• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The cost of education

aociswundumho said:
15 years ago banks were giving big loans to uncreditworthy, low income borrowers to buy houses they couldn't afford. The rationale by the idiotic political left was "Everyone deserves to buy a home."

Today banks will give a big loan to an uncreditworthy, low income borrower to get a degree in Lesbian Dance Theory. The rationale by the idiotic political left is "Everyone deserves a college education."
Click to expand...



‘15 years ago banks were giving big loans to uncreditworthy, low income borrowers to buy houses they couldn't afford. The rationale by the idiotic political left was "Everyone deserves to buy a home." ’

You can’t provide the evidence to prove this claim of yours. Try. Otherwise, your claim is unfounded and dismissed without need of further debate.

‘Today banks will give a big loan to an uncreditworthy, low income borrower to get a degree in Lesbian Dance Theory. The rationale by the idiotic political left is "Everyone deserves a college education." ’

I’m more curious of what evidence you have to do with this than challenging you to prove your claim of no impact. If you want to broaden your claim to “get a degree”, period, then I’d want evidence that these borrowers do not deserve these loans you apparently say they should not be getting and how many there are of them (significance).
 
eman623 said:
We should end all federally subsidized student loans NOW and make existing student loan debt dischargable in bankruptcy.

In other words, stop any further bleeding and let those who took out the loans work it out with the schools that sold the loans to them.

And let's start looking at alternatives to going to a big expensive college, which in the digital age are almost as anachronistic as book stores. Knowledge is free. To paraphrasee Good Will Hunting, a person should be able to get a basic college education for nothing more than a few dollars of overdue library fines. It's that diploma that you're paying for and in many cases it's worthless.
Click to expand...

The experience and direction involved in getting a degree is a lot more than just reading some textbooks, but for the most part, you're on the ball here.
 
trouble13 said:
I saw this last night and i think mike rowe makes some really good points about the cost of college educations. Imo this is a subject that we should be able to discuss in a bipartisan way.

YouTube

Tucker Carlson makes a pretty good suggestion in a later segment. He suggests that schools should share in the risks on student loans. I think he is right about that.

What are your thoughts?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...



As is a public education through 12 grades, at least a public education through a community college two-year degree is now as necessary as once was a HS degree, and public funding up to a limit for a bachelor's degree, besides the normal student loan availability more additional amounts as may be necessary for completing the degree or higher degree. Including an equivalent trade-school training and education as the student may so choose. This is the best way of assuring employers get what they require and prospective employees have what those employers are looking for. However, those students should also be required to give two years of national service. That could be in the military or civil service. Just like now being in the military for two years gives educational benefits.
 
Greenbeard said:
People take out the loans because by-and-large they get a pretty good return on them.
Click to expand...

Michael Spence is not well known outside of the economics community, but he made a very interesting argument with regards to the acquisition of credentials. A big part of what a degree is worth, Spence theorized, depends on its capacity to pin down more productive workers. Most people look at college and think about what you learn at college. However, you can also think of it as a way to economize on the costs of information from the point of view of employers. Productivity depends on an entire host of attributes such as general intelligence and conscientiousness. The harder the sequence of tasks people have to go through to get a degree, the more certain you can be that those coming out at the other end have the right qualities.

Of course, if we are talking about technical degrees, you also acquire skills that can form the basis over which you will build industry-specific expertise later. I only point out the idea of Spence because it's less obvious to most people.
 
Jesse Booth said:
2 minutes, 55 seconds into the video: "college is expensive because we freed up an unlimited pile of money and told an entire generation they were doomed to fail if they didn't borrow it." This is an objectively false assessment of why college is expensive, while almost being on the money. Student loans are the core of the issue, and are built around the idea of driving America's youth into an exorbitantly expensive education system that will see two-thirds of them drop out, while saddling them with debt they can't even escape through bankruptcy & might not even be able to pay of WITH a job afforded by their degree. Nowhere else in the world can you find a nation whose education system is this mismanaged in terms of burdening the most vulnerable of those involved, and pretending that it's caused by the availability of funding is similarly unique to America.
Click to expand...

I think I may have a solution (though not the only solution), Jesse Booth. I would force colleges to guarantee the Federally-backed student loans they receive. So for those colleges that hand out so-called "worthless degrees" that render their students unable to find reasonably well-paying work within a certain amount of time (say, within four years of graduation), forgive the student and force the colleges to pay the loans back with interest and penalties. And for those students who drop out of college for various reasons, again, go after the college.

