Student Loan Reparations (Policy Talk)

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

the good news for student 4 is that when he worked, the minimum wage was only $7.75, but now it's $12.00, so he will be getting his minimum wage reparations in the mail soon.

direct deposit actually.

Good God.  Fucking Bernie.  Free shit for everyone!!!!

At least Warren would cut out multimillionaires but not Bern.  Literally a free for all.  

[David Dennison 18660]

Just now, American Swindle said:

Am I even arguing that we currently have a free market in the US?  Nope.  Our house of cards is being held together by OPEC and the Federal Reserve. So we agree on something, that the US economic system is not free-market capitalism.  Not so bad... 

So we're in agreement, the folks in your meme aren't fleeing from free market capitalism, nor are they fleeing to free market capitalism.

They are traveling to the mythical world of Freedomland.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

I’d argue offering some student loan debt forgiveness isn’t reparations but an investment in the higher educated section of our population.   By reducing the cost burden of this group, you’re giving them more economic freedom to invest that money in their own projects.

Most of Warren’s plans are focused around reducing or eliminating the heaviest cost burdens of the middle class (child care, student loans).   These are not hand outs IMO.  They’re investments in people.  

How many couples would have more kids if they knew they could easily afford child care and wouldn’t have to save all their money for that kid to get an education? 

How many people would pursue higher education if they knew they wouldn’t be slaves to a six figure student loan for life? 

How does all this impact the economy in the long run?  We’d probably have a better educated and healthier population.  Yeah, fuck that shit.

Edited June 25, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Skipper 6103]

All I know is that the fact that an idea this fucking stupid has become a democratic discussion point is great news for Trump.   Democrats catering to woke twitter libs is exactly how you lose an election to a majority despised candidate.  Whoever wins the nomination going to have a tough time walking all this Bernie/AOC nonsense back.

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’d argue offering some student loan debt forgiveness isn’t reparations but an investment in the higher educated section of our population.   By reducing the cost burden of this group, you’re giving them more economic freedom to invest that money in their own projects.

Most of Warren’s plans are focused around reducing or eliminating the heaviest cost burdens of the middle class (child care, student loans).   These are not hand outs IMO.  They’re investments in people.  

How many couples would have more kids if they knew they could easily afford child care and wouldn’t have to save all their money for that kid to get an education? 

How many people would pursue higher education if they knew they wouldn’t be slaves to a six figure student loan for life? 

How does all this impact the economy in the long run?  We’d probably have a better educated and healthier population.  Yeah, fuck that shit.

Why are you talking planning?  Don’t plan, just try.  Or say you tried.  Someone will come along to bail you out.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Wat?

[FondrenRoad 4378]

56 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Not to sound like too much of a politician, but I'm open to the conversation. I haven't seen any analysis of the stimulus benefit of going that far into it, but if the stimulus outweighs the cost, then obviously it's a worthwhile investment.

I think the moral case is stronger for those currently in debt. Next strongest for those who paid debt off. Less strong is the theoretical opportunity costs (which are WAY harder to calculate than existing debt and debt already paid).

You're just a treasure lol

What is a piece of progressive policy that you believe in that you think I would oppose?

If you can't think of one, can you articulate the extremely high level of hostility you feel towards me?

I've never seen you champion basic income, but I doubt you'd oppose it.  The real issue you have is that you like to burden good progressive policy that has a very good chance of passing with bad policy that doesn't.

I've got no hostility toward you either.  I just want to have basic income, universal healthcare, and tuition free college among other things.  You're willing to forgo having those things in order to try to pay for past wrongs.  If you want reparations for things, why not try to pass those as separate bills?  

Its being pretty generous to call one time payments for past wrongs a "policy" anyway.  It isn't.

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Wat?

You’re talking about couples planning.  Read your post.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

I will see myself out. 

[ChickenSandwich 9798]

2 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Because that is the system that was in place and that others counted upon existing. We should have always had universal healthcare too, but when that happens, nobody is going to go back in time and repay people for surgeries from a decade ago.

