Got to College, Get a Good Job? Well…

Hilarious, but unfortunately all too true:

Advertisements

27 thoughts on “Got to College, Get a Good Job? Well…

  1. Retired Spook February 28, 2014 / 10:22 am

    What better way to get the most potentially productive people to become dependent on government than by saddling them with huge student loans at the beginning of their careers. There is, however, an unintended consequence that just now coming to light. Only in the static mind of the Left could this not have been foreseen.

    The growing student loan burden carried by millions of Americans threatens to undermine the housing recovery’s momentum by discouraging, or even blocking, a generation of potential buyers from purchasing their first homes.

    Recent improvements in the housing market have been fueled largely by investors who snapped up homes in the past few years. But that demand is waning as prices climb and mortgage rates rise. An analysis by the Mortgage Bankers Association found that loan applications for home purchases have slipped nearly 20 percent in the past four months compared with the same period a year earlier.

    First-time buyers, the bedrock of the housing market, are not stepping up to fill the void. They have accounted for nearly a third of home purchases over the past year, well below the historical norm, industry figures show. The trend has alarmed some housing experts, who suspect that student loan debt is partly to blame. That debt has tripled from a decade earlier, to more than $1 trillion, while wages for young college graduates have dropped.

    • bardolf2 February 28, 2014 / 11:08 am

      “What better way to get the most potentially productive people to become dependent on government than by saddling them with huge student loans ..” Spook

      {To get, to become, saddling them} is a sequence of passive verbs meant to imply that parents, students and other stakeholders are helpless in the face of some monolithic assault. The burden of students loans has been an open matter of discussion for more than 3 decades. The people choosing student loans have a pretty good idea what they are getting into when they sign up. The mentioned $45,000 per year tuition isn’t in-state tuition anywhere in the country. Those are prices at elite universities, and it’s hard to feel sorry for Jill who goes to Dartmouth instead of the University of New Hampshire, majors in sociology and rack up 100 grand in loans or Jack who goes to a private school to learn Gaming and finds himself in competition with 1 million other young men who also want to do game design for a job.

      • M. Noonan February 28, 2014 / 12:27 pm

        bardolf,

        But they are, indeed, suckered in to it – the whole purpose of student loans is to allow colleges to charge ever more money. The kids aren’t told the whole truth…they’ll be told, for instance, that the average college graduate earns X percent more than the non-college graduate, but no one points out that the college grad with a medical degree is making vastly more than the college grad with a “studies” degree. And it can be in the range of $45,000.00 per year…but even if its $10,000.00 per year, that still works out to $40,000.00 in student loans for a 22 year old kid who doesn’t have a job. He or she has no credit rating, no income – and can borrow $40,000.00. I work in credit underwriting – I wouldn’t loan that kid $500.00; but colleges have made it so that kids can borrow these vast sums.

        The solution is to terminate student loans – the cost of college will drop like a rock the year afterwards, and kids won’t be forced to take absurd courses which in no way relate to their career choice…we’d be putting, for instance, a huge amount of racist, anti-American “studies” professors out of business and begin to let a bit of light and liberty in to our colleges.

      • Amazona February 28, 2014 / 12:32 pm

        I don’t agree that these are passive verbs. If Spook had said that these people had been saddled, that would be passive, but he used the active form.

        To some degree, it is true that “..The people choosing student loans have a pretty good idea what they are getting into when they sign up.” I don’t think that anyone really thinks she is going to make a living because she has a degree in transgendered Native American studies. But this does not contradict the fact that these “studies” programs are degree programs, with the implication that they will contribute to the future of the student in some way. A decade or so ago, the popular major for someone looking for fun classes and a generic degree was psychology, and we all know that this did not lead to increased employability for most of these graduates, other than being proof that they were able to stick with something long enough to get a degree.

        While today’s students may not actually have thought things through enough to realize they will not be able to translate their “black studies” degrees into jobs that will let them pay off their loans, buy houses and cars, and in general participate in the economy, they are also just following emotional breadcrumbs without looking up to see where they lead, and colleges and universities are busy laying out these breadcrumbs because they translate, for the schools, into dollars.

