6 ms·

The exact opposite actually. It's a good for-profit enterprise that fails when it's narrative twists it into a public good. The problem isn't that university d

The exact opposite actually. It's a good for-profit enterprise that fails when it's narrative twists it into a public good. The problem isn't that university doesn't work. The problem is that the federal government has propped it up with so much poorly underwritten debt that the prices have ballooned beyond value delivered. That would be fine if the audience taking the debt was rational. But the discourse around university is itself irrational. And the people taking the loans have underdeveloped brains that are bad at long term thinking.

lostcolony 5y ago
And to be clear - if it was a purely government funded thing there would be strong price controls around it (the same reason why doctors pushed back against the original compulsory medical insurance plans in the 30s, and why there's so much back and forth around medicare covering stuff or not, doctors accepting it or not, etc). But by underwriting debt this way we have an agency problem; the government isn't incentivized to say "no" to bad debt, and students aren't informed enough (just the opposite, as you mention, the discourse is irrational. I don't agree with 'underdeveloped brains', so much as no cultural pressure or life experience to 'count the cost').
- CityOfThrowaway 5y ago
  Yes, good nuanced addition. I agree!
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  Also public land-grant universities have been a great success on the main (even if recent events dim that a bit). Direct publicly provided education unlike universe healthcare has been a thing in the US, including being completely free in certain times and places (CUNY, for example). This is much better than subsidizing tuition without cross controls.
esperent 5y ago
There's plenty of examples of universities being run as not-for-profit and doing just fine. Pretty much all of Europe since the concept of a University has existed, for example. Sure, you can nitpick problems with European universities and they are not perfect. But nobody is going into debt slavery in Europe from getting a degree and nobody is talking about the collapse of European universities. So maybe the problem lies somewhere else? Something to do with the unchecked capitalism of the American system, for example?
- bigmadshoe 5y ago
  I don't know about the second paragraph. I went to the University of Edinburgh, and being Scottish, the government paid around $2.5k per year for me to attend. Around half of students in my course (CS) there were from outside of Europe, and were paying $50k per year to attend. Was the debt really avoided in my case, or was it just transferred to others?
  - esperent 5y ago
    It seems more likely that 50k is the actual cost and you're getting a 95% subsidy. Which seems reasonable - should a government be expected to subsidize international students? Not sure where I stand on that. Besides which, I think EU countries do subsidize students from other EU countries so an Irish person can study in Sweden, for example, without paying high fees (need to confirm this). Also, $50k is way higher than I expected. In my old university, NUIG in Ireland, it would be more like $15k/year for international students.
    - maccolgan 5y ago
      The subsidies are irrelevant, US college degrees can indeed cost around 50k, if European universities have the same cost (despite having lower GDP PPP per capita) that's a even larger problem, except the taxpayer is in trouble.
      - esperent 5y ago
Loughla 5y ago
>It's a good for-profit enterprise I am going to absolutely need any amount of citations for this. For-profit institutions are notoriously sub-par, shady dealers.
stjohnswarts 5y ago
Dang, you said it a lot better than I did in my previous comment. I agree with everything you said, and basically paraphrased it in my previous comment :) . Student loans can work with "adult" oversight. Kids can't make these decisions, they have no probably signing up for a degree that won't even pay their regular bills let alone $200k in loans for that obscure history degree.

lostcolony 5y ago

And to be clear - if it was a purely government funded thing there would be strong price controls around it (the same reason why doctors pushed back against the original compulsory medical insurance plans in the 30s, and why there's so much back and forth around medicare covering stuff or not, doctors accepting it or not, etc). But by underwriting debt this way we have an agency problem; the government isn't incentivized to say "no" to bad debt, and students aren't informed enough (just the opposite, as you mention, the discourse is irrational. I don't agree with 'underdeveloped brains', so much as no cultural pressure or life experience to 'count the cost').

CityOfThrowaway 5y ago
Yes, good nuanced addition. I agree!
Ericson2314 5y ago
Also public land-grant universities have been a great success on the main (even if recent events dim that a bit). Direct publicly provided education unlike universe healthcare has been a thing in the US, including being completely free in certain times and places (CUNY, for example). This is much better than subsidizing tuition without cross controls.

esperent 5y ago

There's plenty of examples of universities being run as not-for-profit and doing just fine. Pretty much all of Europe since the concept of a University has existed, for example. Sure, you can nitpick problems with European universities and they are not perfect. But nobody is going into debt slavery in Europe from getting a degree and nobody is talking about the collapse of European universities. So maybe the problem lies somewhere else? Something to do with the unchecked capitalism of the American system, for example?

bigmadshoe 5y ago
I don't know about the second paragraph. I went to the University of Edinburgh, and being Scottish, the government paid around $2.5k per year for me to attend. Around half of students in my course (CS) there were from outside of Europe, and were paying $50k per year to attend. Was the debt really avoided in my case, or was it just transferred to others?
- esperent 5y ago
  It seems more likely that 50k is the actual cost and you're getting a 95% subsidy. Which seems reasonable - should a government be expected to subsidize international students? Not sure where I stand on that. Besides which, I think EU countries do subsidize students from other EU countries so an Irish person can study in Sweden, for example, without paying high fees (need to confirm this). Also, $50k is way higher than I expected. In my old university, NUIG in Ireland, it would be more like $15k/year for international students.
  - maccolgan 5y ago
    The subsidies are irrelevant, US college degrees can indeed cost around 50k, if European universities have the same cost (despite having lower GDP PPP per capita) that's a even larger problem, except the taxpayer is in trouble.
    - esperent 5y ago

Loughla 5y ago

>It's a good for-profit enterprise I am going to absolutely need any amount of citations for this. For-profit institutions are notoriously sub-par, shady dealers.

stjohnswarts 5y ago

Dang, you said it a lot better than I did in my previous comment. I agree with everything you said, and basically paraphrased it in my previous comment :) . Student loans can work with "adult" oversight. Kids can't make these decisions, they have no probably signing up for a degree that won't even pay their regular bills let alone $200k in loans for that obscure history degree.