• Hey guys, I just got a report from my ad network that we've gone over 80% of users blocking ads. Please allow our ads to run or think about donating $5.00 a month to remove ads. Ad Free Choices

2020 Presidential Election Preview: The Race to the Bottom

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,920
Reaction score
8,196
Points
113
That isn't what I said. And you know that. I am from Cleveland after all.

What I said is that there is a greater concentration on the coasts and in big cities.

I didn't give a reason why they are concentrated there.

But the reason is that is where people are moving. To the coasts and the big cities like Chicago, Minneapolis, Columbus, Austin/San Antonio, Houston, Denver.

And they are moving there for the reasons Medium articulated well: That is where the young folks want to live.
If I weren't tied to this area with my wife and both of our families, I'd be living in San Diego.
 

CleveRocks

There go the Cavs!
Administrator
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
6,037
Reaction score
3,058
Points
113
I know you're not @CleveRocks , but you're moving the goalposts on this conversation.

We were discussing if education makes a person a better contributor towards the nation's economy.

You are now discussing the merits of a degree in terms of work opportunities.

Those are different arguments.

But, to your topic, education results in better quality of life. There are benefits to having a more educated populace. And, yes, there are economic benefits as well. Notice that I did not say having a degree equates to these things--but having a degree is often a marker of attaining a certain amount of education. From my previously listed source (https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2018/data-on-display/education-pays.htm) you can see that, even if you don't attain a degree, your expected earning increase.
I don't think you can divorce the cost/value of specific education discussion from the should we mass forgive loans discussions..

In my view loaning 100k to a student getting a degree in social work, is predatory lending and or a fraud committed by the university.. Both the bank and the institutions know precisely the likely hood of a positive outcome, and yet they leverage the dream to get at the assets..

A candidates promise of debt forgiveness is no more than the old chicken in every pot..

Also the promise of free education will have the effect of devaluing the education people paid the 100 k for, which devalues that education or human capital and returns lower wages because of it.
 

King Stannis

Maréchal d'Empire
Administrator
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
14,759
Reaction score
20,317
Points
135
I think it’s a double edge sword. You move to these areas because you want to be around other educated/successful people and enjoy the amenities they offer. But on the other side, everyone wants to enjoy these, so you attract people who can’t affordor contribute, and over time you start to create a huge divide. You also start to lead to issues like you see on the coast in homeless as Lower income people can’t afford it.
That is happening and has happened.

I mean Cleveland from 1880-1929 was the place to be. It grew to be a top five city in the US and it had all kinds of problems as a result.

San Francisco is particularly susceptible because there is nowhere to grow in the Bay Area and the people who have been here are tied to their real estate and of course don't want to build high-density housing.

Amazon looked around for HQ2 for a reason: Seattle is too full.

And to reiterate to @CleveRocks, I am not from the Left Coast, I was born at Mount Sinai Hospital in downtown Cleveland and I didn't move to Seattle to be around hipsters or for work, although I did pull stings to get stationed at JBLM. I moved there because it has the best salmon fishing in the lower 48 states.
 

cavsfan1985

^ kind of a big deal!
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
4,887
Reaction score
3,020
Points
113
No, sir. But continue.

I don't understand what you mean by this. What are you referring to?

Agreed. I don't think at any point in this discussion have we mentioned the "rich" paying for anything being suggested. If it happened, mind linking it?

Nice. I think that's a good idea with some very positive ramifications. How would you like to see the interest deduced? My half-baked idea I mentioned earlier would be to set the interest rate of all student loans at the Fed's lending rate. Then have the US Government subsidize the difference between 0 and the Fed's rate.

I like this idea as well. What's your take on Trump working to eliminate that current program?

There's merit here. I think the number of people who fall into the category of "bad choices" is very small in comparison to the total group of people that would be helped out by a plan like this. When the net result is a strong positive, I don't like throwing out the entire idea because you might accidentally help some people you didn't plan on helping.

I agree with not making it a "All college is free, all debt is forgiven, this money came from nowhere and all the companies built around this industry are shit out of luck!"

