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

U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

hechingerreport.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 563 posts

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#201

Post by cmpolis »

Finnucane wrote: post #11
sorenn111 wrote: post #7

One thing I find crazy is the very same institutions that are generally very left leaning, decry income inequality, and espouse generally liberal views then turn around and having tuition costs that having been rising at rates so far above inflation. Student debt is a major issue in the US and the ever increasing costs of tuition are a MAJOR culprit in pushing this crisis. Where are these costs coming from? How can y…

I work at one local university, and my wife works at another. One thing we've definitely noticed (and this is a widespread problem) is that the administration is becoming more top-heavy. There are cutbacks in faculty, support, and teaching staff, more reliance on adjuncts (academic temps, basically), and so on, while central administration grows. Expensive new buildings contribute, but less than people suppose. But t…

This comment is sadly familiar to me - it sounds exactly how my friends in healthcare describe the state of their industry (more admin, fancy buildings, less focus or spending on patient care).

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#202

Post by inferiorhuman »

mc3 wrote: post #162
stefano wrote: post #154

What I find funny in these discussions on HN is how most people seem to be completely oblivious to the obvious solution, proven to work in many developed countries around the world: have the state directly fund universities and don't charge tuition to students (or charge them a small amount). Why is the assumption "universities are private endeavours that should make a profit" something that goes unchallenged on HN?

They used to do this in the UK probably until the 90s but then they'd start charging "tuition fees" although to be fair I think they were standardised, so the same fees for any university, and fairly small, with support for poorer families. I think having so many people go to university is a big burden to pay for. Part of the solution is not so many people going to university.

California did this as part of their master plan back in the 60s. Tuition has been around for decades but up until recently tuition was not legally allowed to be named as such. Instead there were "fees".

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#203

Post by mytailorisrich »

stefano wrote: post #154

What I find funny in these discussions on HN is how most people seem to be completely oblivious to the obvious solution, proven to work in many developed countries around the world: have the state directly fund universities and don't charge tuition to students (or charge them a small amount). Why is the assumption "universities are private endeavours that should make a profit" something that goes unchallenged on HN?

My understanding is that the US system is dual: On the one hand there are private universities that charge freely, but on the other hand there are also public universities that charge reasonable fees (at least for state residents).

It's not unreasonable to charge tuition fees that are significant enough to make sure student will choose seriously and study diligently. I say that because it is certainly not always the case in countries where university is free...

It also makes sense to provide scholarship for deserving student who could not otherwise afford it.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#204

Post by narrator »

chimi wrote: post #68

Throughout history, every time loans are invented to pay for something, the price skyrockets. House, Cars, Education... except credit cards. What credit cards did is flatten the salary curve, filling the gap between where salaries should be if they increased as much or more than inflation and the cost of living, with debt. Debt is a powerful tool when used correctly, but most people are unskilled in tool use, financi…

The boom and bust cycle is a feature not a bug. Here's money, go make stuff. You think it's yours, but we'll eventually take it all back in the bust. The money we lost we created out of thin air.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#205

Post by Kalium »

stefano wrote: post #154

What I find funny in these discussions on HN is how most people seem to be completely oblivious to the obvious solution, proven to work in many developed countries around the world: have the state directly fund universities and don't charge tuition to students (or charge them a small amount). Why is the assumption "universities are private endeavours that should make a profit" something that goes unchallenged on HN?

It's worth remembering that the US does not lack for excellent, public, shockingly expensive universities - California, Illinois, Michigan, Virginia, Minnesota, and North Carolina all readily spring to mind.

We're not accepting uncritically that universities are private endeavors. We're accepting that some are and they should be allowed to continue to exist.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#206

Post by alkonaut »

I can’t imagine paying $100k even for a 4- or 5 year degree. My student loans (zero tuition, only food/rent/books) was $35k for 5 years I think. I have paid over $200/month for 15 years and I’ll be done paying it back this year. I just can’t even imagine my calculation if the loan had been 10x. My US paycheck would certainly be bigger, but I still fail to see how it could be a good investment.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#207

Post by fzeroracer »

ummonk wrote: post #186
hedvig wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay - can anyone actually cite me even a class, let alone a degree, that has the word wicker baskets in them? If not, stop using this straw-man term.

Dude it is a satirical term to symbolize low value programs. It isn’t supposed to be taken literally.

Teachers generate less value (see:income, GDP) than engineers.

We should abolish teaching degrees and just teach software engineering at college.

Re: U of Chicago projected to be the first U.S. university to cost $100k per year

#208

Post by Consultant32452 »

mountainofdeath wrote: post #187
Consultant32452 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our system produces the best universities and most sought after students on the planet. Why would we adopt a model that gets worse results? If states want to find community college or something I wouldn't gripe too much, but universities are for advancing human knowledge. Don't hold them back.

The "best" here is really in the eye of the beholder. At the undergraduate level, the most important value of a degree is the signaling value.

Look up basically any list of top universities in the world. The United States is wildly over-represented.

Undergraduate degree as a social signal is a different problem to solve.

Post reply on HN