What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
online.wsj.com
What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
1–10 of 103 posts
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#2You should only be able to use the "principal" pun once per article.
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#3Good grief, I always forget how misleading the WSJ is.
"Gov'ment causes those poor helpless colleges to overcharge."
Bullshit.
The growth in the cost of college is tied to big fat administrator salaries. It is control fraud pure and simple. To paraphrase, the best way to rob a college is to run one.
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#4Good grief, I always forget how misleading the WSJ is. "Gov'ment causes those poor helpless colleges to overcharge." Bullshit. The growth in the cost of college is tied to big fat administrator salaries. It is control fraud pure and simple. To paraphrase, the best way to rob a college is to run one.
So you're saying if we didn't have government guarantees on student loans or any other form of government subsidy, banks would just give 20somethings who want art degrees $200,000 completely unsecured?
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#5Good grief, I always forget how misleading the WSJ is. "Gov'ment causes those poor helpless colleges to overcharge." Bullshit. The growth in the cost of college is tied to big fat administrator salaries. It is control fraud pure and simple. To paraphrase, the best way to rob a college is to run one.
That's precisely what he argued though: "A 2010 study by the Goldwater Institute identified "administrative bloat" as a leading reason for higher costs. The study found that many American universities now have more salaried administrators than teaching faculty."
What's more he doesn't propose eliminating federal aid or loan guarantees, he advocates letting you discharge student loan debt in bankruptcy and putting colleges on the hook for some percentage of that default.
Sounds like a great idea to me. Schools that equip their students for well-paying jobs have nothing to fear, but diploma mills out for easy loan money will suffer.
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#6It is criminal that serious student-loan reform isn't on the table. As a recent graduate making monthly payments towards a 5-figure principal, I say fuck capping the interest rates. Please cap tuition and fees.
Don't give me that BS about how universities need the money.
During undergrad, I squatted in a 600 sq. ft. apartment shared with 3 other people. I seriously doubt my health is unaffected by the mold, mildew, vermin, etc. I had to live with every day. Across the street was the president's mansion(!). He had a team of gardeners, fountains, a gilded mailbox, and some pretty nice carS in the driveway. His army of administrators never worked a minute after 5:00, as evidenced by the steady stream of Bimmers, Benzes, and Lexuses that poured out of the administrative building's parking lot every day at 5:01 pm. Oh BTW, their building was the only one on campus with glass doors, bronze handles, oak furniture, marble floors, etc.
Trim the fat, and make the university answer to a more sane market force.
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#7Good grief, I always forget how misleading the WSJ is. "Gov'ment causes those poor helpless colleges to overcharge." Bullshit. The growth in the cost of college is tied to big fat administrator salaries. It is control fraud pure and simple. To paraphrase, the best way to rob a college is to run one.
Colleges responded to the availability of easy federal money by raising prices to capture the subsidy (ie. big fat administrator salaries).
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#8Good grief, I always forget how misleading the WSJ is. "Gov'ment causes those poor helpless colleges to overcharge." Bullshit. The growth in the cost of college is tied to big fat administrator salaries. It is control fraud pure and simple. To paraphrase, the best way to rob a college is to run one.
So you're saying if we didn't have government guarantees on student loans or any other form of government subsidy, banks would just give 20somethings who want art degrees $200,000 completely unsecured?
> banks would just give 20somethings who want art degrees $200,000 completely unsecured?
Of course they wouldn't. That's the idea though. Back-pressure. The idea is that it would then become unrealistic for institutions to try and charge 200k for an arts degree which no one can afford, even with loans. This should lead to lower tuition.
Bear in mind that that what any institution wants to charge is the absolute maximum the student can borrow, plus any government subsidies or fees they can extract.
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#9Good grief, I always forget how misleading the WSJ is. "Gov'ment causes those poor helpless colleges to overcharge." Bullshit. The growth in the cost of college is tied to big fat administrator salaries. It is control fraud pure and simple. To paraphrase, the best way to rob a college is to run one.
You're not really refuting the article's point, and you're not making a very good argument that school administrators are committing control fraud. Where is the evidence for control fraud?
The article makes a good point, IMO. Schools can pay "big fat administrator salaries" because students have practically unlimited access to money via student loans. Give everybody a 10% raise, and tell students to take out 10% more loans. If the student can't pay the loans then it's not the school's problem, but maybe it should be.
Re: What's Really 'Immoral' About Student Loans
#10Colleges have responded to the availability of easy federal money by doing what subsidized industries generally do: Raising prices to capture the subsidy.
Exactly.
This is an American problem though, the Europeans figured out many years ago that making tuition free for the students is a win-win for society. Everyone wants to go to college, so just make everyone pay for it, progressively, over time.