Live data from Hacker News

What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

online.wsj.com

91–100 of 103 posts

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#91

So.. We make it so that only people likely to pay the loan back get student loans. Then, we watch as the actuaries figure out that students frompoor families are the ones who disproportionately pay their loans (since they don't have the same familial support during and after college.) So, poor students are disproportionately denied loans, and we continue to see generational wealth inequality expand. There are no grea…

> ... generational wealth inequality expand.

People automatically assume economic inequality is bad, though here's an argument for its merits: http://www.paulgraham.com/inequality.html

I'm more concerned about the wealth floor in a society going down, which is at odds with the general trend over the past centuries of it going up, even if not at the same rate as the wealth ceiling.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#92
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About collectivizing costs, you speak as if it has never been tried and you discount the idea based on your own assumptions that it would be too expensive? As someone who has gone to university both at a free*(you actually get money to study) (~top) Scandinavian university as well as a (~top 10) US university, there is not much difference in the actual education from what I could tell. Where there's a real big differ…

Just a slight country point: The US is actually quite low in number of articles published per million citizens.[1] Now that doesn't say anything about the quality or distribution of research areas of course. Switzerland is in a clear lead with Sweden second. Does US universities really outpace European ones? I don't know if that statistic means anything in reality. I guess it also depends on the percentage of the pop…

Maybe my perceptions were wrong. I went to a Swedish university, and I suppose there is a lot of research going on, but I would guess there's not nearly the same amount of money in it. The US also tends to attract the smartest people, while Sweden is less attractive (not being an English language country) and with less money for doctoral students. Also, international rankings seems to favor US universities, probably because they produce good research, not that the education is in any way superior.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#93
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About collectivizing costs, you speak as if it has never been tried and you discount the idea based on your own assumptions that it would be too expensive? As someone who has gone to university both at a free*(you actually get money to study) (~top) Scandinavian university as well as a (~top 10) US university, there is not much difference in the actual education from what I could tell. Where there's a real big differ…

Traditionally[1], I believe US universities have been funded by the government to a large degree. The defunding of the universities I believe corresponds to the ceasing of the Cold War and the dropping of heavy DoD/DoE funding. My understanding of collectivizing costs is that it's proved extremely expensive for countries such as Germany and the UK, which are moving towards a paying model (last I heard). There's also…

You don't need to feel sorry for me, that loan is a government loan that every student is eligible for. The interest is 1.9%, so the government is actually losing money on it. I pay roughly $900 a year in interest, which is very manageable with a near 6-figure salary that this education gave me.

I think it's a pretty good system, it's good both for the students and their parents. Students don't have to rely on their parents (if they are rich enough to support their children anyway) and parents don't have to save up for years for tuition and living expenses. It still hurts though, it's not like it's free to get an education even without tuition and with subsidies and favorable loans. You also have to think about opportunity cost, you could be making money for 5 years, but instead you're in school. So I don't think you need the additional expenses to feel motivated.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#94
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Anyway, that's my undercooked idea to help college education. So undercooked, in fact, that consuming it would make everyone sick.

That's not very constructive, but let me engage in a metacomment. Good ideas are born out of bad ideas sharpened and the bad bits thrown out over time. I am not a professional administrator in college, but I did spend time at a variety of institutions of higher ed and wound up with a Master's degree and experience teaching, researching, and studenting. I think my thoughts are not entirely worthless. But they are not…

Your own comment was not very constructive. You listed three existing proposed solutions, and dismissed them prematurely with minimal explanation. For example, you said free college for everyone would be taken advantage of, yet it seems to have worked wonderfully for Europe. The second solution you listed, you also dismissed, saying it is the "wrong way to go about it" but did not explain why. And for the third solution you said forcing schools to cut overhead would require administrators to fire themselves, which is not true. But you dismissed it too.

The rest of your comment assumes that we can actually find a solution to the mess that is US college education - or education in general. That is unlikely to happen. Despite the fact that most people here on HN are very smart, we are overwhelmingly technologists and don't know much about the problem domain (education) to begin with. We may have participated in it as clients (i.e. students) but that's the extent of most people's exposure to it. This is why everyone has different opinions on what the root cause of the issues are. Debating them might be interesting, but a solution is unlikely to emerge in a medium like this due to the sheer complexity of the problem.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is better to take cognizance of how things really are rather than how you really, really wish them to be. Where you start in life matters. It squares with the things I've observed in my own life; hardworking people who spend every waking hour working for the betterment of their friends and family are nevertheless constantly battered by mischance and bad fortune. I've learned to differentiate the good luck that I p…

Using simplistic philosophical bases for one's beliefs Whoa there - why do you call what I've written "simplistic"? But it's cute you two believe you have any grasp of epistemology, rhetoric, or logic. And of course, that is the point. None of these things were earned. That wasn't my point. Let me put it another way: it is not valid to apply the concept of "earn" as you do, in a situation where no choice exists. You…

> Whoa there - why do you call what I've written "simplistic"?

Because it does not appreciate complexities. This is the danger of confirmation bias; it reduces a complex reality down to a simple explanation by dismissing contrary evidence.

> You can't say that a person has earned his brain, nor can you say that he hasn't. I've already explained why.

