10 ms·

Dear Class of ’13: You’ve been scammed

82 points by DanielBMarkham 13y ago

irrationalidiom 13y ago
Australia is similar in the regard, except the Federal government covers part of the full course cost, the rest being covered by a CPI indexed loan (HECS) which needs to be paid back once employment income exceeds $38k per year (taken from tax refunds -- we have tax deducted every payday). That said, a typical university student will accumulate $9000 a year of HECS debt. And yet Universities continue to cry poor, cutting student services and teaching staff, despite increased revenues from full fee paying international students over the past decade. I'm perplexed as to why this is. Edit: Just found this: http://www.nteu.org.au/library/view/id/3828 http://www.nteu.org.au/library/view/id/3828 -- RMIT University spent $8.2 million on 19 "senior executive and council members". That's ~$431k a head, or according to the Union "125 HEW 6 academic staff."
- adekok 13y ago
  http://deltacostproject.org/resources/pdf/trends_in_spending-report.pdf http://deltacostproject.org/resources/pdf/trends_in_spending... Page 24: > In all institutional groupings—public and private—tuition prices increased faster than education and general spending per student. This suggests that both public and private institutions are becoming more dependent on tuition as a source of general revenue—not just to pay for education and related expenses, but as a general subsidy for all functions, including research and service. Page 33: > The primary cause of tuition increases in public institutions is not increased spending, but rather cost shifting to replace losses in state appropriations and other revenues. What would you rather have? 1) Low tuition subsidized by higher taxes when you're working 2) higher tuition but lower taxes later on The market seems to have chosen (2). Whether or not taxes are actually lower is another question. Personally, I think it's horrible to graduate with 80K+ in debt. To put it into perspective, my parents graduated with minimal debt. Their first debt was the purchase of a house, for about the same amount as student loans are now. What would you rather have on graduation? Student debt, or no student debt and a house?
  - irrationalidiom 13y ago
    Government funding for student places has increased slightly over 10 years, and full fee income (private places) has increased massively. See page 124: http://www.unimelb.edu.au/publications/docs/2012-annual-report.pdf http://www.unimelb.edu.au/publications/docs/2012-annual-repo...
Vivtek 13y ago
As the parent of a college freshman, let me say that this is one significant reason we've relocated to Budapest. (Not that this would be a help to most, as our daughter is bilingual in Hungarian.)
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  +1 Budapest. Beautiful, underrated city. When I was there, I did some of the best creative work of my life.
cstross 13y ago
You won't get that free education at Cambridge any more; it'll set you back £9000 in tuition fees every year, because successive British governments deliberately copied the US system. It is to weep ...
- alexchamberlain 13y ago
  Luckily, we still have the best universities in the world and despite the headline figure, what you actually pay is dependent on your earnings, so it's still well worth going. However, choose your university carefully. I was lucky,I went to Warwick and did well. Don't be taken in by the all degrees are equivalent rubbish.
- iuguy 13y ago
  Although to be fair it's different depending on where you go in the UK. Scottish degrees are distinctly more subsidised, and the situation in Wales is unlike England and Northern Ireland.
- jalev 13y ago
  Not to mention that the government has changed the interest rates[1] on loans for courses starting in '12. It's still lower than the interest rates that banks offer, but it's edging pretty close. [1] https://www.gov.uk/student-finance/repayments https://www.gov.uk/student-finance/repayments
- tezza 13y ago
  ? I went to Uni in Oz in 1995. We had then the exact system the English just put in place ( called HECS ) Students pay nothing up front... Not a penny. And you pay nothing until you get a job. Even when you have a job the repayment is tiny ; esp in relation to to other taxes like fair dinkum Income Tax How is this a bad thing ? Tax payers were nice to me to provide me the loan in the first place, and were nice to let me pay it back at my own pace.
  - frobozz 13y ago
    In England and Wales it's a bad thing, because it's another example of the "pull the ladder up" generation doing what they do best. The people who, in the 1970s&80s, benefited from grants, free tuition, and the ability to claim unemployment/low-income benefits in the summer holidays are the same people who are implementing these policies. They are the same people selling the lie of "get a degree, get a good job", then offering unpaid internships to new graduates, or insisting that even the doorman needs a degree. These are people who had "jobs for life" with year-on-year inflation matching/beating pay increments if they stayed still, or decent career progression if they didn't. They are now telling us that we can't expect that sort of treatment from them, and implementing "up or out" pay policies (even if they don't have any "up" positions to offer, because they are "flattening management structures"). These are also the people who will retire in 5-10 years time with Final Salary pensions from the schemes that they, themselves, have closed to the rest of us (because they took "payment holidays" in the good times). They are also the people who bought up all the housing at prices that a normal (at the time) middle-class single income young family could afford, then sold it on at prices that only better-off mid-30s DINKYs could afford. Just because we can't win all of these fights (and have already lost some), and just because some of the individual fights might seem trivial, it doesn't mean we should just roll over and take it without complaint, either for ourselves, or the current generation of schoolchildren and undergraduates.