Student 1
-takes 30k loan
-gets job paying 30k and makes 50k within 10 years
-lives with roommates, eats at home, doesn't go out much, shops at Marshall's
-still drives the same piece of shit car he had as a freshman in college
-pays off loan according to given terms in 10 years.

Student 2
-takes 30k loan
-gets job paying 30k and makes 50k within 10 years
-gets his own apartment.
-goes out often.
-has 3 new car leases in that 10 year period.
-makes interest only payments on his loan sometimes, but other times has it in forbearance.  He does enough to keep it off his credit report.
-still owes nearly the full balance of his loan 10 years later.

Santa BT comes in and pays Student 2's loan off and laughs in Student 1's face for wasting the last 10 years of his life paying off his loan.

Furthermore, the terms were not misrepresented and nobody was under duress.

no, he actually charges them again in the form of Tax dollars to cover the new debt.  Double taxation

[American Swindle 102]

19 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’d argue offering some student loan debt forgiveness isn’t reparations but an investment in the higher educated section of our population.   By reducing the cost burden of this group, you’re giving them more economic freedom to invest that money in their own projects.

Most of Warren’s plans are focused around reducing or eliminating the heaviest cost burdens of the middle class (child care, student loans).   These are not hand outs IMO.  They’re investments in people.  

How many couples would have more kids if they knew they could easily afford child care and wouldn’t have to save all their money for that kid to get an education? 

How many people would pursue higher education if they knew they wouldn’t be slaves to a six figure student loan for life? 

How does all this impact the economy in the long run?  We’d probably have a better educated and healthier population.  Yeah, fuck that shit.

Yeah, fuck all of what you just said.  Just because some politicians force society to pay for "education" doesn't mean the recipients of the "education" become educated.  Education doesn't end after college, it comes down to the individual's will. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

7 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

I've never seen you champion basic income, but I doubt you'd oppose it.  The real issue you have is that you like to burden good progressive policy that has a very good chance of passing with bad policy that doesn't.

You think UBI is more politically realistic than student debt forgiveness? Why?

Quote

I just want to have basic income, universal healthcare, and tuition free college among other things.  You're willing to forgo having those things in order to try to pay for past wrongs.  If you want reparations for things, why not try to pass those as separate bills?

I am? Can you explain how you came to that conclusion?

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’d argue offering some student loan debt forgiveness isn’t reparations but an investment in the higher educated section of our population.   By reducing the cost burden of this group, you’re giving them more economic freedom to invest that money in their own projects.

Agreed. While justice and fairness are important concepts, the reality of student debt forgiveness is that it is MASSIVELY stimulative and that's why I think it's such a no-brainer.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You think UBI is more politically realistic than student debt forgiveness? Why?

Yes, in fact, I don't think there is anyone who supports student loan forgiveness who also doesn't or wouldn't support UBI.  But I do think there are probably some people who have never heard of UBI because groups like DSA haven't picked it up yet.  UBI is also one of those rare left wing policies that gets some right wing support as a welfare replacement.

The DSA's jobs guarantee is pretty much UBI with a different name, so I'm sure when UBI finally comes to the plate, it will be DOA because it will be burdened with the idea that we have to give everyone a workplace to go with UBI.

However, I don't think either UBI or debt forgiveness are politically realistic right now.  I think universal healthcare is realistic and so is tuition free college if it isn't burdened with paying past debts.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

15 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Yeah, fuck all of what you just said.  Just because some politicians force society to pay for "education" doesn't mean the recipients of the "education" become educated.  Education doesn't end after college, it comes down to the individual's will. 

By that logic, we shouldn’t even fund schools because people should educate themselves on their own, through the google and such. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

I get it, man, you're really mad at me and DSA and all kinds of other stuff (probably strong feelings about podcasts, too), but let's stick to the topic here if we can.

You think UBI is more political realistic than student debt forgiveness (but you don't think either is politically realistic), yes?

All right... on what do you base the idea that tuition-free college is more realistic than student loan forgiveness? Is this based on polling? Previous initiatives?

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

46 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’d argue offering some student loan debt forgiveness isn’t reparations but an investment in the higher educated section of our population.   By reducing the cost burden of this group, you’re giving them more economic freedom to invest that money in their own projects.

