Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 565 posts

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#191

Post by nxm »

dv_dt wrote: post #161
hankbond wrote: post #7

I feel like I have not really heard a compelling reason why student debt should not be dischargeable thru bankruptcy like (afaik) all other forms of debt. I am curious what the ramifications would be if higher education institutions had to (in some form) co-sign the debt being issued. I do get that not all education should be purely for economic reasons, but as an autodidact I feel that "learning for the sake of lear…

Student university edication shouldn't even be a loan. The vast majority of student loans are financed by the government itself. The US spends trillions procuring defense (or war), it should also procure an educated workforce without saddling the citizenry with all the extra red tape and misery of collecting back a loan

Well someone has to do it as its bulk of NATO’s funding.

It also should not waste tax payer’s money of worthless degrees

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#192

Post by nxm »

sethammons wrote: post #148
dyauspitr wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because then the normal thing to do would be to graduate, declare bankruptcy when you have nothing to lose in life because you are just starting out, work for 7 years and you’re in the clear by your late 20s. Everyone would do it.

> Everyone would do it. No, they wouldn't. Source: go back a couple decades, and student loans had low interest rates and were dischargeable in bankruptcy. It was an option. And, in fact, practically nobody did that.

Yes they would as there’d be no cost to them while all of them on the taxpayers.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#193

Post by delusional »

ryzvonusef wrote: post #140

The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job... but the purpose of a college LOAN is 100% a job, and it's very important to differentiate between the two. The whole point of the loan is to buy time; you don't want to wait for when you have savings to purchase the degree, you want to do it now . If you are not doing it for the job, then why the loan, what's the rush? If knowledge and prestige is all that matters, then…

> If knowledge and prestige is all that matters, then don't take the loan, take the scenic route, get your degree slowly as and when you have the time and money, and one day you will have something to look back at.

Do you see no value in young energetic people being educated while their brains are still maximally plastic, and society get maximal value out of the education? Is there no value in handing over our knowledge to the new generation BEFORE they act without it? Is there no value in knowing something the "free labor market" has not priced in?

Rights are something we grant each other. If we see a value in an educated public, we can grant each other the right to get an education. There are no "rights" in nature, so the statement "you don't have the right" is meaningless in matters of politics, where the whole point of the discussion is to figure out if you should "have the right".

Your inner world must be a dead hellscape if you believe that the only things that exist are "prestige", arbitrary "knowledge", or a job.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#194

Post by RandomLensman »

threetonesun wrote: post #190
RandomLensman wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is quite profitable to get a certain education, why would it need the tax payer to provide the loan for it? Shouldn't that be easy to fund from the private sector?

Assuming you’re not talking about a loan to do this (at which point you’ve reinvented indentured servitude), back when there was a smaller pool of college graduates it was easier to find a company that would pay for your education, some even offering bonuses if you completed it.

Not sure I understand: why would a loan be indentured servitude if it funds an education (not binding employment etc.)?

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#195

Post by grumple »

dmurray wrote: post #154
fc417fc802 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> declaring bankrupcy would probably hurt more than help. It wouldn't help at all as you are typically forfeiting all but essential assets by declaring it. The only people who benefit are those with nothing to their name except perhaps the home they live in and the car they drive to work everyday.

A house and a car are an enormous amount of assets for someone 7 years out of college. Leaving bankrupts with "only" enough assets to be in the top few percent of their peers is hardly a hardship.

Bankruptcy must be filed with a court and the creditors get a say. You don’t just wake up and say “I declare bankruptcy!”. A judge would look at your income and tell you to get bent, or at best set up a payment plan. They aren’t going to let a financially solvent person get out of debt. Here’s a quick summary:

https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/credit-education...

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#196

Post by throw94949499 »

kentm wrote: post #171
throw94949499 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They do not. This is nonsense.

Just checked with ai about Berkley (I like this uni from telly):

EECS B.S.: You must complete six humanities/social-science courses. Two are Reading and Composition courses, and four come from approved areas such as history, philosophy, arts, international studies, or social sciences. At least two must be upper-division.

https://engineering.berkeley.edu/students/undergraduate-guid...