amalag 13y ago
Just look at the bright side, we are using that money to pay $40k - $50k a year for prisoners.
- JacksonGariety 13y ago
  But big brother makes $40k - $50k off of those prisoners anyway and puts it towards building weapons for our "war." All good, right?
Morphling 13y ago
I get that paying for your education is pretty bad, but as someone who is enjoying free bachelor level education in Finland I can tell that the amount of quality teachers is pretty low, our small campus has maybe 4 teachers I'd consider competent. I'm also the kind of guy who'd enjoy extracurricular clubs, but sadly out of the few hundred students at our campus total of 3 of us (me included) are interested in club activities and only student body event that gets more than 10 people attending is yearly "drinking cruise". I can't say for sure that these two things are related, but I have a hunch that since people aren't actually paying for their education most don't take it as seriously and thus people just do the bare minimum they can get away with. Or maybe it's just the general level of education which is so much lower nothing feels "real" at least considering how much I read U.S. based engineering students whine about...
- mgla 13y ago
  Which college in Finland are you at? Isn't the University of Helsinki among the best in the world? (just curious)
  - Morphling 13y ago
    I'm actually attending HAMK University of Applied Sciences which only produces engineers for different fields. I'm sure the "bigger players" like Aalto Univeristy or University of Turku are of higher quality, but I can't judge since I've never attended neither.
- bmmayer1 13y ago
  Well, you're not paying for your education yet
- purplelobster 13y ago
  Go to most of the small colleges in the US and you'll probably see the same thing. I don't know what it's like in Finland, but from what I've experienced at Swedish universities it also varies a lot. Uppsala, Lund, KTH etc have great student life and I didn't feel that people took it less seriously than at the american university I've been at. Sure, we don't pay tuition, but usually parents don't pay for their childrens' living expenses during college either. I have about $50k in debt (very low interest loan), all from living expenses for 5 years. That plus the loss of income during this time means you can't really slack off.
jaxbot 13y ago
I'm class of '13 for grade school, entering college this fall at a state university. I've been programming since I was 8, and from what I can tell, my self-teaching has put me at a level above people fresh out of school with a flashy degree that says "hire me." I'm not good with words, but my point is this. I find it terribly concerning that I'm paying $50k to go to a school to learn something I already know, and know well, to take classes on subjects somewhat connected to what I'll do in a future career, to get a job full of incompetent idiots who get the same paper as me. I'd appreciate some critiques on my thinking process
- sunsu 13y ago
  If you actually are as good as you say you are, then don't go. Spend the time getting real work experience.
  - jaxbot 13y ago
    I consider myself pretty good; I honestly have no baseline, but I've spent several years working with PHP, HTML5, JavaScript, I've learned Node.js, and I've built several working prototype projects over my high school years. They're clean, follow standards, and have been great learning experiences for me (trial and error beats lectures, for me). This being said, I have a bad feeling that my portfolio won't outweigh a degree. I don't know why degrees are valued more than actual knowledge, but that seems to be what the data shows.
    - irrationalidiom 13y ago
      > I consider myself pretty good; I honestly have no baseline... This is your only blocker to success. I also had a lack of self confidence -- I put this up to the pedestal we put university degrees upon. By what you've done so far, it sounds like you are better than most 90% of people finishing with Computer Science degrees. There are employers who can see that -- but most recruiters do not (though they do latch on to buzzwords). Demonstrate your passion and your skill and you'll easily get a job somewhere in the industry.
    - 13y ago
jswinghammer 13y ago
30-40k of debt seems a lot less than many people I have known are in with degrees that will never be meaningful to employers. Parents need to adjust for the world as it is and teach their kids that degrees can be profitable to them in the right fields and without debt. I've known several people who had 100k+ worth of college debt and very little to actually show for it. The debt is the real problem here. If you have a degree that isn't going to do anything for you then that's bad but with debt everything is so much worse. Debt makes any problem you have so much worse.
TDL 13y ago
"You have just paid about three times as much for your degree as did someone graduating 30 years ago." Aren't more people going to college these days than people were 30 years ago? The "conspiracy" doesn't exist, the fetishizing of higher education happened in the open. It is a tragedy that a great system of learning (liberal education) has been so watered down and over-sold.
michaelochurch 13y ago
