High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993 • Hacker News Board

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#171

Post by charwalker » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:08 PM UTC

gedy wrote: post #112

memish wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Student debt is mostly held by the richer half of the US population. Serious question: would it do more good if instead of giving money to people with student debt, you gave money to people without it? The first test of a potential policy is whether it's better than doing exactly the opposite. If you can't even prove that, it's probably not a good policy. https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1521112550770946048

Yes I went to a cheap state school that I could afford. I'm from a modest background and it didn't occur to me I could borrow beyond my means and go to a nicer school. I certainly don't feel student loan forgiveness is "fair" in that circumstance!

Nowadays 'affording' a 'cheap' state school is guessing if you can walk away with 20-50k of debt vs 50-150k. My younger brother had solid scholarships and still walked out with 25k. I graduated in 3 years and luckily my parents covered the last tuition check and I still had 15k.

At this point I've paid my debts and still welcome relief for students who didn't have the same opportunities as me.

There is no 'cheap' 4 year school anymore. Costs can be mitigated by going to a Community College for an associates/first 2 years then bridge that into a 4 year program but if you want to go for research, engineering, or many other more dedicated programs then being at the 4 year school all 4 years leads to many more connections and opportunities that some feel are worth the cost.

Borrowing beyond ones means isn't always fully understood by a group of 17-18 year olds, especially those who may be first generation college students or from school districts that have spent 2+ decades now losing resources for educating students on college options in order to focus on the kids failing out. For example, many college apps I completed in 2011 needed a letter of rec from my counselor who I had talked to once as a sophomore but spent most of his time working with students on the edge of failing or dropping out. It's archaic just like how the US college system operates as a capitalists dream and not a public service.

In terms of fair, well policy hasn't been fair in a long time either. The 2017 tax bill raised my taxes and pushed a trillion plus surplus back to the wealthy - a much worse outcome for all then cancelling student debt without a deeper plan. It may not seem "fair" to you but that doesn't make it bad policy.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#172

Post by lamontcg » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:34 PM UTC

vsareto wrote: post #122

hackererror404 wrote: post #28

Might be an unpopular opinion... but this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed and it would actually be a signal to universities and students alike, that Universities can charge more, and students can continue to take out larger loans because... they might be forgiven at some future point in time.

With free universities, they wouldn't have to charge students anything.

And the government would then cap the amount that universities get per student, and it would allow poor people to go to college as well. Everyone winds up paying tuition via taxes over time.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#173

Post by wand3r » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:35 PM UTC

mcv wrote: post #162

wand3r wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The examples you gave are not as direct. This is a direct stimulus that can easily be attributed from the government to an individual. In some cases, as you mentioned, there are political reasons that are also suspect and stupid in my opinion. However, this example is extremely simple and easily attributable as there isn’t some 3rd party hiring people or some number of dollars you get to keep in your bank account in…

I think the other examples are far more blatant. Politicians fund the military by far more than the military needs, to the point that the military doesn't even know what to do with it, but there's always conditions that specific military or NASA projects take place in specific states or districts for specific politicians. The tax cuts for donations are even worse. And neither of those are solving a specific problem,…

Yeah, I think we agree. The military spending is absurd and also extremely wasteful. However, I don’t think it is “buying votes”. Its more akin to this terrible system where senators pork bills and make trades. Paying people (or forgiving a big debt) directly before an election is buying votes. The other examples you said are just political ineptitude, horse trading and a broken governmental system.

My first pass on fixing education is that we should remove the non-discharge of student loan debt. Gen-Z could boycott this system by declaring bankruptcy immediately after graduation which would have relatively minimal affects on their lives relative to the debt and schools would be forced to lower costs

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#174

Post by pyrophane » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:39 PM UTC

nonethewiser wrote: post #115

pyrophane wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see student loan debt forgiven along with implementing a plan to address the cause of this ballooning debt. Unfortunately, this is the United States, and federal legislation on just about anything is currently impossible if there is any opportunity at all to turn it into a divisive issue. Even if the democrats managed to build a majority that would allow them to pass whatever they wanted, tackling a probl…

> I'd like to see student loan debt forgiven along with implementing a plan to address the cause of this ballooning debt. Forgiving debt incentivizes debt though. It's impossible to address the root cause and forgive the debt.

That's why I'm suggesting that forgiveness of any existing debt should be linked to a big policy change.

For example, make student load debt dischargeable in bankruptcy like any other debt, and at the same time impose tuition caps at state universities to make them affordable again.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#175

Post by etempleton » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:44 PM UTC

Agamus wrote: post #24

"The solution is and always has been to cut the fluff from the academies. For context, go add up the salaries the 'student services' area of the expensive school of your choice. Having worked for one such office for ~15 years, the most appalling part was that they are largely antagonistic toward the faculty and mission of the schools. The waste is dizzying." I made the above comment on another thread with a similar t…

As the article mentioned schools are no longer competing on price, but they are competing on features / services / amenities. It seems intuitive to cut those to reduce costs, but the market doesn’t want that even if people say that is what they want that is not how they vote with their dollar.