        When a college or university prefaces its catalogs on “studies” courses with the disclaimer that these courses, and these degrees, are solely for the purpose of self-improvement by exposing the student to various ideas and theories, but will not in any way contribute to their economic well being, and that they will be paying for them for a decade or more, I will be less critical of these schools.

      • Retired Spook February 28, 2014 / 1:04 pm

        Dolf,

        The University of New Hampshire is not a particularly good example of an affordable state university.

        The burden of students loans has been an open matter of discussion for more than 3 decades.

        It obviously hasn’t been a very productive discussion.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) February 28, 2014 / 3:27 pm

        The solution is to terminate student loans – the cost of college will drop like a rock the year afterwards,

        Yeah, right!

      • bardolf2 February 28, 2014 / 6:34 pm

        It’s truly a bizarre collection of ideas from people claiming to be conservative.

        There are thousands of universities in competition for students, private, religious and public and somehow they are all conspiring to keep tuitions high for the naive youngsters AND their parents. They are suckered in as much as I am suckered in when I believe that frozen yoghurt is good for me. Universities are using slick advertising schemes because, because, because, they are in competition. It’s strange to see people simultaneously believe universities are Ponzi schemes, that they are full of richly paid, deceitful nutjobs and yet expect some sort of ideal behavior when these places advertise.

        Mark- If I wanted the GOP to lose forever, I’d suggest they follow your idea and have the next GOP candidate for president campaign against student loans. Conservative students want to take out big student loans to major in public policy just like any other student. Personally I am against student loans, my daughter will get through college without her taking any loans, but I also know that someone like Clarence Thomas wouldn’t be on the Supreme Court without them.

        Amazona- Spook said “… by saddling them ..” which puts students in a liberal victim category. They are not victims. They AND their parents are making questionable choices just like people who choose to smoke/drink etc. That’s their right, I don’t want a nanny state telling them not to be psychology majors. I don’t think banks should be allowed to give loans for more than 50% of the value of a house, especially if those loans are guaranteed by the US government. But, people think otherwise and such is the world.

        Spook- UNH is $16,500 for a year of in-state tuition, Dartmouth is $45,000. UNH seems a bargain to me. Of course in Canada it’s $5000 to go to the University of Toronto for Canadians but that’s just because the taxes are higher in Canada (it’s $17,000 for international students). I’m sure UNH would lower their tuition if the citizens of New Hampshire were willing to pick up the difference.

      • M. Noonan March 1, 2014 / 12:51 am

        bardolf,

        In Alabama, the in-State tuition cost for a 2 year college has risen from $2,728.00 in 2005 to $4,143.00 in 2014. In California, the in-State tuition cost for a 4 year (non-profit) college has risen from $24,708.00 to $36,914.00 in the same time period (this is all in constant dollars). You cannot explain that sort of tuition increase based upon an increase in the quality of the education provided (in most measures, the quality has decreased), nor by the rate of inflation (which has been mostly low over this time), nor by the ability of the students to pay (with the recession, students and their parents are less able to pay). The only explanation for these increases is in the realm of student loans – which have massively exploded over this same time period, totaling more than one trillion dollars of outstanding debt at the moment, with estimates that as much as 20% of it is in default. Student loans are a scam – a means of keeping colleges rich (and tenured professors well paid while grad students do their actual work). They are a money-laundering scheme for the Democrat party (a great deal of money goes through a college and is then donated to the Democrat party and left wing political causes). It is a disgrace – and yes we should campaign against it. First to forgive the debt, then to cancel the program.

      • Amazona March 1, 2014 / 10:54 am

        As usual, dolf is breathlessly outraged at very little.

        An example: “…“… tenured professors well paid while grad students do their actual work” is a complete denial of competition in university recruiting of students. If cheap grad students could do the work of a university which could pass some of those savings on to students those places would make a killing. The closest thing to this is the community college system which is much closer to high school than it is to college. ”

        Hard to tell what the comment on professors being paid while grad students do their actual work is “..a complete denial of competition in university recruiting of students…” might mean. I know that the justification for paying top dollar to professors who seldom set foot in a classroom is that these people are really working very very hard, but we just can’t see that work because it is in research, writing books and papers, etc. OK—so what does that have to do with teaching students? Is dolf stumbling around the edges of the idea that students go to schools with famous professors, who got famous through their writing and research, and really don’t care who actually teaches their classes?

