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

High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

shrewdcuriosity.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 326 posts

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#91

Post by the_only_law »

Agamus wrote: post #24

"The solution is and always has been to cut the fluff from the academies. For context, go add up the salaries the 'student services' area of the expensive school of your choice. Having worked for one such office for ~15 years, the most appalling part was that they are largely antagonistic toward the faculty and mission of the schools. The waste is dizzying." I made the above comment on another thread with a similar t…

Shit I’m fine with keeping stuff if majority of the student body wants to pay for it, but let me opt out. The education system and tangential friends have so far proven the hardest bureaucracy I’ve ever tried to find a way around.

I hate that now, when I’m more mature, more experienced, and know exactly what I want from it is the time it’s the most difficult for me to go back.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#92

Post by thawaya3113 »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #47
suture wrote: post #30

State funding per student has steadily declined since 1987. Tuition rates have risen in response. I don’t claim all of the tuition increases have come from the decline in funding but the decline in public funding contributes to the increase. Public colleges are more and more being run like businesses. According to this research, public funding for higher education has declined in response to increased welfare and Med…

"State funding for higher education has declined by roughly a quarter, to $7,152 per student enrolled in a public two- or four-year school in 2015, down from $9,489 per student in 1987." The article is not in disagreement with the thought that Free Federal Money displaces other sources. Also, the article does not show why tuition has risen 1200% instead of 30%.

The free federal money existed even before the law being suggested.

It’s not clear why a minor change in mechanics would lead to such a significant change in incentives.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#93

Post by sevenf0ur »

lapcat wrote: post #66
hackererror404 wrote: post #28

Might be an unpopular opinion... but this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed and it would actually be a signal to universities and students alike, that Universities can charge more, and students can continue to take out larger loans because... they might be forgiven at some future point in time.

> this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed This is a false dichotomy. The root core of the issue should be addressed. However, that would require an act of Congress, whereas federal student loan forgiveness can be accomplished immediately via executive action. This is why people are calling for it now, because it can be done right now.…

It's debatable that the President has the authority to forgive federal loans. Forgiving a small amount of debt for a more wealthier group of people without fixing the root of the problem is just selfish and bad policy. It's no wonder why the proposal is very unpopular.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#94

Post by lapcat »

memish wrote: post #65
hackererror404 wrote: post #28

Might be an unpopular opinion... but this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed and it would actually be a signal to universities and students alike, that Universities can charge more, and students can continue to take out larger loans because... they might be forgiven at some future point in time.

Student debt is mostly held by the richer half of the US population. Serious question: would it do more good if instead of giving money to people with student debt, you gave money to people without it? The first test of a potential policy is whether it's better than doing exactly the opposite. If you can't even prove that, it's probably not a good policy. https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1521112550770946048

Income is not wealth. Especially when you factor in student loan debt! You can make a higher income than another person but still be poorer than them because of debt.

Also, income can change a lot from year to year. My income certain has. If the economy goes to pot, suddenly a lot of people with higher income will become unemployed. And the years you spend in school are typically very low or no income, so you're not building any wealth during those years. And if you go to graduate school, it's even more years of low to no income.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#95

Post by ookdatnog »

The article contains a chart, ostensibly to support its claim, but I don't see how it supports the claim.

The chart shows that tuition inflation was already massively outpacing overall inflation in the '80s. The trend seems to accelerate a little bit in '93, but there's a much more pronounced acceleration in the early 2000's.

So whatever the underlying reason is for tuition growing much faster than inflation, that reason must have been present in the '80s already, and the greatest acceleration of that process happened about ten years after the event that the article claims is the cause of all of it.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#96

Post by BitwiseFool »

nonameiguess wrote: post #78
BitwiseFool wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"However, that would require an act of Congress, whereas federal student loan forgiveness can be accomplished immediately via executive action. This is why people are calling for it now, because it can be done right now. Also, the President promised to do so multiple times during his campaign." I can't be the only one who feels like this is simply 'buying votes' in an attempt to try and salvage some seats for the up…

It doesn't seem that simple, given he won a primary in which all of the other candidates promised more money than he did.

I still have no idea how he actually managed to win the primary. None of the Democrats or Progressives I know in real life or online actually liked him. He was doing terribly and then all of the sudden he cinched the nomination in the span of two weeks. I sense there was a lot of back room power-broker deals going on and that was the real reason why so many of his competitors dropped out when they still had a good chance.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#97

Post by elliekelly »

monetus wrote: post #75
Loughla wrote: post #16

I mean, yeah. But also, the expectations placed on colleges have grown exponentially. Retention staff, student life staff, counseling staff, new innovative (read: Expensive) programs, the 'experience'. These all cost money. My experience of expectations of college in the 90's - can I drink? Do the faculty let me miss if I need to? My experience of expectations of college now - is my child safe? Can s/he access approp…

This is like a broader version of keeping up with the joneses.

A bit of a hot take but I definitely think Facebook/social media factors into this more than we realize. Colleges regularly have major artists perform “Spring Weekend” concerts and being top-tier headline comedians to perform. That costs a ton of money and it just wasn’t happening in the 90s. Or maybe it was? And no one else knew about it...

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#98

Post by endisneigh »

pif wrote: post #57
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the cost of private colleges in the EU compared to the US. It's roughly what you would expect. The difference between the EU and the US is mostly who pays for college - not how much it costs.

If I understand correctly, the main difference is that in the EU you don't need to go to a private college.

You don’t need to in the United States either.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#99

Post by lapcat »

sevenf0ur wrote: post #93
lapcat wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed This is a false dichotomy. The root core of the issue should be addressed. However, that would require an act of Congress, whereas federal student loan forgiveness can be accomplished immediately via executive action. This is why people are calling for it now, because it can be done right now.…

It's debatable that the President has the authority to forgive federal loans. Forgiving a small amount of debt for a more wealthier group of people without fixing the root of the problem is just selfish and bad policy. It's no wonder why the proposal is very unpopular.

> It's no wonder why the proposal is very unpopular.

It's actually quite popular: https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2022/04/18/student...

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#100

Post by nonethewiser »

lapcat wrote: post #66
hackererror404 wrote: post #28

Might be an unpopular opinion... but this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed and it would actually be a signal to universities and students alike, that Universities can charge more, and students can continue to take out larger loans because... they might be forgiven at some future point in time.

> this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed This is a false dichotomy. The root core of the issue should be addressed. However, that would require an act of Congress, whereas federal student loan forgiveness can be accomplished immediately via executive action. This is why people are calling for it now, because it can be done right now.…

> This is a false dichotomy. The root core of the issue should be addressed.

It's not a false dichotomy because he's saying the root cause would get worse if student loans were forgiven.

You can argue whether or not that's true, but the claim he's making is not a false dichotomy.

Post reply on HN