7 ms·

Top Colleges Are Too Costly Even for Parents Making $300k

littlexsparkee 2y ago
https://archive.ph/16fsy https://archive.ph/16fsy
echelon 2y ago
We've been talking about this for two decades at this point. Nothing is happening because too many people are willing to go in debt to get their degree. Free loans & Easy admissions Loans carry no risk | v Ample money supply for universities & no pressure to cut costs | v Increase in budget and expenses University FOMO for not being competitive on shiny offerings (Admin, fancy facilities, etc.) | v Perpetually raising costs Students take bigger loans | v Student loan crisis It's a perverse positive feedback system. The easiest lever to pull is adjusting the student loan situation. Students need to be able to discharge their debt, which will put risk calculus back into the equation. STEM degrees, graduation rates, degree value, and student academic performance will be directly correlated with risk. Under these changes, a student with so-so academics going to an expensive school for art history won't work anymore. STEM degrees at local community colleges will be affordable and abundant. That's what the country needs rather than a system that buys fancy academic buildings. Our ancestors could make do with learning in decrepit old buildings. They didn't have staycation amenities. They turned that into incredible productive value and didn't go into debt. That's what we need again. If we want to continue to provide access as a matter of policy, then we should make universities meet strict standards on budget and degree cost to offer non-dischargeable loans to students. Then universities can decide whether they want to meet those eligibility requirements or continue inflating their own costs. The market will fix itself.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  People go into debt for the credential because employers require the credential. If employers provided training and did not require a degree, you’d see demand evaporate. Instead, they require a degree the role may not even need, which externalizes the cost onto the student and future candidate (who then goes into debt as a gamble to increase future lifetime earnings). A college degree was marketed as a ticket to a secure, middle class life, and that marketing has been seen through. Why US Men Think College Isn’t Worth It Anymore- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43788914 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43788914 - April 2025 Pew Reseach: Is College Worth It? - https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/05/23/is-college-worth-it-2/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/05/23/is-coll... - May 23rd, 2024 There is some progress here on companies removing the credential requirement, and the situation should improve as labor supply continues to decline into the future due to structural demographics (forcing employers to loosen hiring requirements). Learn a trade, get a CDL (~$5k), etc.
  - elteto 2y ago
    Corporations can (and should) provide training for tradespeople, but you can't do the same for specialized degrees, like engineering. To train engineers it takes 4-5 years of academic + project work, which is what colleges and universities provide. There's nothing wrong with degrees, what we have in the US is a broken aid system with perverse incentives around the financing of such degrees. Don't conflate one thing with the other.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - toomuchtodo 2y ago
      I don't disagree that there is a legit need for engineering degree holding workers, but, how many folks in the US are getting engineering degrees just to check a box to get a job that requires a degree? This is a distinct issue versus dysfunctional funding of necessary degree paths.
      - ghostpepper 2y ago
        I may just be misunderstanding what you're saying but if you're just getting a degree to tick a box that says "Must have a degree" why would you pick engineering? What are the jobs that "require" an engineering degree but don't actually require any engineering knowledge?
        toomuchtodo 2y ago
        Sorry for any misunderstanding. To be clear, there are two problems: 1. Students going into debt to get a degree simply because a job req calls for it, but potentially doesn't use the degree. Think "business administration" amongst others. The "Bachelor's Checkbox" on an application if you will. The debt they incur is the cost to increase their white collar lottery odds. 2. Degrees in domains that are crucial for the work to be done, but the financing model is fucked. Engineering, MD, etc. Both require solving for, but in this context, I am addressing the former.
- tonetegeatinst 2y ago
  I got a stem degree via community college, but had to goto a state college and get a bachelor in the same degree for employers to even consider hiring me or being able to move up in a company. I have a associates in science in cyber security, most credits didn't transfer to a bachelor's of science in cybwrsecurity program despite both being public schools and not private colleges. Its set my education back years all because most jobs demand a bachelor's and certifications.
- musicale 2y ago
  It is also hard to discharge student loan debt in bankruptcy.
- cyanydeez 2y ago
  Isn't the problem that education is a public good and therefore shouldn't cost anything special, and a system to sort prospective students into correct tiers based on honest merits would be better, but because rich people, it's what we have? Seems like you haven't even gone down the path most of the world operates on and just assume the system as it exists can't be modified.