Most of Warren’s plans are focused around reducing or eliminating the heaviest cost burdens of the middle class (child care, student loans).   These are not hand outs IMO.  They’re investments in people.  

How many couples would have more kids if they knew they could easily afford child care and wouldn’t have to save all their money for that kid to get an education? 

How many people would pursue higher education if they knew they wouldn’t be slaves to a six figure student loan for life? 

How does all this impact the economy in the long run?  We’d probably have a better educated and healthier population.  Yeah, fuck that shit.

You're correct, but total forgiveness is just not a precedent to even think about.  Reduction of some kind is more palatable and feasible, and I still have no sympathy for anyone selecting a degree where the payoff is not going to cover their student loans within a reasonable time period (less then 10 years).

The daughter did state school, $24K year, and has paid off the approx. $24k she borrowed, in less then 4 years. She had a job lined up at capital One before she graduated, and makes pretty good money.  She made paying it off quickly a priority to keep interest from killing her over the years.  So just forgiving debt isn't the right answer.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

12 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I get it, man, you're really mad at me and DSA and all kinds of other stuff (probably strong feelings about podcasts, too), but let's stick to the topic here if we can.

You think UBI is more political realistic than student debt forgiveness (but you don't think either is politically realistic), yes?

All right... on what do you base the idea that tuition-free college is more realistic than student loan forgiveness? Is this based on polling? Previous initiatives?

 

Based on trajectory.  In 2017, NY State was the first to implement a tuition coverage plan with the Excelsior Scholarship.  Now, 11 states have something similar.  If you recall, states also took the initial reins in the leadup to the ACA and are now attempting to do the same thing for a public option.  Are they flawed?  Absolutely, since states have no control over money supply or who can be their residents, but they have shown that the political will is there.  The NY State Senate was even GOP controlled in 2017.

Zero states have expunged student debt.  Some states have specific LRAP programs for those who do specific jobs.  

Edited June 25, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[TwiceHorn 31283]

12 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Based on trajectory.  In 2017, NY State was the first to implement a tuition coverage plan with the Excelsior Scholarship.  Now, 11 states have something similar.  If you recall, states also took the initial reins in the leadup to the ACA and are now attempting to do the same thing for a public option.  Are they flawed?  Absolutely, since states have no control over money supply or who can be their residents, but they have shown that the political will is there.  The NY State Senate was even GOP controlled in 2017.

Zero states have expunged student debt.  Some states have specific LRAP programs for those who do specific jobs.  

Which brings up the excellent point that the states really ought to take the lead on higher education finance reform subsidizing, by student loan, tuition reductions, grant programs, etc. If state schools ought to be "free," then it's the states that ought to decide exactly how they're going to work that, with maybe some federal assistance along the way.

The feds stuck their noses in it with guaranteed student loans, and lo, err'thang got fucked up.

[American Swindle 102]

36 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

By that logic, we shouldn’t even fund schools because people should educate themselves on their own, through the google and such. 

Public Schools are prisons for our children and the first place they'll receive threats of violence, but they need more funding and money right?

Edited June 25, 2019 by American Swindle
public*

[David Dennison 18660]

Just now, American Swindle said:

Schools are prisons for our children and the first place they'll receive threats of violence, but they need more funding and money right?

We could always pay the teachers like real professionals.

Nah.

[bad_teammate 13132]

24 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Based on trajectory.  In 2017, NY State was the first to implement a tuition coverage plan with the Excelsior Scholarship.  Now, 11 states have something similar.  If you recall, states also took the initial reins in the leadup to the ACA and are now attempting to do the same thing for a public option.  Are they flawed?  Absolutely, since states have no control over money supply or who can be their residents, but they have shown that the political will is there.  The NY State Senate was even GOP controlled in 2017.

Zero states have expunged student debt.  Some states have specific LRAP programs for those who do specific jobs.  

States control funding for their own university systems, but states have no input in or control of federal loans.

I don't know if it's fair to put those two things next to each other like that.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

States control funding for their own university systems, but states have no input in or control of federal loans.

I don't know if it's fair to put those two things next to each other like that.

