5 ms·

I would argue that the problem isn't "if the poor are screwed, bad. If the rich are screwed, ok." I think the problem is eqch individual is pushed to go to col

I would argue that the problem isn't "if the poor are screwed, bad. If the rich are screwed, ok." I think the problem is eqch individual is pushed to go to college to find a good job which raises demand of college, which raises price. But those good jobs are barely out there for the graduates. And the college institutions didnt guide people down paths of success, instead gave enough freedom to find their own path to failure. Now, you have a lot of intelligent hardworking (college is not easy) people who are in debt with a very abysmal perspective on their future. Their debt makes them worse off than working poor because any low income job would simply put them in the black. And the gov has their habds tied because america is a great believer in the free market yet a huge group of hardworking young people are effectively worthless and the coming generations are likely to fall in the same trap.

tptacek 10y ago
It's really hard to work through the framing you've created here, where it's supposed that going to college is a requirement to find a good job, the rich are "screwed" by college debt, and the poor are... what? Screwed from multiple directions simultaneously? Further: if college is a necessity for a good job, and that's why students are going to college, and they're leaving college with a mountain of debt and no means to pay it off, then college is not achieving the promise of securing better jobs, and the answer isn't to plow even more money into the system but instead to stop sending kids to expensive colleges that have no positive impact on their financial futures. It would be nice if college in the US was free. If one could wave a magic wand and reach that outcome, one certainly would. But since we don't have magic wands, we have to prioritize, and we're generally not keen to prioritize the financial well-being of the wealthy before that of the less well-off. In matters other than finance, sure, we don't discriminate that way; we don't, for instance, send the rich off to wars first (we do rather the opposite).
- formula1 10y ago
  Disclaimer : I am a self educated programmer with $0 in debt. You say this with 20/20 hindsight and a unique perspective on supply and demand. You say this with what sounds anger and resentment towards successful people. I hope you view success and upperclass as a goal, or areat least a believer in independence and hardwork The mass majority of americans are sheep that are expecting the gov and society to guide them towards a better future. These individuals worked hard for 4, sometimes more, years. What these people are lacking is an understabding of tge employment economy abd supply/demand. Since they dont have mbas its quite understandable to be this naive. So now we have thousands of intelligent hardworking people who were led to the cloffside to jump. Arguably that is an example of survival of the fittest. Theres only room for cockroaches doing the dirty jobs and allstars doing the big ones. But considering our future depends on the survival and success on understanding the universe, it is in our best interest to ensure these hardworking individuals can be rewarded somehow and that future sheep understand how the world works so that their cliff is one of choice not of ignorance or force. So your telling me - tough luck, let them die Im telling you - these sheep were simply going down the path they were told - they were ambitious, smart and hardworking enough to survive 4 years and graduate - the economy only selects the best and the rest are left to compete in the same income bracket as the lazy, stupid, young, immigrant, unskilled etc. Is it on the best interest of the united states as a nation to punish ambition? How do we guide people from here?
  - tptacek 10y ago
    I'm a self-educated (1 semester at UIC and nothing else) programmer with $0 in debt. I just sold a company a few years back. I do not have "anger and resentment towards successful people". I do not think we should spend large amounts of money to help refinance the debts of some of the best-off people in our society. I think that's a bad use of funds. I also do not believe that college selects for "ambition". The overwhelming majority of middle class high school students go on to college. They're not all ambitious. They're just lucky. Everything else I have to say about this comment, I already said in the preceding comment.
    - formula1 10y ago
      Its clear you wish to end this discussion so I will give you the final word after this. Luck only goes so far. You need grades or sports to get in cheaply. The inflation of college prices isnt related to only the "1%" going to college. Nearly everyone goes [0], 68% in 2014. And if you dont, you either couldnt get in or smarter than the system could handle. To graduate you need to study, pass exams, write essays. College is not a free lunch only for the upper class. Its a bet the the american government guarentees because they believe a well educated workforce is a better workforce. [0] http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cpa.asp http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cpa.asp
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - tptacek 10y ago
        I'm comfortable with the words I've already had here. As with my previous comment: there's no response I have to this that I didn't already write in my first response to you.
      - rayiner 10y ago
        Only 35% of millenials have student loan debt: http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/188984/americans-big-debt-burden-growing-not-evenly-distributed.aspx http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/188984/americans-big-d.... As you concede, if you are part of the one-third that doesn't go, it's probably because you couldn't get in. But to the extent the government should be spending public funds to help people, those are the people who it should help first. Moreover, on a dollar basis, it's the people who have the most education that will likely have the most debt. E.g. interest free student loans will help those who do a couple of semesters of community college a little bit, but will really help out the doctors, lawyers, etc. who take on six-figure debt. This is part of a larger phenomenon of the American welfare system helping people who are already relatively better off. Own a million dollar house? You can deduct tens of thousands of dollars a year in mortgage interest! Have $200,000 in debt after going to a private college and getting a masters degree? The government will forgive it! Did you make a six figure income during your working years? Great, the government will not only give you the disproportionate share of social security benefits, it will pay out more than you put in!