That way, colleges will either have to make sure that they only sign off on loans that they believe will almost-certainly guarantee their students bright financial futures. Or lower tuition costs so to make any student's default less onerous on the college to repay.
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
Being a non-profit organization (as most colleges are) does not mean that huge salaries aren't paid to all sorts of administrators or that the facilities include only what is required to meet the needs of the operation - the heads (CEOs) of many charitable non-profits are paid more than the POTUS and their facilities are often quite lavish.
Click to expand...

The pay of top executives at MANY non profits is astronomical. Salaries and benefits you would never see in the private sector.
 
Felis Leo said:
I think I may have a solution, Jesse Booth. I would force colleges to guarantee the federally-backed loans they receive. So for those colleges that hand out so-called "worthless degrees" that render their students unable to find reasonably well-paying work, forgive the student and force the colleges to pay the loans back. And for those students who drop out of college for various reasons, again, go after the college.
Click to expand...

That would only make the entire system more expensive for the people who CAN find well-paying work, Felis, and I personally suspect that it would make it extremely difficult for people from poorer households to get accepted. If I meet a college's standards for admission, and for whatever reason my grades end up in the gutter, be it laziness, family issues getting in the way of studies or an unexpected arrest (rightful or otherwise), I may be unable to graduate. If that unforseen drop out costs the institution for all of my finances, either everyone's tuition gets significantly more expensive when we're already one of the most expensive in the world, or a lot of people that *could* get into college today will be made unable to do so tomorrow.

Even worse, for a great many smaller institutions, neither option is affordable. Harvard or MIT may be able to budget the expenses from the occasional rich kid flopping after they get out with their prestigious degree, but little old local colleges that get an entire community's worth of B-students passing through would either reject 80% of their incoming students to try and stop half of them from dropping out, or they'd go belly up in a year. Hell, they'd probably end up doing both.
 
Last edited:
noonereal said:
The pay of top executives at MANY non profits is astronomical. Salaries and benefits you would never see in the private sector.
Click to expand...

Non-profits are part of the private sector. What (if anything) is your point?
 
bluesmoke said:
(...) I’d want evidence that these borrowers do not deserve these loans you apparently say they should not be getting and how many there are of them (significance).
Click to expand...

Here is a very simple way to understand the problem.

From the point of view of the bank, is it worth to lend you money so that you attend college, absent any guarantee or contribution made by the government? This determination is not carried out with the benefit of hindsight in the real world: the bank will use your credit history, your assets, and liabilities, as well as some projection of future cash flows. The idea is to determine how much of the loan and interest the bank can expect to get back. That's what the bank does before lending. However, we are even more informed than the bank because we can make an ex-post evaluation based on how many people actually can be expected to pay back their loans.

But here is where it hurts: if you make the case that a sizable fraction of students are too indebted for the cash flows they can expect after graduation (or worse, after flunking out), you are making the case that those students made a poor investment. If you want to stress the need for the government to solve the problem, you have to argue those loans were bad loans. The case for such policies is at its strongest if the loans were so bad that many would have chosen to go bankrupt if they could.

Because this is the cru of the problem: if the loans were generally good for the banks and the students, the government would have no need getting involved in any way; and if the funds were put to a smart use by students, they wouldn't have trouble paying them back. Regardless of what you think of Democrats, they are politically motivated to pick up causes when they touch many people. They wouldn't be talking about student debt if there were not hundreds of thousands of students in serious financial trouble after college. That is indirect evidence, but it's probably the best you will have because I don't know how you plan to get your hands on the private financial information of thousands of American citizens.


The tone used by aociswundumho was inappropriate, but he makes a fair point when he talks about a degree in "Lesbian Dance Theory." It is admittedly stylized, but if you're going to ask other people to bear part of the financial burden borne by students, they are entitled to ask why they should do it. If someone asked you to help a poor student who contracted $40 000 in debt and you learn it paid for a degree in ethnic studies, the first question you will be asking is what kind of job the student got out of it. It will quickly become manifest they spent 4 years and tens of thousands of dollars to finance their way to flip burgers at McDonald's. At that rate, they could have started McDonald's 4 years ago and they would be a manager now.

