291–300 of 483 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rewarding people who have worked for decades to climb out of that situation by lifting those who didn't do the same to the same financial position doesn't exactly encourage upward mobility, either.
So you would rather your neighbors be poor?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way you present the problem is inaccurate to me. It's not "I can't have it so nobody can" or "I couldn't have it back then, so nobody should have it now.". It is: "At the time, these were the rules, I ran the numbers, was responsible and ended up limiting my opportunities. Others, who were not responsible, now not only have more opportunities thanks to their degree but will also end up not paying for it". I'm sor…
So you would rather your children continue to suffer the burden of a system that forces people into limited opportunities simply because you had to? So much for making the world a better place. The course that you took in life failed to teach you a fundamental truth about how a society grows.
I definitely do want the system to be fixed for future generations to not go through this. I do not want past generations to get a free pass. Loan forgiveness does nothing for future generations of students.
One technical question I've never understood about this debate: when the government "forgives" loans like this, what are they actually doing? Is the government paying the creditors off on the debtors' behalf (like a bailout)? Or are they simply declaring a refusal to prosecute the debtors?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And then the colleges will have to reduce prices or go out of business.
University employees are, unfortunately or not, consistent one party voting blocs. Cuts to them are highly unlikely.
1) I'm going to, absent some massive political shift, vote for Democrats for the rest of my life anyway. So, they don't really have to play for my vote.
2) Playing around with boring stuff like tweaking market forces around by changing how loans work is sufficiently indirect that blame can probably be dodged.
3) We're all aware that the current system is pretty bad, a new solution that at least purports to be an attempt at something better can be sold to me pretty easily.
3a) Keep in mind that, at least in the STEM departments, the instructors are there for essentially irrational reasons -- they could make much more money in industry. At least some of the motivation is to produce interesting science and help students, paycheck be damned. Changes that hurt the last while helping the first two will probably be accepted with only minimal grumbling as long as they aren't too painful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s all fine and dandy until you realize the people who where smart and careful have to foot the bill for those who weren’t. I was smart and sacrificed a little by going to community college so I wouldn’t have debt. I was also smart enough to get a degree in stem where jobs are actually available and in demand. Why should I have to foot the bill for someone who just partied and got a useless degree? I did everythi…
How much do you really think this is taking out of your pocket? You are paying for others all the time with your taxes, which can’t be selective for the system to function
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way you present the problem is inaccurate to me. It's not "I can't have it so nobody can" or "I couldn't have it back then, so nobody should have it now.". It is: "At the time, these were the rules, I ran the numbers, was responsible and ended up limiting my opportunities. Others, who were not responsible, now not only have more opportunities thanks to their degree but will also end up not paying for it". I'm sor…
So you would rather your children continue to suffer the burden of a system that forces people into limited opportunities simply because you had to? So much for making the world a better place. The course that you took in life failed to teach you a fundamental truth about how a society grows.
No one was forced to do this.
> So much for making the world a better place. The course that you took in life failed to teach you a fundamental truth about how a society grows.
Idealism is great for virtue signaling. The reality is that rewarding bad behavior and punishing good behavior does not lead to a healthy society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They'd actually have to underwrite on the basis of the value of a degree -- yeah, no one is going to lend money to the same people who wouldn't be able to repay their loans after graduation. That's good!
This is a slippery slope though. This effectively turns universities into career-training centers. Eventually enrollment in less-profitable subjects, like dance and art, will decrease, forcing colleges to drop it from their programming. Then suddenly we have a society that does not appreciate art or dance or whatever other subjects were dropped. This is the slippery slope - creditors get to decide what others know an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They'd actually have to underwrite on the basis of the value of a degree -- yeah, no one is going to lend money to the same people who wouldn't be able to repay their loans after graduation. That's good!
This is a slippery slope though. This effectively turns universities into career-training centers. Eventually enrollment in less-profitable subjects, like dance and art, will decrease, forcing colleges to drop it from their programming. Then suddenly we have a society that does not appreciate art or dance or whatever other subjects were dropped. This is the slippery slope - creditors get to decide what others know an…
Isn't that the case already? Aren't most university students looking to increase their career prospects? Wasn't that the whole point of telling generations of kids to go to college, so that they'll get better jobs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know we're currently in the Church of Paul Graham, where college is useless and it's all about the startup grind. But college is known to lead to better outcomes on average for people who go to college, and there is an intrinsic value, to both individuals and society, in receiving an education. High school is free, for example, and it's not worthless.
> But college is known to lead to better outcomes on average for people who go to college That largely depends on the field you're studying. STEM? Sure. Perhaps not for software engineering, because that these days can be entirely self-taught,if you're a person capable of it. But everything else? Probably worthless. A gender studies or liberal arts degree is not going to make you money.
And is everything else really 'worthless?' Do we not need lawyers? Social workers? Teachers? Tutors? Librarians? Student debt is a barrier to solving teacher shortages, and not everyone is teaching STEM.