It's better to understand this as an extortion dynamic than a single conspiracy. Mafia is a good analogy. There is no "Mafia" (except for werewolves, if anyone gets the allusion). There are various crime families and connections between them are loose to nonexistent. "Mafia" is a term people make up to describe what are actually a heterogeneous set of people who just happen to compete in such a way that they get the benefits and the externalities fall out on society (just like an upper class). Conspiracy theories are an attractive proposition because you can "blow up the room where they meet". If only it were that simple. The reality is that the types of people who are in power are naturally extortionist-- it's probably genetic-- and such people are naturally drawn to the power they gain in numbers, but too individually arrogant and selfish to form comic-book "Conspiracies" (cf. "The Empire" in mid-90s console RPGs). In reality, lower-case-c conspiracies exist all over the place, but there's no "one room where they meet". Ok, now onto the expensiveness of college and (as mentioned) urban real estate, it's an extortion economy. It's a protection racket. Colleges are (at least in theory) able to protect people from falling to the bottom, and that's the service they sell these days. As the U.S. middle class shuts down, demand for the few remaining seats becomes nearly infinite. That's why college tuitions are crossing the $50,000 barrier and rents are skyrocketing in the few locations where it's possible for a young person to start a career. The U.S. middle class is being "obsoleted" and people, in panic, are clinging to the few successful institutions (top universities, star cities) that appear high enough to survive the flood. You can view this as a generation getting "screwed" but I see it as a mix of good and bad. We also live in a time when participation in technology is becoming available to the masses. This really is the best and worst of times. We could win big and change history, or we could be the worst loser generation the world has seen in hundreds of years. It's still not determined yet. I look at the upper classes and see insecurity and weakness. Sure, they're parasitic and mostly evil, but they also are afraid of something. I'm not sure what yet. But a lot of their parasitic hyperconsumption is them throwing a huge party before the curtain drops on them. I still believe in Avenue 1. Avenue 1 is that we level up on technology and education and make a better world and just outperform these assholes. We build better companies and institutions and allow them to decline peacefully. (Avenue 2 is a violent, worldwide revolution against the current global elite that will probably kill ~4 million before it concludes.) We don't have to fight them directly; we just build things that are superior to what they can come up with, and gradually draw power through positive means. Avenue 1 means we, as a generation, build something like what Silicon Valley was before it became VC-istan. I see a lot of opportunity. Sure, those in our generation who hoped to have the easy route to corporate executive sinecures have lost that opportunity forever; but Avenue 1 is a real possibility.
codva 13y ago
I really have little sympathy for somebody that attends an out of state or private school and racks up $100K in college debt getting a sociology degree. My son just finished up his freshman year as a history major. However, he is going to the perfectly good public school located 15 minutes from home, and living at home. It's costing me $5000 a semester in tuition, which isn't chump change, but isn't going to bankrupt me either. If he had to take on some debt to get his degree it would be manageable. We could have made it cheaper still by having him spend the first two years in community college. College costs are out of control in the US, but that doesn't mean we have to blindly pay them.
- mikegioia 13y ago
  I agree with you, but you're neglecting to realize how little some people understand about the college process. My dad and I we're definitely in the upper quartile in the college application process, yet even I got stuck with 100k of debt from a private university. Why didn't I go to a public college instead? Who knows! All I can say is that I would have done it differently back then (graduated 2007). Now imagine you're NOT that informed of the college process, your school's guidance counselor doesn't know anything or care, and your parents don't really know anything about it other than the US News top colleges report. You're more than likely going to enroll in an overpriced university more-so out of ignorance than anything else.
  - AJ007 13y ago
    You don't need any help, its math that any high school student should be capable of. Its the same as any time you borrow money to buy something like a car or house, except with this one your ability to ever discharge the debt is quite limited! When I was starting college none of my friends really knew what they wanted to do. Many switched degrees. Some more than once. While I had only a rough idea at the time, in general terms it matched what I ended up doing. I don't know what the answer is here, but it starts with high school students getting a good deal of real life experience. Football, tennis, cheer leading, and prom are not real life experiences.
    - 13y ago
quackerhacker 13y ago
Attending a "prestigious," college usually means that you NEED to make it. I use to pressure my own self into a mental state that, "I need to achieve in life... a career, a business, something that shows my valor, my intellect." A college degree, I believe, will get you further in a career (or at least an interview),...but getting the interview, that's what college is for! I don't believe that BS saying "it's not what you know, it's who you know." What you know, is equally important as to who you know, because if you don't know diddly squat, who you know will laugh you away. To clear up any presumptions...I'm a college dropout that passed on going to SFSU, because I didn't want to go back to the bay area, but if I could change it...hmmm college degree or criminal record. (easy choice)
Alex3917 13y ago