And you're wrong. Your central claim is this: "A person has earned any given X if and only if this person has made a choice." We can say "A person has earned any given X" is P and "A person has made a choice" is Q. Thus, the claim is a simple P Q, which is shorthand for P -> Q AND Q -> P.

Your next claim, however, is "If a person has not made a choice, then this person has neither earned nor not-earned the given X." This looks like ~Q -> ~P, which is logically valid, but it's not. The claim depends on a statement which is completely new. You've defined a third category of existence.

> Please stop with the insults.

Earn my respect. That's a choice on your part, right?

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#96
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This question I can only answer for holland, where I live. Basically you can apply to any university and they will let you in. Sometimes you need maths, but mostly it is open. If you don't score 50 out of 60 credits in your first year you're out. You fail a class if your grades are too low, which is more frequent than would happen in usa.

would never fly in the US. Students would sue for unfair (or worse, from a PR perspective, discriminatory) treatment. Education is a right, and by flunking those students, you are denying those students that right.

Nonsense. American students at public and private universities flunk out all the time.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Where you start in life doesn't matter, but how big a jump you make in improving your lot does, and that's something that's entirely up to you. How big a jump you can make in improving your lot is a function of where you start in life. It is significantly more difficult for someone born into a poor, single-parent household to bootstrap and "choose to make something of themselves" compared to someone who is born int…

"How big a jump you can make in improving your lot is a function of where you start in life." Says you, but my experience contradicts it. You have not convinced me. "It is significantly more difficult" So? Why does that matter? None of us are equal in any way, and none of us ever will be. You might as well decry the fact that some people are taller, or have an eye color that you prefer, or keep a head full of hair in…

>>Says you, but my experience contradicts it.

Your experience is anecdotal. Surely you can understand why basing opinions and worldviews on pure anecdote is problematic, yes?

>>None of us are equal in any way, and none of us ever will be. You might as well decry the fact that some people are taller, or have an eye color that you prefer, or keep a head full of hair into old age. In a just (my definition of that word, not necessarily yours) society, we are equal in one respect alone: equal before the law.

Nobody argues that everyone is equal in terms of physical and personal characteristics. What is important however is for everyone to have equal opportunity. If you come from a well-off family who pays for your college, you are an order of magnitude better off than someone who had to take student loans. While you were studying for your classes and partying (or otherwise networking) in your spare time, they were working several minimum wage jobs. Similarly, after college, your job prospects will be better, not only because of higher grades (due to having had more time to study) but also parental connections, which may have landed you internships during summer breaks or full-time jobs after graduation.

If we move beyond anecdotes and look at the data, we see that it supports my argument. Do a Google search for social mobility in the USA and you will see that those who come from poor families are much less likely to proceed to middle class or higher throughout their lifetime. This is not because they are shorter or dumber or start balding at an early age, but because they did not have the same opportunities and therefore could not make as big of a jump as people who had better means.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using simplistic philosophical bases for one's beliefs Whoa there - why do you call what I've written "simplistic"? But it's cute you two believe you have any grasp of epistemology, rhetoric, or logic. And of course, that is the point. None of these things were earned. That wasn't my point. Let me put it another way: it is not valid to apply the concept of "earn" as you do, in a situation where no choice exists. You…

> Whoa there - why do you call what I've written "simplistic"? Because it does not appreciate complexities. This is the danger of confirmation bias; it reduces a complex reality down to a simple explanation by dismissing contrary evidence. > You can't say that a person has earned his brain, nor can you say that he hasn't. I've already explained why. And you're wrong. Your central claim is this: "A person has earned a…

> Earn my respect.

This is supposed to be a community where we all respect each other. There is no excuse to be disrespectful to other people here, especially over disagreements about politics and philosophy.

If you want to be part of a community where you are free to be disrespectful to people until they "earn" your respect, you should go somewhere else.

I'm not even commenting on how you made fun of me and maxharris, which is kind of irrelevant because it doesn't support your argument intellectually. I'm only talking about your explicit assertion that you don't have to be respectful as part of the bargain of being in this community.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#99
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schools would immediately close departments that tend to graduate low-paid folks -- humanities, acting, psychology, history, anthropology, all gone. Not sure if it would be a problem for society because those who actually produce art tend to learn to do it before college and just spend their time in college refining, which they could as easily do in clubs and societies without the BS that goes along with college.

Based on that criteria, wouldn't universities also have to close math, biology, physics, foreign languages, environmental science, psychology, architecture, civil engineering, etc?

Math, biology, and civil engineering are all on the high end of graduate pay.

Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans

#100
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whoa there - why do you call what I've written "simplistic"? Because it does not appreciate complexities. This is the danger of confirmation bias; it reduces a complex reality down to a simple explanation by dismissing contrary evidence. > You can't say that a person has earned his brain, nor can you say that he hasn't. I've already explained why. And you're wrong. Your central claim is this: "A person has earned a…

> Earn my respect. This is supposed to be a community where we all respect each other. There is no excuse to be disrespectful to other people here, especially over disagreements about politics and philosophy. If you want to be part of a community where you are free to be disrespectful to people until they "earn" your respect, you should go somewhere else. I'm not even commenting on how you made fun of me and maxharri…

Such an authoritarian. If you want me to be respectful, then make a choice and earn that respect from me. What is this, a pg-subsidized respect space? That's immoral.
Post reply on HN