  - echelon 2y ago
    > Isn't the problem that education is a public good and therefore shouldn't cost anything special If your solution is to make all higher education free and turn this into yet another tax, then I have to ask where that money is going to come from. There's already tremendous inefficiency and malinvestment in higher education. Is it really worth diverting productive capital and private money into a system that is bloated? The frequently suggested fix is to remove the crutches and allow the system to fail, ie. make student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy. Risk has been foreign to the equation since the student loan system was established. With the reintroduction of risk, the system will balance itself. People will stop taking expensive degree programs with low ROI because there won't be any loans available. No lender will write loans for bad degree programs. Additionally, when the universities are forced to stop competing on what amenities they offer, they can lower their tuitions to a point where some form of public subsidy could be possible and sustainable. But in no way should we be spending tax dollars on present-day college tuition costs. Those costs need to drop substantially. The US would add another 0.5 - 0.7 trillion dollars to the deficit if we funded all universities at their present day costs. That would sink the entire ship. It'd be insane to add that to our budget.
    - cyanydeez 2y ago
      The money is going to come from the same place the money already comes from. I don't understand, and won't follow further someone who doesn't understand how public good works. Sorry you wasted your time.
NoWordsKotoba 2y ago
15 years ago when I was still in college in the US, the new president of the school came to give a speech to some incoming freshman. In that speech he talked a lot about how colleges were businesses and that the goal was to make them appealing to new students (new gyms, updated dorms, better stadiums, etc...). I knew in that moment that higher education had been overtaken by the MBAs. I guarantee that a school that focuses on education solely will not only be cheaper, but get the type of students that actually want to learn.
- tssva 2y ago
  My daughter will be starting in the fall at a private STEM focused university. They pride themselves on being a difficult school which throws you right into the deep end. They have no fancy gyms, the dorms are basic cinder block buildings without any fancy conveniences including no AC. The dining hall is very basic with limited food stations. It is very much inline with the amenities or lack of at my college when I was a freshmen in 1987. It has 1 D1 sport with the rest being D3. It is located in a mostly rural area. The other finalist school she didn’t choose is also private but has every amenity under the sun. The newer dorms which she would have been in because of her major have state of the art gyms inside them and parking garages under them which she would have been assigned a spot in. Multiple dining facilities whith a wide range of high quality food. The school has a full array of D1 sports programs and new atheletic facilities built within the last 5-15 years. It is located in a large metropolitan area. It doesn’t have near the same quality of academics as her choice. The estimated cost of attendance for 25-26 is with $500 of each other. Both being around $89k before any aid. She doesn’t qualify for federal financial aid. Luckily both offered very substantial merit aid. She did also consider one of our state schools. Although not as nice as the private she didn’t choose it is much closer to that than the school she did choose. They, along with all our state schools, are known for giving almost no aid beyond federal financial aid. The cost to attend would have been more than the two private schools after their merit aid awards. I guess my point is they get you whether they give you amenities or not and whether they are private or public.
  - elteto 2y ago
    Precisely, if the tuition increases had generally gone into improving students lives at least it would serve as a sort of crappy consolation price. But the reality is that a high tide floats all boats, big or small, crappy or great. They are all charging outrageous tuition and making a fortune at the expense of the future of these students.
techpineapple 2y ago
300k is not rich, 300k in 2025 is like 90,000 in 1982. How is the aristocracy supposed to maintain their dominance if just anyone can go to a top college? You can’t risk a middle class family sending they’re kids to a school that may qualify them for a top job in law or politics.
- pixelatedindex 2y ago
  300K is over 5.5K/week. How the hell is that not rich? Delusional take.
  - lucaspm98 2y ago
    $300k a year is rich in 99% of the world and 90%+ of the U.S. However, jobs that pay $300k vastly over-index to a few coastal major metros, where $300k a year is at the lower end of ever being able to own even a condo within a reasonable commute.
    - pixelatedindex 2y ago
      Yeah but then your spouse works too, and even if they only bring in like 80K that’s enough to cover living expenses, with the other salary covering housing.
- 0_____0 2y ago
  And 90k in 1982 was what, the change between the couch cushions?
- tiahura 2y ago
  90k in 82 was country club eligible.
- mikestew 2y ago
  When I went to a top engineering school in 1982, we were told that when we graduated we could expect to make $35K/year as CS grads. Whoo hoo! Hello, upper middle class! $90K/year in 1982 was fuckin’ rolling in it.
