Student Debt Now Outweighs Credit Card Debt (1 Viewer)

[samsmart]

The problem is that these jobs are now requiring people to get an education, which doesn't make any sense.
My company requires an associates degree for a job, that doesn't need a high school education to perform or understand.
It's ridiculous.

I was listening to NPR this weekend (which I don't usually do, so I can't refer you to the particular program I heard this on) but there was a segment in which they talked about some of the social programs being paid for by the stimulus package.

One programs was designed to help get non-college graduates jobs. The program worked in three tiers. Everybody did the first tier, graduates of the first tier then move on to the second tier; and those graduates moved on to the third tier. Those who graduated the third tier could then get referrals for jobs.

I paid the most attention to the first tier. Basically, to graduate the first tier all a person had to do was
1) show up on time every day
2) be well dressed and well groomed
3) use deodorant

That's it.

And the reality is that there are people like that.

So on one level I can understand why businesses demand a college degree - it's more of a guarantee that that person is responsible and professional enough to show up on time and knows how to handle him/herself professionally.

But does every person need to go in debt with student loans to prove that to businesses? No, I don't think so.

 

[samsmart]

They are entitled to better than "junior college". Pfft.

I'm the same way. Outside my window is a large, very nice community college that we set up shop near to hire part of our entry level from. The tuition is so cheap, and the facility and faculty so good, its just absurd to excuse people for not using it. And it's designed to transfer to 4-year institutions. I think a semester is in the hundreds, it's absurdly good value.

My first taste of college was at a university. I passed the first semester, but to this day I don't know how I passed my classes, such as macroeconomics. But I got kicked out the second semester.

I went back to get an education at the local community college. It was wonderful. The best education experience I could get.

Community colleges get nothing but love from me.

 

[Catawba]

My first taste of college was at a university. I passed the first semester, but to this day I don't know how I passed my classes, such as macroeconomics. But I got kicked out the second semester.

I went back to get an education at the local community college. It was wonderful. The best education experience I could get.

Community colleges get nothing but love from me.

Our middle son had a similar experience in his second semester and had to attain a certain grade point average at our local community college while working to support himself to be allowed to reenter the ivy league school he had chosen.

The community colleges, as the poster before stated, are a great value! And ours is well used? They are continously expanding it to reduce crowding. Too bad we don't have 4 year programs that are such a value.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

On this slightly off subject topic (RE: non-serious students who drop out and re-enter . . .etc)

I think that non serious students who NEVER leave should be under this same scrutiny. I've met too many who can't make up their mind, 2 years this - change their major - another year of that - change again. . . and again.

Some go for *years* and never decide *what to do* and still eventually drop out because they run out of steam, time or money. As in the case of my sister: it took her 7 YEARS of college to finally decide what degree she wanted.

Honestly - If someone's going to dick around in life and not make up their mind I'd rather they drop out earlier than later - after the first year or whatever - and give that space, opportunity, class seat to someone else who DOES need and want to hit it, get it done, and be out when it's finished.

 

[Boo Radley]

On this slightly off subject topic (RE: non-serious students who drop out and re-enter . . .etc)

I think that non serious students who NEVER leave should be under this same scrutiny. I've met too many who can't make up their mind, 2 years this - change their major - another year of that - change again. . . and again.

Some go for *years* and never decide *what to do* and still eventually drop out because they run out of steam, time or money. As in the case of my sister: it took her 7 YEARS of college to finally decide what degree she wanted.

Honestly - If someone's going to dick around in life and not make up their mind I'd rather they drop out earlier than later - after the first year or whatever - and give that space, opportunity, class seat to someone else who DOES need and want to hit it, get it done, and be out when it's finished.

I didn't figure it out until my thirties. Sometimes it's good for some to just go to work for awhile.

 

[samsmart]

I didn't figure it out until my thirties. Sometimes it's good for some to just go to work for awhile.

F. Scott Fitzgerald said that one didn't become a man until he was 30. I tend to agree. I think by the time someone's 30 they know enough about the world to settle on what they want to do and have the experience in order to do it.

Before then, it's all ****s and giggles no matter how hard someone tries.

 

[cpwill]

Non support would merely mean less going

non support would mean fewer going to traditional four year colleges where many leave after a few years with no degree and high debt, that is correct.

now, you're smart, so you tell me. what happens to prices when demand goes down?

