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

Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

statecraft.beehiiv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 771 posts

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#161

Post by YetAnotherNick »

rhplus wrote: post #94
Workaccount2 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't going to happen because the whole point of the current government back student loan program is to give kids from not-ideal backgrounds access to credit, and hence access to the full range of schools available.

Crazy idea, but how about the gov just gives kids from not-ideal backgrounds access to grants and scholarships, rather than credit.

If it is grant for all regardless of performance, it basically means giving subsidy, which government already does afaik.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#162

Post by Xeronate »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #135
GartzenDeHaes wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lenders that are taking on too much risk The lenders are taking no risks since these loans cannot be discharged through bankruptcy. There are also very large late fees and penalties that can triple (or more) the amount owed.

Now I read that Wall Street is creating CDO's based on these loans, like they (continue to) do on mortgages. Some people die "early" without paying back these loans, and sometimes, they will owe more than they took out. Given the mounting problems with the numbers here, it seems a whole generation of people in the middle of this bubble are going to go to the grave while still owing on these loans. What happens to the…

Seems wrong to influence your son's decision based on your financial situation rather than his desires/passions. Of course if he's naturally interested in the trades then sure.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#163

Post by yardie »

ourmandave wrote: post #56
codegeek wrote: post #41

It is free money for lenders because backed by the Govt AND protected against bankruptcy. It is Free money for colleges because they know they will get paid regardless. Remove this "free money guarantee" and watch how market corrects itself. When students can file for bankruptcy and/or the debt is not guaranteed by Govt, lenders would now use the same criteria they use to issue credit cards to 18 year olds. Hint: It'…

If you don't repay your student loan, it dies with you. They won't go after your estate for the balance.

Hospice and long-term care would have already picked through those bones. Unless you're rich there isn't much of an estate to go after.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#165

Post by patrickthebold »

eschulz wrote: post #10

Makes sense when you have student loans backed by the federal government. If an 18 year old with no money and no credit history gets accepted into a qualifying university, she will be able to receive a loan since the bank knows that the government will protect their investment if she fails to pay them back. So now young people have this easy access to credit, and universities can greatly increase tuition and fees wit…

"Able to pay", but where is the "Want to pay?"

I feel you also need to argue: "18 year olds don't realize they are being ripped off", or "college is actually worth that much". It's probably a different answer for different students.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#167

Post by atonse »

codedokode wrote: post #148

Could it be because in capitalism, the seller tries to take as much money as possible from buyer and the price is not related to expenses? Let me give an example that can illustrate this: a typical mobile plan from Verizon in US costs $45/month and gives you 15 Gb of traffic. At the same time in Russia one can get 30 Gb for $9/month. Are expenses for maintaining a cell network 5 times higher in US? Unlikely. It is ju…

Isn’t Russia capitalist too? I’m confused but your comparison. Sounds like you’ve just compared two markets without myriad variables.

The fact that student loans are backed by the government would in fact undermine this as a good example of a free market.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#168

Post by raz32dust »

codedokode wrote: post #148

Could it be because in capitalism, the seller tries to take as much money as possible from buyer and the price is not related to expenses? Let me give an example that can illustrate this: a typical mobile plan from Verizon in US costs $45/month and gives you 15 Gb of traffic. At the same time in Russia one can get 30 Gb for $9/month. Are expenses for maintaining a cell network 5 times higher in US? Unlikely. It is ju…

I was with you until "It is just customers in US are richer and are ok to pay more for the same service." How did you reach that conclusion? The other reason (which seems more likely to me) is that it is because the free market is not functioning because of monopoly/duopoly created by regulatory capture.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#169

Post by jedberg »

londons_explore wrote: post #54

I'd like to see a new funding model for universities. I'd like to see universities be able to register for a share of tax revenue from their students post-graduation. For example "This course costs 5% extra income tax for 20 years". Then, you pay nothing for the course, but after you graduate you pay a 5% higher tax rate, and that extra money goes to the university. The IRS would administer the scheme since they alre…

The one problem with this scheme is that it turns colleges into job training and nothing else. They would most likely drop any major that doesn't make a lot of future money.

There is still value in providing philosophy courses and music and art and all the other things that don't lead directly to high paying jobs.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#170

Post by akiselev »

drunner wrote: post #37
toomuchtodo wrote: post #2

The only service category that has outpaced higher education is hospital services. https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-or-century/

Related: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-administrati... I always thought the issue was in admin body count. However, just picking the largest universities in Germany and US on wikipedia we see: Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich Academic staff: 5,565 Administrative staff: 8,208 Students: 51,606 Michigan State University Academic staff: 5,703 Administrative staff: 7,365 Students: 49,809 Those look…

Michigan state is a public university, which generally aren't as bad because their mission tend towards providing low cost education to residents.

Stanford University, for example: Academic staff: 2,279; Administrative staff: 15,314, Students: 17,246 - that's basically 1:1

A less prestigious private university like University of Southern California: Academic staff: 4,706; Administrative staff: 16,614; Students: 49,318 - that's about 1:2.5

Post reply on HN