4 ms·

I think we already have a solution built into the legal system: Lemon Laws. From the Great Wiki in the Sky: "Lemon laws are laws that provide a remedy for purc

I think we already have a solution built into the legal system: Lemon Laws. From the Great Wiki in the Sky: "Lemon laws are laws that provide a remedy for purchasers of cars and other consumer goods in order to compensate for products that repeatedly fail to meet standards of quality and performance." Obviously, these degrees did not meet the standards of quality to make "productive members of society" so the universities should have to "buy them back", preferably using their own endowments. In the short term, it would hurt them immensely - which is deserved for selling a "product" that wasn't worthwhile but in the long term, it would mean that they're more likely to a) keep prices more reasonable and b) make a higher quality "product".

landemva 4y ago
Or repeal the Clinton-era law that made student loan debt non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. In that way, potential lenders would have incentive to determine ability to repay.
- gruez 4y ago
  >would have incentive to determine ability to repay. It's a mixed bag. On one hand it should decrease costs and incentivize students into choosing better career plans (ie. not going to college just because), but it will also mean disadvantaged students won't be able to attend because their projected credit risk is so high.
  - washadjeffmad 4y ago
    The problem that law was meant to address was that most of the debt being discharged came from a relatively small pool of students who attended very expensive or prestigious schools. If they had set a limit for discharge to the value of the median cost of tuition, it might have prevented the runaway train of inflated costs in the education and perhaps even medical sector, outside of what was caused by malpractice insurance rates in the 70s. Also, individualizing risk to the students irrespective of degree choices and economics without dutifully notifying students isn't ethical behavior, especially when they are responsible for the magnitude of the risk by not controlling costs or advocating for the value of the students they graduate.

landemva 4y ago

Or repeal the Clinton-era law that made student loan debt non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. In that way, potential lenders would have incentive to determine ability to repay.

gruez 4y ago
>would have incentive to determine ability to repay. It's a mixed bag. On one hand it should decrease costs and incentivize students into choosing better career plans (ie. not going to college just because), but it will also mean disadvantaged students won't be able to attend because their projected credit risk is so high.
- washadjeffmad 4y ago
  The problem that law was meant to address was that most of the debt being discharged came from a relatively small pool of students who attended very expensive or prestigious schools. If they had set a limit for discharge to the value of the median cost of tuition, it might have prevented the runaway train of inflated costs in the education and perhaps even medical sector, outside of what was caused by malpractice insurance rates in the 70s. Also, individualizing risk to the students irrespective of degree choices and economics without dutifully notifying students isn't ethical behavior, especially when they are responsible for the magnitude of the risk by not controlling costs or advocating for the value of the students they graduate.