Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

hechingerreport.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 563 posts

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#231

Post by bilbo0s »

kansface wrote: post #171
stefano wrote: post #154

What I find funny in these discussions on HN is how most people seem to be completely oblivious to the obvious solution, proven to work in many developed countries around the world: have the state directly fund universities and don't charge tuition to students (or charge them a small amount). Why is the assumption "universities are private endeavours that should make a profit" something that goes unchallenged on HN?

Most colleges/universities are nonprofits and they still charge tens of thousands per semester. I will also point out that the European model is not free, universal college degrees for all - access is restricted behind rigorous entrance exams. Such a system would be politically untenable in the US wherein a growing movement wants to do away with all entry tests. What would actually happen in practice is that we would…

>restricted behind rigorous entrance exams

I don't know which nations you're talking about, but I'm not certain that I'd call entrance exams in France "rigorous". But the entire system is different than in the US, so I guess maybe it's not comparable?

In any case, trying to get a perfect score on an SAT is way harder. Probably the whole reason an industry has popped up around increasing your score on the SAT/ACT/GRE/GMAT/MCAT etc etc etc.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#232

Post by kaffeemitsahne »

afarrell wrote: post #219
JBorrow wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point about entrance exams is, in general, not true. University applications in Europe are very similar to those in the USA.

What is the European version of SAT/ACT scores and AP tests?

I can only speak for the Netherlands, we have a tiered high school system, and you can enter most university programs with just a high school diploma of the highest tier.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#233

Post by smileysteve »

julienb_sea wrote: post #160
chrischattin wrote: post #17

How to fix student loans... The .gov backs student loans. And, they are non-dischargeable. So, it is zero risk for the lender to give loan to the 2.7 GPA moron getting a worthless basket weaving degree from the local private lib arts school for $100k. So, they give as many loans as possible, since they can't lose (taxpayer on the hook). Colleges are incentivized to drive up costs of tuition b/c tons of free money. It…

Good luck with that. You just made college out of reach for everyone that isn't already wealthy, exacerbating inequality and further entrenching class boundaries. To be clear, I agree with you, rip out the loan guarantees and let the private market deal. But progressives would never allow this.

> You just made college out of reach for everyone that isn't already wealthy

Immediately yes, fortunately, there is a supply and demand curve, so if you cut the demand for a bunch of colleges that already exist; then the price should find a new equilibrium. Of course, as is the science of economics, time and outside influences matter.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#234

Post by jimbob45 »

I see a lot of people telling everyone to just go to another university if the one you want is too expensive or isn't up your standard in the degree you're chasing. Remember that out-of-state tuition effectively bars students from attending any university outside of their state and, if you're in a smallish state like Oregon, your options can be pretty limited, particularly if you'd like to stay in one geographical region.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#235

Post by virmundi »

fzeroracer wrote: post #207
ummonk wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude it is a satirical term to symbolize low value programs. It isn’t supposed to be taken literally.

Teachers generate less value (see:income, GDP) than engineers. We should abolish teaching degrees and just teach software engineering at college.

Given the hard core attempt to subvert eduction going on in the public schools, maybe. At least with software you’ll have logic, math, and history. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/dqd6ca/activist...

You should take a moment and read that individuals post. It is well researched. Just because it’s from r/conspiracy doesn’t mean you should skip it.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#236

Post by Someone1234 »

Carioca wrote: post #185

At what point doesn't it just become feasible to hire a full-time tutor?

The point of college is a name and certificate. If it was about actual education and learning, we'd see online classes with in-person exams in the forefront.

