Live data from Hacker News

How America's universities became debt factories

anandsanwal.me

501–510 of 564 posts

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#501
post #465
post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am disinclined to agree with you. Homecoming, football, having fun in sports, are exactly what kids should be focused on. They should be enjoying life, not hunched over materials studying late into the night. Of course, focus on footballs, elaborate dance, and other sports can be excessive. I merely object to the excessive focus on academics, the rat race, and pressure cooker environment to get education at top ran…

> navigate life's challenge, such as avoiding scammers, how to judge quality information, how to diagnose and solve emotional challenges where are the parent's? They're meant to be the ones teaching these non-academic education to their children. School does not replace parenting. School is for academic studies - stuff that a parent won't have had the qualifications to teach.

where are the parent's? They're meant to be the ones teaching these non-academic education to their children.

School does not replace parenting. School is for academic studies - stuff that a parent won't have had the qualifications to teach.

This is rigid thinking. We should be adapting schools to the need of the 21st century and challenges our current population faces, rather than have people sink or swim.

Leaving it to parenting alone is basically sink or swim. Some do great. Some do shit. Some are middling. Never mind the fact that a large part of children time are spent in school. Schools are basically daycare. They're also 'raising' children whether we want to admit it or not.

That's pretty much the hard part. There will still be some needs for some academics classes. However, once you teach them how to learn, learning academics is easy to do.

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#502
post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be very honest with you, I've never met a humanities PhD student without funding who should've been pursuing a PhD, and if the department you were in was so poorly funded that it couldn't give out stipends, then it's likely that you would've never found a job in academia afterwards anyway. Look, its not your fault, some people don't end up in the right undergraduate programs, they don't meet the right people, ma…

> I've never met a humanities PhD student without funding who should've been pursuing a PhD 1) In your entire life, how many humanities PhD students without funding have you met? Perhaps you think that, somehow, you've magically met most of them, since you seem to believe there aren't that many. 2) It's just your opinion whether an individual "should've been pursuing a PhD". > if the department you were in was so poo…

I think what may be going unsaid is there are some predatory practices that puff up the idea of a PhD to get people to attend a department that is otherwise struggling. It sounds like what you describe is rarer in better programs. That shouldn’t be taken as personal or an immutable law, just a general observation.

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#503
post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are either of you even former humanities PhD students? I have my PhD in Greek and Latin. I applied to many schools for my PhD program and, on the advice of professors who had told me what I repeated above, accepted admission to the department that gave me the best aid offer, not necessarily the one with the best reputation. They were right, and I never paid a dime for my education.

> accepted admission to the department that gave me the best aid offer, not necessarily the one with the best reputation. That's a personal choice, but it's an obvious tradeoff with downsides. If you have a non-monetary goal — after all, pursuing a PhD in the humanities would be a crazy way to make money — then why would you let money stand in your way? > They were right, and I never paid a dime for my education. The…

>then why would you let money stand in your way?

Just because money isn’t a primary motivation doesn’t mean it isn’t a consideration.

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#504

I don't know if this is some kind of heresy, but here we go. I don't think universities provide much value at all to the common student who is not going to be a PhD. I went to a very well-known institution known for putting the students in a room with the professors, maybe two or three students, to one professor. My economics professor taught me one on one. I still think, in the end, the work is mostly done alone, in…

My university has a space mission ground station.

I wasn't an engineering major, I was a computer science major, but I still asked and was allowed to work evenings in the facility.

I got on the job training from experienced experts on orbital mechanics, the practical operation of spacecraft, and the infrastructure behind space flight activities. I also got to write some software that is used in the command and control of spacecraft.

Going to school gave me access to supercomputers and mainframes, practical hands-on experience that cannot be learned from a book.

Also, my university is somewhat unique in that it has an extremely rigorous writing requirements for all graduates, including creative and business writing. A comment I received multiple times at the beginning of my career is that my writing skills were extremely advanced compared to my peers. This is a double-edged sword because now, decades later, coworkers send me paragraphs to edit before being sent out.

I also minored in studio art, because as a young freshman I figured it was an easy A. Little did I realize that free and easy access to studios, models, screen printing equipment, and photography labs would lead to several lifelong hobbies.