I don't necessarily agree with targeting the aid towards education avenues you deem worthy. If the government wants to increase the level of education in this country, that's a noble cause--but don't tell me what I can and can't go to school for. Once you start picking and choosing, then you're inevitably going to start picking and choosing specific colleges that do or don't fall within this umbrella. That's eventually going to be a political weapon that gets wielded in a harmful way.
I don’t think you pick what people can go to college for. More, you can go for what ever you want, but you pay your own way.

I have shared this before, but my idea is you don’t touch the current college system, but add or grow the 2 year community college program, more so add this on to high school that is funded. You still have the option to go to a 4 year degree, but you also have the option to go to a free 2 year program, and based on grades or work programs you can work yourself up to a subsidized program after.
Let’s change college from school and party’s to, education and adult responsibility.
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,920
Reaction score
8,196
Points
113
Are your numbers before or after taxes?
Honestly, I could take a guess, but I don't know and can't find for sure from the BLS website. I even skimmed over the full report that generated that little chart and couldn't find a clarification. I bet there's a glossary somewhere that defines "Median weekly earnings." https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2018/data-on-display/education-pays.htm

(My guess is....

Wait! I found it and it's late. I'm getting lazy and I'm just typing with a stream of consciousness now rather than going back and editing my post.

Usual weekly earnings. Data represent earnings before taxes and other deductions and include any overtime pay, commissions, or tips usually received (at the main job in the case of multiple jobholders)
Source: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf

So value is a shitty term. We might say economic value, which I would argue is determinant of how much money you should borrow for a specific education.. then there is personal value or satisfaction, which I don't see any reason to subsidize loans for.. you might argue that there is a societal value, but I think this would be quantified in terms of dollars.. how much is society willing to pay for this social value, and who determines that..
I think this gets more into philosophy than politics. I think this is an opportunity where we can not only make a decision that positively impacts our financial situation in this country, but also increases the quality of life or happiness of the average American. If executed correctly, it could be a win-win in my book.
 

King Stannis

Maréchal d'Empire
Administrator
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
14,759
Reaction score
20,317
Points
135
Also the promise of free education will have the effect of devaluing the education people paid the 100 k for, which devalues that education or human capital and returns lower wages because of it.
I think the opposite will happen.

If most people went to State U, employers will put a premium on places like the Ivy League or Case.
 

cavsfan1985

^ kind of a big deal!
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
4,887
Reaction score
3,020
Points
113
I think the opposite will happen.

If most people went to State U, employers will put a premium on places like the Ivy League or Case.
yes but then imagi the cost of those schools or how hard it is to get into them. Look at the big ten, Michigan,tOSU, IL,IN all are elite schools and degrees mean something from them. Why devalue these degrees or institutions.
I think you would need to do is grow the lower levels colleges, with the Midwest theme, the schools in the Mac, and grow and fund community colleges.
 

King Stannis

Maréchal d'Empire
Administrator
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
14,759
Reaction score
20,317
Points
135
yes but then imagi the cost of those schools or how hard it is to get into them. Look at the big ten, Michigan,tOSU, IL,IN all are elite schools and degrees mean something from them. Why devalue these degrees or institutions.
I think you would need to do is grow the lower levels colleges, with the Midwest theme, the schools in the Mac, and grow and fund community colleges.
Again, the un-affordability of places like Big Ten schools is a relatively new phenomenon over the past 15 years.

For decades in-state tuition for really good State schools was affordable. In the post-War boom, enormous numbers of young men went to schools for nearly free.

It did not devalue anyone's degree.
 

Marcus

So Hot Right Now
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
12,927
Reaction score
11,667
Points
123
Higher interest rates for low need or essentially useless degrees like gender studies, art history, English or business degrees. Lower interest rates for STEM fields. With larger companies starting to forego four year degrees, the emphasis on a college degree isn't as much as a priority as it once was.
Not sure how true this is across the spectrum, but as someone with a Computer Science degree, I agree that this is the case in the IT field. A quick example:

Candidate A has a four year degree, is fresh out of college, did a three month internship over the summer of their senior year, and is a decent programmer.

Candidate B doesn't have a formal education (or maybe has an Associates), but does have certifications, a few years of experience, and a demonstrated ability and willingness to learn new things.