So, never? A tutor cannot give you a magic piece of "job qualification" paper.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#237

Post by jetpks »

asdfman123 wrote: post #189
fortran77 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm completely against forgiving student loans. I want to solve the problem, which means no more Government backed student loans. (I'm all for the Government building more low-cost public Universities, though.) But if they are going to forgive them, certainly the students who prided themselves on being the best and the brightest should have known better! Therefore, anyone in the top 10% of SAT scores or at the top 10…

I would be angry because I lived in the cheapest apartment I could and biked as much as I could until I paid everything off. Had I been less responsible, I would get more money under debt forgiveness. The incentives are inverted. I'm all for wealth redistribution but messing with incentives is shown over and over again to be a bad idea. Also, my perspective as the kind of frugal guy that everyone else calls cheap is…

Because you suffered, everyone in perpetuity must also suffer?

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#238

Post by seiferteric »

1shooner wrote: post #155
seiferteric wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my thought as well. These universities have had very little incentive to cut costs for a long time and have padded out administrators and built opulent and unnecessary facilities driving costs ever upward. Universities used to be little more than professors and classrooms with very few administrators.

>Universities used to be little more than professors and classrooms with very few administrators. Correct. There was also no IT, counseling, healthcare, Title IX, and secondary public education was functional. Things are different now.

Why do those things have to be a part of a university?

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#239

Post by war1025 »

codedokode wrote: post #166

The prices in USA look exorbitant. If a worker works full year for minimum wage, they earn $7.25 * 8 * 253 = $14674. Such worker will have to work for 6 years and 9 months to pay tuition costs for 1 year, if we assume that they don't have to pay taxes, buy food, visit a doctor and pay the rent. A house may cost several hundred thousands dollars or higher. If that worker has paid for a university, no way they will be…

Private school tuition is the same as healthcare in the US.

Everything has an enormous sticker price for anyone who asks, but no one is expected to actually pay that amount. And if you do pay that amount, it's just because you're a sucker who didn't get in on the fact that it's just a made up number.

Rich kids may pay that amount, but it probably gets flipped around into some tax-advantaged "donation" that also helps people feel good about themselves.

Poor people get "scholarships", which are really just the university cutting the sticker price down to what they actually need from the person, with some creative shuffling of funds to make it look like they are paying "sticker price".

Healthcare works exactly the same. The key is to have enough layers of bureaucracy that no one can quite figure it all out.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#240

Post by dredmorbius »

wholepointofcc wrote: post #135
wholepointofcc wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Debt is a powerful tool when used correctly, Could you expand on that? It's a very interesting perspective

Thank you FrozenTuna for your input but I was specifically thinking of physical people, as opposed to companies. I also meant a more specific application rather than a general iteration on the (perfectly valid) idea that if one can make more money with a value now, rather than later, and this opportunity cost is larger than the interest rate minus inflation, then the deal is good. Student loans would be a good exampl…

What debt does is allow money that won't be available until some time in the future to be used for present purchases. It's a bit like the idea of a chemical catalyst, in that the effort required to trigger a transaction is lowered, though this is a catalyst that requires being paid back.

For the general public, instances of use include:

- Small but seasonal businesses. Farming is the classic case, but any sector in which receipts are seasonal (though relatively predictable) apply: hostelry, tourism, landscaping businesses, construction, etc.

- Small nonseasonal business. Writing or other contract work in which production and income can be disconnected by months, sometimes years. The risk is higher here, but can still be bridged.

- Large-ticket purchases. Automobiles, appliances, and electronics are typical. Numerous present credit banks got their start as the lending arms of large manufacturers, who could rely on a constant stream of incoming payments to advance loans to new customers, increasing net sales. GMAC (General Motors Acceptance Corporation, now Ally Financial, is the classic case).

- Revolving credit lines. These generally started as credit accounts specific to a given store, often a department store. They eventually became much of the current credit card industry, by way of Bank of America. Here again, the general principle is to advance credit, easing purchases.

Credit can be (and very often is) misused. But having a flexible payment mechanism on demand without requiring layaway or specific authorisation, and serving as a general check on other factors (credit cards have effectively been a social credit scoring system for decades) benefits ... at least some.

Interestingly, much of the actual financial risk gets pushed off onto merchants. Though costs of managing credit do land on the individual.

And no, I'm not much of a fan of the system. It exists, and has its uses, however.

Post reply on HN