This article is completely wrong. The basic claim of the article is that according to the College Board, the amount students actually spend to attend college has increased 300% over the last 30 years. Is this actual true? College Board does track the amount students spend, they call this statistic net sticker price -- that is, sticker price minus all grants, scholarships, and tax credits. However, they only track net sticker price back to 1990. The figure that this article is citing is sticker price, which isn't the amount that students spend, as the article claims, but rather it's just the list price. (This guy is basically quoting the fake price that's crossed out on Amazon that no one actually pays so that they can trick you into thinking you're saving money.) Here is the difference, with both statistics carried as far back as they go from the College Board data: "The average sticker price for yearly tuition and required fees (not including room and board) at private non-profit 4-year institutions increased from $10,378 in 1972-73 (2012 dollars) to $29,056 in 2012-13. At public institutions the cost increased from $2,225 to $8,655. The net yearly tuition and required fees (sticker price minus total grant aid and tax benefits) at public 4-year colleges for in-state residents increased from $1,840 in 1990-91 (2012 dollars) to $2,910 in 2012-13 . At private non-profit institutions the net price increased from $11,060 in 1990-91 to $13,380 in 2012-13." Sources: CollegeBoard - http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-table-2a2b.xlsx http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-t... - Tuition and Fee and Room and Board Charges over Time in 2012 Dollars, 1972-73 through 2012-13, Selected Years http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-table-7_0.xlsx http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-t... - Table 7 - Average Net Price for Full-Time Students over Time — Public Institutions http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-table-8.xlsx http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-t... - Table 8 - Average Net Price for Full-Time Students over Time — Private Institutions This isn't to say that it's impossible that the net sticker price has increased by 300% -- it may have, or may not have, there's no way to know. But the College Board data certainly doesn't doesn't show this, which is the claim the author is making. Similarly, the author claims that the average student this year at a private college spent $29,000 on their education. This is also a blatant lie. As you can see from the actual College Board data, which this guy claims is his source, the real figure there is $13,380. And it's not like this guy doesn't know the difference, since the data for both is on the same page -- this entire article is just a bunch of blatant lies designed to promote whatever his bullshit agenda is.
jupiterjaz 13y ago
Cynicism aside that was a pretty entertaining read.
JeffJenkins 13y ago
At the University of Waterloo where I went we had a co-op program where people would get (usually) reasonably well paid internships. We switched between work and school every 4 months, so when you were done you had a 4-year degree and 2 years of work experience. This both drastically increased the value of the degree—it was very common to end up getting a job in one of the places you did a co-op term—and gave you some money to help cover your costs for each upcoming school term. It also helps that Canada subsidizes its universities, but I still would have had 30k in tuition alone if it weren't for co-op. As it was I left with ~13k in debt and I had lived reasonably comfortably and chosen to never work while I was in school. I really don't understand why co-op hasn't been adopted almost universally. It's hugely beneficial to all parties.
- sghill 13y ago
  > I really don't understand why co-op hasn't been adopted almost universally. It's hugely beneficial to all parties. I completely agree. I went to a much more traditional school in the US, but recently got the chance to visit Waterloo to do a guest lecture. It feels like the university of the future. In the classroom, students were having discussions with opinions backed by actual work experience. After spending the day there I wished I had known about it or looked for a co-op when I was looking for school.
- ampersandy 13y ago
  Waterloo's co-op program has been absolutely incredible. I'm fairly confident that most of my classmates will graduate debt-free (or very close) and already have several job offers on the table.
- greenlander 13y ago
  I was a manager at a major semiconductor company for long time. I personally hired boatloads of interns out of Waterloo. On the whole, they were a great bunch. Many of the best ones we converted to full-time hires. I agree it was a great program for both parties.
rlu 13y ago
Oh look, it's this article again..
the7nd 13y ago
I graduated high school last year and decided to forgo a $40,000 college to be an entrepreneur. I regret nothing. Unfortunately, my parents are doing the silliest thing imaginable and are forcing me to go to college now. I dread reading articles like this four years from now.
lordofbackland 13y ago
Most of universities now a days charge according to their brand value. The major ingredient of their brand value is the alumni network and only minor part is actual environment that they provide. If your only aim is to learn something, then spending $40,000 is atrocious.
vinceguidry 13y ago
The hack overuse of <X Industrial Complex> makes this article very difficult to take seriously. The real military industrial complex and the regulatory capture it described was far more serious and dangerous than this ever could be, producing war after war on the backs of the poor to serve tiny oligarchies. Compared to that, this is just a schoolyard tussle.

