|
Canada873 Posts
On April 18 2012 22:28 CruelZeratul wrote:
Studying should be free anyway. I don't get why people are not willing to support education. Cut down military and other nonsense and invest in education. So called human capital would help the development of a better future. I don't say everything else should be cut down drastically but education needs bigger attention. It's the future of every country. It is fucking important to have qualified persons.
Studying is free. Its other peoples time and labour that costs money. You mean to say that college should be free, which is just silly. If education is your right, then the people who pay for it are your slaves.
Theres a new thread like this every week on TL so I will say this again: A forum made up primarily of college kids think that college should be free? What a shocker.
|
On April 18 2012 22:58 Equity213 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 22:28 CruelZeratul wrote:
Studying should be free anyway. I don't get why people are not willing to support education. Cut down military and other nonsense and invest in education. So called human capital would help the development of a better future. I don't say everything else should be cut down drastically but education needs bigger attention. It's the future of every country. It is fucking important to have qualified persons.
Studying is free. Its other peoples time and labour that costs money. You mean to say that college should be free, which is just silly. If education is your right, then the people who pay for it are your slaves. Theres a new thread like this every week on TL so I will say this again: A forum made up primarily of college kids think that college should be free? What a shocker.
Isn't primary school and school in general free in US/Canada? Are you a slave for them?
|
Canada873 Posts
On April 18 2012 23:08 CruelZeratul wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 22:58 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 22:28 CruelZeratul wrote:
Studying should be free anyway. I don't get why people are not willing to support education. Cut down military and other nonsense and invest in education. So called human capital would help the development of a better future. I don't say everything else should be cut down drastically but education needs bigger attention. It's the future of every country. It is fucking important to have qualified persons.
Studying is free. Its other peoples time and labour that costs money. You mean to say that college should be free, which is just silly. If education is your right, then the people who pay for it are your slaves. Theres a new thread like this every week on TL so I will say this again: A forum made up primarily of college kids think that college should be free? What a shocker. Isn't primary school and school in general free in US/Canada? Are you a slave for them?
Yes. People with guns come for my money and kidnap me if I dont give it to them. Dont have kids? Dont use the system? Too bad I have no chioce.
Slave is an inflammatory word because obviously im not getting whipped, but thats only because I always pay up.
|
On April 18 2012 23:08 CruelZeratul wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 22:58 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 22:28 CruelZeratul wrote:
Studying should be free anyway. I don't get why people are not willing to support education. Cut down military and other nonsense and invest in education. So called human capital would help the development of a better future. I don't say everything else should be cut down drastically but education needs bigger attention. It's the future of every country. It is fucking important to have qualified persons.
Studying is free. Its other peoples time and labour that costs money. You mean to say that college should be free, which is just silly. If education is your right, then the people who pay for it are your slaves. Theres a new thread like this every week on TL so I will say this again: A forum made up primarily of college kids think that college should be free? What a shocker. Isn't primary school and school in general free in US/Canada? Are you a slave for them?
Try not paying your property tax and see where you end up. The State owns your ass and your property. If you have no money, property all ready paid off fully, tough shit you'll be kicked out and probably off to jail too.
|
Or just pay your loans? Don't take them out if you can't pay them back.
|
Canada873 Posts
On April 18 2012 23:14 turamn wrote:
Or just pay your loans? Don't take them out if you can't pay them back.
Thats another great point. So many kids (myself included) just stay in school and just go deeper in debt very carelessly. Private lenders dont want to pay out 50 000k for someone to sit in school for 6 years in some liberal arts program: why? Because they dont see a way they are ever going to get paid back, and are they wrong? Just think of all the people out there with massive debt and little to no job opportunities.
