6 ms·

I don't think we should abandon it, but if you want to pay 500k usd for you degree on french poetry in the 17th century, you should pay for it yourself.

Sakos 4y ago
No.
marcellus23 4y ago
Horrifying take. Typical of /hn/ when it comes to stuff like this, unfortunately.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  Suppose someone wants to spend the posited $500K on that degree. If not them, who should pay for it?
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    The premise here doesn't match reality: nobody wants to (much less is, to a rounding error) paying $500k for a degree. Nobody should pay for it directly. It should be virtually free to go to college, the way it is everywhere else in the developed world. It should be that way because it's single most obvious investment and high-returning investment any country can make in its future.
    - aortega 4y ago
      >It should be virtually free to go to college If you are going to invest into something, it should be good investment that gives returns. An Useless degree clearly do not give enough returns not even to pay for itself.
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        "Nothing is free" is an aphorism. Read the comment again: the direct cost of attending university in most developed countries is close to $0. In other words: it's free for the attending individuals, because the country understands that investing in education is in its own self interest. Whatever your particular country's failures are might be unfortunate, but they don't counteract the track record of success here. It might be worth considering whether both of our countries would do well to change, rather than presuming that your country's failure will also be mine's.
      - hither_shores 4y ago
        > If you are going to invest into something, it should be good investment that gives returns. An Useless degree clearly do not give enough returns not even to pay for itself. You're assuming that individuals capture the entirety of the value they generate for society (and that they do so exclusively in the form of income), which is essentially never the case.
    - moduspol 4y ago
      Is there any amount of money or any study-able topic that you would acknowledge is, perhaps, not the single most obvious and high-returning investment a country can make? If so, we're already agreeing in principle and just disagreeing where the line is.
    - imtringued 4y ago
      You are disingenuous, I have seen plenty of comments on HN that say you should take on $100k/year degrees and be allowed to go in that much debt even if you are poor and have no prospects of ever paying it back. There are actually people on this planet who think this is normal and should be encouraged. I'm not one of them.
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        I'm not compelled to defend random HN comments, especially ones that don't have any particular basis in reality. The overwhelming majority of US undergraduates pay a tiny fraction of that for their entire undergraduate career.
- miked85 4y ago
  I'm not sure I understand the "horrifying" part - is paying for your own loan it?
woodruffw 4y ago
You keep bringing up these 500K degrees, but I'm not aware of any schools that charge anything close to that for a degree. The most expensive college I could find wouldn't come close to that after 4 years, and that's a hyperspecialized school for people with disabilities[1]. Having come from a liberal arts program: excellence there is a strong predictor for general workforce competence, including in technical fields (like I am now). I studied 18th century German philosophy, and now I work on compilers. But even this shouldn't be a necessary justification: developing our understanding of history, society, and the human condition is sufficient in itself. [1]: https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/the-50-most-expensive-colleges-in-america/ https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/the-50-most-expensive-colle...
- aortega 4y ago
  Tuition in many colleges is over 80k usd/year.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    No, it isn't. The article I directly linked to has the most expensive colleges in the US, and none are over 80k a year. And that's the vanishingly small minority; the largest colleges in the US are in-state schools with large populations paying (generally) under ~10k/year. For my state (NY, an expensive one), it's almost exactly 10k[1]. Even for out-of-state, it's well under half of 80k (with everything included, not just tuition). [1]: https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/stony-brook-suny-2838/paying https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/stony-brook-suny-2838/p...
xapata 4y ago
Can you point me to an example of a $500k USD degree on French poetry in the 17th century? Or anything similar?
- AdrianB1 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
  - xapata 4y ago
    Yes, it seemed so, and thus not helpful for the discussion. But, you can see in the other branch of the thread, that commenter seemed to believe the hyperbole as fact.
matsemann 4y ago
Why not the opposite? Me getting a STEM education will pay me back quickly. Thus I can afford to pay for it. Society probably need someone to do those other things as well, which don't pay as much. So therefore we should pay for it.