Australia is similar in the regard, except the Federal government covers part of the full course cost, the rest being covered by a CPI indexed loan (HECS) which needs to be paid back once employment income exceeds $38k per year (taken from tax refunds -- we have tax deducted every payday). That said, a typical university student will accumulate $9000 a year of HECS debt. And yet Universities continue to cry poor, cutting student services and teaching staff, despite increased revenues from full fee paying international students over the past decade. I'm perplexed as to why this is. Edit: Just found this: http://www.nteu.org.au/library/view/id/3828 http://www.nteu.org.au/library/view/id/3828 -- RMIT University spent $8.2 million on 19 "senior executive and council members". That's ~$431k a head, or according to the Union "125 HEW 6 academic staff."

adekok 13y ago
http://deltacostproject.org/resources/pdf/trends_in_spending-report.pdf http://deltacostproject.org/resources/pdf/trends_in_spending... Page 24: > In all institutional groupings—public and private—tuition prices increased faster than education and general spending per student. This suggests that both public and private institutions are becoming more dependent on tuition as a source of general revenue—not just to pay for education and related expenses, but as a general subsidy for all functions, including research and service. Page 33: > The primary cause of tuition increases in public institutions is not increased spending, but rather cost shifting to replace losses in state appropriations and other revenues. What would you rather have? 1) Low tuition subsidized by higher taxes when you're working 2) higher tuition but lower taxes later on The market seems to have chosen (2). Whether or not taxes are actually lower is another question. Personally, I think it's horrible to graduate with 80K+ in debt. To put it into perspective, my parents graduated with minimal debt. Their first debt was the purchase of a house, for about the same amount as student loans are now. What would you rather have on graduation? Student debt, or no student debt and a house?
- irrationalidiom 13y ago
  Government funding for student places has increased slightly over 10 years, and full fee income (private places) has increased massively. See page 124: http://www.unimelb.edu.au/publications/docs/2012-annual-report.pdf http://www.unimelb.edu.au/publications/docs/2012-annual-repo...

Vivtek 13y ago

As the parent of a college freshman, let me say that this is one significant reason we've relocated to Budapest. (Not that this would be a help to most, as our daughter is bilingual in Hungarian.)

michaelochurch 13y ago
+1 Budapest. Beautiful, underrated city. When I was there, I did some of the best creative work of my life.

cstross 13y ago

You won't get that free education at Cambridge any more; it'll set you back £9000 in tuition fees every year, because successive British governments deliberately copied the US system. It is to weep ...

alexchamberlain 13y ago
Luckily, we still have the best universities in the world and despite the headline figure, what you actually pay is dependent on your earnings, so it's still well worth going. However, choose your university carefully. I was lucky,I went to Warwick and did well. Don't be taken in by the all degrees are equivalent rubbish.
iuguy 13y ago
Although to be fair it's different depending on where you go in the UK. Scottish degrees are distinctly more subsidised, and the situation in Wales is unlike England and Northern Ireland.
jalev 13y ago
Not to mention that the government has changed the interest rates[1] on loans for courses starting in '12. It's still lower than the interest rates that banks offer, but it's edging pretty close. [1] https://www.gov.uk/student-finance/repayments https://www.gov.uk/student-finance/repayments
tezza 13y ago
? I went to Uni in Oz in 1995. We had then the exact system the English just put in place ( called HECS ) Students pay nothing up front... Not a penny. And you pay nothing until you get a job. Even when you have a job the repayment is tiny ; esp in relation to to other taxes like fair dinkum Income Tax How is this a bad thing ? Tax payers were nice to me to provide me the loan in the first place, and were nice to let me pay it back at my own pace.
- frobozz 13y ago
  In England and Wales it's a bad thing, because it's another example of the "pull the ladder up" generation doing what they do best. The people who, in the 1970s&80s, benefited from grants, free tuition, and the ability to claim unemployment/low-income benefits in the summer holidays are the same people who are implementing these policies. They are the same people selling the lie of "get a degree, get a good job", then offering unpaid internships to new graduates, or insisting that even the doorman needs a degree. These are people who had "jobs for life" with year-on-year inflation matching/beating pay increments if they stayed still, or decent career progression if they didn't. They are now telling us that we can't expect that sort of treatment from them, and implementing "up or out" pay policies (even if they don't have any "up" positions to offer, because they are "flattening management structures"). These are also the people who will retire in 5-10 years time with Final Salary pensions from the schemes that they, themselves, have closed to the rest of us (because they took "payment holidays" in the good times). They are also the people who bought up all the housing at prices that a normal (at the time) middle-class single income young family could afford, then sold it on at prices that only better-off mid-30s DINKYs could afford. Just because we can't win all of these fights (and have already lost some), and just because some of the individual fights might seem trivial, it doesn't mean we should just roll over and take it without complaint, either for ourselves, or the current generation of schoolchildren and undergraduates.

amalag 13y ago

Just look at the bright side, we are using that money to pay $40k - $50k a year for prisoners.