My school also had telescopes I got to use as a member of the astronomy club, and amateur radio equipment far beyond my ability to afford as a member of the ham radio club. There is an exact and precise 0.0% chance that I would have ever gotten to even touch a 20" reflector, high quality CCD cameras, or sophisticated mounts and star trackers without going to school. Ditto for 1.5kW amplifiers and vast fields of specialized antennas for radio communications.

After I realized that staring at an IDE window all day was actual, literal, hell to me I transitioned to being an aerospace engineer. No degree, I just explained to people what I knew and did in school, what programs I had worked on, and they said "good enough, here's a board assembly drawing start spec'ing out space-rated micro- and nano-d connectors for it" and decades later I'm a senior principal engineer designing satellites.

Hell, just understanding what SWR is, what multiplexers and other RF terms meant, and knowing about polarization, propagation, and effective radiated power from my university ham radio club days went a long way to getting me to where I am today.

All of this is possible to learn autodidactically.

It would require a level of income (to gain access to the tools), foresight (to focus on specific subjects relevant to your goals), and drive (to have realistic goals laid out and to actually do it) not typically found in young adults, or old adults.

I assert it is easier, and outcomes are more favorable, if you pay someone to do all of this for you.

My perspective may be warped. I used the GI Bill and paid $0.00 for all of this. But if I had to pay the $54k it cost it would have been worth it 100 times over (I make a lot of money now).

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#505
post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>has it ever existed? This question being written as singular suggests to me you’re conflating some combination of education as a concept, education in America, and education in Europe. I see this as muddled thinking, they each have their own issues and their own timetables over which issues can and do exist. Education history in Europe is actually decently hyperlocal and pretty path dependent for each country during…

> but you seem to care about I care about having actual definitions of what "more competitive market" and "vigorous market for education" means, and gave examples of markets with significant market failures. Is it even possible to have a vigorous market without strong government oversight?

> define more competitive markets - Is it even possible?

Yes it is, and I am using it in the traditional sense of "Sellers vying to make their offerings more compelling so consumers prefer them to alternatives". A more competitive market has more of the above fighting happening, which can be incentivized in several ways.

Specifically for the US, I already gave a massive truck-sized example of how you can make offerings more competitive: repeal recent 1970s policy changes that make college debt work different than essentially all other debt in being non-dischargeable, and lenders will put pressure by refusing to lend for failschools. This will slash their demand, and survivors will be expected to provide more compelling “when examined actuarially” lifetime student economic outcomes: from the lender’s perspective, the education needs to be expected to at least pay for itself. Schools in a world with dischargeability will therefore make efforts to compete on being able to compellingly show “we are imparting an effective education which equips you to repay what you spent”, and in general will be less able to get away with “we have a strong brand and you’re young and naïve, come study here!”. You can fool an 18 year old, you won’t fool the underwriter.

Specifically for the EU, there’s three approaches I’d like to see considered, the first and last more experimental than the others. It’s a widely agreed upon problem that faculty aren’t incentivized or often even that good at actually teaching, and to a lesser extent they’re also bad at training graduate students, because professorial incentives are to be good at research and grant writing, the thing for which universities pay their salary.

Historically, many universities used a different mode where they kept permanent salaried faculty positions very limited, and rather than charge a tuition, most schools and professors were expected to charge a fee or honorarium they would collect from their individual pupils as the bulk or totality of a professor’s compensation.

We moved away from this because historically teacher compensation was abysmal and we wanted to better support educators in studying - the pendulum swung way too far the other way though, and professors are essentially totally insulated from needing to seriously engage with their student body - they make a salary no matter what and it shows when they teach like it. Returning to a market where teachers’ financial outcomes are at least partially linked to their students explicitly choosing and paying professors chosen fees rather than a tuition which everyone in society pays stochastically, professors are incentivized to competitively vie for being better at training and teaching, because their prosperity and success would be linked to it.