AStonesThrow 2y ago
I think another factor at work here is analogous to our broken system of health care billing vs. insurance companies. Scholarships and financial aid will basically expand as necessary to meet tuition demands for students. Therefore, the colleges can name their price, as it is basically funny-money, and any given student will be on a combination of scholarship, FAFSA, mom/dad funds, loans. In fact it is sort of a joke. When I was in community college, Phi Theta Kappa made overtures to recruit me. One of their seminars featured a few students who had earned a lot of scholarships by virtue of their membership and service. And I do mean "a lot". I think one of the figures tossed out there was $23 million in scholarships. For a community college student. And to think I was baffled how to spend an extra $500 or so kicking around. I got really disillusioned, even with community college, after my final years there. It seemed that the tuition was the right price, and all the instructors were highly credentialed, knowledgeable, and helpful. The classes themselves were great. But the whole package was draining, and exhausting. It was like a neverending exposition of clubs, events, deals, and engagement. Every table on the mall, every student leader next to me, was simply dying to gain my loyalty, membership, and engagement in whatever they had going on. And I personally could not keep a lid on that, so I just sort of got torn to pieces. I was in 5 clubs and doing honors and all kinds of extra stuff that just wore me out. All I had wanted to do was just Take some Classes, Earn the Credits, and get out of there. But that is not a satisfactory goal for the colleges of today.
kylehotchkiss 2y ago
USC is $100,000 a year? How likely is that degree to net you $400,000 of value through your career?
- artificialprint 2y ago
  Divided by 40 years it doesn't look like much...
  - nitwit005 2y ago
    $10k a year is a huge amount. The median US salary is $61k. Also realistically, you're likely getting a loan, so you need to factor in interest.
    - moralestapia 2y ago
      Not sure why you're downvoted as this is true. (and there's nothing wrong with you expressing this opinion) Not everyone in the US makes 500k TC doing remote work. 400k for a degree is absolute bonkers!
      - Projectiboga 2y ago
        To pay $400k off over even 20 years at 6%, which is below the average student loan rate is just over $2,000 a month and it is mostly not tax free. Our society is messing up with how expensive this has gotten. The bloat is facilities and administrators who earn two and three or more times the tenured professor salary. The guarantors have to be the schools themselves and those execs who take these bloated salaries. And that interest isn't deductable other than a pittance of $2,500 or less in a year. Here is the IRS about this; Student loan interest is interest you paid during the year on a qualified student loan. It includes both required and voluntarily prepaid interest payments. You may deduct the lesser of $2,500 or the amount of interest you actually paid during the year. The deduction is gradually reduced and eventually eliminated by phaseout when your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) amount reaches the annual limit for your filing status. https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc456 https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc456
butterlettuce 2y ago
I’m all for the federal government to completely ban student loans. You can either go to college out of pocket or with merit-based scholarships. And also place a federal ban on HR departments requiring degrees for clerical work. Such a stupid requirement is a form of discriminatory class warfare. Inequality would fall substantially and many universities will be forced to drop prices down to around 10-20k.
- skybrian 2y ago
  My guess is that it would result in more loans that aren’t called student loans. For example, via parents.
  - sparky_z 2y ago
    That wouldn't distort the college market like ubiquitous student loans backed by the government do, so I don't see why that would be a problem.
    - skybrian 2y ago
      The claim is that “inequality would fall substantially” and I don’t see how it would when only the children of well-off families (or at least with good credit) can get college loans.
- sunflowerfly 2y ago
  I have wondered about the effects of adding minimum wages/salaries for positions that require each degree level. For example, if the job requires a bachelor degree or masters degree then the job must pay at least $X/hr. Set that rate just high enough to discourage abuse.
  - Gigachad 2y ago
    Not sure how you’d enforce it when jobs would just silently require it but not advertise that fact. Or maybe not require it, but preference anyone who has one.
tiffanyh 2y ago
Surprised NIL wasn’t mentioned. Given that non-athletics are funding the lambo’s some universities give to all their football players (and huge paychecks) … if people thought the past 10-years tuition inflation was bad, watch what the next 10-years will be like.
- klooney 2y ago
  Isn't that generally an arms length thing- the boosters give the money, not the university?
  - tiffanyh 2y ago
    NCAA is proposing direct student payment. Universities are now longer in the business of education. Its effectively competing with NFL. https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/44787232/ncaa-proposes-new-rules-allow-direct-payments-players https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/44787232/ncaa...