JacksonGariety 13y ago
But big brother makes $40k - $50k off of those prisoners anyway and puts it towards building weapons for our "war." All good, right?

Morphling 13y ago

I get that paying for your education is pretty bad, but as someone who is enjoying free bachelor level education in Finland I can tell that the amount of quality teachers is pretty low, our small campus has maybe 4 teachers I'd consider competent. I'm also the kind of guy who'd enjoy extracurricular clubs, but sadly out of the few hundred students at our campus total of 3 of us (me included) are interested in club activities and only student body event that gets more than 10 people attending is yearly "drinking cruise". I can't say for sure that these two things are related, but I have a hunch that since people aren't actually paying for their education most don't take it as seriously and thus people just do the bare minimum they can get away with. Or maybe it's just the general level of education which is so much lower nothing feels "real" at least considering how much I read U.S. based engineering students whine about...

mgla 13y ago
Which college in Finland are you at? Isn't the University of Helsinki among the best in the world? (just curious)
- Morphling 13y ago
  I'm actually attending HAMK University of Applied Sciences which only produces engineers for different fields. I'm sure the "bigger players" like Aalto Univeristy or University of Turku are of higher quality, but I can't judge since I've never attended neither.
bmmayer1 13y ago
Well, you're not paying for your education yet
purplelobster 13y ago
Go to most of the small colleges in the US and you'll probably see the same thing. I don't know what it's like in Finland, but from what I've experienced at Swedish universities it also varies a lot. Uppsala, Lund, KTH etc have great student life and I didn't feel that people took it less seriously than at the american university I've been at. Sure, we don't pay tuition, but usually parents don't pay for their childrens' living expenses during college either. I have about $50k in debt (very low interest loan), all from living expenses for 5 years. That plus the loss of income during this time means you can't really slack off.

jaxbot 13y ago

I'm class of '13 for grade school, entering college this fall at a state university. I've been programming since I was 8, and from what I can tell, my self-teaching has put me at a level above people fresh out of school with a flashy degree that says "hire me." I'm not good with words, but my point is this. I find it terribly concerning that I'm paying $50k to go to a school to learn something I already know, and know well, to take classes on subjects somewhat connected to what I'll do in a future career, to get a job full of incompetent idiots who get the same paper as me. I'd appreciate some critiques on my thinking process

sunsu 13y ago
If you actually are as good as you say you are, then don't go. Spend the time getting real work experience.
- jaxbot 13y ago
  I consider myself pretty good; I honestly have no baseline, but I've spent several years working with PHP, HTML5, JavaScript, I've learned Node.js, and I've built several working prototype projects over my high school years. They're clean, follow standards, and have been great learning experiences for me (trial and error beats lectures, for me). This being said, I have a bad feeling that my portfolio won't outweigh a degree. I don't know why degrees are valued more than actual knowledge, but that seems to be what the data shows.
  - irrationalidiom 13y ago
    > I consider myself pretty good; I honestly have no baseline... This is your only blocker to success. I also had a lack of self confidence -- I put this up to the pedestal we put university degrees upon. By what you've done so far, it sounds like you are better than most 90% of people finishing with Computer Science degrees. There are employers who can see that -- but most recruiters do not (though they do latch on to buzzwords). Demonstrate your passion and your skill and you'll easily get a job somewhere in the industry.
  - 13y ago

jswinghammer 13y ago

30-40k of debt seems a lot less than many people I have known are in with degrees that will never be meaningful to employers. Parents need to adjust for the world as it is and teach their kids that degrees can be profitable to them in the right fields and without debt. I've known several people who had 100k+ worth of college debt and very little to actually show for it. The debt is the real problem here. If you have a degree that isn't going to do anything for you then that's bad but with debt everything is so much worse. Debt makes any problem you have so much worse.