They don't have to control new student loans.  You are talking about forgiveness of existing debt. They would just have to pay off the lender on behalf of the debtor. They aren't doing that. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

18 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Which brings up the excellent point that the states really ought to take the lead on higher education finance reform subsidizing, by student loan, tuition reductions, grant programs, etc. If state schools ought to be "free," then it's the states that ought to decide exactly how they're going to work that, with maybe some federal assistance along the way.

The feds stuck their noses in it with guaranteed student loans, and lo, err'thang got fucked up.

But the residency problem still remains, and you need a constitutional amendment to change it. You only need 12 months of residency to qualify as a NY resident for the excelsior scholarship.  It's unsustainable if other states don't follow suit. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

4 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

But the residency problem still remains, and you need a constitutional amendment to change it. You only need 12 months of residency to qualify as a NY resident for the excelsior scholarship.  It's unsustainable if other states don't follow suit. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

15 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

They don't have to control new student loans.  You are talking about forgiveness of existing debt. They would just have to pay off the lender on behalf of the debtor. They aren't doing that. 

Then...

4 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

But the residency problem still remains, and you need a constitutional amendment to change it. You only need 12 months of residency to qualify as a NY resident for the excelsior scholarship.  It's unsustainable if other states don't follow suit. 

Don't you see how the Brandeis "states as the laboratories of democracy" thing doesn't really make sense?

Also, why are you acting like the myriad loan forgiveness programs that exist even in red states don't indicate a desire for loan forgiveness as a concept? Why are you acting like it's some insane concept when even Oklahoma has at least 3 different loan repayment programs?

The popular will is already there for free tuition, single-payer, and loan forgiveness. It would be there for UBI if we worked for it.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Then...

Don't you see how the Brandeis "states as the laboratories of democracy" thing doesn't really make sense?

Also, why are you acting like the myriad loan forgiveness programs that exist even in red states don't indicate a desire for loan forgiveness as a concept? Why are you acting like it's some insane concept when even Oklahoma has at least 3 different loan repayment programs?

The popular will is already there for free tuition, single-payer, and loan forgiveness. It would be there for UBI if we worked for it.

It is there for the first 2. You are going to sink the first by tying it to the third. And while I agree with Brandeis, states have gone ahead with general welfare and tuition coverage anyway. If the will was there for loan forgiveness, they would have done that too. 

And yes, loan forgiveness exists for people who take certain jobs.  No shit that OK has to incentivize doctors to go work there, and they still struggle to get enough.  Most people would take on twice as much debt at half the salary in order to avoid living in Oklahoma.

No state is seeking blanket loan forgiveness.  

[bad_teammate 13132]

7 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

It is there for the first 2. You are going to sink the first by tying it to the third. And while I agree with Brandeis, states have gone ahead with general welfare and tuition coverage anyway. If the will was there for loan forgiveness, they would have done that too. 

And yes, loan forgiveness exists for people who take certain jobs.  No shit that OK has to incentivize doctors to go work there, and they still struggle to get enough.  Most people would take on twice as much debt at half the salary in order to avoid living in Oklahoma.

No state is seeking blanket loan forgiveness.  

The incentive structure for using NY state tax money to pay off loans taken to go to SMU is not nearly the same thing as making your own state schools tuition-free, come on.

The state-level programs that exist show the appetite for loan forgiveness exists. It's not some alien, ridiculous concept.

Edited June 25, 2019 by bad_teammate

[Beau Vine 54003]

7 hours ago, Asithappens said:

Not following this. 

Just because some students had to take out student loans doesn't mean higher education wasn't funded properly.

Repaying loans for some guy becoming a brain surgeon? Fuck that. 

Repaying loans for some idiot who took out $100k in loans to major in Radio/TV/Film? Again, fuck that.

Repaying loans for the scads of morons who went to a crappy graduate program who now can't find a job? Yeah, fuck that.

 

I had basically a full fellowship in grad school.  But I was still eligible for an interest-free student loan.  So I took advantage of that and used the cash to buy a truck.

[Huckleberry 32703]

I had basically a full fellowship in grad school.  But I was still eligible for an interest-free student loan.  So I took advantage of that and used the cash to buy a truck.