 

[cpwill]

On this slightly off subject topic (RE: non-serious students who drop out and re-enter . . .etc)

I think that non serious students who NEVER leave should be under this same scrutiny. I've met too many who can't make up their mind, 2 years this - change their major - another year of that - change again. . . and again.

Some go for *years* and never decide *what to do* and still eventually drop out because they run out of steam, time or money. As in the case of my sister: it took her 7 YEARS of college to finally decide what degree she wanted.

Honestly - If someone's going to dick around in life and not make up their mind I'd rather they drop out earlier than later - after the first year or whatever - and give that space, opportunity, class seat to someone else who DOES need and want to hit it, get it done, and be out when it's finished.

This is why I think our model of automatically pushing most students straight from high school into college is flawed. Let them get some experience in the workforce or the military first, and then go back - they will get much more out of it.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

This is why I think our model of automatically pushing most students straight from high school into college is flawed. Let them get some experience in the workforce or the military first, and then go back - they will get much more out of it.

I didn't seriously go back (well - go at all) until I was 27. Me doing it when I was 17, 20? Too immature, unorganized and unfocused - I didn't even waste my time and I think I'm better off for it.

I do not get the point of the 'Crawl' type student.

 

[cpwill]

Indeed. I have a much better work ethic now than I did when I went to undergrad straight out of high school. I treated it like 13th Grade - yeesh, what I could have done and instead what I chose to do because I didn't know what I was giving up.

 

[Catawba]

This is why I think our model of automatically pushing most students straight from high school into college is flawed. Let them get some experience in the workforce or the military first, and then go back - they will get much more out of it.

On this we agree! That was my wife's idea years ago, require HS graduates serve their country for a couple years, either in military or civilian service to their country. In return, they get assistance for college if they meet the academic standards.

Later, Obama came up with the same plan.
America Serves | Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team

 

[Dittohead not!]

On this we agree! That was my wife's idea years ago, require HS graduates serve their country for a couple years, either in military or civilian service to their country. In return, they get assistance for college if they meet the academic standards.

Later, Obama came up with the same plan.
America Serves | Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team

They can choose service and have their college paid for now. My nephew did that, joined the Navy, and let them put him through UC. He wound up with a degree and a commission, instead of a degree, no job, and student loans up the wazoo like so many collegians do now.

 

[Catawba]

They can choose service and have their college paid for now. My nephew did that, joined the Navy, and let them put him through UC. He wound up with a degree and a commission, instead of a degree, no job, and student loans up the wazoo like so many collegians do now.

Yes, and we need a non-military service option as well for college aid. That's why I am very much in favor of Obama's plan.

 

[Boo Radley]

non support would mean fewer going to traditional four year colleges where many leave after a few years with no degree and high debt, that is correct.

now, you're smart, so you tell me. what happens to prices when demand goes down?

Fewer schools, not a reduction in price. Much of what costs can't go down, and competition means they have to have better fitness centers and provide more service. This doesn't reduce cost. This is the problem with a ideological belief versus a full undersranding of the situation. You see one solution that you see as magic. It isn't.

 

[Boo Radley]

This is why I think our model of automatically pushing most students straight from high school into college is flawed. Let them get some experience in the workforce or the military first, and then go back - they will get much more out of it.

I agree. But do keep in mind, when profits are what si being counted, you need students to enroll. That's your life blood if you're a school, especially for profit.

 

[Cameron]

It's not the government's fault that universities are expensive. I can only go to school because I have federal loans, state aid, a Pell Grant, and an academic scholarship.

Same here. I would absolutely not be in law school right now without federal loans.

It is probably because of the availability of loans that school tuition continues to go up. But that problem should probably be solved by attacking the people taking advantage of the system, not by attacking the system that makes education available to those with less means.

Conservatives repeatedly insist that people with ambition and a sense of responsibility can create a better life for themselves. Yet without things like federal loans, it is very hard to imagine how that belief has any basis in reality.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Yes, and we need a non-military service option as well for college aid. That's why I am very much in favor of Obama's plan.

Yes, it is a good idea. It's not likely to come to fruition, as Obama's opponents have already painted it as "indentured servitude" and implied that it would be mandatory for everyone.

but, it would be an excellent idea, to give youth some practical experience and a way to go to college without incurring huge debts, give them a chance to mature a little bit more before making life changing decisions, it would be a positive thing, no question.