        If that is the case, then we might examine that criterion for choosing a school. If, in fact, Susie Student picks a school because six of her alleged professors have been cited in scholarly journals, shouldn’t she have the expectation that she, herself, in her classrooms, will be taught by these highly regarded people? Or is it supposed to be enough for her to be able to say “I had two of Professor Dingdong’s classes” even though they were taught by someone else? And pay an extra ten or twenty grand a year for the privilege?

        And I did not argue that students are victims. I merely pointed out the grammatical error made by the associate professor, in wrongly identifying the passive voice in a sentence. I did not address the content of the sentence. If dolf were an associate professor of English instead of mathematics I would use him as an example of why we need better professors, as his comprehension of the written word constantly puts in him the running for the Emily Litella Prize of the Month.

        Example: ” It’s strange to see people simultaneously believe universities are Ponzi schemes, that they are full of richly paid, deceitful nutjobs and yet expect some sort of ideal behavior when these places advertise. ”

        Gee, where to start? First off, I don’t think anyone believes universities are “Ponzi schemes”. One would expect a maths professor to know what a Ponzi scheme IS, wouldn’t one? For that matter I would expect a third grade teacher to know this, and to know that a phrase he might have been searching for though his mental clutter was “bait and switch scheme” or something like that.

        “…full of richly paid, deceitful nutjobs…” ??????? Deceitful? Huh? No, dolfie, they are doing what they are paid to do. Unless you are claiming that the administrations are the ones who are deceitful, as well as richly paid and also nutjobs.

        “…and yet expect some sort of ideal behavior when these places advertise. ” Again, ?????? Ideal behavior? Huh? You seem to be swinging wildly between the comment on professors not teaching enough and advertising not being truthful, but again it is never easy to figure out just what the hell you are yammering on about. “ideal behavior when these places advertise”???

        An no, no one stated or even implied a wish for a nanny state telling kids they can’t take certain classes. We keep telling you, dolf—ignore the voices in your head. They are not your friends. It is more and more obvious that they sit back and snicker when you respond as if what they tell you is related at all to what is really going on.

      • Amazona March 1, 2014 / 11:03 am

        But then, maybe dolf learned about Ponzi schemes and processing the written word on “iTunes and the like”. You know, where you can get a cheap eddimication.

  2. bardolf2 March 1, 2014 / 2:06 am

    Mark

    I’ll let the Count explain California, but I don’t think in-state tuition per year is anywhere near $36,000. http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect/budget.htm How on earth did you make up that number?

    You seem intentionally obtuse. The rise in tuition in most states is mainly related to the decrease in taxpayer funding. Nobody claims a great leap forward in quality of education. Though, strictly speaking education itself has been made very, very cheap if you are willing to learn on your own with itunes and the like.

    “… tenured professors well paid while grad students do their actual work” is a complete denial of competition in university recruiting of students. If cheap grad students could do the work of a university which could pass some of those savings on to students those places would make a killing. The closest thing to this is the community college system which is much closer to high school than it is to college.

    Again, I think the GOP should run against government subsidized loans of all kinds. Why not be consistent and also get rid of the welfare handout known as the interest deduction on houses. Let the price of houses fall to honest levels that hard working people can afford. Make people pony up 50% of the value before the government backs the loans. The housing market is still a scam that is still crippling the economy. And it’s worse because people can just walk away from their bad housing investments and leave the taxpayers on the hook.

    Additionally, Spook thinks its a bad thing that people who can’t afford to buy overpriced houses (i.e. those with student loans) are being prevented from doing so. I think it’s a good thing not to buy things you can’t afford.

    • M. Noonan March 1, 2014 / 2:16 am

      Bardolf,

      Got them right here. And you can go jump in a lake – calling me a liar and saying that I’m uninformed is hardly the way to get me interested in a debate.