The biggest declines in enrollments are at community colleges and state schools. Also counter intuitively when a college lowers their listed tuition to offer more transparent pricing they almost see an enrollment decline.

The difference between 50k, 60k, 70k, 80k per year is almost irrelevant to the students if they are able to secure a gurnanteed government loan.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#176

Post by michaelt » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:44 PM UTC

the_only_law wrote: post #91

Agamus wrote: post #24

"The solution is and always has been to cut the fluff from the academies. For context, go add up the salaries the 'student services' area of the expensive school of your choice. Having worked for one such office for ~15 years, the most appalling part was that they are largely antagonistic toward the faculty and mission of the schools. The waste is dizzying." I made the above comment on another thread with a similar t…

Shit I’m fine with keeping stuff if majority of the student body wants to pay for it, but let me opt out. The education system and tangential friends have so far proven the hardest bureaucracy I’ve ever tried to find a way around. I hate that now, when I’m more mature, more experienced, and know exactly what I want from it is the time it’s the most difficult for me to go back.

> Shit I’m fine with keeping stuff if majority of the student body wants to pay for it, but let me opt out.

For things like swimming pools and gyms, sure.

But some of the new services are things like 'mental health support' - it would be problematic if you'd opted out of mental health support to save $50/month, then you committed suicide.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#177

Post by paulpauper » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:44 PM UTC

"Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993"

yet the chart he supplies clearly show the trend starting in 1985, so he torpedoes his own argument with his own 'evidence'. self-own

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#178

Post by zoolily » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

nonethewiser wrote: post #139

zoolily wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universities have a broader purpose than training people for the workplace. Ironically, increased costs is a large part of the reason why society's vision of universities has become so limited. It's also worth noting that reducing subsidies to education led to much of the administrative expansion. Recruitment, development, alumni, grant, and IP offices were created or expanded tremendously in an attempt to find addit…

> Universities have a broader purpose than training people for the workplace. Ironically, increased costs is a large part of the reason why society's vision of universities has become so limited. What is that? Instilling values some people think is important and not others?

Focusing on workforce training is a choice of values too, that not everyone agrees is important.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#179

Post by paulpauper » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

dap wrote: post #53

There’s no data in this article. In his recent book, Ron Lieber argues that the actual price paid hasn’t gone up nearly so much as the sticker price because of the increasing ubiquity of merit aid (which is terribly named). How does that factor in? He also points out that people’s expectations about what colleges provide have gone up. People expect small class sizes, mental health services, etc. If you argue colleges…

i dunno why this got up-voted so highly. Nothing here.

>He also points out that people’s expectations about what colleges provide have gone up. People expect small class sizes, mental health services, etc. If you argue colleges are just capturing extra money and not doing anything useful with it, I want to know where you think it’s going and why you think that?

Exactly. Also ignoring the wage premium, which is wider than ever. Adjusted for inflation and student loan debt, grads are still earning more money than ever.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#180

Post by derbOac » Tue, May 31, 2022, 4:51 PM UTC

suture wrote: post #30

State funding per student has steadily declined since 1987. Tuition rates have risen in response. I don’t claim all of the tuition increases have come from the decline in funding but the decline in public funding contributes to the increase. Public colleges are more and more being run like businesses. According to this research, public funding for higher education has declined in response to increased welfare and Med…

I think the blog post might be onto something, but I agree that I don't think it's all of it. My friend and colleague were just talking recently about how something happened around the mid to late 1990s in the US with college, but it's really hard to put one's finger on one thing or even one set of things, or why they changed around the same time. It's like higher ed just started getting insane around then in several different ways, from cost, to funding, to administration, to culture, to everything. Some institutions managed to resist the insanity longer but it seems like it's spreading.

I agree that cuts to public universities are also a big part of it, but that doesn't explain similar trends with private institutions, unless you explain it in terms of "inflation afforded through competitors" that private institutions could accrue. That is, public university funding is cut -> tuition increases at public universities -> private universities can increase tuition by comparison. It seems this would then lead to comparative budget surpluses at private universities though?

There's also a lot of trends that seem to have happened around the same time too that don't have anything directly related to state funding. For example, federal grant funds started ballooning around that same time, and the feeding frenzy on indirect funds and pyramid scheme of grad student funding started coming into play.

I'd love to have a single coherent explanation for why all of this started accelerating together in the late 90s. So far I've just chalked it up to political-administrative culture in the US (healthcare started seeing similar problems around the same time), but I'm open to the idea there's some sort of unidentified sociopoliticoeconomic explanation. I don't think it's just the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 though.