Private loans and private free market interest rates are not 'mean' or 'punitive'. They are REALISTIC. They convey real information about the likelyhood of repayment. The fact the 90% of elective representatives dont understand this is scary (but hardly surprising).
|
On April 18 2012 23:31 Equity213 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 23:14 turamn wrote:
Or just pay your loans? Don't take them out if you can't pay them back. Thats another great point. So many kids (myself included) just stay in school and just go deeper in debt very carelessly. Private lenders dont want to pay out 50 000k for someone to sit in school for 6 years in some liberal arts program: why? Because they dont see a way they are ever going to get paid back, and are they wrong? Just think of all the people out there with massive debt and little to no job opportunities. Private loans and private free market interest rates are not 'mean' or 'punitive'. They are REALISTIC. They convey real information about the likelyhood of repayment. The fact the 90% of elective representatives dont understand this is scary (but hardly surprising).
Actually, private lenders will jump at the idea to pay out 50k for a student loan, especially if there is a co-signer. They are almost guaranteed the money back since filing bankruptcy doesn't apply to student loans. You'll default, and they'll sue anyone involved for all that you're worth. EDIT: And the interest will continue to build.
|
I think parents should also take responsibility to guide those 16-17 year olds make decisions, but the problem with that is that in the Western culture, they are too caught up with the whole individuality thing so the kids often make stupid decisions despite what the parents might say. A lot of parents know how the job market is at the time and can roughly make out a picture of what degrees can get a job and what can't - a vital piece of information that can be passed along to their children.
|
Let's consider other education that is free. How much is a high school diploma worth? Essentially nothing as far as anyone is concerned. And people want to do the same thing to college? The amount of retardation that comes from student debt forgiveness and free college tuition is asounding. Apparently the people these ideas eminate from didn't learn anything in college.
|
On April 18 2012 23:39 Elegance wrote:
I think parents should also take responsibility to guide those 16-17 year olds make decisions, but the problem with that is that in the Western culture, they are too caught up with the whole individuality thing so the kids often make stupid decisions despite what the parents might say. A lot of parents know how the job market is at the time and can roughly make out a picture of what degrees can get a job and what can't - a vital piece of information that can be passed along to their children.
It's probably mostly the parents' faults actually. They think that since the market is so bad, they want their kid to go to college to HELP them get a job. They think they SHOULD spend the money and come out four years later to HOPEFULLY a better job market.
|
On April 18 2012 18:19 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 17:26 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 18 2012 16:42 NEOtheONE wrote:Commence Rant/ Education is grossly overcharged. It is utterly preposterous what we have to pay on average here in America. Expenses, Tuition Fee & Living Costs
US Universities fall under two major categories: public (state supported), and private (independent) institutions. International students’ tuition expenses at state schools are based on nonresident costs, which are still usually less expensive than those of private universities. It’s important to note that the cost of a program in a US school does not necessarily affect its quality. A brief idea can be got from the following table:
University Type Average Tuition Fees
(annual in U.S. Dollars)
Private Institutions (High Cost) $ 25,000
Private Institutions (Low Cost) $ 15,000
State Institutions (High Cost) $ 20,000
State Institutions (Low Cost) $ 10,000
The tuition fee is different for different universities and varies widely with courses. It can vary from as low as $ 5000 a year for state universities to as much as $ 30000 per annum for some private universities. For more specific details, please contact the universities.