And that is a real problem. When you enroll for a degree, you should be aware of what you will get out of it. Women studies, gender studies, sociology, history, philosophy, etc. might be interesting at least to some people, but why do you need to spend so much for a paper which says you majored in one of these fields? I mean, you can take up the subjects on your own time, study them as optional courses, study them through online courses, or make it a minor part of your education. Those are all options that will not lead to your financial ruin. However, there is a problem here because I just got in the business of telling you what to do.

Another question here would concern what are students told. Are people misleading students? It's one thing to be making bad decisions. It's another to realize you got scammed thereafter.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Non-profits are part of the private sector. What (if anything) is your point?
Click to expand...

OMG, do you never weary of trite?

If you followed the thread my point was clear.

Many people think of non profits as being run by volunteers when it's not at all the case.
 
noonereal said:
OMG, do you never weary of trite?

If you followed the thread my point was clear.

Many people think of non profits as being run by volunteers when it's not at all the case.
Click to expand...

That wasn't so hard at all - was it?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That wasn't so hard at all - was it?
Click to expand...

You are educated yet basic.

We often "miss" each other as I deal in macro and assume basics.

It's all good, I enjoy your posts. I just get pissed at your tone which I should not.

Peace out.
 
Jesse Booth said:
2 minutes, 55 seconds into the video: "college is expensive because we freed up an unlimited pile of money and told an entire generation they were doomed to fail if they didn't borrow it." This is an objectively false assessment of why college is expensive, while almost being on the money. Student loans are the core of the issue, and are built around the idea of driving America's youth into an exorbitantly expensive education system that will see two-thirds of them drop out, while saddling them with debt they can't even escape through bankruptcy & might not even be able to pay of WITH a job afforded by their degree. Nowhere else in the world can you find a nation whose education system is this mismanaged in terms of burdening the most vulnerable of those involved, and pretending that it's caused by the availability of funding is similarly unique to America.
Click to expand...
I think his point is that the losns allow colleges to get away with chargung exoberant fees. I didnt take it as him blaming the loans.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Jesse Booth said:
That would only make the entire system more expensive for the people who CAN find well-paying work, Felis, and I personally suspect that it would make it extremely difficult for people from poorer households to get accepted. If I meet a college's standards for admission, and for whatever reason my grades end up in the gutter, be it laziness, family issues getting in the way of studies or an unexpected arrest (rightful or otherwise), I may be unable to graduate. If that unforseen drop out costs the institution for all of my finances, either everyone's tuition gets significantly more expensive when we're already one of the most expensive in the world, or a lot of people that *could* get into college today will be made unable to do so tomorrow.

Even worse, for a great many smaller institutions, neither option is affordable. Harvard or MIT may be able to budget the expenses from the occasional rich kid flopping after they get out with their prestigious degree, but little old local colleges that get an entire community's worth of B-students passing through would either reject 80% of their incoming students to try and stop half of them from dropping out, or they'd go belly up in a year. Hell, they'd probably end up doing both.
Click to expand...

All valid concerns. But presently, our federal student loan system guarantees a practically unlimited amount of money for colleges and universities with relatively few strings attached and very little risk to the University itself. The only caveat is that the student's loan application needs acceptance. After that, the student sinks or swims on their own, with the anchor of ever-ballooning debt tied to the ankle. The University meanwhile laughs it way to the bank with the money that is paid by we the taxpayers and guaranteed by the student.

At a certain point, this all begins to look very much like product liability. Imagine if you had both a bachelors and masters degree in Art History from a prestigious liberal arts college. Imagine further that you are presently grossing $50,000.00 per year working at a major art museum, but have $200,000.00 in combined student loan debt with interest continually compounding, even (and especially when) the loan is deferred. Somewhere along the line, you were taken for a ride, not merely by the lender, but by the college charging such an exorbitant tuition for a degree that would not, in the present job climate, yield any return on investment. The federally-backed lenders handed you a credit card with your name on it, but you then handed it to the University to charge it. And they charged the maximum they could get away with.

If a car manufacturer sells you a lemon which you had to take a loan out to buy, you have a claim against the car manufacturer in order to help make up the cost for that loan. Especially for an exorbitantly expensive car. Or perhaps a more salient example would be the so-called "Trump University" for teaching the secrets of investment. Donald Trump's business was forced to settle for overcharging for essentially worthless education. Why shouldn't students from regular universities being overcharged for such degrees not be allowed similar remedies?