Well then you get a new truck. Can I count on your vote?

 

[immamac 42519]

When is the last time one of you guys/gals spent a substantial amount of time with a current undergraduate who is taking out student loans to pay for everything? (Sans parental assistance)

It's been nearly 10 years for me and even 10 years ago I can tell you that people weren't exactly frugal even when they didn't get help from their parents they pretty much kept the same lifestyle as the others maybe with an old paid off car or no car. 

I'm all for refunding tuition and fees (books, materials etc) as a retroactive thing to forgive in the loans, but don't give me this BS of forgiving loans that were used to pay for luxury midrise student housing close to campus or fucking beer money. 

Submit tuition receipts and give a % based on top of that for fees and receive a voucher as forgivable debt for that loan. That seems very very fair to me and much more doable than just saying oh fuck it forgive all student debt that exists currently and make college free. 

[Captainant 27465]

26 minutes ago, immamac said:

I'm all for refunding tuition and fees (books, materials etc) as a retroactive thing to forgive in the loans, but don't give me this BS of forgiving loans that were used to pay for luxury midrise student housing close to campus or fucking beer money.

For what it's worth, those "luxury midrise housing close to campus" are usually cheaper than the dorms are, at least at UT. Per federal rules, every university must publish a cost of attendance, which is based on local housing, food, and tuition prices. 

While I attended UT, cost of living was 22k a year. Half of that was just the price to live in Austin. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

And that's the fault of the state for not properly subsidizing tuition and adequate student housing.

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

Submit tuition receipts and give a % based on top of that for fees and receive a voucher as forgivable debt for that loan. That seems very very fair to me and much more doable than just saying oh fuck it forgive all student debt that exists currently and make college free. 

Here's what I suggest:

Find a good Republican and get him to run on this.

100% serious

[immamac 42519]

50 minutes ago, Captainant said:

For what it's worth, those "luxury midrise housing close to campus" are usually cheaper than the dorms are, at least at UT. Per federal rules, every university must publish a cost of attendance, which is based on local housing, food, and tuition prices. 

While I attended UT, cost of living was 22k a year. Half of that was just the price to live in Austin. 

IIRC dorms include meal plans which offsets the higher cost by quite a bit (I think meal plans if purchased separately are in the neighborhood of 3k per semester)

My point still stands - I feel like the government should be on the hook for the education piece and the "living" piece is just your fee. If you don't get educated enough to pay back a loan for the life you lead for 4 years then you probably aren't doing something valuable and productive (from an economic definition of productivity) 

If HALF of your student debt was erased/refunded and you still complain then idk what to tell you, you likely made very poor life decisions. (You as in the general you not captainant)

[Captainant 27465]

4 minutes ago, immamac said:

My  point still stands - I feel like the government should be on the hook for the education piece and the "living" piece is just your fee. If you don't  get educated enough to pay back a loan for the life you lead for 4 years then you probably aren't doing something valuable and productive (from an economic definition of productivity)

If HALF of your student debt was erased/refunded and you still complain then idk what to tell you, you likely made very poor life decisions. (You as in the general you not captainant)

I feel you on that. There's absolutely some folks just using educational loans for partying. But also, it's unreasonable to expect students to put in full time study hours and effort (assuming 3-4 hours of study a week per hour of classes) and somehow pay for food and a roof and internet access. And clothes. And books. 

I worked at least 20 hrs a week for three of my five undergrad years. The most I ever made was $13.50/hr, my senior year at the ITS help desk. That's not enough to pay for rent and groceries. 

[immamac 42519]

15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I feel you on that. There's absolutely some folks just using educational loans for partying. But also, it's unreasonable to expect students to put in full time study hours and effort (assuming 3-4 hours of study a week per hour of classes) and somehow pay for food and a roof and internet access. And clothes. And books. 

I worked at least 20 hrs a week for three of my five undergrad years. The most I ever made was $13.50/hr, my senior year at the ITS help desk. That's not enough to pay for rent and groceries. 

