don't think building that correlation into direct budgeting is a good thing to do in the long term. It would do far more good to first get tuition costs under control and then maybe use the direct funding path as a way where influence on public universities could be had. However, I think society ends up stronger if there's something of a firewall preventing politicians from putting too many specific policy requirements attached to that funding.
  - 10y ago
branchless 10y ago
See here is your problem. You think it's fine that college costs reflect the return over a working lifetime for the skills gained. That is credit creation right there. It allows the pulling forward of demand to capture labour over a lifetime for credit creators (not intermediaries) - the banks. Until we tackle money creation housing and college, two essentials - that's why they lend into them - will always reflect the total potential income over a person's working life. If we double productivity rentiers will get the same % of your labour. This means everyone will always and forever be under the thumb of usurers. By design.
- tptacek 10y ago
  Elite university tuition is essential... why?

by gist 10y ago

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago

That is a great answer and illuminates the serious ups and downs with higher education. However, I have two points that prevent me from changing my views: 1: The ex husband is a great example of how someone can go into tremendous debt that cannot be discharged through bankruptcy and still come out with nothing. 2: The rapidly increasing price of higher education compounds the risk of making the wrong choice. A mistake that could tail you for decades could instead be with you to the grave.

gist 10y ago
Yeah but the devil is in the details. Look further and you find that the husband is the type of guy who did very well in school academically but lacks the initiative to be the person who keeps the good job after law school. To that point he got a job at a top firm but blew it. One reason was he didn't want to put in the extra hours (I think) and he wanted instead to play with his young kids. The hard working guy who wasn't just interested in being family guy (this was roughly 10 years ago btw) is probably still on a career path if not partner with that firm. See there is always a story behind all of this. My point is sure the game has gotten tougher but just because it is doesn't mean you blame the game you just outwork the other person.
- rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
  A caring parent would have to assume that in many circumstances, their child could very well be that other person.
- antisthenes 10y ago
  > My point is sure the game has gotten tougher but just because it is doesn't mean you blame the game you just outwork the other person. Sounds like a race to the bottom in the ever decreasing marginal productivity of labor in 21st century capitalism.
- zardo 10y ago
  >My point is sure the game has gotten tougher but just because it is doesn't mean you blame the game you just outwork the other person. Of the system requires you be a bad parent, it is not sustainable.

shostack 10y ago

Key to this decision is also the ability to know what future demand for a given profession will be like, and have a realistic expectation of getting a job. Lawyers were misled by a lot of law schools, and their tuition skyrocketed. With automation impacting some aspects of that field, demand has dropped, and so several classes worth of students have been screwed. I'm not familiar with the medical field, but in theory the same thing could happen there. Nobody can see the future, so barring that, for many, taking on that level of extreme debt does not make sense.

gist 10y ago
> Lawyers were misled by a lot of law schools Generally a good idea to be skeptical of what someone selling you something is saying, right? I question whether any of these people who went to law school did much research or thinking (or if their counselors at schools did) in advance of such a major decision.
- kamaal 10y ago
  Programming/Medicine is a little different, you get a good deal of exposure as to what the job basically is even before you start your education is. Other professions not so much. It would be hard to imagine for most people that a good deal of work in law wouldn't even happen in courts. Stuff like documentation and range of other things are hard to see while you are picking the course.

dv_dt 10y ago

So at 17 or 18, with little life experience, students are supposed to make a financed $160k ($40*4) investment which may decide their economic fate for 20-30 years? Even with the help of parents and advisors to make predictions that isn't a good policy for the general case. (For one parents and advisor’s are also often wrong). There are ways to achieve good outcomes in the current system, but that is not the same as systemically maximizing good outcomes for society at large. I think the most efficient way to do that is to go back to giving significant direct funding to public university systems so they can offer low to no tuition education options. This puts competitive pressure on private universities and would have an overall downward effect on tuitions.

gist 10y ago
> So at 17 or 18, with little life experience, students are supposed to make a financed Well a good start might be simply avoiding majors that you know will go nowhere, don't you think? Like music, art and certain liberal arts. Even when I went to school it was known to be hard to get a job in those fields. But yet people still choose them and tried to "follow their passion". My passion was to learn something where I could earn a living. And I am having plenty of fun doing that. Of course you can't predict the future. But you can certainly improve your chances by giving some thought to what is not a good choice and hasn't ever really been.
- dv_dt 10y ago
  I'm sympathetic to what you're saying here. Sometimes I think the same. But ultimately I think it's premature optimization for society to directly build in economic earning value onto the cost of education. Maybe every major should show prospective students the typical earnings of that major as an indirect influence - but I don't think building that correlation into direct budgeting is a good thing to do in the long term. It would do far more good to first get tuition costs under control and then maybe use the direct funding path as a way where influence on public universities could be had. However, I think society ends up stronger if there's something of a firewall preventing politicians from putting too many specific policy requirements attached to that funding.
- 10y ago

branchless 10y ago

See here is your problem. You think it's fine that college costs reflect the return over a working lifetime for the skills gained. That is credit creation right there. It allows the pulling forward of demand to capture labour over a lifetime for credit creators (not intermediaries) - the banks. Until we tackle money creation housing and college, two essentials - that's why they lend into them - will always reflect the total potential income over a person's working life. If we double productivity rentiers will get the same % of your labour. This means everyone will always and forever be under the thumb of usurers. By design.

tptacek 10y ago
Elite university tuition is essential... why?