Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition • Hacker News Board

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#121

Post by andrewjl » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 8:45 PM UTC

dogman144 wrote: post #39

djsumdog wrote: post #4

> cut its tuition by $10,000 for all new students I find it insane tuition is that high. I finished grad school before 2010, and at least with the smaller state schools I went to, total cost of tuition and books was in the $3k~$5k range. Boutique schools like Vanderbilt were like $25k+ (per semester). I had a friend who got a free ride there for graduate school, and he said it wasn't really that different than our st…

> Federally subsidized student loans need to GO AWAY. The language I'm about to use pains me, but this is an extremely privileged take, or at least naive take, on what these loans do. Removing them will hurt about about a generation of students from the very low to the upper middle class set until the academic employment market adjusts. What do I mean? A simple, pragmatic fact is degree from a name-school, vs. a no-n…

> The language I'm about to use pains me, but this is an extremely privileged take, or at least naive take

I think the take outlined later in the post is the privileged take. Sure those who are lucky enough to be accepted into a school with an alumni network, name recognition, can leverage those connections. But at what cost? Paying off debts until mid to late 40s? It's certainly life changing as you say, but more of an "out of the frying pan and into the fire" type of change. Worse still is many of these students have no warning of this (legalese in promissory notes isn't a fair warning) and once they sign the dotted line, no recourse. They won't be buying home, won't be starting families, and will be restricted in any type of career growth that doesn't translate into higher incomes. But yes, they will enjoy great informational interviews.

Finally this post completely leaves out those who attended for-profit schools who provide none of the benefits listed and really have no business signing their students up for a lifetime of debt peonage.

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#122

Post by anonAndOn » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 8:48 PM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #106

react_burger38 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really think you need to reconsider your stance on private colleges.. For example, BYU and BYU-Idaho provide affordable education for tens of thousands of students every year. Sure they're religious, but they serve as price competition to state schools in the area, keeping prices down across the state of Utah. Secondly, the reason things are so expensive is because the federal government gives loans to everyone, dr…

All good points. I remain skeptical that loans are what drove prices up. Declining public funding has also played a role. Sending money directly to public colleges rather than sending that money through a twisted loan system makes more sense to me. And the state / regional colleges are cheaper to operate. I'm paying tuition to two of those schools right now for my kids -- a state "flagship" university, and a regional…

If the government suddenly stopped willing to back student loans, without question the cost of tuition and/or the amount of 'scholarships' offered to students would respond commensurately.

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#123

Post by sandeeps_ » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 8:52 PM UTC

afterwalk wrote: post #91

Recently playing around with a 529 college saving plan calculator, it told me that for a 5 year old aiming to go to a 4 year private school, I need to save up $600k in the next 13 years. I thought the calculator was broken, but it was simply using the past decade's grow rate for tuition to model the next decade.

Do you mean the account should have 600k at the time of kid starting college? Does the 600k include gains from the investment in 529 or is it just the principal?

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#124

Post by kube-system » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 8:53 PM UTC

smileysteve wrote: post #81

kube-system wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Top tier colleges (and even state colleges) teach a lot more than what is inside of a book. They teach interpersonal skills, social skills, work ethic, self care, professional networking, etc. I think it is misconception that these schools are respected because they teach the subject matter better, or that they provide no value outside of the lecture hall. If anything, >50% of the value is outside of the lecture hall…

> They teach interpersonal skills, social skills, work ethic, self care, professional networking This suggests that people who don't go to college lack interpersonal skills, work ethic, ability to self care; Seems like all of these are important, especially for the other 34%. But the other response is, this is a loud siren for nepotism -- and potentially other isms; as opposed to meritocracy, thanks for including "pr…

> This suggests that people who don't go to college lack interpersonal skills, work ethic, ability to self care;

No I am not suggesting that. These skills are not boolean, they are all a varying continuum, and they can be learned in different ways.

Liberal arts schools don't teach these things because they cannot be learned in a different way, they simply teach them because they are important to their educational mission. Colleges don't need a monopoly on conveying these skills to have it as an important part of their value proposition.

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#125

Post by nrclark » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 9:02 PM UTC

gregario wrote: post #86

altdatathrow wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should compare the actual effective taxation rates. For example, high earners in Norway get taxed about ~8% higher than comparable earners in California but that comes with affordable healthcare, education, and government-backed pensions that people can actually survive on.

So they tax 8% higher than USA's highest tax state? > affordable healthcare, education, and government-backed pensions Affordable healthcare, education, and pensions are wonderful things and I want them as well. It's immoral to provide them through the federal government though, it should be done privately through the market.

Why is it immoral for the government to provide that stuff? What makes private industry better in any way?