tptacek 10y ago

It's really hard to work through the framing you've created here, where it's supposed that going to college is a requirement to find a good job, the rich are "screwed" by college debt, and the poor are... what? Screwed from multiple directions simultaneously? Further: if college is a necessity for a good job, and that's why students are going to college, and they're leaving college with a mountain of debt and no means to pay it off, then college is not achieving the promise of securing better jobs, and the answer isn't to plow even more money into the system but instead to stop sending kids to expensive colleges that have no positive impact on their financial futures. It would be nice if college in the US was free. If one could wave a magic wand and reach that outcome, one certainly would. But since we don't have magic wands, we have to prioritize, and we're generally not keen to prioritize the financial well-being of the wealthy before that of the less well-off. In matters other than finance, sure, we don't discriminate that way; we don't, for instance, send the rich off to wars first (we do rather the opposite).

formula1 10y ago
Disclaimer : I am a self educated programmer with $0 in debt. You say this with 20/20 hindsight and a unique perspective on supply and demand. You say this with what sounds anger and resentment towards successful people. I hope you view success and upperclass as a goal, or areat least a believer in independence and hardwork The mass majority of americans are sheep that are expecting the gov and society to guide them towards a better future. These individuals worked hard for 4, sometimes more, years. What these people are lacking is an understabding of tge employment economy abd supply/demand. Since they dont have mbas its quite understandable to be this naive. So now we have thousands of intelligent hardworking people who were led to the cloffside to jump. Arguably that is an example of survival of the fittest. Theres only room for cockroaches doing the dirty jobs and allstars doing the big ones. But considering our future depends on the survival and success on understanding the universe, it is in our best interest to ensure these hardworking individuals can be rewarded somehow and that future sheep understand how the world works so that their cliff is one of choice not of ignorance or force. So your telling me - tough luck, let them die Im telling you - these sheep were simply going down the path they were told - they were ambitious, smart and hardworking enough to survive 4 years and graduate - the economy only selects the best and the rest are left to compete in the same income bracket as the lazy, stupid, young, immigrant, unskilled etc. Is it on the best interest of the united states as a nation to punish ambition? How do we guide people from here?
- tptacek 10y ago
  I'm a self-educated (1 semester at UIC and nothing else) programmer with $0 in debt. I just sold a company a few years back. I do not have "anger and resentment towards successful people". I do not think we should spend large amounts of money to help refinance the debts of some of the best-off people in our society. I think that's a bad use of funds. I also do not believe that college selects for "ambition". The overwhelming majority of middle class high school students go on to college. They're not all ambitious. They're just lucky. Everything else I have to say about this comment, I already said in the preceding comment.
  - formula1 10y ago
    Its clear you wish to end this discussion so I will give you the final word after this. Luck only goes so far. You need grades or sports to get in cheaply. The inflation of college prices isnt related to only the "1%" going to college. Nearly everyone goes [0], 68% in 2014. And if you dont, you either couldnt get in or smarter than the system could handle. To graduate you need to study, pass exams, write essays. College is not a free lunch only for the upper class. Its a bet the the american government guarentees because they believe a well educated workforce is a better workforce. [0] http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cpa.asp http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cpa.asp
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - tptacek 10y ago
      I'm comfortable with the words I've already had here. As with my previous comment: there's no response I have to this that I didn't already write in my first response to you.
    - rayiner 10y ago
      Only 35% of millenials have student loan debt: http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/188984/americans-big-debt-burden-growing-not-evenly-distributed.aspx http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/188984/americans-big-d.... As you concede, if you are part of the one-third that doesn't go, it's probably because you couldn't get in. But to the extent the government should be spending public funds to help people, those are the people who it should help first. Moreover, on a dollar basis, it's the people who have the most education that will likely have the most debt. E.g. interest free student loans will help those who do a couple of semesters of community college a little bit, but will really help out the doctors, lawyers, etc. who take on six-figure debt. This is part of a larger phenomenon of the American welfare system helping people who are already relatively better off. Own a million dollar house? You can deduct tens of thousands of dollars a year in mortgage interest! Have $200,000 in debt after going to a private college and getting a masters degree? The government will forgive it! Did you make a six figure income during your working years? Great, the government will not only give you the disproportionate share of social security benefits, it will pay out more than you put in!