5 ms·

> Cancelling student debt is good if it's tied to fixing the problem going forward, which means not offering it, or having the colleges be the guarantor, or ISA

> Cancelling student debt is good if it's tied to fixing the problem going forward, which means not offering it, or having the colleges be the guarantor, or ISAs, or something. What do you tell the upper middle class families that didn't buy a bigger house or pad their investment accounts so that they could help put 3 of their kids through schools? My parents spent at least $200k on undergrad education between me and my siblings (UVA, Cornell, UW-Madison). Did they make the wrong decision? Should they have saddled us with debt? At 10% (ie: S&P AAR) that would net $600,000! When America becomes a place where you're punished for having invested in your children, it becomes a place where you will no longer want to live.

alanbernstein 5y ago
You know, I've asked this exact question before, but I've changed my mind. Here is what I'd tell them: "Congratulations on being wealthy enough to afford tuition. Try to be considerate of the people less fortunate than you."
- nickysielicki 5y ago
  If it was $60k of opportunity cost I might be willing to accept it as a progressive tax and let bygones be bygones. But $600k likely represents half of their net worth. "Considerate" only goes so far.
  - alanbernstein 5y ago
    Yeah, $60k is closer to the amount that I was complaining about having already paid. But you're not wrong; I'm just trying to keep the greater good in mind. How about: "Try to consider how much you and your family will benefit from the improvements made possible to society and the economy by redirecting billions of dollars from loan payments to other spending."
tenebrisalietum 5y ago
Red herring. Subject of TFA is the value of school. This example family wasted $200k on a low-value thing that only seems to exist because companies are terrible at recruiting. It's worse for someone who has to go in a lifetime of debt, but ideally neither the rich nor poor family would have to waste their money.
- nickysielicki 5y ago
  Subject of TFA is about the dwindling value of school and I agree with it. But I don't think it's wrong to push back on this aside about cancelling student debt. It's completely untenable and anyone proposing it is ignoring the massive opportunity cost that has been incurred by people that played by the rules, pursued useful degrees, and made the responsible decision to stretch their means to do so.
  - MisterBastahrd 5y ago
    I paid for my entire education myself by working nights and weekends and taking side gigs in combination with loans and scholarships. It took me 6 years to complete a 4 year degree because of sheer exhaustion and I did NOT choose the best university I could have attended (that would have been an Ivy) because I didn't have the money to do so and I didn't feel comfortable saddling myself with giant loan debt. Two questions: 1. What do you think my opportunity cost was, and 2. How much do you think I lost by not pursuing an education at a university worthy of my accomplishments to that point? You have a very entitled point of view from where I sit.
    - nickysielicki 5y ago
      How am I entitled? All I’m asking for is that the government continues to enforce contract law so that people who made financial decisions under the assumption of continued enforcement of contract law aren’t left holding the bag. That’s not a huge ask. It’s a founding principle of our government. I think most universities are scams and FWIW I made a point to literally only apply to two schools: UW Madison (in-state) and Minnesota (in-state reciprocity agreement) because I knew I’d get in and I saw what it cost my parents for my siblings to go out of state. I did a semester at a community college, too. 1. Your opportunity cost is debatable. I took 15 years of market return on the lump sum of tuition/boarding/books cost as an example. It would be about the same for you, assuming you spent ~$75k on your education between rent and supplies and food and tuition. 2. I don’t think you lost out on anything meaningful unless it was MIT, Harvard, or Stanford that you would have gone to instead.
ryanSrich 5y ago