Second, as much criticism as the US model gets for its prices, much of that appears to be driven by administrative bloat and nondischargeability, payment itself is actually really great when dischargeable because it seems prices stay low and this bloat doesn’t happen when it is. It also means a significant fraction of students do try to get into the best school they can and the schools have some incentive to fight to be seen as better - they make their money when students go. The results speak for themselves: something like half to two-thirds of the world’s top 100 universities are all in America.

Last, I’d like to see both European and US models collaborate harder on job and work placement as part of ensuring student success. Colleges being a source of a liberal education without concern for fiscal outcomes can be great, but the pendulum swung too far and these students are essentially thrown out into the world without any expectation of success, because the school no longer has any investment in them. I’d like to see some portion of the fee of education be moved to explicitly garnished wages from placed-into-their-trained field employees - you succeeding would therefore be the university’s success.

I’d therefore like to see taxes slashed on education with moves to paid models comparable to how they existed in the US prior to the 70s, reductions in permanent salaried academic positions with in-kind movements of price of tuition from the school at large to being in baked into professorial fees instead, and moving the funding of education from societal fees to a fixed percentage of post-graduation salaries for some fixed time, to incentivize effective job placement.

The common bailiwick that needs to die is that Europeans don’t pay for college - they do, it’s just compulsory, lifelong, and in a way that is not incentivized to produce quality.

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took out around $20k in loans to study literature starting in 2001. Graduated in 2005. Rent was $150 a month. Played a lot of poker and disc golf. Studied and learned a bit. Had a 75% scholarship to help with tuition. Had a $300/semester book stipend as part of that and just bought penny books off Amazon (one of the benefits of an English degree) and pocketed the difference. Basically for 5-8% or so of my (estimate…

20 years to pay 20k$?

With a rate of 1.5%, paying the loan off might not be a smart move, as long as you don't mind not being fully debt free.

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Available residency slots are dictated by the funding made available through the Medicare program and ultimately Congress.

Out of curiosity, why cannot hospitals fund residency slots on their own with some riders (the resident should work in the same hospital for x years)? It seems odd that the medical profession is not willing to invest in the training of the next generation of professionals without government help.

Because they need to support their executives and capital projects / debt service. That’s the discretionary budget… training doctors doesn’t improve the bottom line.

Hospitals are really quasi-government entities. Their pricing structures have price controls based on Medicare reimbursements. A third of hospital revenue is Medicare and Medicaid.

Both programs have been slowing rate growth, which in turn impacts private insurance as well. The institutions haven’t been successful in reducing cost growth. ACA built out regional cartels^H provider networks, essentially eliminating competition.

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs are the exact antithesis of what an English degree teaches you: how to communicate effectively and with context, and to understand nuance in what other people say. LLMs make things that sound good but have no real depth to them.

You might understand this but I would like to believe and employer won't. Anyways, my main point is universities should focus more on tangible skills - accounting, engineering etc and should not have random useless degrees of little value. Maybe English major is still valuable, but I personally don't see the tangible value in it - other than being an English teacher.

Well that's the thing, there is a tiny market for your art historian or english Phd or whatever humanities specialty. And to get english professors you need english Phds and english students, who need an english professor. there is a need albeit a small one.

the universities also fairly say "choose your major we can't choose it for you"

so if too many people go for that english degree, at best you can make them aware the job market is tiny. But it is their choice to take their shot at their passion, a hypercompetitive field, not far different than being a hollywood actor.

the issue isn't any of that, that's all fine, the issue is why does it cost a gorillion dollars to get that english BA degree.

the spirit of it all is "pure learning is purely good, let us have you learn", and so we have english majors, that's all fine spirited, the issue is somewhere along the line someone at this so-called non-profit decided it costs 9999 gorillion dollars to reimburse the educator for this degree

Re: How America's universities became debt factories

#510
post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it worth it then? Was there a benefit like meeting your classmates? I have to make the decision for my kids.

Absolutely worth it because of the environment that it put around me for four years and the peers who inspired and pushed me to do better (and also helped me grow socially, become more independent, etc). There is nothing in adult life that's even close to that kind of environment and the growth that it fosters. Although you have to go to a good school with great peers to experience these benefits.

Thanks that is helpful to me.
Post reply on HN