https://archive.ph/16fsy https://archive.ph/16fsy

We've been talking about this for two decades at this point. Nothing is happening because too many people are willing to go in debt to get their degree. Free loans & Easy admissions Loans carry no risk | v Ample money supply for universities & no pressure to cut costs | v Increase in budget and expenses University FOMO for not being competitive on shiny offerings (Admin, fancy facilities, etc.) | v Perpetually raising costs Students take bigger loans | v Student loan crisis It's a perverse positive feedback system. The easiest lever to pull is adjusting the student loan situation. Students need to be able to discharge their debt, which will put risk calculus back into the equation. STEM degrees, graduation rates, degree value, and student academic performance will be directly correlated with risk. Under these changes, a student with so-so academics going to an expensive school for art history won't work anymore. STEM degrees at local community colleges will be affordable and abundant. That's what the country needs rather than a system that buys fancy academic buildings. Our ancestors could make do with learning in decrepit old buildings. They didn't have staycation amenities. They turned that into incredible productive value and didn't go into debt. That's what we need again. If we want to continue to provide access as a matter of policy, then we should make universities meet strict standards on budget and degree cost to offer non-dischargeable loans to students. Then universities can decide whether they want to meet those eligibility requirements or continue inflating their own costs. The market will fix itself.

toomuchtodo 2y ago
People go into debt for the credential because employers require the credential. If employers provided training and did not require a degree, you’d see demand evaporate. Instead, they require a degree the role may not even need, which externalizes the cost onto the student and future candidate (who then goes into debt as a gamble to increase future lifetime earnings). A college degree was marketed as a ticket to a secure, middle class life, and that marketing has been seen through. Why US Men Think College Isn’t Worth It Anymore- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43788914 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43788914 - April 2025 Pew Reseach: Is College Worth It? - https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/05/23/is-college-worth-it-2/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/05/23/is-coll... - May 23rd, 2024 There is some progress here on companies removing the credential requirement, and the situation should improve as labor supply continues to decline into the future due to structural demographics (forcing employers to loosen hiring requirements). Learn a trade, get a CDL (~$5k), etc.
- elteto 2y ago
  Corporations can (and should) provide training for tradespeople, but you can't do the same for specialized degrees, like engineering. To train engineers it takes 4-5 years of academic + project work, which is what colleges and universities provide. There's nothing wrong with degrees, what we have in the US is a broken aid system with perverse incentives around the financing of such degrees. Don't conflate one thing with the other.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    I don't disagree that there is a legit need for engineering degree holding workers, but, how many folks in the US are getting engineering degrees just to check a box to get a job that requires a degree? This is a distinct issue versus dysfunctional funding of necessary degree paths.
    - ghostpepper 2y ago
      I may just be misunderstanding what you're saying but if you're just getting a degree to tick a box that says "Must have a degree" why would you pick engineering? What are the jobs that "require" an engineering degree but don't actually require any engineering knowledge?
      - toomuchtodo 2y ago
        Sorry for any misunderstanding. To be clear, there are two problems: 1. Students going into debt to get a degree simply because a job req calls for it, but potentially doesn't use the degree. Think "business administration" amongst others. The "Bachelor's Checkbox" on an application if you will. The debt they incur is the cost to increase their white collar lottery odds. 2. Degrees in domains that are crucial for the work to be done, but the financing model is fucked. Engineering, MD, etc. Both require solving for, but in this context, I am addressing the former.
tonetegeatinst 2y ago
I got a stem degree via community college, but had to goto a state college and get a bachelor in the same degree for employers to even consider hiring me or being able to move up in a company. I have a associates in science in cyber security, most credits didn't transfer to a bachelor's of science in cybwrsecurity program despite both being public schools and not private colleges. Its set my education back years all because most jobs demand a bachelor's and certifications.
musicale 2y ago
It is also hard to discharge student loan debt in bankruptcy.
cyanydeez 2y ago
Isn't the problem that education is a public good and therefore shouldn't cost anything special, and a system to sort prospective students into correct tiers based on honest merits would be better, but because rich people, it's what we have? Seems like you haven't even gone down the path most of the world operates on and just assume the system as it exists can't be modified.
- echelon 2y ago
  > Isn't the problem that education is a public good and therefore shouldn't cost anything special If your solution is to make all higher education free and turn this into yet another tax, then I have to ask where that money is going to come from. There's already tremendous inefficiency and malinvestment in higher education. Is it really worth diverting productive capital and private money into a system that is bloated? The frequently suggested fix is to remove the crutches and allow the system to fail, ie. make student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy. Risk has been foreign to the equation since the student loan system was established. With the reintroduction of risk, the system will balance itself. People will stop taking expensive degree programs with low ROI because there won't be any loans available. No lender will write loans for bad degree programs. Additionally, when the universities are forced to stop competing on what amenities they offer, they can lower their tuitions to a point where some form of public subsidy could be possible and sustainable. But in no way should we be spending tax dollars on present-day college tuition costs. Those costs need to drop substantially. The US would add another 0.5 - 0.7 trillion dollars to the deficit if we funded all universities at their present day costs. That would sink the entire ship. It'd be insane to add that to our budget.
  - cyanydeez 2y ago
    The money is going to come from the same place the money already comes from. I don't understand, and won't follow further someone who doesn't understand how public good works. Sorry you wasted your time.