TDL 13y ago

"You have just paid about three times as much for your degree as did someone graduating 30 years ago." Aren't more people going to college these days than people were 30 years ago? The "conspiracy" doesn't exist, the fetishizing of higher education happened in the open. It is a tragedy that a great system of learning (liberal education) has been so watered down and over-sold.

michaelochurch 13y ago

It's better to understand this as an extortion dynamic than a single conspiracy. Mafia is a good analogy. There is no "Mafia" (except for werewolves, if anyone gets the allusion). There are various crime families and connections between them are loose to nonexistent. "Mafia" is a term people make up to describe what are actually a heterogeneous set of people who just happen to compete in such a way that they get the benefits and the externalities fall out on society (just like an upper class). Conspiracy theories are an attractive proposition because you can "blow up the room where they meet". If only it were that simple. The reality is that the types of people who are in power are naturally extortionist-- it's probably genetic-- and such people are naturally drawn to the power they gain in numbers, but too individually arrogant and selfish to form comic-book "Conspiracies" (cf. "The Empire" in mid-90s console RPGs). In reality, lower-case-c conspiracies exist all over the place, but there's no "one room where they meet". Ok, now onto the expensiveness of college and (as mentioned) urban real estate, it's an extortion economy. It's a protection racket. Colleges are (at least in theory) able to protect people from falling to the bottom, and that's the service they sell these days. As the U.S. middle class shuts down, demand for the few remaining seats becomes nearly infinite. That's why college tuitions are crossing the $50,000 barrier and rents are skyrocketing in the few locations where it's possible for a young person to start a career. The U.S. middle class is being "obsoleted" and people, in panic, are clinging to the few successful institutions (top universities, star cities) that appear high enough to survive the flood. You can view this as a generation getting "screwed" but I see it as a mix of good and bad. We also live in a time when participation in technology is becoming available to the masses. This really is the best and worst of times. We could win big and change history, or we could be the worst loser generation the world has seen in hundreds of years. It's still not determined yet. I look at the upper classes and see insecurity and weakness. Sure, they're parasitic and mostly evil, but they also are afraid of something. I'm not sure what yet. But a lot of their parasitic hyperconsumption is them throwing a huge party before the curtain drops on them. I still believe in Avenue 1. Avenue 1 is that we level up on technology and education and make a better world and just outperform these assholes. We build better companies and institutions and allow them to decline peacefully. (Avenue 2 is a violent, worldwide revolution against the current global elite that will probably kill ~4 million before it concludes.) We don't have to fight them directly; we just build things that are superior to what they can come up with, and gradually draw power through positive means. Avenue 1 means we, as a generation, build something like what Silicon Valley was before it became VC-istan. I see a lot of opportunity. Sure, those in our generation who hoped to have the easy route to corporate executive sinecures have lost that opportunity forever; but Avenue 1 is a real possibility.

codva 13y ago

I really have little sympathy for somebody that attends an out of state or private school and racks up $100K in college debt getting a sociology degree. My son just finished up his freshman year as a history major. However, he is going to the perfectly good public school located 15 minutes from home, and living at home. It's costing me $5000 a semester in tuition, which isn't chump change, but isn't going to bankrupt me either. If he had to take on some debt to get his degree it would be manageable. We could have made it cheaper still by having him spend the first two years in community college. College costs are out of control in the US, but that doesn't mean we have to blindly pay them.

mikegioia 13y ago
I agree with you, but you're neglecting to realize how little some people understand about the college process. My dad and I we're definitely in the upper quartile in the college application process, yet even I got stuck with 100k of debt from a private university. Why didn't I go to a public college instead? Who knows! All I can say is that I would have done it differently back then (graduated 2007). Now imagine you're NOT that informed of the college process, your school's guidance counselor doesn't know anything or care, and your parents don't really know anything about it other than the US News top colleges report. You're more than likely going to enroll in an overpriced university more-so out of ignorance than anything else.
- AJ007 13y ago
  You don't need any help, its math that any high school student should be capable of. Its the same as any time you borrow money to buy something like a car or house, except with this one your ability to ever discharge the debt is quite limited! When I was starting college none of my friends really knew what they wanted to do. Many switched degrees. Some more than once. While I had only a rough idea at the time, in general terms it matched what I ended up doing. I don't know what the answer is here, but it starts with high school students getting a good deal of real life experience. Football, tennis, cheer leading, and prom are not real life experiences.
  - 13y ago

quackerhacker 13y ago

Attending a "prestigious," college usually means that you NEED to make it. I use to pressure my own self into a mental state that, "I need to achieve in life... a career, a business, something that shows my valor, my intellect." A college degree, I believe, will get you further in a career (or at least an interview),...but getting the interview, that's what college is for! I don't believe that BS saying "it's not what you know, it's who you know." What you know, is equally important as to who you know, because if you don't know diddly squat, who you know will laugh you away. To clear up any presumptions...I'm a college dropout that passed on going to SFSU, because I didn't want to go back to the bay area, but if I could change it...hmmm college degree or criminal record. (easy choice)