      • bardolf2 March 1, 2014 / 10:49 am

        ” In California, the in-State tuition cost for a 4 year (non-profit) college has risen from $24,708.00 to $36,914.00 ” Mark

        “Got them right here”- Mark

        BUT You’ve quoted the prices for PRIVATE nonprofit 4 year institutions. For PRIVATE institutions the in-state designation is meaningless.

        That you have no feeling for the difference between private vs. public university costs pretty much declares you uninformed. You started a discussion about a topic where your gut instinct and cliches are all you have. I assume you know something about home loans, but you’ve run away from a larger discussion where you might actually contribute.

      • M. Noonan March 1, 2014 / 12:59 pm

        Bardolf,

        Look, this is the last thing I’m going to say to you on this – if Spook and Amazona want to put up with you, that is their business. I’m not interested in debating someone who calls me a liar, calls me stupid and when presented with the proof that he’s wrong about me, just goes and makes up another slanderous lie about me.

        Per my link, the cost of a public, four year college in-State tuition in California has increased from $4,195.00 to $9,037.00. Once again, massive increase, far in excess of the demand for college, rate of inflation or quality of the education. It has more than doubled – so don’t try to say its all because of budget cuts, either…whatever cuts the State made to support college didn’t account for a more than 100% increase in the tuition cost.

        For whatever reason, you simply will not face the fact that the student loan program is nothing more than a scam to keep colleges rich. That is your business and your right; you can believe whatever you wish…but you’d be a fool for doing so.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) March 3, 2014 / 7:10 pm

        Jesus, this is absurd.

        Mark, the reason the tuition went up is because the State is paying far less of the tuition than they previously did. The total cost hasn’t gone up in California, the cost to educate the students has been stable while the cost to the student has gone up because the State of California won’t continue to pay the share they previously paid..

        Ditto other States.

        Tuition at Cal State is approx $6,600/year and UC is about twice that.

        Your absurd contention that Loans make the University rich is indeed rich! You really need to learn how Fund Accounting works; we are not charging more because students have more to pay.

        State Run Colleges and Universities are prohibited from making profits.

    • Retired Spook March 1, 2014 / 8:38 am

      Additionally, Spook thinks its a bad thing that people who can’t afford to buy overpriced houses (i.e. those with student loans) are being prevented from doing so.

      But that wasn’t always the case, and the fact that it is now is due, in no small part, to massive student loan debt, much of it a fairly recent phenomenon. In its “noble” quest to make college more affordable for more people, the government has caused the cost to increase exponentially (one of the few things at which government excels — making things more expensive by simply getting involved), to the point that the only way the average person can afford it is to take out substantial loans. And, in citing tuition only, you act as if room and board are not part of the cost. Oh, and I said nothing about “overpriced” houses — those are your words. Housing around here is quite reasonable.

      When I graduated from college, I had NO debt, and by the time I came back from the navy 4 years later, I had saved enough for a 20% down payment on a nice little 15-year-old, 1,200 square foot ranch that my wife and I bought for under $20,000. That same house today is around $80,000, a 400% increase in 47 years, while room, board and tuition for an out of state student at Miami University has gone from less than $2,000/year to around $40,000, and increase of 2,000%. So now, which is more affordable to the average person, college or a house?

      • bardolf2 March 1, 2014 / 11:25 am

        Spook,

        Please. The average family can send their kids to an in-state university without taking out massive loans. I work at a university and see the poorest students in the United States. The loan scam is University of Phoenix, overpriced private schools students with ethereal offerings that students feel entitled to, beauty colleges and the like.

        Why on earth would you quote the price of out of state tuition at Miami University? It is a public university, financed by Ohio taxpayers, mainly for the benefit of Ohio citizens. If once upon a time, Miami U and Ohio taxpayers were subsidizing out of state students I see no reason for them to continue. $13,266 is in-state at Miami, without any scholarships, not terribly expensive and the poorest have need based financial aid apart from loans.