Living Expenses
The approximate annual living expenses are about $10,000, which includes accommodation as well as other daily expenses. However, the expenses are different for different people depending on the lifestyles and this is just a rough idea. The main expenses can be split up as:
Rent $ 400 per month
(you can live alone with that amount in a place like Auburn or share an apartment with 6 people in NY)
Groceries $ 100 per month
Utilities $ 100 per month
Phone $ 100 per month
Sundry $ 200 per month
So, about $1000 per month is a good estimation. Most people can survive with $700-$1000 a month. The key here is to share apartments/houses so that you save on the utilities, fixed charge portion of phone and to some extent on groceries. source: http://www.infozee.com/usa/expenses.htmFor myself, I went to a private institution and lived there. So tuition +room +board was approximately $29,000 per year. I received a scholarship for $8500 per year and a grant of $4500 per year. The other $16,000 per year came in the form of loans split between my parents and myself. Tack on 3 years of graduate school for my Masters degree in Counseling and I am looking at $60,000 that I personally owe (before interest). I am greatly in favor of the idea of not having to pay back the full $60,000 plus interest over a 10-15 year period (which makes the $60,000 turn into more like $90,000-100,000). In addition to that debt, I have to obtain and maintain my license to practice counseling, which there are two levels of and I have to pay someone to supervise me 1 hour per week (which could cost anywhere from $40 to $140 per week) while I accumulate 1900 hours of counseling work (that's about 2 years working full time so 104 weeks ish minimum) to obtain the second level of licensure so I can work with people who have insurance. So it's fair for me to shell out all this money just to help people, but it's ignorant to ask the government to make paying it back a little more reasonable? I call bullshit. /End Rant i lived at home and commuted to school to keep living expenses down. i earned money before college so i wouldnt have to take as many loans out. i worked hard to get scholarships. i worked during college and every summer to keep loans manageable. i now have loans that i can repay with my job, and i would not benefit at all from the loan forgiveness because i kept expenses down and made sure i could pay back all my student debt. is it fair for me to have to pay extra taxes because you decided to go to an expensive private institution? is it fair for me to have to pay extra taxes because you decided to live on campus at extra expense to yourself? is it ignorant of me to expect that my tax money wont be used to subsidize people's choice of not managing their finances appropriately? It's so depressive to see that so many people have this "I went through this so I want everyone else to have to go through the same thing as well" attitude these days. One would think that after you've been through all that and had to make so many sacrifices to get what you want, you would strive to make sure other people - or at the very least future generations - do not have to go through the same thing or at least have it a LITTLE bit easier, rather than condemning them to the same fate due to some misguided concept of fairness.
i certainly will strive to make sure my children dont have to go through it because i am in a good economic position, but i dont feel any need to make sure that society generally doesnt have to act financially responsible.
here is my problem with these loan forgiveness plans: people signed contracts saying that they will pay back the money at a certain interest rate (no ifs, ands or buts); employment was potential, but not absolute; the economy was not absolute; yet, when it comes to them to pay back back the loans, they say they shouldnt have to; that is neither responsible nor appropriate. maybe education is too expensive; maybe the economy sucks so some type of deferral on payments is necessary; however, in no way, shape or form should people be allowed to renege on their agreement to pay back the money. it promotes financial irresponsibility and non-accountability.
would it be nice if we live in a society where nobody has to pay for education? yes. i can get behind that. but we dont, and when you agree to do something (e.g., pay back a loan) then be responsible and pay it back.
too many times have people acted irresponsibly in their financial endeavors and then asked the gov't to bail them out.
|
Canada873 Posts
On April 18 2012 23:36 Classysaurus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 23:31 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 23:14 turamn wrote:
Or just pay your loans? Don't take them out if you can't pay them back. Thats another great point. So many kids (myself included) just stay in school and just go deeper in debt very carelessly. Private lenders dont want to pay out 50 000k for someone to sit in school for 6 years in some liberal arts program: why? Because they dont see a way they are ever going to get paid back, and are they wrong? Just think of all the people out there with massive debt and little to no job opportunities. Private loans and private free market interest rates are not 'mean' or 'punitive'. They are REALISTIC. They convey real information about the likelyhood of repayment. The fact the 90% of elective representatives dont understand this is scary (but hardly surprising). Actually, private lenders will jump at the idea to pay out 50k for a student loan, especially if there is a co-signer. They are almost guaranteed the money back since filing bankruptcy doesn't apply to student loans. You'll default, and they'll sue anyone involved for all that you're worth. EDIT: And the interest will continue to build.
Well your assuming a co-signer. Let me ask again then: who would co-sign such a loan? The essential question here is who is going to bear the risk?
