Live data from Hacker News

USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

wsj.com

221–230 of 261 posts

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#221

Ehh eh. I went to a CSU for like 6k a year. If you want to be elitist and attend the most expensive school possible, you have to eventually pay for it. > Ms. Fowler, a 2018 graduate, enjoyed the program but owes $307,000 in total student-loan debt, including about $200,000 from the master’s degree. She said she earns $48,000 as a community mental-health therapist in Mount Pleasant, Iowa. This translates into paying 3…

Yes, adults can make poor choices. Agreed. Said choices should be constrained though. She wouldn't be allowed to buy a 300k car with no possibility of bankruptcy. The lender is made of adults as well. They also made poor choices. Why is a group of adults hiding behind a piece of paper allowed to be saved from their poor choices while an individual not?

You can't have it both ways.

Either allow the government to turn down most of these loans and charge higher interest rates based on credit-worthiness or make bankruptcy very difficult. What you want is the bankrupcty rights of a non-government guaranteed loan in which credit worthiness is taken into account, but interest rates and credit availability of a loan in which the bankruptcy rights are substantially reduced.

That's not possible. I agree we should abolish these lending guarantees entirely and let the private sector provide loans and charge whatever interest rate they want if people can just walk away from the loan. But that's not the interest rate people are paying now, so that's not an option for existing borrowers.

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#222
post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why is a group of adults hiding behind a piece of paper allowed to be saved from their poor choices while an individual not? Because rich people lending money to poor people needs to be a risk-free endeavor backed up by the state. This way, it's easier for the banks to make money. And at the same time, it's easy to spin predatory lending as "helping out" when it shouldn't exist to begin with, and victim-blame people…

I don't agree with that take. Without government backing, the alternative is that banks would not lend. Just like they don't currently lend to the poor and that market is instead filled by predatory loan sharks and payday lenders. In other words, the purpose is not to help the banks, but to help people get the loans in the first place. However, the unintended consequences are that the banks are incentivized to make w…

>Without government backing, the alternative is that banks would not lend

This is an absurd proposition, since the legislation that makes student loans indismissable with bankruptcy is unique to student loans (and quite recent). Yet lending still happens.

Surely you don't mean to say that an educational loan is always a loss, do you? But let's play along for a second, and imagine that lenders back out of the very lucrative business.

And that would be bad... why again?

Because then the education would be priced affordably if the universities wanted to have any students?

Because the government would not have much headroom in defunding higher education (look at state college funding percentage in the 70s vs now?

Because the universities would be incentivized to provide education, and wouldn't have an obscene admin-to-professor ratio that they have attained since then?

Because the universities would not have the cash to burn on ever-expanding construction projects, like stadiums, luxury residence halls, hotels, etc, and would catch some flak for building them at students' expense?

Because the people would be incentivized to demand free, or near-free higher education the way Europe does it, and "just take out a loan like everyone does" won't be an excuse to not provide it anymore?

Because fewer university degrees would mean a higher status and acceptance for trade schools, and would lead to trade schools being acceptable for white-collar higher-pay jobs (...without having to rebrand them as "Boot Camps" like we do in software)?

Because the universities would then be able to focus on teaching critical thinking and research skills that advance our civilization, and emphasize growth instead of having the students see it as an investment into a salaried position?

>However, the unintended consequences

Oh, you mean it is just an unfortunate accident that making student loans non-dischargeable in 1976 by the Nixon administration (renowned for integrity)[1] simply coincided with inflation-adjusted education cost starting to grow after a long period of not growing[2]?

And, by pure chance, after that 1976 legislation, inflation-adjusted federal education funding remained stagnant and decreased over the subsequent decades[3] in spite of number of students nearly doubling[4]?

And that all of that simply coincided with education becoming accessible to Black people (in 1976, the first generation that didn't go to segregated schools would be going to colleges)?

And that nobody would have guessed that non-dismissal of loans in case of bankruptcy, and simultaneous effective decrease in higher ed funding as the number of students steadily grows would result in costs and loans ballooning?

And that all of that was unintentional, somehow, though the profit and political motives are not only known, documented, and openly admitted, but have been a part of the platform of the party that enacted that legislation?

In that case, I might disagree.

[1]https://www.tateesq.com/learn/student-loan-bankruptcy-law-hi...

[2]https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-college-by-year

[3] https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002129.pdf

[4]https://www.statista.com/statistics/183995/us-college-enroll...

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#223

Ehh eh. I went to a CSU for like 6k a year. If you want to be elitist and attend the most expensive school possible, you have to eventually pay for it. > Ms. Fowler, a 2018 graduate, enjoyed the program but owes $307,000 in total student-loan debt, including about $200,000 from the master’s degree. She said she earns $48,000 as a community mental-health therapist in Mount Pleasant, Iowa. This translates into paying 3…

> This translates into paying 300k to feel prestigious. At dinner parties she gets to tell everyone about how she's a USC grad.