Sakos 4y ago

No.

marcellus23 4y ago

Horrifying take. Typical of /hn/ when it comes to stuff like this, unfortunately.

sokoloff 4y ago
Suppose someone wants to spend the posited $500K on that degree. If not them, who should pay for it?
- woodruffw 4y ago
  The premise here doesn't match reality: nobody wants to (much less is, to a rounding error) paying $500k for a degree. Nobody should pay for it directly. It should be virtually free to go to college, the way it is everywhere else in the developed world. It should be that way because it's single most obvious investment and high-returning investment any country can make in its future.
  - aortega 4y ago
    >It should be virtually free to go to college If you are going to invest into something, it should be good investment that gives returns. An Useless degree clearly do not give enough returns not even to pay for itself.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      "Nothing is free" is an aphorism. Read the comment again: the direct cost of attending university in most developed countries is close to $0. In other words: it's free for the attending individuals, because the country understands that investing in education is in its own self interest. Whatever your particular country's failures are might be unfortunate, but they don't counteract the track record of success here. It might be worth considering whether both of our countries would do well to change, rather than presuming that your country's failure will also be mine's.
    - hither_shores 4y ago
      > If you are going to invest into something, it should be good investment that gives returns. An Useless degree clearly do not give enough returns not even to pay for itself. You're assuming that individuals capture the entirety of the value they generate for society (and that they do so exclusively in the form of income), which is essentially never the case.
  - moduspol 4y ago
    Is there any amount of money or any study-able topic that you would acknowledge is, perhaps, not the single most obvious and high-returning investment a country can make? If so, we're already agreeing in principle and just disagreeing where the line is.
  - imtringued 4y ago
    You are disingenuous, I have seen plenty of comments on HN that say you should take on $100k/year degrees and be allowed to go in that much debt even if you are poor and have no prospects of ever paying it back. There are actually people on this planet who think this is normal and should be encouraged. I'm not one of them.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      I'm not compelled to defend random HN comments, especially ones that don't have any particular basis in reality. The overwhelming majority of US undergraduates pay a tiny fraction of that for their entire undergraduate career.
miked85 4y ago
I'm not sure I understand the "horrifying" part - is paying for your own loan it?

woodruffw 4y ago

You keep bringing up these 500K degrees, but I'm not aware of any schools that charge anything close to that for a degree. The most expensive college I could find wouldn't come close to that after 4 years, and that's a hyperspecialized school for people with disabilities[1]. Having come from a liberal arts program: excellence there is a strong predictor for general workforce competence, including in technical fields (like I am now). I studied 18th century German philosophy, and now I work on compilers. But even this shouldn't be a necessary justification: developing our understanding of history, society, and the human condition is sufficient in itself. [1]: https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/the-50-most-expensive-colleges-in-america/ https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/the-50-most-expensive-colle...

aortega 4y ago
Tuition in many colleges is over 80k usd/year.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  No, it isn't. The article I directly linked to has the most expensive colleges in the US, and none are over 80k a year. And that's the vanishingly small minority; the largest colleges in the US are in-state schools with large populations paying (generally) under ~10k/year. For my state (NY, an expensive one), it's almost exactly 10k[1]. Even for out-of-state, it's well under half of 80k (with everything included, not just tuition). [1]: https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/stony-brook-suny-2838/paying https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/stony-brook-suny-2838/p...

xapata 4y ago

Can you point me to an example of a $500k USD degree on French poetry in the 17th century? Or anything similar?

AdrianB1 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
- xapata 4y ago
  Yes, it seemed so, and thus not helpful for the discussion. But, you can see in the other branch of the thread, that commenter seemed to believe the hyperbole as fact.

matsemann 4y ago

Why not the opposite? Me getting a STEM education will pay me back quickly. Thus I can afford to pay for it. Society probably need someone to do those other things as well, which don't pay as much. So therefore we should pay for it.