If its the lender or co-signer in a private arrangment then they do that voluntarily of their own free will, and it doesnt affect society at large.
|
On April 18 2012 23:43 Classysaurus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 23:39 Elegance wrote:
I think parents should also take responsibility to guide those 16-17 year olds make decisions, but the problem with that is that in the Western culture, they are too caught up with the whole individuality thing so the kids often make stupid decisions despite what the parents might say. A lot of parents know how the job market is at the time and can roughly make out a picture of what degrees can get a job and what can't - a vital piece of information that can be passed along to their children. It's probably mostly the parents' faults actually. They think that since the market is so bad, they want their kid to go to college to HELP them get a job. They think they SHOULD spend the money and come out four years later to HOPEFULLY a better job market.
Not to mention that their kids HAVE to make 6 figures and are better than everyone elses' kids
|
On April 18 2012 23:44 Equity213 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 23:36 Classysaurus wrote:On April 18 2012 23:31 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 23:14 turamn wrote:
Or just pay your loans? Don't take them out if you can't pay them back. Thats another great point. So many kids (myself included) just stay in school and just go deeper in debt very carelessly. Private lenders dont want to pay out 50 000k for someone to sit in school for 6 years in some liberal arts program: why? Because they dont see a way they are ever going to get paid back, and are they wrong? Just think of all the people out there with massive debt and little to no job opportunities. Private loans and private free market interest rates are not 'mean' or 'punitive'. They are REALISTIC. They convey real information about the likelyhood of repayment. The fact the 90% of elective representatives dont understand this is scary (but hardly surprising). Actually, private lenders will jump at the idea to pay out 50k for a student loan, especially if there is a co-signer. They are almost guaranteed the money back since filing bankruptcy doesn't apply to student loans. You'll default, and they'll sue anyone involved for all that you're worth. EDIT: And the interest will continue to build. Well your assuming a co-signer. Let me ask again then: who would co-sign such a loan? The essential question here is who is going to bear the risk? If its the lender or co-signer in a private arrangment then they do that voluntarily of their own free will, and it doesnt affect society at large.
A parent that believes in their child? It's happening. Do you really not know that parents co-sign their children's loans? Edit: To directly answer the question, the borrower is bearing the risk WITH the co-signer, so student and parent typically with false idea beaten into them that they will be able to pay it off later (stupid idea for some people without the knowledge or foresight to have known any better). The thing is, lending money should be a risk for both borrower AND lender. The fact that student loans are not affected by bankruptcy makes it such that lenders have basically no risk, so they're just handing out loans to everyone who has a parent. Or grandparent. Or relative.
|
Student loan forgiveness is a bailout for the upper class. There a ton of people who would have liked to go to college, but did not have that opportunity.
The extra income earned by those who are lucky enough to go to college more than makes up for their student loan payments. There is no need to make the best off any better off than they already are.
|
studying should be free, thankfully it basically is in my region in germany, just got to pay some fee that everyone has to pay that pays for social stuff like food and transportation.
The teaching part of a university is NOT expensive, buy one cruise missile less and you payed it for a few thousand people for a year.