All Berkeley undergraduates must complete one approved American Cultures course dealing comparatively with race, ethnicity, and culture in the United States

https://undergraduate.catalog.berkeley.edu/earning-your-degr...

We can argue about subject names, but if teacher openly promotes marxism, anticolonialism and misandry, etc..., for me it is "woke garbage", even if the subject name is "history" or "international studies".

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#197

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

anonym29 wrote: post #170
reactordev wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, college is considered a privilege for those who can afford it or are poor enough to be granted it from poorly designed taxpayer funds. Then we set the bar for hiring to requiring a degree making it so that if you want anything above minimum wage, you’re going to have to get a degree. This is how the predatory lending prior to 2008 started with student loan debt. Glad to see that 20 years hasn’t taught us a…

>Then we set the bar for hiring to requiring a degree making it so that if you want anything above minimum wage, you’re going to have to get a degree. While this may have been true in the past, this is no longer the case, and it has not been the case for at least a decade and change now, at least in the US. If you are intelligent and self-motivated to learn in-demand skills, and you can demonstrate those skills, and…

> working fully remote for Google, also with no degree.

Aquihired? My understanding, is that Google is infamous for requiring, not just degrees, but degrees at prestigious STEM colleges.

Apple is known for hiring folks with patchy educational creds. They showed interest in me, a couple of times, and I’m as scruffy as you can get.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#198

Post by sscaryterry »

ryzvonusef wrote: post #140

The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job... but the purpose of a college LOAN is 100% a job, and it's very important to differentiate between the two. The whole point of the loan is to buy time; you don't want to wait for when you have savings to purchase the degree, you want to do it now . If you are not doing it for the job, then why the loan, what's the rush? If knowledge and prestige is all that matters, then…

> purpose of a college LOAN is 100% a job

Wow, what horseshit.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#199

Post by Muromec »

zo1 wrote: post #158
CamouflagedKiwi wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't really tell people that they just can't be bankrupt though. What are they supposed to do if they have debts they can't pay but they're not allowed to declare bankruptcy because they pinky swore they wouldn't do it seven years ago?

Bankruptcy is such an alien concept. Adults took out consensual loans from another adult and now they get to just say oops "take backsies"? It's one thing if you're in a crazy desperate situation and someone takes advantage of you, I could get that. But if you're not desperate and you took money from someone else and can't pay it back? Theft. The rest is just how we manage to keep that low on an aggregate level in ou…

The goal of having laws is as much about being fair as it is about having a society that can function. Aka "the target amount of fraud is not zero".

Sometimes it's better for both parties to cut their losses and move on to do better things.

Looking at this from the other angle: if value can be created out of nothing it can also disappear into nothing when investment fails.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#200

Post by delusional »

reactordev wrote: post #159
jclulow wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, says you? We live in a society and to some extent we decide what that means. I believe many countries outside the US have heavily subsidised loans or cost deferment mechanisms, or just outright government funding for school. Certainly in Australia you essentially don't have to pay back your HECS debt if you don't end up with a salary of sufficient magnitude, and then the rate at which you pay it back is scale…

In the US, college is considered a privilege for those who can afford it or are poor enough to be granted it from poorly designed taxpayer funds. Then we set the bar for hiring to requiring a degree making it so that if you want anything above minimum wage, you’re going to have to get a degree. This is how the predatory lending prior to 2008 started with student loan debt. Glad to see that 20 years hasn’t taught us a…

> In the US, college is considered a privilege for those who can afford it or are poor enough to be granted it from poorly designed taxpayer funds.

Here in Denmark, part of the organized labor movements was also a focus on the duty of the worker to acquire new skills. That reframing of an education, of something you should be grateful for receiving, towards something you had a duty to continually pursue, is extremely important to how education is seen and practiced.

We've lost a lot of that philosophical backing, but that's one of the cool things of organizations. Even years after we've forgot why we've organized education like this, the gears continue to turn. I do think we're in the middle of a pretty frighting turn away from it, but hopefully we can fix that in time.

Post reply on HN