 

[UtahBill]

Yes, it is a good idea. It's not likely to come to fruition, as Obama's opponents have already painted it as "indentured servitude" and implied that it would be mandatory for everyone.

but, it would be an excellent idea, to give youth some practical experience and a way to go to college without incurring huge debts, give them a chance to mature a little bit more before making life changing decisions, it would be a positive thing, no question.

If the govt pays for part of your education, you should pay it back, one way or another. If you select service, and provide POOR service, you should be kicked out of the service and presented a bill for what the govt paid for your education.
I heard a story the other day from a neighbor, a VA employee, about how some of their young "temps" are working off their debt under some program, and being rude to the Vets while supposedly serving the vets......

 

[UtahBill]

Yes, and we need a non-military service option as well for college aid. That's why I am very much in favor of Obama's plan.

As old as I am, I can't help but know more than a few people who the military would not take because of some minor imperfection, like near sightedness, or color blindness, or flat feet.
Funny how these same people managed to make good livings with those "handicaps".
There are MANY military jobs that don't demand physical perfection.
There are many that don't demand mental perfection.....that is where a lot of the Officers come from...:2razz:

 

[Dittohead not!]

If the govt pays for part of your education, you should pay it back, one way or another. If you select service, and provide POOR service, you should be kicked out of the service and presented a bill for what the govt paid for your education.
I heard a story the other day from a neighbor, a VA employee, about how some of their young "temps" are working off their debt under some program, and being rude to the Vets while supposedly serving the vets......

Then, you're right: They should have to pay back their debt some other way. Scrubbing toilets might be an option.

Better yet, do the volunteer work first, then get your education paid for, or do both at the same time. That way, there is no debt to pay back after graduation.

 

[Catawba]

As old as I am, I can't help but know more than a few people who the military would not take because of some minor imperfection, like near sightedness, or color blindness, or flat feet.
Funny how these same people managed to make good livings with those "handicaps".
There are MANY military jobs that don't demand physical perfection.
There are many that don't demand mental perfection.....that is where a lot of the Officers come from...:2razz:

I would agree. My point was that a non-military option for service to our country is needed to require some skin in the game in exchange for their college aid, not just for those that have physical disabilities but for those also that morally oppose military service in optional wars.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

It's not the government's fault that universities are expensive. I can only go to school because I have federal loans, state aid, a Pell Grant, and an academic scholarship.

It's 100% the government's fault.

They keep providing "free" money, and the university's raise their tuition's, the the government provides more "free" money.

College tuitions have been rising at 10% a year for thirty years. No free market could sustain that, only government interference can keep that pump primed.

How to stop the insanity:

If unwilling to get the government out of the education business, which, by the Constitution, it's not supposed to be in anyway, then make government grants available only to the following:

1) Students at the top of their class, as determined by national annual competition,

2) In technical fields the nation's census bureau foresees a shortage of in the future.

Anyone wanting to be a lawyer, an artist, a writer, a psychologist, or any of most of the other fluffy programs, well, they can fund their own tuitions, since they're not serving a national need.

It'll help them build character, and they certainly need to build character, they're rather tiresome as characters now.

The Mayor is fairly certain that the number of "artists" going to college will dramatically decline when the future "artists" have to spend their own money for a change.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

I would agree. My point was that a non-military option for service to our country is needed to require some skin in the game in exchange for their college aid, not just for those that have physical disabilities but for those also that morally oppose military service in optional wars.

No.

It's not.

If a person wants to volunteer, that's fine. There's no reason they should get any credit by any government agency for doin so. It's not like they're risking their lives. No, they're playing games.

The US military veteran? He's EARNED his perks, what little there are.

BTW, all wars are "optional". Everytime the United States has been attacked, it's had the opportunity to exercise the option of surrender.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Yes, and we need a non-military service option as well for college aid. That's why I am very much in favor of Obama's plan.

Why should someone afraid of or disdainful of the nation's military uniform be granted benefits equivalent to those earned by patriots?

 

[UtahBill]

Why should someone afraid of or disdainful of the nation's military uniform be granted benefits equivalent to those earned by patriots?

certainly not equivalent, the veteran should always be the first priority and combat/wounded veterans go to the head of the line...