The US is anti-children from the moment they are born. College is no exception. As someone with 2 kids under 2 years old, it’s one of those things you don’t think about until it happens to you. - daycare is on average around $2k per month per child where I live. - outside of tech, almost no companies pay for parental leave. At most, they are obligated to hold your position, but no pay is required. This is especially true if you or your spouse work in the healthcare field. It’s absolutely mind blowing how poorly employees are treated by their employers in the healthcare industry. - childcare tax credits are an absolute joke. From the $32k in childcare I paid for last year, I got a $1,600 credit… - once you have kids, your health insurance costs will be astronomical unless you’re lucky enough to work at a company that provides good insurance. In my situation, I run a small tech company where we don’t provide HC insurance (too costly atm). My wife works in healthcare. Our insurance is beyond a joke. Thousands per month with a $20k deductible. It’s hell. - once your kids are in school they’re taught very little useful skills. It’s mostly an exercise in obedience and conformist thinking. - once your child graduates high school they have the option to either take out hundreds of thousand of dollars in federally backed loans if they’re lucky enough to have parents that don’t make enough money. If they have middle class parents they’ll have to rely on even worse loans from private lenders. So would I expect the US to punish middle class parents that foot the bill for their child’s college? Yes. The US hates the middle class, as much as they hate children.
- disambiguation 5y ago
  This is an extremely important observation and it doesn't get discussed enough. For whatever reason, the USA is extremely hostile to having kids.
- barry-cotter 5y ago
  > once your child graduates high school they have the option to either take out hundreds of thousand of dollars in federally backed loans if they’re lucky enough to have parents that don’t make enough money. If they have middle class parents they’ll have to rely on even worse loans from private lenders. Um > Currently, student loan debt at graduation is an estimated $31,100. https://educationdata.org/average-student-loan-debt-by-year https://educationdata.org/average-student-loan-debt-by-year
barry-cotter 5y ago
> Did they make the wrong decision? Yes. The average US college graduate has under $40K in debt. If you're able to get into a networking school for the upper class like Cornell you're able to get a full ride at a state university. UVA and UW-Madison means at most one of three children went to college in state, on in state tuition. It's perfectly fine to choose the university to go to based on prestige but paying for a network is not morally superior to going to a less good university on a full scholarship, or doing two years at a community college and transferring to a state flagship for the last two years. Making expensive choices to chase status, a zero sum game, isn't eveil. Neitehr should it be encouraged.
- nickysielicki 5y ago
  > > Did they make the wrong decision? > Yes You’re not actually answering the question I posed. My question was, assuming XYZ amount of dollars are going to be spent on education, did they make the right or the wrong decision by making sacrifices to pay for their kids instead of letting/forcing their kids to take out loans? The question you answered was, “should a lot of money be spent on education in the first place?”. And sure, I’d agree, we all should have gone to community college for 2 years and then the state flagship, that would have been the most cost effective, bang-for-buck solution. I was the in-state kid, and also the youngest, and that’s not a coincidence; I saw what it cost my dad. My point is that if there’s a suspension of contract law, regardless of whether you’ve spent a lot or a little on education, you’re punishing those who budgeted for it and rewarding those that didn’t. Whether it’s a lot of money or a little money, you’re fucking over the honest people.
Imnimo 5y ago
>When America becomes a place where you're punished for having invested in your children, it becomes a place where you will no longer want to live. I'm sure they'll be itching to move to a new country where their children can spend another $200k on their grandchildren.