        Why should I count room and board? You feed/provide shelter if your kids at home even if he/she isn’t going to school. You can’t even take room and board off taxes because it’s a normal expense. Think the University is cheating you? Well, with the beauty of the market place you can live off campus. But of course, you’ll have to prepare your own food, you’ll pay your utility bills/deal with landlords, when your neighbor is too loud you don’t have a student assistant to tell them to turn things down, … Maybe its worthwhile to live off campus, maybe not.

        Finally, you’ve compared the house you live in and a college experience vastly different from the one you had. That’s apples and oranges. Your 1,200 square ft ranch was slightly above average 47 years ago, but is about half the size of the median house in 2007. The $80,000 1,200 square ft ranch is still affordable to the youngsters coming out with loans and criminal justice majors, working as security guards. But, that’s not what the housing market and bank industry is pushing to them, and that’s not what they feel they are entitled to have.

      • Retired Spook March 1, 2014 / 11:46 am

        Please. The average family can send their kids to an in-state university without taking out massive loans.

        I question whether the average family (making $50,000/year) can afford to spend $16,000/year (tuition only at UNH) without taking out a substantial loan.

        Why should I count room and board? You feed/provide shelter if your kids at home even if he/she isn’t going to school.

        Jeez, you really do live in an ivory tower, don’t you? Does your shelter cost go down when you send your kid off to college? Nope. Do your utility, maintenance and property tax costs go down when you send your kid to college? Nope. Does your grocery bill go down $10,000 when you send your kid to college? Nope. Is room and board a very real cost of sending a kid to college? Yup.

        Why on earth would you quote the price of out of state tuition at Miami University?

        Because, when I went there from 1963 – 1967, I was an Indiana resident, ie. “out-of-state”.

        The $80,000 1,200 square ft ranch is still affordable to the youngsters coming out with loans and criminal justice majors, working as security guards. But, that’s not what the housing market and bank industry is pushing to them, and that’s not what they feel they are entitled to have.

        You might want to talk to someone coming out of college with $40,000 in student loans, and applying for a 95% FHA mortgage on an $80,000 house (very few coming out of college are going to have more than a 5% down payment saved up.) Would you loan $76,000 to a 22-year-old security guard, already $40,000 in debt and making, say $30,000 a year? I wouldn’t. And, BTW, I don’t feel the least bit sorry for someone just out of college who feels that they’re “entitled” to more house than they can afford.

      • bardolf2 March 1, 2014 / 12:14 pm

        I don’t live in an ivory tower, I see a university and its students (poor) close up every day unlike you, Mark and others.

        The median housing price in NH is >$200,000. So even if a family did nothing else (no contributions, no loans, no scholarships …) and took out loans against their house, 4 years at $15,000 is less than 1/3rd the value. If they wanted to expand and took out a $60,000 to make their house bigger that wouldn’t be a problem to rail against.

        Lucky for you that Ohio subsidized an Indiana resident. Not a good idea anymore. My alma mater, Purdue University would be more expensive for me than sending my daughter to Yale. Am I supposed to be upset that Indiana taxpayers don’t care about my daughters talents that much and yet Yale alumni are willing to pick up most of her tuition? Nope. Do I support the Dream Act for aliens? Nope

        If your kid moves to another area to start a business and you support them your housing costs haven’t gone down either. Maybe these kids should live at home and go to the local college then no whining about room and board. 1/4 of my students commute > 45 miles each day one way to afford college so again the IRS is correct not to allow a write-off for room and board.

        I wouldn’t loan 2 cents to a CJ major with $40,000 in debt. Mainly, because if you ran up $40,000 and took a CJ major you don’t know anything about money. I don’t care if you have a million dollar a year job. Then again, if the CJ major became a good steward of their money (together with potential earnings of housemate) with that $30,000 they could pay down the loan, put aside money, live in an apartment and after 5-10 years put down a reasonable downpayment. That’s how it works everywhere else in the world.

      • Retired Spook March 1, 2014 / 12:38 pm

        Lucky for you that Ohio subsidized an Indiana resident.