Definitely not, but having to pay back the amount even if you didn't work at all that wasn't tuition is the "deal". If you aren't making 27/hr (double a high paying college job) after getting a 4 year degree why the fuck didn't you go to trade school?  At 27/hr the debt load should be reasonable as you progress through your career to pay for life + your debt, which is in a purely economic sense the way you borrowed from your future self as a trade-off for gaining productivity or efficiency. 

[CooterBrown 17913]

...you can start with the fact that paying someone back for the $40,000 they spent decades ago is not nearly paid back by giving them $40,000 in 2019.

If I hadn’t paid for college from ‘90-‘95, I would’ve invested all of that money in Amazon back in ‘97. In lieu of cash, I’ll just take my stock with all the appropriate splits and reinvestments.

[NoRagrets 1125]

I’m completely against this half cocked nonsense. However, Yang makes a compelling argument as to why his form of UBI is great. Because it gets rid of stupid ideas like this from Washington. If you want to use our money to help you go to college, great! If you want to smoke weed all day and play video games and pretend you’re in college, great! No more government picking affected groups based on woke trends. It’s actually very libertarian and it’s the only form of UBI I would consider.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

The incentive structure for using NY state tax money to pay off loans taken to go to SMU is not nearly the same thing as making your own state schools tuition-free, come on.

The state-level programs that exist show the appetite for loan forgiveness exists. It's not some alien, ridiculous concept.

If I don't support the state of NY covering college tuition for private schools in NY State, I certainly don't support them covering private school tuition in Texas. 

Private schools aren't and shouldn't be covered by any of this. They can have endowments that fund their students' education, they can continue to charge tuition, or they can go fuck themselves. As it is, we already spend too much public money on private schools at every level from pre-K through grad school.

However, that same pre-enrollment NY resident who attends UT and works in NY state for 4 years following graduation should get tuition reimbursed up to the full amount of SUNY tuition. Beyond that, he can go to a NY State school instead or find a way to cover the difference. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

If you aren't making 27/hr (double a high paying college job) after getting a 4 year degree why the fuck didn't you go to trade school?

Is this a serious question?

How the fuck is an 18-year-old going to accurately predict the job market 4+ years into the future.

Christ, conservatives are so fucking stupid.

[immamac 42519]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Is this a serious question?

How the fuck is an 18-year-old going to accurately predict the job market 4+ years into the future.

Christ, conservatives are so fucking stupid.

What? Are you fucking retarded dude? That's 46k/year. 

Also I'm not conservative, but thanks for playing. 

Christ, people who can't do math are so fucking stupid.

[bad_teammate 13132]

You didn't answer the question.

How is an 18-year-old supposed to predict a job market 4+ years out? How is an 18-year-old supposed to predict the full costs of living and going to school 4+ years out?

It makes no sense.

[TwiceHorn 31283]

23 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

If I don't support the state of NY covering college tuition for private schools in NY State, I certainly don't support them covering private school tuition in Texas. 

Private schools aren't and shouldn't be covered by any of this. They can have endowments that fund their students' education, they can continue to charge tuition, or they can go fuck themselves. As it is, we already spend too much public money on private schools at every level from pre-K through grad school.

However, that same pre-enrollment NY resident who attends UT and works in NY state for 4 years following graduation should get tuition reimbursed up to the full amount of SUNY tuition. Beyond that, he can go to a NY State school instead or find a way to cover the difference. 

The thing that, as much as anything, "uncorked" tuition was states permitting their universities to set their own tuition, which occurred in Texas in 2003.  Privates stopped having to compete with ultra-cheap and competitive publics, and the race was on.  Couple that with student loan shenanigans at the federal level and kaboom.

I think part of the idea of making publics "free" is that private have to start competing again.  So the demand/need for student loans should diminish somewhat. Cut back the availability of student loans, and universities will really have to compete for a finite and smaller pool of  tuition dollars.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Is this a serious question?

How the fuck is an 18-year-old going to accurately predict the job market 4+ years into the future.

Christ, conservatives are so fucking stupid.

 If you're going into a college degree program, and don't have some historical data, and general projections about future earnings potential, against the cost of your 4 year in the future degree, you deserve to be working at the fry bin of your local Burger King.  What does any of what you said have to do with conservative or liberal philosophy ?