alanbernstein 5y ago

You know, I've asked this exact question before, but I've changed my mind. Here is what I'd tell them: "Congratulations on being wealthy enough to afford tuition. Try to be considerate of the people less fortunate than you."

nickysielicki 5y ago
If it was $60k of opportunity cost I might be willing to accept it as a progressive tax and let bygones be bygones. But $600k likely represents half of their net worth. "Considerate" only goes so far.
- alanbernstein 5y ago
  Yeah, $60k is closer to the amount that I was complaining about having already paid. But you're not wrong; I'm just trying to keep the greater good in mind. How about: "Try to consider how much you and your family will benefit from the improvements made possible to society and the economy by redirecting billions of dollars from loan payments to other spending."

tenebrisalietum 5y ago

Red herring. Subject of TFA is the value of school. This example family wasted $200k on a low-value thing that only seems to exist because companies are terrible at recruiting. It's worse for someone who has to go in a lifetime of debt, but ideally neither the rich nor poor family would have to waste their money.

nickysielicki 5y ago
Subject of TFA is about the dwindling value of school and I agree with it. But I don't think it's wrong to push back on this aside about cancelling student debt. It's completely untenable and anyone proposing it is ignoring the massive opportunity cost that has been incurred by people that played by the rules, pursued useful degrees, and made the responsible decision to stretch their means to do so.
- MisterBastahrd 5y ago
  I paid for my entire education myself by working nights and weekends and taking side gigs in combination with loans and scholarships. It took me 6 years to complete a 4 year degree because of sheer exhaustion and I did NOT choose the best university I could have attended (that would have been an Ivy) because I didn't have the money to do so and I didn't feel comfortable saddling myself with giant loan debt. Two questions: 1. What do you think my opportunity cost was, and 2. How much do you think I lost by not pursuing an education at a university worthy of my accomplishments to that point? You have a very entitled point of view from where I sit.
  - nickysielicki 5y ago
    How am I entitled? All I’m asking for is that the government continues to enforce contract law so that people who made financial decisions under the assumption of continued enforcement of contract law aren’t left holding the bag. That’s not a huge ask. It’s a founding principle of our government. I think most universities are scams and FWIW I made a point to literally only apply to two schools: UW Madison (in-state) and Minnesota (in-state reciprocity agreement) because I knew I’d get in and I saw what it cost my parents for my siblings to go out of state. I did a semester at a community college, too. 1. Your opportunity cost is debatable. I took 15 years of market return on the lump sum of tuition/boarding/books cost as an example. It would be about the same for you, assuming you spent ~$75k on your education between rent and supplies and food and tuition. 2. I don’t think you lost out on anything meaningful unless it was MIT, Harvard, or Stanford that you would have gone to instead.

ryanSrich 5y ago

The US is anti-children from the moment they are born. College is no exception. As someone with 2 kids under 2 years old, it’s one of those things you don’t think about until it happens to you. - daycare is on average around $2k per month per child where I live. - outside of tech, almost no companies pay for parental leave. At most, they are obligated to hold your position, but no pay is required. This is especially true if you or your spouse work in the healthcare field. It’s absolutely mind blowing how poorly employees are treated by their employers in the healthcare industry. - childcare tax credits are an absolute joke. From the $32k in childcare I paid for last year, I got a $1,600 credit… - once you have kids, your health insurance costs will be astronomical unless you’re lucky enough to work at a company that provides good insurance. In my situation, I run a small tech company where we don’t provide HC insurance (too costly atm). My wife works in healthcare. Our insurance is beyond a joke. Thousands per month with a $20k deductible. It’s hell. - once your kids are in school they’re taught very little useful skills. It’s mostly an exercise in obedience and conformist thinking. - once your child graduates high school they have the option to either take out hundreds of thousand of dollars in federally backed loans if they’re lucky enough to have parents that don’t make enough money. If they have middle class parents they’ll have to rely on even worse loans from private lenders. So would I expect the US to punish middle class parents that foot the bill for their child’s college? Yes. The US hates the middle class, as much as they hate children.

disambiguation 5y ago
This is an extremely important observation and it doesn't get discussed enough. For whatever reason, the USA is extremely hostile to having kids.
barry-cotter 5y ago
> once your child graduates high school they have the option to either take out hundreds of thousand of dollars in federally backed loans if they’re lucky enough to have parents that don’t make enough money. If they have middle class parents they’ll have to rely on even worse loans from private lenders. Um > Currently, student loan debt at graduation is an estimated $31,100. https://educationdata.org/average-student-loan-debt-by-year https://educationdata.org/average-student-loan-debt-by-year

barry-cotter 5y ago

> Did they make the wrong decision? Yes. The average US college graduate has under $40K in debt. If you're able to get into a networking school for the upper class like Cornell you're able to get a full ride at a state university. UVA and UW-Madison means at most one of three children went to college in state, on in state tuition. It's perfectly fine to choose the university to go to based on prestige but paying for a network is not morally superior to going to a less good university on a full scholarship, or doing two years at a community college and transferring to a state flagship for the last two years. Making expensive choices to chase status, a zero sum game, isn't eveil. Neitehr should it be encouraged.

nickysielicki 5y ago
> > Did they make the wrong decision? > Yes You’re not actually answering the question I posed. My question was, assuming XYZ amount of dollars are going to be spent on education, did they make the right or the wrong decision by making sacrifices to pay for their kids instead of letting/forcing their kids to take out loans? The question you answered was, “should a lot of money be spent on education in the first place?”. And sure, I’d agree, we all should have gone to community college for 2 years and then the state flagship, that would have been the most cost effective, bang-for-buck solution. I was the in-state kid, and also the youngest, and that’s not a coincidence; I saw what it cost my dad. My point is that if there’s a suspension of contract law, regardless of whether you’ve spent a lot or a little on education, you’re punishing those who budgeted for it and rewarding those that didn’t. Whether it’s a lot of money or a little money, you’re fucking over the honest people.

Imnimo 5y ago

>When America becomes a place where you're punished for having invested in your children, it becomes a place where you will no longer want to live. I'm sure they'll be itching to move to a new country where their children can spend another $200k on their grandchildren.