Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
1–10 of 106 posts
Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#2Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#3EDIT: And, of course, the elephant in the room is the fascist government/corporate cooperation on student debt, which is now larger and more important than credit card debt in the overall economic credit environment. You kill student debt growth, you kill debt growth and, in todays insane economy, that means you kill growth period.
Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#4My thoughts on the solution is the same for housing increases. Get rid of the government loans. In this situation also make student loans able to discharge by bankruptcy, that way banks will think twice about it as well.
The easier it is to finance something the more people will likely buy it. Look at cars, houses, colleges, even the use of credit cards. Peope will be angry when the loans go away, because it has become a part of the American Dream along with owning a house. But this will cause a huge decrease in demand and hopefully lower the price. And maybe students will work a few years before attending college and know what they want to do in life (can't say I had much of a clue when I attended).
Another side of effect with less graduates is that maybe we can get rid of the college degree requirements (you know, the ones that require a BA in any field).
Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#5I've always found it baffling that anybody expected to solve the college affordability issue by making student loans cheaper and easier to get. When we do the same thing with mortgage rates, we expect the prices of homes to rise. Why do we expect any different of college tuition prices?
Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#6When it ends it be non-linear: the debt system that we've built our economy and currency on is going to eventually throw up all over itself as we reach Keynes' "long run" and, at that point, experience consumers simply won't have the choice to screw themselves with unproductive debt. EDIT: And, of course, the elephant in the room is the fascist government/corporate cooperation on student debt, which is now larger and…
Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#7I'm very opinionated about colleges / tuition. Many people find value in it, or they justify it somehow like they couldn't get the education / experience some other, more affordable, way. My thoughts on the solution is the same for housing increases. Get rid of the government loans. In this situation also make student loans able to discharge by bankruptcy, that way banks will think twice about it as well. The easier…
However, in this 3 page article it isn't even mentioned once. Instead, he jumps immediately into the trendy topic of inequality. He might as well have just tweeted #1% #wealthgap #taxtherich
Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#8I'm very opinionated about colleges / tuition. Many people find value in it, or they justify it somehow like they couldn't get the education / experience some other, more affordable, way. My thoughts on the solution is the same for housing increases. Get rid of the government loans. In this situation also make student loans able to discharge by bankruptcy, that way banks will think twice about it as well. The easier…
Re: Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition
#9When it ends it be non-linear: the debt system that we've built our economy and currency on is going to eventually throw up all over itself as we reach Keynes' "long run" and, at that point, experience consumers simply won't have the choice to screw themselves with unproductive debt. EDIT: And, of course, the elephant in the room is the fascist government/corporate cooperation on student debt, which is now larger and…
Of course, it's a terrible message to send and creates a moral hazard, but that's the way the game has been played for the last 30+ years. Your best bet to make it in America is to leverage yourself to the hilt. If you succeed, the benefits are privatized and you can sail off into the sunset. If you fail, the losses are eaten by the public.
In 2007 it was the bankers, mortgage lenders, GSEs and insurance companies working together to line each others pockets. This time around its the same deal, with (in order), the bankers, student loan originators (i.e. the government), Sallie Mae and the universities. Why would things play out any differently this time around?