[immamac 42519]

8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You didn't answer the question.

How is an 18-year-old supposed to predict a job market 4+ years out? How is an 18-year-old supposed to predict the full costs of living and going to school 4+ years out?

It makes no sense.

You don't need to predict the job market 4 years out wtf are you talking about? You also don't need to predict costs of living 4 years out. What is this nonsense you are spouting. 

If a person is not more valuable and doesn't have higher earning potential after college, then making an investment in themselves is effectively and objectively worthless and a negative debt load. So yeah if you think that going to get a 4 year degree does nothing to boost the amount of money you can make over the course of your life then why the fuck are you going to college and wasting that money? You could easily do trade school or just join the workforce sans investment. 

The premise here is that it is assumed that a 4 year degree is still held in higher regards than a high school diploma and unlocks otherwise locked opportunities for productivity or earnings. If you don't think that's true that is a different debate my man, although I don't think it's a bad one to have. 

Going to college isn't about partying your dick off and fucking coeds and "developing socially" it's about making yourself more valuable from an economic standpoint, the argument is that we will gain productivity as a society if we unburden the debt load on students who pursued higher learning to achieve a higher rate of productivity. If it's just a dog and pony show for people to learn how to be adults, then the government shouldn't subsidize it at all. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

You didn't answer the question.

How is an 18-year-old supposed to predict a job market 4+ years out? How is an 18-year-old supposed to predict the full costs of living and going to school 4+ years out?

It makes no sense.

One can't predict economic collapse, but if a supposedly college-capable 18 year old can't figure out cost of living for four years based on the typical inflation rate, we do have a serious problem with education. Not with college loans though. Our K-12 system would be pumping out entirely uneducated children. 

Instead, nearly every person who carries student loan debt into their 30s realizes that their issues with debt were due to youthful indiscretion and a refusal to care about the future rather than an inability to understand that they will be paying 5% more rent in their senior year than they are in their freshman year. 

And 4 year job market predictions have also been accurate for decades anyway. The job market for liberal arts has always been tough outside the top 10%. The real problem an 18 year old has is in understanding that statistic.  He is far more likely to be in that bottom 90 but plans to be in that top 10. 

If anything, the problem is beer inflation. 75 cent pitchers don't exist anymore.  And you can't get a shiner long neck for 1 dollar at HEB much less at a bar. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

3 minutes ago, immamac said:

If a person is not more valuable and doesn't have higher earning potential after college, then making an investment in themselves is effectively and objectively worthless and a negative debt load.

How is an 18-year-old supposed to accurately predict whether or not that "potential" will pan out?

Quote

So yeah if you think that going to get a 4 year degree does nothing to boost the amount of money you can make over the course of your life then why the fuck are you going to college and wasting that money?

That's not how time works. It flows in the OTHER god damned direction. You make the decision about college and costs BEFORE you see your income in the future career, not after. The best you can do before is guess and hope you succeed.

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

One can't predict economic collapse, but if a supposedly college-capable 18 year old can't figure out cost of living for four years based on the typical inflation rate, we do have a serious problem with education. Not with college loans though. Our K-12 system would be pumping out entirely uneducated children. 

It's amazing how you constantly just sound like an angry conservative dad.

Yes, 18-year-old boys don't predict or plan very well. That's not because we have a bad educational system, it's because that's how humans are at that age.

Quote

Instead, nearly every person who carries student loan debt into their 30s realizes that their issues with debt were due to youthful indiscretion and a refusal to care about the future rather than an inability to understand that they will be paying 5% more rent in their senior year than they are in their freshman year. 

Oh so you actually DO realize how humans work? You're giving me whiplash.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

12 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How is an 18-year-old supposed to accurately predict whether or not that "potential" will pan out?

That's not how time works. It flows in the OTHER god damned direction. You make the decision about college and costs BEFORE you see your income in the future career, not after. The best you can do before is guess and hope you succeed.

It's amazing how you constantly just sound like an angry conservative dad.

Yes, 18-year-old boys don't predict or plan very well. That's not because we have a bad educational system, it's because that's how humans are at that age.