Nine times out of ten, the company is going to go with Candidate B. When it comes to IT, degrees are beginning to matter less and less - unless, of course, you want to be a manager, a C-Suite executive, or a senior engineer. Bottom line, if you can get into that interview, scribble some workable code onto a white board, and give halfway coherent answers to behavioral and scenario based questions, the sky's the limit. I'd argue that a good blend of certifications (Sec+, CCNA, CISSP, etc.) and some experience to back it up would go much further than a degree and less or no experience in most cases.

Getting back to my original point, I think reducing or altogether eliminating interest rates would do wonders for helping people rid themselves of the student loan weight around their neck. Interest rates are so high that in many cases you need to make double payments on a monthly basis to be able to meaningfully chip away at that principle balance. Many students are going to be paying their loans well into their middle age, if not later. You can say that nobody is forcing someone to go to college fresh out of high school, and you'd be right, but what 18-year-old is going to know the difference, especially with these predatory lenders offering them the moon and stars in order to get them to sign on the dotted line?

Here's what I would propose as a solution for the student debt crisis:

1. Severely cap, if not completely eliminate, all interest on student loans. You're not cancelling the debt, but you're giving the people who took the loans out a fair chance to actually be able to get out from under them and eventually that money saved is put back into the economy in other ways down the road.

2. Make it mandatory curriculum in every high school/prep school/whatever school before college that students sit down and learn about student lending and everything that goes into it. These starry eyed kids are fresh out of high school, they don't know better, and chances are that their parents are still of the (somewhat) antiquated view that your kid has to go to college in order to be successful. Speaking of having to go to college...

3. Promote and advertise trade schools and trade education as a lucrative alternative to college. You can be a skilled tradesman for a fraction of the cost of a higher education and make damn good money doing so.

I wouldn't be sad about having student debt altogether cancelled - Lord knows I would save about a mortgage payment's worth of money every month - but I just don't think it's realistic. That being said, there's no reason that you can't throw people a lifeline for having the audacity to try and pursue a higher education to improve their prospects for gainful employment.
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,920
Reaction score
8,196
Points
113
I don't think you can divorce the cost/value of specific education discussion from the should we mass forgive loans discussions..

In my view loaning 100k to a student getting a degree in social work, is predatory lending and or a fraud committed by the university.. Both the bank and the institutions know precisely the likely hood of a positive outcome, and yet they leverage the dream to get at the assets..

A candidates promise of debt forgiveness is no more than the old chicken in every pot..

Also the promise of free education will have the effect of devaluing the education people paid the 100 k for, which devalues that education or human capital and returns lower wages because of it.
From my point of view, you're too stuck on the financial contributions of a person to society.

There are plenty of people who would say $100k for the experience of a four-year institution is worth it to them.

There are plenty of people who want to go into social work.

These people aren't all victims of fraud or had the wool pulled over their eyes. Painting them that way is pretty insulting.

But now we return to "Okay, if they knew this situation, why should we bail them out?"

Because lessening the burden of student loans on our young adults will pay dividends in terms of how much those individuals contribute to other economic sectors. If you're not burdened by a student loan payment, you're spending your money elsewhere rather than handing it to a financial institution profiting off student loan debt.

All that being said, I don't think 100% student loan forgiveness is what we should be working towards. I don't think it's feasible, and I don't believe it's the best use of tax dollars. I think there are more important things (Universal Health Care) that should be tackled first, and we should focus on improving the future of education (reduce the barrier to entry) rather than fixing past mistakes (student loan debt forgiveness). If I could shape a platform around the financials of education in this country, it would likely be:
  1. Zero-to-low interest student loans. I would like all student loans to be handled via the government. But, that's probably not feasible, so all private student loans must be indexed to the Federal Reserve's lending rate. The government will then subsidize the difference between 0% and that rate. Students get interest-free student loans, and the lenders still make a minimal profit for the time being and we phase them out completely
  2. Reduced admission prices. Work with state universities to bring down the price of admission. If you can make the value proposition incredibly disproportionate, then some private institutions will be forced to follow suit
  3. Student Loan Debt Forgiveness based on work done. Increase the current program's scope. Try to drive people towards fields that you want to see growth in. Renewable energy seems like a good addition to the current portfolio.
I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot of things, but it's late.
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,920
Reaction score
8,196
Points
113
Not sure how true this is across the spectrum, but as someone with a Computer Science degree, I agree that this is the case in the IT field. A quick example:

Candidate A has a four year degree, is fresh out of college, did a three month internship over the summer of their senior year, and is a decent programmer.

