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

Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 565 posts

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#311

Post by Hizonner »

sib wrote: post #247
ryzvonusef wrote: post #140

The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job... but the purpose of a college LOAN is 100% a job, and it's very important to differentiate between the two. The whole point of the loan is to buy time; you don't want to wait for when you have savings to purchase the degree, you want to do it now . If you are not doing it for the job, then why the loan, what's the rush? If knowledge and prestige is all that matters, then…

>> The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job >> If knowledge and prestige is all that matters I disagree. The primary purpose of the college degree is the job. If you don't need a job (which derives from the signaling factor of the degree == the prestige), you can just study the same material and gain the knowledge by yourself without getting a degree.

Few people can do actually do that effectively.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#312

Post by analog31 »

djoldman wrote: post #288

The calculation is interesting: (For bachelors degrees): Each year, they will calculate the median earnings 4 years after graduation of graduates of every (Institution, CIP code) tuple. (CIP Code: 6 digit code that identifies a "program"; there are ~2,000). Then they calculate the median earnings of high school grads in that Institution's state across all jobs . If the high school grads earn more than the bachelors d…

So the jobs of the past will determine the funding of the future. This must be some new kind of economic planning.

Wait, no it's not. It's how economic planning always worked. It's summed up by the saying "The generals are always preparing to fight the last war." The university near my house is just putting the finishing touches on a building to house the new Data Science program, that was started a few years ago.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#313

Post by N_Lens »

ryzvonusef wrote: post #140

The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job... but the purpose of a college LOAN is 100% a job, and it's very important to differentiate between the two. The whole point of the loan is to buy time; you don't want to wait for when you have savings to purchase the degree, you want to do it now . If you are not doing it for the job, then why the loan, what's the rush? If knowledge and prestige is all that matters, then…

Unless you specialize in Egyptology, which then leads to getting tenured somewhere so you teach Egyptology to others. A pyramid scheme, if you will.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#314

Post by technothrasher »

zo1 wrote: post #158
CamouflagedKiwi wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't really tell people that they just can't be bankrupt though. What are they supposed to do if they have debts they can't pay but they're not allowed to declare bankruptcy because they pinky swore they wouldn't do it seven years ago?

Bankruptcy is such an alien concept. Adults took out consensual loans from another adult and now they get to just say oops "take backsies"? It's one thing if you're in a crazy desperate situation and someone takes advantage of you, I could get that. But if you're not desperate and you took money from someone else and can't pay it back? Theft. The rest is just how we manage to keep that low on an aggregate level in ou…

> But if you're not desperate and you took money from someone else and can't pay it back? Theft.

Bankruptcy is a civil matter, not a criminal matter. Charging somebody with theft, whether appropriate or not, does not resolve the civil debt. So, they are convicted of theft and still haven't paid back their debt. Then what? Fine them? Seems pointless in a bankruptcy situation. Indentured servitude? Slavery is not ever a winning argument. Debtors' prison? That just shifts the indentured servitude to the state, has been tried extensively throughout history, and doesn't actually make things better. Bankruptcy as as solution acknowledges that the situation is unwinnable and starting over from nothing, with a public notice to others to be wary about extending credit, is likely the only way out.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#315

Post by delusional »

RandomLensman wrote: post #202
delusional wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is no expectation of future income or employment, and no collateral since you don't have any. Then who would lend you the money? I don't think anyone is stopping the private sector from extending "student loans" if they were such a good business.

Of course, there would be an expectation for loan repayment (most likely from employment somewhere). Is any unsecured/uncollateralized loan indentured servitude for you then?

If what you're imagining is a zero equity zero income dischargable unsecured consumer loan to 18 year olds, then nobody is going to provide that loan.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#317

Post by Arubis »

ryzvonusef wrote: post #140

The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job... but the purpose of a college LOAN is 100% a job, and it's very important to differentiate between the two. The whole point of the loan is to buy time; you don't want to wait for when you have savings to purchase the degree, you want to do it now . If you are not doing it for the job, then why the loan, what's the rush? If knowledge and prestige is all that matters, then…

I want my taxes to go towards a more educated populace, full stop.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#318

Post by Bratmon »

bitmasher9 wrote: post #284
WillAdams wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that a child has a right to a certain number of years of education. The best school which I attended divided classes between academic and social --- the latter were attended with one's age peers (so homeroom, social studies, PE, &c.) while the former were attended at one's ability level (with a cap of four years through 4th grade, so I was in 4th grade but taking 8th grade science, English, and history…

> I would argue that a child has a right to a certain number of years of education. I would also argue society is better if its people are more educated.

I'm genuinely curious why you think that.

Like, how specifically has our society gotten better since High School became universal and college became the norm?

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#319

Post by xyzelement »

ryzvonusef wrote: post #140

The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job... but the purpose of a college LOAN is 100% a job, and it's very important to differentiate between the two. The whole point of the loan is to buy time; you don't want to wait for when you have savings to purchase the degree, you want to do it now . If you are not doing it for the job, then why the loan, what's the rush? If knowledge and prestige is all that matters, then…

// The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job

I think we are past the age where the folks who went to higher education were scholars in pursuit of some higher truth and a broad elevation of themselves. The percentage of people who care about that is very low.

As college became "a universal must." Nearly 40 percent of US adults have a bachelor's degree or higher, and obviously 40% of any population aren't inherently scholars.

So yes college today is primarily either "something people just do" (I believe this is the attitude that leads to proliferation of obvious worthless degrees) or at best "a way to get a better job."

An obvious internet-era reality is that a true scholar can find access to knowledge and like-minded peers outside the universe much more easily.

Re: Under federal rule, colleges must leave grads better off or lose financial aid

#320

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

LPisGood wrote: post #282
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you see no value in young energetic people being educated This is what the public school system is for. Post-secondary education was not meant to be for everyone. But the world has changed and universities and colleges only service as the gate-keepers to degrees and diplomas that every employer now has required to get a job (regardless of whether that education is needed for the actual job). It's not that young…

Why not expand “public school” to include post secondary education to reflect the realities of the modern economy?

Some countries do in fact do this by making post-secondary education free. But the key problem is the artificial requirements imposed by employers to people to have degrees to do jobs that in no way require them. Instead a degree is used as a proxy metric, and like Betterbridge keeps hammering at us, it stops being a good one once the everyone abuses it.
Post reply on HN