Alex3917 13y ago

This article is completely wrong. The basic claim of the article is that according to the College Board, the amount students actually spend to attend college has increased 300% over the last 30 years. Is this actual true? College Board does track the amount students spend, they call this statistic net sticker price -- that is, sticker price minus all grants, scholarships, and tax credits. However, they only track net sticker price back to 1990. The figure that this article is citing is sticker price, which isn't the amount that students spend, as the article claims, but rather it's just the list price. (This guy is basically quoting the fake price that's crossed out on Amazon that no one actually pays so that they can trick you into thinking you're saving money.) Here is the difference, with both statistics carried as far back as they go from the College Board data: "The average sticker price for yearly tuition and required fees (not including room and board) at private non-profit 4-year institutions increased from $10,378 in 1972-73 (2012 dollars) to $29,056 in 2012-13. At public institutions the cost increased from $2,225 to $8,655. The net yearly tuition and required fees (sticker price minus total grant aid and tax benefits) at public 4-year colleges for in-state residents increased from $1,840 in 1990-91 (2012 dollars) to $2,910 in 2012-13 . At private non-profit institutions the net price increased from $11,060 in 1990-91 to $13,380 in 2012-13." Sources: CollegeBoard - http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-table-2a2b.xlsx http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-t... - Tuition and Fee and Room and Board Charges over Time in 2012 Dollars, 1972-73 through 2012-13, Selected Years http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-table-7_0.xlsx http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-t... - Table 7 - Average Net Price for Full-Time Students over Time — Public Institutions http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-table-8.xlsx http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2012-t... - Table 8 - Average Net Price for Full-Time Students over Time — Private Institutions This isn't to say that it's impossible that the net sticker price has increased by 300% -- it may have, or may not have, there's no way to know. But the College Board data certainly doesn't doesn't show this, which is the claim the author is making. Similarly, the author claims that the average student this year at a private college spent $29,000 on their education. This is also a blatant lie. As you can see from the actual College Board data, which this guy claims is his source, the real figure there is $13,380. And it's not like this guy doesn't know the difference, since the data for both is on the same page -- this entire article is just a bunch of blatant lies designed to promote whatever his bullshit agenda is.

jupiterjaz 13y ago

Cynicism aside that was a pretty entertaining read.

JeffJenkins 13y ago

At the University of Waterloo where I went we had a co-op program where people would get (usually) reasonably well paid internships. We switched between work and school every 4 months, so when you were done you had a 4-year degree and 2 years of work experience. This both drastically increased the value of the degree—it was very common to end up getting a job in one of the places you did a co-op term—and gave you some money to help cover your costs for each upcoming school term. It also helps that Canada subsidizes its universities, but I still would have had 30k in tuition alone if it weren't for co-op. As it was I left with ~13k in debt and I had lived reasonably comfortably and chosen to never work while I was in school. I really don't understand why co-op hasn't been adopted almost universally. It's hugely beneficial to all parties.

sghill 13y ago
> I really don't understand why co-op hasn't been adopted almost universally. It's hugely beneficial to all parties. I completely agree. I went to a much more traditional school in the US, but recently got the chance to visit Waterloo to do a guest lecture. It feels like the university of the future. In the classroom, students were having discussions with opinions backed by actual work experience. After spending the day there I wished I had known about it or looked for a co-op when I was looking for school.
ampersandy 13y ago
Waterloo's co-op program has been absolutely incredible. I'm fairly confident that most of my classmates will graduate debt-free (or very close) and already have several job offers on the table.
greenlander 13y ago
I was a manager at a major semiconductor company for long time. I personally hired boatloads of interns out of Waterloo. On the whole, they were a great bunch. Many of the best ones we converted to full-time hires. I agree it was a great program for both parties.

rlu 13y ago

Oh look, it's this article again..

the7nd 13y ago

I graduated high school last year and decided to forgo a $40,000 college to be an entrepreneur. I regret nothing. Unfortunately, my parents are doing the silliest thing imaginable and are forcing me to go to college now. I dread reading articles like this four years from now.

lordofbackland 13y ago

Most of universities now a days charge according to their brand value. The major ingredient of their brand value is the alumni network and only minor part is actual environment that they provide. If your only aim is to learn something, then spending $40,000 is atrocious.

vinceguidry 13y ago

The hack overuse of <X Industrial Complex> makes this article very difficult to take seriously. The real military industrial complex and the regulatory capture it described was far more serious and dangerous than this ever could be, producing war after war on the backs of the poor to serve tiny oligarchies. Compared to that, this is just a schoolyard tussle.