31–40 of 65 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you repay the amount of money you took off the Government. I don't understand how that's even a question?
10 years @15% if you've graduated is biased towards people with shit degrees is all I'm saying
NYU is a school for rich kids. It's a vacation for students who want college fun, but prefer it to be in an urban setting like NYC (and the best part of NY, to be sure), rather than in a small college town with its frat parties and beer pong. IMO, it's not the ideal place to study at all. Too many distractions. If you're a liberal arts student you can probably take advantage of all the events, museums, intellectual s…
As someone who went to college in a small college town (a 3-college town, even) with no semblance of events, museums, and non-academic "intellectual stuff" to be found anywhere... Wut.
I'd have killed, even as an engineering major, to have access to all of the above. I'd have killed to balance out 4 years of mindlessly pounding of head against books with some semblance of creativity and culture.
I left college culturally stunted and have spent a lot of time crawling out of that dark hole, I wish it upon no one else. It's an endemic problem in our field to belittle the arts, or to regard the total abandonment of the arts as some sort of ascetic virtue. To be clear, there should be no pride in spending 4 years of your life in an academic dungeon and eschewing museums, music, and "intellectual stuff".
Throwing would-be engineers into an arena where there are constantly exposed to non-engineering things and non-engineering people is probably the best thing you can do to engineering education.
Any government backed student loan should have a simple repayment schedule -- a maximum of 15% of your earnings for 10 years following graduation. At the end of 10 years, the loan is considered fully paid and any balance, if remaining, forgiven. The institution eats the cost of forgiving the balance. So if you're an institution providing an expensive but worthless education, you aren't going to get paid for it. Let's…
And then we make it 20%, and then 30%, and then extend it out to 15 years, and then . . .
We've been putting people into debt they cannot escape to go to college while telling them they "need" to go to college. Given the history, the end result of any kind of "we take a portion of your income" plan will be to make it ever more efficient for the colleges to capture 99% of the lifetime earning difference between a high-school grad and a college grad.
We need price pressure on the cost of education.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you repay the amount of money you took off the Government. I don't understand how that's even a question?
10 years @15% if you've graduated is biased towards people with shit degrees is all I'm saying
As a general rule, I think there is an counter-productive reaction among people to the idea of paying high salaries to people working in non-profits. At the end of the day, good people are willing to take a pay cut to work at an organization they perceive to be socially beneficial, but only so much of one. Their kids still have to go to college, after all. And if the organization can raise the money, why object to it…
I'm not even sure parental credit would slow things down. That might send more of the less-privileged students to smaller universities and community colleges, but I'm not sure they constitute a large fraction of major university students in the first place. And for those students whose parents credit would justify a 60k loan, how many of those couldn't also get an 80k loan, on student loan terms (rates and repayment…
Furthermore, make the students able to declare bankruptcy to escape student debt.
The reaction from the schools would be to make sure their students don't end up more than (very roughly) $10,000 in debt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even simpler: Don't have the government involved in student loans at all, and let the market price loans for different degrees for different students freely. Those institutions that can convince lenders that graduates will be in a position to pay back the loans quickly will be able to offer lower rates to students, and thus attract more and better students. Those out to study degrees that don't offer great employment…
That's simpler, but worse. Education is a text-book example of a good with positive externalities and it's worth subsidizing, especially for poorer people.
The idea that all education at any cost carries positive externalities is exactly what got us into the mess that is education today.
Edited to add: Also, my proposal isn't incompatible with neither financial aid nor grants to institutions. But like underpriced mortgages caused a housing bubble, underpriced student loans is causing an education bubble.
> building itself less like a university and more like a for-profit corporation This concept was discussed recently on the EconTalk podcast http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2013/06/pallotta_on_cha.htm... "The way we think about charity is dead wrong" http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about... Uncharitable: How Restraints on Nonprofits Undermine Their Potential http://www.amazon.com/dp/1584659556/
Charity is very profitable for many elites especially in places like NYC and DC. Just because they don't distribute dividends doesn't mean they don't distribute salaries. Most "connected" people here come out of school and get hired by their friends at non-profits. They sit around, raise money, and don't do much with it other than pay themselves.
Of course this was a while ago. I don't know if the tax laws have changed to make these sorts of things more difficult to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if you've dropped out?
Then you repay the amount of money you took off the Government. I don't understand how that's even a question?
NYU is a school for rich kids. It's a vacation for students who want college fun, but prefer it to be in an urban setting like NYC (and the best part of NY, to be sure), rather than in a small college town with its frat parties and beer pong. IMO, it's not the ideal place to study at all. Too many distractions. If you're a liberal arts student you can probably take advantage of all the events, museums, intellectual s…
NYU's Courant Institute is the top ranked applied math program in the States...
http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-gradu...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even simpler: Don't have the government involved in student loans at all, and let the market price loans for different degrees for different students freely. Those institutions that can convince lenders that graduates will be in a position to pay back the loans quickly will be able to offer lower rates to students, and thus attract more and better students. Those out to study degrees that don't offer great employment…
That's simpler, but worse. Education is a text-book example of a good with positive externalities and it's worth subsidizing, especially for poorer people.
If you want to see what happens when a society mindlessly thinks "more kids in more college is better, damn everything else," look at society right now.