Candidate B doesn't have a formal education (or maybe has an Associates), but does have certifications, a few years of experience, and a demonstrated ability and willingness to learn new things.

Nine times out of ten, the company is going to go with Candidate B. When it comes to IT, degrees are beginning to matter less and less - unless, of course, you want to be a manager, a C-Suite executive, or a senior engineer. Bottom line, if you can get into that interview, scribble some workable code onto a white board, and give halfway coherent answers to behavioral and scenario based questions, the sky's the limit. I'd argue that a good blend of certifications (Sec+, CCNA, CISSP, etc.) and some experience to back it up would go much further than a degree and less or no experience in most cases.

Getting back to my original point, I think reducing or altogether eliminating interest rates would do wonders for helping people rid themselves of the student loan weight around their neck. Interest rates are so high that in many cases you need to make double payments on a monthly basis to be able to meaningfully chip away at that principle balance. Many students are going to be paying their loans well into their middle age, if not later. You can say that nobody is forcing someone to go to college fresh out of high school, and you'd be right, but what 18-year-old is going to know the difference, especially with these predatory lenders offering them the moon and stars in order to get them to sign on the dotted line?

Here's what I would propose as a solution for the student debt crisis:

1. Severely cap, if not completely eliminate, all interest on student loans. You're not cancelling the debt, but you're giving the people who took the loans out a fair chance to actually be able to get out from under them and eventually that money saved is put back into the economy in other ways down the road.

2. Make it mandatory curriculum in every high school/prep school/whatever school before college that students sit down and learn about student lending and everything that goes into it. These starry eyed kids are fresh out of high school, they don't know better, and chances are that their parents are still of the (somewhat) antiquated view that your kid has to go to college in order to be successful. Speaking of having to go to college...

3. Promote and advertise trade schools and trade education as a lucrative alternative to college. You can be a skilled tradesman for a fraction of the cost of a higher education and make damn good money doing so.

I wouldn't be sad about having student debt altogether cancelled - Lord knows I would save about a mortgage payment's worth of money every month - but I just don't think it's realistic. That being said, there's no reason that you can't throw people a lifeline for having the audacity to try and pursue a higher education to improve their prospects for gainful employment.
As an IT professional who's interviewed and hired people in two separate companies now, I can back this statement up.

I want a talented individual. A degree doesn't make you better or worse as a candidate.
 

CleveRocks

There go the Cavs!
Administrator
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
6,037
Reaction score
3,058
Points
113
I think the opposite will happen.

If most people went to State U, employers will put a premium on places like the Ivy League or Case.
Where the world's elite will bond and work together to start the next Google.. As they do today at Harvard and Stanford..
 

King Stannis

Maréchal d'Empire
Administrator
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
14,759
Reaction score
20,317
Points
135
Where the world's elite will bond and work together to start the next Google.. As they do today at Harvard and Stanford..
Or drop out. Like so many did.

Which takes us back to square one.
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,920
Reaction score
8,196
Points
113
Or, gradually over time, the opinion of places of higher education shifts. As an employer, instead of thinking that a person who went to Harvard must be an exceptional candidate, you realize that a person who went to Harvard possibly comes from a more privileged background, and that you still have to judge each candidate on his own merits.

I think this shift is something that has to happen at the individual level, and isn't something we can solve through government/politics.

From what I've seen (again, in the IT world--which is very different and sheltered) I believe this to be a shift that is already occurring.
 

-Akronite-

All-Star
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
8,313
Reaction score
7,217
Points
113
I understand but disagree with the position that higher taxes on someone that paid off their loans would feel unfair.

It does remind me of this exchange:

Here's the thing, he's not getting screwed by the idea of free college or loan forgiveness. He ALREADY GOT SCREWED by the current system that has jacked up the price of a higher education. This proposal doesn't screw people that "did it right," it's preventing new people from getting screwed in the future.
 

Radio

Top