NoWordsKotoba 2y ago

15 years ago when I was still in college in the US, the new president of the school came to give a speech to some incoming freshman. In that speech he talked a lot about how colleges were businesses and that the goal was to make them appealing to new students (new gyms, updated dorms, better stadiums, etc...). I knew in that moment that higher education had been overtaken by the MBAs. I guarantee that a school that focuses on education solely will not only be cheaper, but get the type of students that actually want to learn.

tssva 2y ago
My daughter will be starting in the fall at a private STEM focused university. They pride themselves on being a difficult school which throws you right into the deep end. They have no fancy gyms, the dorms are basic cinder block buildings without any fancy conveniences including no AC. The dining hall is very basic with limited food stations. It is very much inline with the amenities or lack of at my college when I was a freshmen in 1987. It has 1 D1 sport with the rest being D3. It is located in a mostly rural area. The other finalist school she didn’t choose is also private but has every amenity under the sun. The newer dorms which she would have been in because of her major have state of the art gyms inside them and parking garages under them which she would have been assigned a spot in. Multiple dining facilities whith a wide range of high quality food. The school has a full array of D1 sports programs and new atheletic facilities built within the last 5-15 years. It is located in a large metropolitan area. It doesn’t have near the same quality of academics as her choice. The estimated cost of attendance for 25-26 is with $500 of each other. Both being around $89k before any aid. She doesn’t qualify for federal financial aid. Luckily both offered very substantial merit aid. She did also consider one of our state schools. Although not as nice as the private she didn’t choose it is much closer to that than the school she did choose. They, along with all our state schools, are known for giving almost no aid beyond federal financial aid. The cost to attend would have been more than the two private schools after their merit aid awards. I guess my point is they get you whether they give you amenities or not and whether they are private or public.
- elteto 2y ago
  Precisely, if the tuition increases had generally gone into improving students lives at least it would serve as a sort of crappy consolation price. But the reality is that a high tide floats all boats, big or small, crappy or great. They are all charging outrageous tuition and making a fortune at the expense of the future of these students.

techpineapple 2y ago

300k is not rich, 300k in 2025 is like 90,000 in 1982. How is the aristocracy supposed to maintain their dominance if just anyone can go to a top college? You can’t risk a middle class family sending they’re kids to a school that may qualify them for a top job in law or politics.

pixelatedindex 2y ago
300K is over 5.5K/week. How the hell is that not rich? Delusional take.
- lucaspm98 2y ago
  $300k a year is rich in 99% of the world and 90%+ of the U.S. However, jobs that pay $300k vastly over-index to a few coastal major metros, where $300k a year is at the lower end of ever being able to own even a condo within a reasonable commute.
  - pixelatedindex 2y ago
    Yeah but then your spouse works too, and even if they only bring in like 80K that’s enough to cover living expenses, with the other salary covering housing.
0_____0 2y ago
And 90k in 1982 was what, the change between the couch cushions?
tiahura 2y ago
90k in 82 was country club eligible.
mikestew 2y ago
When I went to a top engineering school in 1982, we were told that when we graduated we could expect to make $35K/year as CS grads. Whoo hoo! Hello, upper middle class! $90K/year in 1982 was fuckin’ rolling in it.