With an online degree? Why would anyone brag about that?

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#224
post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why is a group of adults hiding behind a piece of paper allowed to be saved from their poor choices while an individual not? Because rich people lending money to poor people needs to be a risk-free endeavor backed up by the state. This way, it's easier for the banks to make money. And at the same time, it's easy to spin predatory lending as "helping out" when it shouldn't exist to begin with, and victim-blame people…

I don't agree with that take. Without government backing, the alternative is that banks would not lend. Just like they don't currently lend to the poor and that market is instead filled by predatory loan sharks and payday lenders. In other words, the purpose is not to help the banks, but to help people get the loans in the first place. However, the unintended consequences are that the banks are incentivized to make w…

Exactly. Banks should not be lending without some risk. Bankruptcy exists for a reason.

Far better for the government to decide how many of each profession it’s willing to subsidize than the current free for all. It would give people a rough idea of the value of their debt.

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#225
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, adults can make poor choices. Agreed. Said choices should be constrained though. She wouldn't be allowed to buy a 300k car with no possibility of bankruptcy. The lender is made of adults as well. They also made poor choices. Why is a group of adults hiding behind a piece of paper allowed to be saved from their poor choices while an individual not?

> Said choices should be constrained though. She wouldn't be allowed to buy a 300k car with no possibility of bankruptcy. The reason she isn't able to get a crazy car loan is because there's no government program giving anyone unlimited loans, no questions asked. Private lenders understand not all degrees are made equal, so if you go to LendingClub or similar and ask for a student loan for a top tier law school, they…

Government involvement in higher education is important, but better done as keeping tuition low and encouraging people to live at home, penalizing textbook profiteering, and subsidizing desired majors like engineering, etc where the need is great and the local students aren’t joining in great enough numbers.

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#226
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, adults can make poor choices. Agreed. Said choices should be constrained though. She wouldn't be allowed to buy a 300k car with no possibility of bankruptcy. The lender is made of adults as well. They also made poor choices. Why is a group of adults hiding behind a piece of paper allowed to be saved from their poor choices while an individual not?

You can't have it both ways. Either allow the government to turn down most of these loans and charge higher interest rates based on credit-worthiness or make bankruptcy very difficult. What you want is the bankrupcty rights of a non-government guaranteed loan in which credit worthiness is taken into account, but interest rates and credit availability of a loan in which the bankruptcy rights are substantially reduced.…

Few things are black and white.

I absolutely believe in bankruptcy. I also believe the government can fund state schools and community colleges in such a way as to improve access without building more palaces.

Just by improving the rigor of community colleges students can save massive amounts of money by paying $2k/y instead of $30k and live at home instead of $15k for housing.

This cuts the cost basically in half.

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The problem with Student Loan forgiveness is it would typically help the highest paid Americans. Most people with 100k plus in loans also make very good money. Why would that be a problem ? First, your "typically" needs a citation. The average student loan is about $40K. Second, it's not a problem to help struggling people if a percentage of people who are not struggling benefits too. Nothing is 100% efficient, and…

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/01/college-graduate-starting-sa... Those with college degrees make more. So if you forgive student loan debt, you're giving a ton of money to people who are largely doing very well. One can make a large variety of very stupid life-altering choices at 25, these people should have known better. I would say, again unless you're trying to be a doctor or a lawyer your student loans should be c…

> you're giving a ton of money to people who are largely doing very well.

Make more =/= "doing real well".

Some are doing well, some aren't, many are struggling. And the ones who are just getting by aren't having kids, which is really going to bite this nation in the long run.

>One can make a large variety of very stupid life-altering choices at 25

Where's that 25 coming from, eh? People apply to colleges when they're 17. That determines how big of a loan they'll end up with.

>these people should have known better

> I know for myself I took a modest 20,000

When? Did you bother to check tuition costs today?

Better than what? Than not go to a university that aligns with

> I would say, again unless you're trying to be a doctor or a lawyer your student loans should be capped at 100k.

"Should" is a nice word. My double-major undergrad took me five years, and I ended up with over $20K in loans while my tuition was free, because neither dorms (or off-campus housing) nor food were free, and that $25K didn't even cover those expenses.

And no, commute was not an option; and it was, indeed, a good choice of school (not to mention, free tuition).

$100K over 5 years barely covers living expenses[1], but let's be conservative and say the living expenses are paid with $50K over 4 years (by sharing an off-campus room with someone and subsisting on ramen).

Now, the fun part, tuition. Out-of-state tuition can be anywhere from $15K to $40K; it's about $38K in Texas A&M, for example, which is not what people would think is a prestigious school. $27K/year is just about average[2]

So out-of-state school puts us over the $100K for a 4-year degree right away. Tough luck if your state doesn't have great schools for your major!