Oh so you actually DO realize how humans work? You're giving me whiplash.

Yes I do understand how humans work. Not sure you do. 

Conservatives aren't the only ones who teach their kids personal responsibility. In fact, judging by Trump, I don't think conservatives teach it at all anymore. Personal responsibility is a liberal thing these days just like the golden rule is. 

Maybe your kids will be completely dysfunctional morons when they turn 18, but I try to be a better parent than that.  My mom raised me better than that too.

But maybe the disconnect is that you've had your own rich kid problems like Eric and Donald Jr and you don't understand money. 18 year old kids that grow up poor and attend college do understand it though.  Some of us had to work even in high school.  Actually, I think that may be your overall problem.  

I'm not angry either. Just trying to teach you how real people work. I'm even still optimistic that you will get it eventually. 

Edited June 26, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[immamac 42519]

23 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How is an 18-year-old supposed to accurately predict whether or not that "potential" will pan out?

That's not how time works. It flows in the OTHER god damned direction. You make the decision about college and costs BEFORE you see your income in the future career, not after. The best you can do before is guess and hope you succeed.

It's amazing how you constantly just sound like an angry conservative dad.

Yes, 18-year-old boys don't predict or plan very well. That's not because we have a bad educational system, it's because that's how humans are at that age.

Oh so you actually DO realize how humans work? You're giving me whiplash.

Wait, so you are saying we should just give stupid people free money because that's supposedly what the government is for? 

I'm not sure you live in the same reality as the rest of us, but you are significantly off base accusing people of "conservative dad" talk when we are using a premise that is clearly stated to make a point about college reimbursement from the government and what seems to be appropriate use of government funding of society. 

Let me spell it out for you in a way a 5 year old could understand.

1) A teenager knows one day they will have to live on their own and pay for everything themselves.

2) A teenager believes their best chance of living a lifestyle they want to live is pursuing higher education to become more productive or specialized in a certain area of study

3) teenager applies to college and gets accepted, yay!

4) teenager over 4 years turns into adult and learns valuable skills and gains valuable knowledge along the way

5) adult person now is a more productive member of society due to their investment in their higher education. 

6) (my version) adult person pays back non- related funds that were borrowed to enable full focus and dedication to higher education with the money they now receive in exchange for providing goods or services to a company or individuals (this is assumed to be higher than without said education)

6) (Sanders/Warren) adult person spends all the money they receive on positive economic impact in exchange for providing goods and services to a company or individuals with some investment elsewhere to boost productivity.

6) (current reality) adult person is a slave to their debt they have accrued in pursuit of higher earning potential, but cannot realize their gains in productivity due to the uneven debt burden in relation to the money they receive in exchange for providing goods and services to a company or individuals. - this is an acknowledged problem, if you don't agree with this then that is yet another debate

If you disagree with any of 1-5 then our argument is not valid and you are yelling at clouds because that's not the premise I'm discussing. 

If your premise is the government should pay for people to party and live a certain lifestyle that again is a completely different argument and has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

30 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The thing that, as much as anything, "uncorked" tuition was states permitting their universities to set their own tuition, which occurred in Texas in 2003.  Privates stopped having to compete with ultra-cheap and competitive publics, and the race was on.  Couple that with student loan shenanigans at the federal level and kaboom.

I think part of the idea of making publics "free" is that private have to start competing again.  So the demand/need for student loans should diminish somewhat. Cut back the availability of student loans, and universities will really have to compete for a finite and smaller pool of  tuition dollars.

The real problem for Texas is that public university seats haven't come close to matching population growth.  The UT and A&M systems are structured like midsize state systems with a single flagship and several other smaller and shittier satellite campuses. They should be structured like CA or NY.  Even though it pains me as a UT Austin grad to say it, we need a UCLA and UC Irvine to our UC Berkeley, or even a SUNY Stony Brook to our Binghamton. Instead, we have a couple of small good academic satellites that fill a niche, or glorified community colleges where every student wants to transfer to Austin. Because of that, I would expect Texas to have a magnified student loan problem. UC Irvine grads don't complain this much.