look at this... "lucky to go to college", sounds like medieval times oO
|
Canada873 Posts
On April 18 2012 23:47 Classysaurus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 23:44 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 23:36 Classysaurus wrote:On April 18 2012 23:31 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 23:14 turamn wrote:
Or just pay your loans? Don't take them out if you can't pay them back. Thats another great point. So many kids (myself included) just stay in school and just go deeper in debt very carelessly. Private lenders dont want to pay out 50 000k for someone to sit in school for 6 years in some liberal arts program: why? Because they dont see a way they are ever going to get paid back, and are they wrong? Just think of all the people out there with massive debt and little to no job opportunities. Private loans and private free market interest rates are not 'mean' or 'punitive'. They are REALISTIC. They convey real information about the likelyhood of repayment. The fact the 90% of elective representatives dont understand this is scary (but hardly surprising). Actually, private lenders will jump at the idea to pay out 50k for a student loan, especially if there is a co-signer. They are almost guaranteed the money back since filing bankruptcy doesn't apply to student loans. You'll default, and they'll sue anyone involved for all that you're worth. EDIT: And the interest will continue to build. Well your assuming a co-signer. Let me ask again then: who would co-sign such a loan? The essential question here is who is going to bear the risk? If its the lender or co-signer in a private arrangment then they do that voluntarily of their own free will, and it doesnt affect society at large. A parent that believes in their child? It's happening. Do you really not know that parents co-sign their children's loans? Edit: To directly answer the question, the borrower is bearing the risk WITH the co-signer, so student and parent typically with false idea beaten into them that they will be able to pay it off later (stupid idea for some people without the knowledge or foresight to have known any better). The thing is, lending money should be a risk for both borrower AND lender. The fact that student loans are not affected by bankruptcy makes it such that lenders have basically no risk, so they're just handing out loans to everyone who has a parent. Or grandparent. Or relative.
I agree. I dont know why we are arguing.
|
On April 18 2012 23:54 Equity213 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2012 23:47 Classysaurus wrote:On April 18 2012 23:44 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 23:36 Classysaurus wrote:On April 18 2012 23:31 Equity213 wrote:On April 18 2012 23:14 turamn wrote:
Or just pay your loans? Don't take them out if you can't pay them back. Thats another great point. So many kids (myself included) just stay in school and just go deeper in debt very carelessly. Private lenders dont want to pay out 50 000k for someone to sit in school for 6 years in some liberal arts program: why? Because they dont see a way they are ever going to get paid back, and are they wrong? Just think of all the people out there with massive debt and little to no job opportunities. Private loans and private free market interest rates are not 'mean' or 'punitive'. They are REALISTIC. They convey real information about the likelyhood of repayment. The fact the 90% of elective representatives dont understand this is scary (but hardly surprising). Actually, private lenders will jump at the idea to pay out 50k for a student loan, especially if there is a co-signer. They are almost guaranteed the money back since filing bankruptcy doesn't apply to student loans. You'll default, and they'll sue anyone involved for all that you're worth. EDIT: And the interest will continue to build. Well your assuming a co-signer. Let me ask again then: who would co-sign such a loan? The essential question here is who is going to bear the risk? If its the lender or co-signer in a private arrangment then they do that voluntarily of their own free will, and it doesnt affect society at large. A parent that believes in their child? It's happening. Do you really not know that parents co-sign their children's loans? Edit: To directly answer the question, the borrower is bearing the risk WITH the co-signer, so student and parent typically with false idea beaten into them that they will be able to pay it off later (stupid idea for some people without the knowledge or foresight to have known any better). The thing is, lending money should be a risk for both borrower AND lender. The fact that student loans are not affected by bankruptcy makes it such that lenders have basically no risk, so they're just handing out loans to everyone who has a parent. Or grandparent. Or relative. I agree. I dont know why we are arguing.
Hmm. I guess I got the wrong idea about the points you were making or something. Who knows. 
|
Canada873 Posts
On April 18 2012 23:53 LaNague wrote:
studying should be free, thankfully it basically is in my region in germany, just got to pay some fee that everyone has to pay that pays for social stuff like food and transportation.
The teaching part of a university is NOT expensive, buy one cruise missile less and you payed it for a few thousand people for a year.
look at this... "lucky to go to college", sounds like medieval times oO
Socialists (i dont mean that as an insult) always defend their programs by saying "its better than guns and bombs". Well thats true, but it still doesnt make it right. Its still selfishly squandering the resources of this world, stealing from society to build things THEY think are good. Your just offering up the lesser of two evils.
"Im gunna chop of your finger, but hey at least im not chopping off your leg?" Yeah thats not good enough for me.
And also in North America not everyone goes to college. "Lucky to go to college" is a reality.
|
Man, if I knew something like this was coming out, I should have gone to Harvard. Could have been classmates with Jeremy Lin 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