Fine, let's settle for in-state tuition. Nationwide it's $10K/year on the average, but say, you were unfortunate enough to grow up in Pennsylvania or Illinois, where it's $15K/year[2][3].

Then again, having spent $60K on tuition and $50K on life over 4 years, we are $110K in the red. Bummer.

On the average, living expenses + tuition for a 4 year degree (in-state) is $80K; throw in books, supplies, transportation, and it's $100K[4].

That's average, meaning quite a few people attending public schools in-state end up paying more.

Any private college? Any college out of state? Any of the more expensive states?

Or simply not getting into one of the cheaper public schools in your state?

Or actually choosing a good program?

That's $200K over 4 years very easily.

> I have no sympathy for someone who with a college education decides it would be a good idea to take out another $200,000 in loans in order to get into a low paying field.

Yeah, it's totally reasonable to expect 17-year-olds to estimate correctly how well paid they will be in 4 years in the field of their choice.

We don't trust them with making any adult choices, except this one.

>If you forgive the student loans, the counter argument becomes get rid of the student loans and then people who are responsible with them

That's quite a leap of logic you have there, friend.

The first thing is to make student loans dismissible in bankruptcy. That makes the student loan just like any other loan. Bankruptcy exists for a reason.

Then, canceling the student debt just resets the game that was rigged in 1976 by making student loans different from the others. Education loans are lucrative, especially when given to responsible people like you. The banks won't pass on this opportunity (why would they?).

Finally, see my other comment[5] about how the most likely outcome is that the tuition costs will go drastically down. Availability of these loans is the reason the education is not affordable! You wouldn't need the loans if we didn't allow them.

Before the 1976 legislation, you could pay off your tuition working a part-time job on the weekends.

In 1975, six weeks of work at minimum wage paid your tuition at a public school.

Today, it's 33 weeks. Five times as much. If you're lucky.

We can and must go back to where we were 50 years ago. And the banks have to pay for milking us for those 50 years.

People like us won't be hurt when the banks pay up.

[1]https://www.collegecovered.com/paying-for-college/real-colle...

[2]https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-college

[3]https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-col...

[4]https://www.valuepenguin.com/student-loans/average-cost-of-c...

[5]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29171278

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The problem with Student Loan forgiveness is it would typically help the highest paid Americans. Most people with 100k plus in loans also make very good money. Why would that be a problem ? First, your "typically" needs a citation. The average student loan is about $40K. Second, it's not a problem to help struggling people if a percentage of people who are not struggling benefits too. Nothing is 100% efficient, and…

while the parent poster indeed made an unsubstantiated assertion, it's not that hard to understand the perverseness of giving money to already well-off people. i personally think we should make federal loans highly progressive, both in amount and interest rate, and make them dischargeable via ordinary bankruptcy proceedings (also, revert the bankruptcy-tightening laws that were passed in the mid-oughts). that would b…

I agree with what you say.

The idea for total loan forgiveness is that for a reasonable progressive scheme, the difference between that and total forgiveness may be marginal.

We have plenty examples of how drug-testing for government benefits ends up costing more than simply giving those benefits to all who qualify even if they are drug users. Same applies here. It'd be interesting to see the actual numbers.

But sure, I'd take a progressive scheme like the one you proposed. Hell, just your first sentence (re: bankruptcy) warms my heart and fills my soul with glee :)

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you want to be elitist and attend the most expensive school possible, you have to eventually pay for it. Eh, I feel like this isn't true. Most of top schools in the US offer full, need-blind financial aid. This means no scholarship that can be taken away nor student loans. Many fellow classmates were there completely free of charge. The best schools have money, and they're interested in making sure their talent…

Um USC is still considered one of the top schools. The full rides you're referring to are often reserved to students from very low income backgrounds. Let's say your mom and your dad make 150 combined, that doesn't mean they have a spare $60,000 for you to go to school. Meaning you might have to take out some student loans. I still think student loans are an amazing program, and no they don't need to be forgiven. As…

> Um USC is still considered one of the top schools.

This is true only by an extremely expansive definition of top school. It's not even a top 20 school.

Re: USC pushed a $115k online degree – graduates got low salaries, huge debts

#230

Ehh eh. I went to a CSU for like 6k a year. If you want to be elitist and attend the most expensive school possible, you have to eventually pay for it. > Ms. Fowler, a 2018 graduate, enjoyed the program but owes $307,000 in total student-loan debt, including about $200,000 from the master’s degree. She said she earns $48,000 as a community mental-health therapist in Mount Pleasant, Iowa. This translates into paying 3…

> This translates into paying 300k to feel prestigious. At dinner parties she gets to tell everyone about how she's a USC grad. With an online degree? Why would anyone brag about that?

With a USC degree? Why would anyone brag about that?

Snobbery is fractal. People who went to elite schools look down on places that are very good, like USC.

Post reply on HN