Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983 • Hacker News Board

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#471

Post by leshow » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:16 PM UTC

Night_Thastus wrote: post #49

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…

It's unfortunate, but to me this feels like half of the root of the problem. One half is easy access to loans, the other half is student debt relief programs. Between the two, colleges know they can charge absurd prices and pocket the money. It's awful, and I wish someone was doing something to stop this. It cannot go like this forever.

There is an answer that "just" requires the political will: instead of doing public K-12, do public K-16.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#472

Post by nathan_compton » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:16 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #229

verteu wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect GP is referring to the fact that the US has the one of the worst health outcomes per dollar spent vs peer countries [1] [2]. If "better health outcomes per dollar" is not "what you want" -- how come? [1] https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2022/07/how-does-the-us-healthcare... [2] https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economic-issues-watch/wh...

People making this argument tend to want 'better health outcomes for millionaires/ healthy white collar people', either because they are one, or they think they will be one.

What I always point out is that markets are a form of rationing too. They are just form where people with money are allocated more goods than people without it, sometimes to the total exclusion of large parts of the population. Given that we set up polities for the common good, I'd argue that any necessity which markets fail to deliver to everyone should use some other kind of rationing strategy.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#473

Post by dauertewigkeit » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:16 PM UTC

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…

Easy access to credit is a good thing. I cannot believe I am saying this on HN. The problem as I see it, as a non-American, is that university in the US is a business trying to turn a profit. Even if most universities are technically non-profits, they are managed like businesses by MBAs. In the EU many countries offer guaranteed loans for Uni education, but this has not spiked the cost of education because Universities are not run with the aim to turn a profit.

IMHO, easy access to credit is one of the best things about the American economy, and hiring MBAs to manage things that aren't for profit corporations, one of its worst aspects.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#474

Post by runako » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:16 PM UTC

Eumenes wrote: post #188

runako wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly the opposite. In 2023, a degree is a prerequisite (or effectively so) to a lot of jobs. This was less true in 1983 than it is now.

Not if you're independent, resourceful, and motivated to learn. Is there some risk in not going to college, yeah, maybe - but young adults have many years to 'figure it out'. Not all answers lie in institutional credentials. I've worked with dozens of self taught programmers, designers, operators, etc. Look at how much more information is available via the web now vs what was available in 1983.

Not disagreeing with anything you are saying. In fact, why get a job at all? Start a business during high school, make millions, and skip it all. There's plenty of information out there to make this a realistic option.

However, for people that did not pursue that route, it is also true that many employers require a college degree for many jobs. Some 19-year-olds may "pattern match" well enough to get some hiring managers to grant exceptions. But these are exceptions and by definition not good general advice.

> Not all answers lie in institutional credentials.

Also consider that the truth of this may depend on the specifics of a job-seeker's phenotype. YMMV.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#475

Post by ibgeek » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:18 PM UTC

BeetleB wrote: post #347

drewg123 wrote: post #173

One thing that was mentioned in the article, but which seems to be missing from the discussion is the decrease in state funding for higher education. When I was looking for colleges in the 80s, the most expensive private schools were on the order of $20K all in. Those same schools are on the order of $85K all in, which is an increase of "only" (hah) 450%. However, my alma mater (SUNY Buffalo) has increased in-state t…

Indeed. I attended a talk by one of the presidents of a local state university about a decade ago, and she showed a plot showing that the overall cost to educate a student hadn't changed in 30 years (inflation adjusted). What had changed was the state support per student. As it dwindled, the university continually increased the tuition such that the overall cost remained constant. It's one university, so I don't know…

This is absolutely correct. For public universities, the amount of state funding hasn't kept up with the increase in the number of students.

While tuition at private institutions have also gone up, so has the amount of financial aid (scholarships) that they've made available:

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/college-prices-arent-skyr...

The result is that the net price hasn't increased all that much for the average student.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#476

Post by sgerenser » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:18 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #27

From 1991 to 2013, federal student loan issuances increased from $20 billion to over $100 billion (in 2013 dollars). And federal tax expenditures related to education increased from $2.5 billion to over $30 billion. Growing tuitions are a predictable consequence of the federal government subsidizing higher education systems that they don't control (unlike state funding of state universities). The feds should impose p…

I wonder if there's any data comparing tuition growth rates at "normal" schools and those schools that don't accept federal funding of any kind (including federal loans). There's not many of them, and they're usually small, Christian-oriented schools[0], but I'd be curious to see if there's actually any obvious difference in growth rate. A quick google search didn't come up with any data.

[0] https://deanclancy.com/a-list-of-colleges-that-dont-take-fed...

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#477

Post by epistasis » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:18 PM UTC

johngladtj wrote: post #444

Xeronate wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Education is an investment, period, end of story. If you don't do a modicum of Research before you take on tens or hundreds of thousands in debt to invest in something, that's on you and you alone. If people were not bailed out and subsidized we would not have these issues of this magnitude.

Seems like if we don't think 18 year olds are not legally responsible enough to drink alcohol, then perhaps we shouldn't allow them to take on life-destroying amounts of debt.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#478

Post by sixstringtheory » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:18 PM UTC

mrguyorama wrote: post #311

mensetmanusman wrote: post #182

We know what happens when it is other people's money. Also fascinating is the increased room and board (square area requirement per student) due to the lack of experience sharing rooms in the family as family sizes have collapsed to sub replacement levels.

Funny because all the other countries that use literal public funds to pay for all of college do not have this problem.

My understanding is that other countries that bankroll higher education also get to decide who even goes on to that level of study. Could you provide a list of countries you had in mind so we could see if they have that kind of process?

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#479

Post by nsvd » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:18 PM UTC

aidenn0 wrote: post #183

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'…

> Hint: It's tough to get your 1st credit card if you have no credit history in the US and most lenders will not even entertain that idea. Some will do if you put in a collateral like $500 of actual cash deposit to guard against the default risk. Is that true these days? At my university 20 years ago, the credit card companies would bribe 18-year-old freshmen to sign up for their cards.

My first credit card was a $200 secured card. They offered me a real card after about 6 months of usage.

This was about 5 years ago.

Re: Tuition costs have risen 710% since 1983

#480

Post by Sohcahtoa82 » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 7:19 PM UTC

algoatecorn wrote: post #152

rhplus wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

They do though. I was a Pell Grant recipient. All I did was fill out the FAFSA and the grant was automatically applied. That got me through community college debt free. When I transferred to a 4-year, I once again filled out the FAFSA and was eligible for an interest-free loan which covered the difference between tuition and my Pell Grant.

I'm wondering when and where you went to college and what other circumstances affected the size of your Pell grant.

I went to community college in 2009. I filed my FAFSA and if I recall correctly, my Pell grant was $300/term. Meanwhile, tuition was $115/credit. My full-time class load was nearly $2,000/term once you included the books.

When I transferred to the state University, tuition was double that and my Pell barely changed.

I was 27 years old when I started college, working at a Subway restaurant for $10/hr, had no savings, and parents that did not give me a dime after I moved out at 21.

I finished my degree with $45K in debt.