        No, they did not. When I was a freshman, room, board and tuition was $1,100 for in-state and around $1,750 for out of state. And I’m using room, board and tuition because I have no idea what part of that was tuition. Well, actually, I do, come to think about it. I got married the middle of my junior year. My folks paid for the 2nd half of my junior year, and I paid for my senior year. Since my wife and I had an apartment, I paid the university for tuition only, and I also qualified for in-state tuition since we lived there year around, and I convinced the registrar that I was planning on staying in Ohio after graduation. My tuition for my senior year was around $500. So, during the ensuing 47 years, in-state (tuition only) has gone from $500 to over $13,000, and increase of 2,600%. I don’t care whether you use nominal income or inflation adjusted income, neither has gone up 2,600% during that time.

        The median housing price in NH is >$200,000. So even if a family did nothing else (no contributions, no loans, no scholarships …) and took out loans against their house, 4 years at $15,000 is less than 1/3rd the value.

        That’s assuming the average family has enough equity in their house to do that, and I’d bet they don’t.

        If your kid moves to another area to start a business and you support them your housing costs haven’t gone down either.

        Now you’re really stretching. I think it’s time to stop digging, Dolf.

      • Retired Spook March 1, 2014 / 12:40 pm

        Then again, if the CJ major became a good steward of their money (together with potential earnings of housemate) with that $30,000 they could pay down the loan, put aside money, live in an apartment and after 5-10 years put down a reasonable downpayment. That’s how it works everywhere else in the world.

        That’s one of the few sensible things you’ve said, but, sadly, not everyone listens to Dave Ramsey.

      • Amazona March 1, 2014 / 4:21 pm

        Every now and then something trips one of dolf’s many tripwires and we get a knee-jerk reaction depending on what is making him defensive at the time. Talk about professors getting paid too much and the associate professor gets his back up. (To be fair, talking about administration getting too big a slice of the pie gets the Count riled, and don’t even talk to me about fracking.) It’s just that dolf goes off half-cocked and by the time he does start to make a little bit of sense, around the edges, his posts are cluttered with so much nonsense, so much responding to things that were never said, expounding on the life experiences of others as if he has some actual knowledge, and so on, there is little left to consider.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) March 3, 2014 / 7:28 pm

        Spook & Amazona,

        ‘dolf is correct.

        No one forces your kid to go to an expensive private or research university. State colleges are still a bargain and money is available for them. Taxpayers used to fork out more to support public post-secondary facilities than they do now. In California we are educating far more students than we did in the 1960s; We are still capped on total enrollment, so we can’t just get more students in the institution to make more money; it don’t work that way.

        Housing is housing and the kid has to live somewhere; live at home and commute or on or off campus is irrelevant.

        I can assure you that campus housing facilities do not gouge in order to “make more money (Mark) They Can’t do that; it’s illegal

        the parent should ask how much will room and board cost if hedoesn’t go to college? So the rise in housing cost is a non issue for this discussion.

        Realistically, buy your kid a house when you send them to college. Rent out the other rooms to other students and that’ll make the mortgage payments. Sell the house when he graduates and give him the proceeds to start his life with.

    • bardolf2 March 1, 2014 / 11:53 am

      the nominal median income in 1967 was $6000 and in-state tuition for Miami U was X dollars. the nominal median income is $50,000 and in-state tuition is $13,500 find X

      Try to not conflate three things: 1. in-state vs. out of state burdens that taxpayers might not want to shoulder 2. nominal vs. adjusted median incomes 3. demographics of people going to university in 1967 vs. 2014

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) March 1, 2014 / 1:12 pm

        the nominal median income in 1967 was $6000 and in-state tuition for Miami U was X dollars. the nominal median income is $50,000 and in-state tuition is $13,500 find X

        Oooooh, a math problem — from a math professor, yet. I did not do well in algebra, but, thanks to Spook’s great memory, X is $500. $6,000 to $50,000 represents a 733% increase in nominal income, and $500 to $13,000 represents a 2,600% increase in tuition.

      • Amazona March 1, 2014 / 4:23 pm

        Show your work……………heh

        (Just playing teacher…)

Comments are closed.