As you said, because our bankruptcy laws do not permit discharge of student loan debt (except under a very narrow and stringent set of circumstances), I think that universities that might potentially sell their students "lemon educations" need to have some real skin in the game. If they are confident in the quality of education they provide and the economic benefits derived therefrom, that is.
 
Last edited:
eman623 said:
We should end all federally subsidized student loans NOW and make existing student loan debt dischargable in bankruptcy.

In other words, stop any further bleeding and let those who took out the loans work it out with the schools that sold the loans to them.

And let's start looking at alternatives to going to a big expensive college, which in the digital age are almost as anachronistic as book stores. Knowledge is free. To paraphrasee Good Will Hunting, a person should be able to get a basic college education for nothing more than a few dollars of overdue library fines. It's that diploma that you're paying for and in many cases it's worthless.
Click to expand...
I dont jave a problem with feferal funds helping students but i do think a higher level of accountability for the costs needs to be placed on the schools.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
bluesmoke said:
As is a public education through 12 grades, at least a public education through a community college two-year degree is now as necessary as once was a HS degree, and public funding up to a limit for a bachelor's degree, besides the normal student loan availability more additional amounts as may be necessary for completing the degree or higher degree. Including an equivalent trade-school training and education as the student may so choose. This is the best way of assuring employers get what they require and prospective employees have what those employers are looking for. However, those students should also be required to give two years of national service. That could be in the military or civil service. Just like now being in the military for two years gives educational benefits.
Click to expand...
Imo our education is both failing to adequately prepare graduates for a vocation or give them adequate critical thinking skills.

Average tution costs for a decent 4yr college is aprox $35k per semester. That is a lot of money, i dont know the exact stats but i will go out on a limb and say less than half of americans earn that kind of money.

The average starting salary for a graduate is about $50k
College grads expect to earn $60,000—here'''s how much they make

How many dont get degrees?


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Felis Leo said:
I think I may have a solution (though not the only solution), Jesse Booth. I would force colleges to guarantee the Federally-backed student loans they receive. So for those colleges that hand out so-called "worthless degrees" that render their students unable to find reasonably well-paying work within a certain amount of time (say, within four years of graduation), forgive the student and force the colleges to pay the loans back with interest and penalties. And for those students who drop out of college for various reasons, again, go after the college.

That way, colleges will either have to make sure that they only sign off on loans that they believe will almost-certainly guarantee their students bright financial futures. Or lower tuition costs so to make any student's default less onerous on the college to repay.
Click to expand...
In essence that was what tucker also suggested. He suggested the schools share the risk of the loan with the feds which i think is fair.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
TheEconomist said:
Here is a very simple way to understand the problem.

See post #34



Most students have no clue as to whether or not employability and income from a chosen field of study will be a good investment after the six-plus years it takes to get a bachelor’s degree, if they get it at all. Neither do the various experts, advisers and clairvoyants that tell you.

The higher the cost of higher education gets and/or the less able more people can afford college, the more necessary it is for the government to be involved and the more different ways to finance same must be examined and decided. That’s when government needs to “touch” more people because nobody else will. Same thing happened with healthcare.

I don’t know what the stats are now, but in 2016, 23% of workers in low-pay sectors had at least a bachelor’s degree. Most degrees do not necessarily cover the skill factors nor levels for a given job or near future expectation of a new hire. What is most important, except where a specific degree is sought (MBA for finance, etc.) is that by having completed a degree shows both an ability to learn something new and the discipline to stay the course over a period of time. Regardless of what is the major.

The students did get scammed in many cases. Only the government is making it harder for students to write-off these bad loans. That’s the Ed Secty Betsy Devos “saving” government, taxpayer money and protecting the rights of business risk-takers.
Click to expand...
 
trouble13 said:
I saw this last night and i think mike rowe makes some really good points about the cost of college educations. Imo this is a subject that we should be able to discuss in a bipartisan way.

YouTube

Tucker Carlson makes a pretty good suggestion in a later segment. He suggests that schools should share in the risks on student loans. I think he is right about that.

