|
On April 24 2012 03:33 Enki wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's worse in states like Georgia where I live. There are a few others too where the minimum wage is $5.15/hour. That's $2.10 lower then the federal minimum wage. Blows my fucking mind. What the hell is the point of having a federal minimum wage if states can set there own? I'm pretty sure people around here working minimum wage live with their parents. I don't see how its possible to afford even a basic apartment by yourself.
When a state's minimum wage is lower than the federal, minimum wage workers are paid the federal rate. It's still ludicrously low, however, and insufficient to avoid death in many cases without any sort of other assistance.
|
On April 24 2012 05:03 HunterX11 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 03:33 Enki wrote:On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's worse in states like Georgia where I live. There are a few others too where the minimum wage is $5.15/hour. That's $2.10 lower then the federal minimum wage. