4 ms·

Some of those schools are unlike the others. It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree, makes less but still some sense for Tufts

by kough 9y ago

Some of those schools are unlike the others. It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree, makes less but still some sense for Tufts and Olin, and makes no sense at all for the rest. And the average college that Americans experience is a 2 year community college; very, very few attend schools of the caliber you're mentioning. It makes no sense to lump all these different schools together when arguing for your position on tuition prices and their effects on students and families.

alpha_squared 9y ago
> It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree No it doesn't? I think we should stop putting schools on a pedestal because of their name. I admire some of the research and work that comes out of those schools, but in the end their degrees are no better or worse than other schools' (regarding undergraduate, I can't speak for graduate). The only differences come down to network and academic history. If you're justifying that level of debt purely on those two criteria, then I understand that's the value those things mean to you -- and that's okay. Personally, that's not worth it to me. I'm not sure there's "absolute sense" here.
- whack 9y ago
  There can be an "absolute sense" from a financial perspective. For better or worse, having a degree from Harvard/Stanford/MIT can open a number of doors that may be otherwise shut. Doors which can be very financially lucrative. For example, suppose you want to work in finance/law. Most prestigious firms place a very high premium on having a degree from a top university, and pay extremely generously if you get your foot in the door. In these contexts, the $250k investment on your college will easily pay for itself within 10 years. Conversely, suppose you're trying to break into a field that's extremely hard to crack (writing?). In such situations, you'll need every edge you can get, and having a great network or an eye-catching degree in your resume can make the difference between you getting a toe-hold and you calling it quits. To be sure, it certainly is very context dependent. Getting a cheap Bachelor's degree from a public university, and a Master's degree from a brand name university, might be a good way to get the best of both worlds. In general though, anyone who's smart enough to get admission into Harvard/Stanford is likely going to make multiple millions of dollars over the course of their lifetime. Given this baseline, investing 250k for a top-notch education/network/resume certainly seems well worth it.
  - 8note 9y ago
    Isn't admittance to these schools largely oriented towards wealth/past wealth, and the preference in those "prestigious" schools just to make sure that only wealthy families get those jobs? In that case, if it's a meaningful amount of money to you, it's probably not worth the investment because those firms will still look at you poorly
    - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
      Don't all of those schools also have significant scholarship offerings?
  - Inconel 9y ago
    I'd add to your comment that from what I've heard some of the traditionally elite universities such as Harvard/Yale/Stanford have very generous financial aid for lower income students. And while I don't have the exact numbers handy, if I remember correctly their definition of lower income extended into the $100k+ household income range. Again, this is anecdotal, but I have a good friend who was accepted to both Berkeley and Stanford, among a host of other schools but those two were his top choices, as an undergrad transfer from a community college. He grew up extremely poor, not HN's definition of poor as in he can't afford a SFH in Noe, but poor as in relying on food stamps/section 8 with parents who never even graduated high school. He was leaning towards Cal but ultimately the financial aid package that Stanford gave him was too good to turn down. He will graduate with close to zero debt or loans.
  - dalbasal 9y ago
    Can and will pay off is not exactly the same thing. To break even on an extra 100k within 10 years of graduating, the pre-tax premium on your salary needs to $1.5k -$2k on gross monthly salary. I wouldn't call that a brilliant investment even if it was a lot more certain than it is in reality. But importantly, there are lot of potential loss scenarios. The student could drop out, get sick at some point in the next 15 years. They could decide they don't want to be a lawyer, get pregnant, go to jail. Anything that gets them off a high earning path becomes a disaster with that kind of debt. A debt burden like this taken on by young people seems to me to be incompatible with the concept of free society. I can't understand how Americans tolerate it. In most countries, I think the public outcry would be too great.
- Inconel 9y ago
  Huge disclaimer here, I have never attended any undergraduate university so everything I say here is second hand and anecdotal. With that out of the way, I was under the impression that there are some rather significant differences in the depth, breadth, and rigor between courses of study even at the undergrad level, at least in certain majors. For example, I've often heard that Harvard's undergrad math course is considered especially challenging. Is it really the case that an undergrad education at a place like MIT in math/physics, or some other STEM field, is without any differentiation from a similar major at Tufts or BU? I find that somewhat hard to believe. I'm sure there are brilliant students at less prestigious institutions, as I'm sure there are not so brilliant ones even at places like MIT, but I would expect an undergrad math class at MIT would be somewhat different than one at BU. Am I wrong here? On occasion I work with a rather brilliant engineer from Caltech and in talking with her she has relayed to me that one of the unique aspects of Caltech's undergrad education is that all students, regardless of major, must take a certain number of college level math and physics courses. That alone seems like a pretty big differentiator to me. This isn't to say that we as a society don't perhaps put too much emphasis on the notoriety of big name schools, but I still find it somewhat unlikely that there really is zero difference in the degrees offered. Of course, I'm very often wrong so there's that.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    Firstly, that Caltech requires all students to undertake a certain number of math and physics courses seems to align with, at least, the name of the institution. Secondly, regarding your comment "I find that somewhat hard to believe", so long as everyone keeps believing that then the cost value of the reputation and network probably justify the fees. It's part of their brand image. Marketing. The proof is in then numbers though: do reputable university graduates discover more valuable insights more often, do they earn more, and live longer healthier happier lives? Is the net benefit to society worth the cost? I'd argue it's all very difficult to quantify in the final analysis.
- josh_fyi 9y ago
  > The only differences come down to network and academic history. Yes, indeed. With a degree from a top university, you are almost guaranteed an A average and can go straight to Wall Street or into other potentially super-lucrative professions. Not every wants that, and there are other paths to get there, but if that's what you want, this is by far the easiest way. http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21615616-not-what-it-used-be-grade-expectations http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21615616-not-wha... http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septoct-2014/why-are-harvard-grads-still-flocking-to-wall-street/ http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septoct-2014/why-are-h...
  - user5994461 9y ago
    Meanwhile at wall street... Candidates are interviewing and 9x% of them will get rejected without mercy. Just like at Google and co. Well, I hope they didn't think that a degree and 200k of debt would guarantee them a job anywhere.
- taway_1212 9y ago
  I'd say one big difference is that in places like MIT you have an option to volunteer on awesome research projects, working under top-notch researchers. This goes a long way towards securing a entry to a top PhD program later, if that's your thing.
- Nimitz14 9y ago
  What you say is not true.
geezerjay 9y ago
> It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree Can you explain why?
sgt101 9y ago
Maybe - but if you are very rich it makes complete sense to just go there and suck up the cost so that you can be even richer in the future. From talking to people with college age kids in the states it seems that assistance for talent is largely gone, assistance for social position is still available. The issue I can see with this (as an outsider) is that there are very many kids right at the bottom of the social scale - assisting them makes lots of sense. But step one rung up (I'm not sure what the cut offs are but they seem very low) and no matter what talent you have you will get no assistance. This could generate a lot of resentment down the line...
j7ake 9y ago
Going $250k in debt makes you extremely fragile. After you graduate, you're limiting your job opportunities to only ones that pay much higher than others, even if one job was a much better fit for yourself. You are also much more sensitive to adverse job conditions. If you happen to graduate during times of recession, you will be much more hurt than your other unemployed friends. Staying out of debt relieves you from the need to have to get a job within a certain salary range, allowing you to choose jobs based on criteria beyond salary.
yodsanklai 9y ago
> It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree, I'm not so familiar with the American system, but aren't there prestigious schools that would accept bright students for free? In France for instance, the most selective engineer schools are free (or sometimes pay their students) and they enjoy the same careers than their American counterparts. Somehow, it sounds counterintuitive that you have to pay anything if you're extremely bright!

by kough 9y ago

alpha_squared 9y ago

> It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree No it doesn't? I think we should stop putting schools on a pedestal because of their name. I admire some of the research and work that comes out of those schools, but in the end their degrees are no better or worse than other schools' (regarding undergraduate, I can't speak for graduate). The only differences come down to network and academic history. If you're justifying that level of debt purely on those two criteria, then I understand that's the value those things mean to you -- and that's okay. Personally, that's not worth it to me. I'm not sure there's "absolute sense" here.

whack 9y ago
There can be an "absolute sense" from a financial perspective. For better or worse, having a degree from Harvard/Stanford/MIT can open a number of doors that may be otherwise shut. Doors which can be very financially lucrative. For example, suppose you want to work in finance/law. Most prestigious firms place a very high premium on having a degree from a top university, and pay extremely generously if you get your foot in the door. In these contexts, the $250k investment on your college will easily pay for itself within 10 years. Conversely, suppose you're trying to break into a field that's extremely hard to crack (writing?). In such situations, you'll need every edge you can get, and having a great network or an eye-catching degree in your resume can make the difference between you getting a toe-hold and you calling it quits. To be sure, it certainly is very context dependent. Getting a cheap Bachelor's degree from a public university, and a Master's degree from a brand name university, might be a good way to get the best of both worlds. In general though, anyone who's smart enough to get admission into Harvard/Stanford is likely going to make multiple millions of dollars over the course of their lifetime. Given this baseline, investing 250k for a top-notch education/network/resume certainly seems well worth it.
- 8note 9y ago
  Isn't admittance to these schools largely oriented towards wealth/past wealth, and the preference in those "prestigious" schools just to make sure that only wealthy families get those jobs? In that case, if it's a meaningful amount of money to you, it's probably not worth the investment because those firms will still look at you poorly
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    Don't all of those schools also have significant scholarship offerings?
- Inconel 9y ago
  I'd add to your comment that from what I've heard some of the traditionally elite universities such as Harvard/Yale/Stanford have very generous financial aid for lower income students. And while I don't have the exact numbers handy, if I remember correctly their definition of lower income extended into the $100k+ household income range. Again, this is anecdotal, but I have a good friend who was accepted to both Berkeley and Stanford, among a host of other schools but those two were his top choices, as an undergrad transfer from a community college. He grew up extremely poor, not HN's definition of poor as in he can't afford a SFH in Noe, but poor as in relying on food stamps/section 8 with parents who never even graduated high school. He was leaning towards Cal but ultimately the financial aid package that Stanford gave him was too good to turn down. He will graduate with close to zero debt or loans.
- dalbasal 9y ago
  Can and will pay off is not exactly the same thing. To break even on an extra 100k within 10 years of graduating, the pre-tax premium on your salary needs to $1.5k -$2k on gross monthly salary. I wouldn't call that a brilliant investment even if it was a lot more certain than it is in reality. But importantly, there are lot of potential loss scenarios. The student could drop out, get sick at some point in the next 15 years. They could decide they don't want to be a lawyer, get pregnant, go to jail. Anything that gets them off a high earning path becomes a disaster with that kind of debt. A debt burden like this taken on by young people seems to me to be incompatible with the concept of free society. I can't understand how Americans tolerate it. In most countries, I think the public outcry would be too great.
Inconel 9y ago
Huge disclaimer here, I have never attended any undergraduate university so everything I say here is second hand and anecdotal. With that out of the way, I was under the impression that there are some rather significant differences in the depth, breadth, and rigor between courses of study even at the undergrad level, at least in certain majors. For example, I've often heard that Harvard's undergrad math course is considered especially challenging. Is it really the case that an undergrad education at a place like MIT in math/physics, or some other STEM field, is without any differentiation from a similar major at Tufts or BU? I find that somewhat hard to believe. I'm sure there are brilliant students at less prestigious institutions, as I'm sure there are not so brilliant ones even at places like MIT, but I would expect an undergrad math class at MIT would be somewhat different than one at BU. Am I wrong here? On occasion I work with a rather brilliant engineer from Caltech and in talking with her she has relayed to me that one of the unique aspects of Caltech's undergrad education is that all students, regardless of major, must take a certain number of college level math and physics courses. That alone seems like a pretty big differentiator to me. This isn't to say that we as a society don't perhaps put too much emphasis on the notoriety of big name schools, but I still find it somewhat unlikely that there really is zero difference in the degrees offered. Of course, I'm very often wrong so there's that.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  Firstly, that Caltech requires all students to undertake a certain number of math and physics courses seems to align with, at least, the name of the institution. Secondly, regarding your comment "I find that somewhat hard to believe", so long as everyone keeps believing that then the cost value of the reputation and network probably justify the fees. It's part of their brand image. Marketing. The proof is in then numbers though: do reputable university graduates discover more valuable insights more often, do they earn more, and live longer healthier happier lives? Is the net benefit to society worth the cost? I'd argue it's all very difficult to quantify in the final analysis.
josh_fyi 9y ago
> The only differences come down to network and academic history. Yes, indeed. With a degree from a top university, you are almost guaranteed an A average and can go straight to Wall Street or into other potentially super-lucrative professions. Not every wants that, and there are other paths to get there, but if that's what you want, this is by far the easiest way. http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21615616-not-what-it-used-be-grade-expectations http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21615616-not-wha... http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septoct-2014/why-are-harvard-grads-still-flocking-to-wall-street/ http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septoct-2014/why-are-h...
- user5994461 9y ago
  Meanwhile at wall street... Candidates are interviewing and 9x% of them will get rejected without mercy. Just like at Google and co. Well, I hope they didn't think that a degree and 200k of debt would guarantee them a job anywhere.
taway_1212 9y ago
I'd say one big difference is that in places like MIT you have an option to volunteer on awesome research projects, working under top-notch researchers. This goes a long way towards securing a entry to a top PhD program later, if that's your thing.
Nimitz14 9y ago
What you say is not true.

geezerjay 9y ago

> It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree Can you explain why?

sgt101 9y ago

Maybe - but if you are very rich it makes complete sense to just go there and suck up the cost so that you can be even richer in the future. From talking to people with college age kids in the states it seems that assistance for talent is largely gone, assistance for social position is still available. The issue I can see with this (as an outsider) is that there are very many kids right at the bottom of the social scale - assisting them makes lots of sense. But step one rung up (I'm not sure what the cut offs are but they seem very low) and no matter what talent you have you will get no assistance. This could generate a lot of resentment down the line...

j7ake 9y ago

Going $250k in debt makes you extremely fragile. After you graduate, you're limiting your job opportunities to only ones that pay much higher than others, even if one job was a much better fit for yourself. You are also much more sensitive to adverse job conditions. If you happen to graduate during times of recession, you will be much more hurt than your other unemployed friends. Staying out of debt relieves you from the need to have to get a job within a certain salary range, allowing you to choose jobs based on criteria beyond salary.

yodsanklai 9y ago

> It makes absolute sense to go $250k in debt for an MIT or Harvard degree, I'm not so familiar with the American system, but aren't there prestigious schools that would accept bright students for free? In France for instance, the most selective engineer schools are free (or sometimes pay their students) and they enjoy the same careers than their American counterparts. Somehow, it sounds counterintuitive that you have to pay anything if you're extremely bright!