What are your thoughts?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The three big factors are how much your state contributes i.e. how much in-state tuition is out of pocket; housing expenses; and whether you attend a private or public school. If you happen to live in a public college town and live at home, you can fair pretty well most places. Living in the dorms is often as much if not more than the actual tuition at public colleges and universities. Go private or out of state, you are going to be struggling if you are borrowing all that money.

US College 2019 Tuition & Costs By State
 
trouble13 said:
Imo our education is both failing to adequately prepare graduates for a vocation or give them adequate critical thinking skills.

Average tution costs for a decent 4yr college is aprox $35k per semester. That is a lot of money, i dont know the exact stats but i will go out on a limb and say less than half of americans earn that kind of money.

The average starting salary for a graduate is about $50k
College grads expect to earn $60,000—here'''s how much they make

How many dont get degrees?


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...



Yup. Cost of college has gone up faster than COL. A little under half never graduate with at least a bachelor's degree.
 
Drawdown said:
The three big factors are how much your state contributes i.e. how much in-state tuition is out of pocket; housing expenses; and whether you attend a private or public school. If you happen to live in a public college town and live at home, you can fair pretty well most places. Living in the dorms is often as much if not more than the actual tuition at public colleges and universities. Go private or out of state, you are going to be struggling if you are borrowing all that money.

US College 2019 Tuition & Costs By State
Click to expand...

Housing plus everything that goes along with it like food, transport, etc. is a major cost and if you cannot live with your parents it can make up most of your expenses. It was most of mine. Like many other I had no choice but to move away for university, I would have had to pay the federal cap ($8000/year) but at least I chose Montreal with a much lower cost of living than Toronto.
 
bluesmoke said:
Most students have no clue as to whether or not employability and income from a chosen field of study will be a good investment after the six-plus years it takes to get a bachelor’s degree if they get it at all. Neither do the various experts, advisers, and clairvoyants that tell you.
Click to expand...

We actually have data on these things: surveys on how majors ties to occupations, as well as very detailed data on employment per occupation going back very many decades. Although problems might arise in peculiar cases due to quickly shifting trends, there are things which are relatively stable and you can take the recent past as an indication of the near future. Being uncertain is not the same as being clueless and it's absolutely untrue that you cannot make a reasonable guess.

Some cases are also damn obvious. If you major in one of the many useless social justice majors (usually names "..." studies), it's as clear as day that you will not make six figures. It doesn't financially justify the several tens of thousands of dollars in debt and 4 full-time years of study.

bluesmoke said:
What is most important, except where a specific degree is sought (MBA for finance, etc.) is that by having completed a degree shows both an ability to learn something new and the discipline to stay the course over a period of time. Regardless of what is the major.
Click to expand...

If someone studied mathematics, statistics, physics, finance, or economics, a fair guess is that they know how to crunch numbers on a computer. If you have a need for any type of modeling, statistical or structural, or for any type of business analytics, these people can learn it relatively fast. In other words, a lot of people are very interested because they have useful skills that can be applied right away. Now, if you're dealing with a major in early American literature, you cannot realistically hope to get them to do any of that in a reasonable amount of time because you would have to start from scratch. They can write, though probably not much better than anyone else who went to any university. And if you're dealing with a major in Ethnic Studies, you can almost surely bet their political views are radical and that just sounds like begging for problems.

Generally, you might still land some kind of job and work your way into a good career even if you didn't study in a technical field. However, if you get a debt the size of a down payment on an apartment building and spend 4, 5 or even 6 years pursuing a degree to end up earning $40 K, it's not a financially sound choice. The gains over flipping burgers don't justify those massive costs.

bluesmoke said:
The students did get scammed in many cases. Only the government is making it harder for students to write-off these bad loans. That’s the Ed Secty Betsy Devos “saving” government, taxpayer money and protecting the rights of business risk-takers.
Click to expand...

If you got told you would make $100 K with an undergraduate degree in philosophy, this is indeed a scam.

However, there is a problem with writing off the loans. If nobody lied to you and you decided to go through with an undergraduate program, we have to hold you accountable to it. Your freshmen are generally old enough or soon to become old enough to be able to enroll in the army and to vote, so they spend the vast majority of that time as an adult pursuing a degree. They picked the university, they picked the major and they financed this with loans. That's all on you. The rationale behind the laws prohibiting erasing student debt generally is to give reasons to banks to accept lending in the first place.