AStonesThrow 2y ago

I think another factor at work here is analogous to our broken system of health care billing vs. insurance companies. Scholarships and financial aid will basically expand as necessary to meet tuition demands for students. Therefore, the colleges can name their price, as it is basically funny-money, and any given student will be on a combination of scholarship, FAFSA, mom/dad funds, loans. In fact it is sort of a joke. When I was in community college, Phi Theta Kappa made overtures to recruit me. One of their seminars featured a few students who had earned a lot of scholarships by virtue of their membership and service. And I do mean "a lot". I think one of the figures tossed out there was $23 million in scholarships. For a community college student. And to think I was baffled how to spend an extra $500 or so kicking around. I got really disillusioned, even with community college, after my final years there. It seemed that the tuition was the right price, and all the instructors were highly credentialed, knowledgeable, and helpful. The classes themselves were great. But the whole package was draining, and exhausting. It was like a neverending exposition of clubs, events, deals, and engagement. Every table on the mall, every student leader next to me, was simply dying to gain my loyalty, membership, and engagement in whatever they had going on. And I personally could not keep a lid on that, so I just sort of got torn to pieces. I was in 5 clubs and doing honors and all kinds of extra stuff that just wore me out. All I had wanted to do was just Take some Classes, Earn the Credits, and get out of there. But that is not a satisfactory goal for the colleges of today.

kylehotchkiss 2y ago

USC is $100,000 a year? How likely is that degree to net you $400,000 of value through your career?

artificialprint 2y ago
Divided by 40 years it doesn't look like much...
- nitwit005 2y ago
  $10k a year is a huge amount. The median US salary is $61k. Also realistically, you're likely getting a loan, so you need to factor in interest.
  - moralestapia 2y ago
    Not sure why you're downvoted as this is true. (and there's nothing wrong with you expressing this opinion) Not everyone in the US makes 500k TC doing remote work. 400k for a degree is absolute bonkers!
    - Projectiboga 2y ago
      To pay $400k off over even 20 years at 6%, which is below the average student loan rate is just over $2,000 a month and it is mostly not tax free. Our society is messing up with how expensive this has gotten. The bloat is facilities and administrators who earn two and three or more times the tenured professor salary. The guarantors have to be the schools themselves and those execs who take these bloated salaries. And that interest isn't deductable other than a pittance of $2,500 or less in a year. Here is the IRS about this; Student loan interest is interest you paid during the year on a qualified student loan. It includes both required and voluntarily prepaid interest payments. You may deduct the lesser of $2,500 or the amount of interest you actually paid during the year. The deduction is gradually reduced and eventually eliminated by phaseout when your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) amount reaches the annual limit for your filing status. https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc456 https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc456

butterlettuce 2y ago

I’m all for the federal government to completely ban student loans. You can either go to college out of pocket or with merit-based scholarships. And also place a federal ban on HR departments requiring degrees for clerical work. Such a stupid requirement is a form of discriminatory class warfare. Inequality would fall substantially and many universities will be forced to drop prices down to around 10-20k.

skybrian 2y ago
My guess is that it would result in more loans that aren’t called student loans. For example, via parents.
- sparky_z 2y ago
  That wouldn't distort the college market like ubiquitous student loans backed by the government do, so I don't see why that would be a problem.
  - skybrian 2y ago
    The claim is that “inequality would fall substantially” and I don’t see how it would when only the children of well-off families (or at least with good credit) can get college loans.
sunflowerfly 2y ago
I have wondered about the effects of adding minimum wages/salaries for positions that require each degree level. For example, if the job requires a bachelor degree or masters degree then the job must pay at least $X/hr. Set that rate just high enough to discourage abuse.
- Gigachad 2y ago
  Not sure how you’d enforce it when jobs would just silently require it but not advertise that fact. Or maybe not require it, but preference anyone who has one.

tiffanyh 2y ago

Surprised NIL wasn’t mentioned. Given that non-athletics are funding the lambo’s some universities give to all their football players (and huge paychecks) … if people thought the past 10-years tuition inflation was bad, watch what the next 10-years will be like.

klooney 2y ago
Isn't that generally an arms length thing- the boosters give the money, not the university?
- tiffanyh 2y ago
  NCAA is proposing direct student payment. Universities are now longer in the business of education. Its effectively competing with NFL. https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/44787232/ncaa-proposes-new-rules-allow-direct-payments-players https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/44787232/ncaa...