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#126

Post by michaelt » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 9:03 PM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #114

manfredo wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bankruptcy tanks your credit rating for years. Most of a decade, ~7 years IIRC. If student loans could only be cancelled via bankruptcy after 10-15 years, that would mean students trying to cancel their loans through bankruptcy would be doing it in their early to mid 30s assuming they graduated at 21 years of age. Their credit scores would be ruined until their 40s at least. Few people would pursue this route just to…

"Few people would pursue this route just to save some money on education." You seem confident saying this, but countless youths have accumulated hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt they won't pay off until their mid 40s at no-name liberal arts schools and degree mills

That sounds like an argument they should be able to discharge the debt, not that they shouldn't

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#127

Post by winphone1974 » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 9:07 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #104

manfredo wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what I'm failing to explain. It's not feasible to make student loans able to be eliminated via bankruptcy without restriction, since students could just go through bankruptcy right after graduation and plan around being unable to get a mortgage or car loan until they're 30. If you graduated with a degree in CS, and landed a six figure tech job it'd still make sense financially to go through bankruptcy an…

>The optimal spot is somewhere in the middle, where the student has an escape valve - but one that is only feasible to take if you have no significant assets by the time you're 30 or 35. The optimal spot is to not let 18 to 21 year olds borrow six figure sums without understanding the ramifications of it. There is no need for these loans to exist. The cost of higher education is high because the loans exist. The loan…

You're saying the same thing as the parent post, but they're describing mechanism to discourage lenders from making these loans and borrowers from gaming the system. You just say the system is broken and shouldn't be.

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#128

Post by sbeller » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 9:17 PM UTC

gregario wrote: post #86

altdatathrow wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should compare the actual effective taxation rates. For example, high earners in Norway get taxed about ~8% higher than comparable earners in California but that comes with affordable healthcare, education, and government-backed pensions that people can actually survive on.

So they tax 8% higher than USA's highest tax state? > affordable healthcare, education, and government-backed pensions Affordable healthcare, education, and pensions are wonderful things and I want them as well. It's immoral to provide them through the federal government though, it should be done privately through the market.

> USA's highest tax state?

That is another myth that is floating around the US. CA actually has progressive tax brackets (i.e. the rate changes quite a bit from bracket to bracket) and only few get into the top state brackets, whereas most of the other states that have income tax, >90% of people are in the top bracket as the top bracket is around $10k (looking at https://tax.idaho.gov/i-1110.cfm).

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#129

Post by ntsplnkv2 » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 9:40 PM UTC

emidln wrote: post #96

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The federal loan influence is not large enough to cause the problem we're in. The real problem is the demand for college is enormous because it's the only way to a semi-decent living these days. If you get rid of federal loans all it will mean is private loans fill in to take its place - people still want good paying jobs, so they'll still pay to go to school.

> The real problem is the demand for college is enormous because it's the only way to a semi-decent living these days. There are well-paying jobs that don't require a university degree. Skilled trade jobs exist and are in high demand. Tech careers with IT, networking, software, and hardware exist for those that put in the time, whether that time is on school grounds or at home. I've known (and currently work with) pr…

> There are well-paying jobs that don't require a university degree. Skilled trade jobs exist and are in high demand. Tech careers with IT, networking, software, and hardware exist for those that put in the time, whether that time is on school grounds or at home.

I knew someone would make this comment, they always do. The trades don't pay nearly as well as you think you do, put enormous strain on the body, have bad hours, etc. Most tradesmen that make big money either work insane overtime, or own their own business because they're the top 10% in their craft.

Also the idea that it's like what it was when you grew up, where you just work hard in your support job and then you magically become software engineer and make big bucks simply doesn't happen anymore. It's like winning the lottery.

My grandfather made a great living in the trades. That is until he got cancer from exposure doing it.

Re: Some U.S. Colleges Cut Tuition

#130

Post by michaelt » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 9:41 PM UTC

pclmulqdq wrote: post #45

dogman144 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Federally subsidized student loans need to GO AWAY. The language I'm about to use pains me, but this is an extremely privileged take, or at least naive take, on what these loans do. Removing them will hurt about about a generation of students from the very low to the upper middle class set until the academic employment market adjusts. What do I mean? A simple, pragmatic fact is degree from a name-school, vs. a no-n…

These loans have destroyed any chance that a generation of underprivileged students will achieve financial prosperity. If they go away, the federally subsidized loan programs will likely be phased out over ~5 years or so. The private sector will replace them for students who are good bets, probably with income-share agreements or something similar and MUCH less predatory than the current federal loan programs.

> The private sector will replace them for students who are good bets, probably with income-share agreements or something similar and MUCH less predatory than the current federal loan programs.

Maybe.

Or maybe the the costs and loans will remain huge - but now with parents as co-signers, and only available to people whose parents are homeowners with good credit.