Now, you have people who made mistakes in the US -- very big mistakes. 100 K of student debt for little more than fancy toilet paper is ridiculous. So, who pays? If you just let them default, lenders lose money, even though they have nothing to do with it. If you ask the government to pay, those are going to be very large numbers and it requires all tax payers to pay for your mistakes, including people without a degree.
 
Last edited:
Carjosse said:
Housing plus everything that goes along with it like food, transport, etc. is a major cost and if you cannot live with your parents it can make up most of your expenses. It was most of mine. Like many other I had no choice but to move away for university, I would have had to pay the federal cap ($8000/year) but at least I chose Montreal with a much lower cost of living than Toronto.
Click to expand...

Where did you study in Montreal?
 
TheEconomist said:
We actually have data on these things: surveys on how majors ties to occupations, as well as very detailed data on employment per occupation going back very many decades. Although problems might arise in peculiar cases due to quickly shifting trends, there are things which are relatively stable and you can take the recent past as an indication of the near future. Being uncertain is not the same as being clueless and it's absolutely untrue that you cannot make a reasonable guess.

Some cases are also damn obvious. If you major in one of the many useless social justice majors (usually names "..." studies), it's as clear as day that you will not make six figures. It doesn't financially justify the several tens of thousands of dollars in debt and 4 full-time years of study.



If someone studied mathematics, statistics, physics, finance, or economics, a fair guess is that they know how to crunch numbers on a computer. If you have a need for any type of modeling, statistical or structural, or for any type of business analytics, these people can learn it relatively fast. In other words, a lot of people are very interested because they have useful skills that can be applied right away. Now, if you're dealing with a major in early American literature, you cannot realistically hope to get them to do any of that in a reasonable amount of time because you would have to start from scratch. They can write, though probably not much better than anyone else who went to any university. And if you're dealing with a major in Ethnic Studies, you can almost surely bet their political views are radical and that just sounds like begging for problems.

Generally, you might still land some kind of job and work your way into a good career even if you didn't study in a technical field. However, if you get a debt the size of a down payment on an apartment building and spend 4, 5 or even 6 years pursuing a degree to end up earning $40 K, it's not a financially sound choice. The gains over flipping burgers don't justify those massive costs.



If you got told you would make $100 K with an undergraduate degree in philosophy, this is indeed a scam.

However, there is a problem with writing off the loans. If nobody lied to you and you decided to go through with an undergraduate program, we have to hold you accountable to it. Your freshmen are generally old enough or soon to become old enough to be able to enroll in the army and to vote, so they spend the vast majority of that time as an adult pursuing a degree. They picked the university, they picked the major and they financed this with loans. That's all on you. The rationale behind the laws prohibiting erasing student debt generally is to give reasons to banks to accept lending in the first place.

Now, you have people who made mistakes in the US -- very big mistakes. 100 K of student debt for little more than fancy toilet paper is ridiculous. So, who pays? If you just let them default, lenders lose money, even though they have nothing to do with it. If you ask the government to pay, those are going to be very large numbers and it requires all tax payers to pay for your mistakes, including people without a degree.
Click to expand...




One can make as reasonable a guess as is possible, but not predictable. Most college grads do not get a first job that requires a degree. Only a distinct minority get a job within the field of their degree. It can’t be shown that prediction of what few grads base choice of major on, or stick with for that matter, prove out after that 6-year period of time. Most students simply do not have a qualified clue as to what the future will be and thereby what choice they should make. You can’t even say that the great majority of grads are happy they chose the major they did.

“Some cases are also damn obvious. If you major in one of the many useless social justice majors (usually names "..." studies), it's as clear as day that you will not make six figures. It doesn't financially justify the several tens of thousands of dollars in debt and 4 full-time years of study.”

The 6-figure earners have the highest education debt to income ratio, not the Social Justice jobs.

“you can almost surely bet their political views are radical and that just sounds like begging for problems.”

Who cares why people choose what degree they wish? Like I said, they so often get a job not in their field of study. Many people of a particular political leaning believe scientists are radical.

“If nobody lied to you and you decided to go through with an undergraduate program, we have to hold you accountable to it.”

Well, my post in this area had to do with real scams, where a lie or some other deception was involved and where the Trump admin is making it more difficult for students to go against the perps or write-off scam debt. Do you agree with Devos?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom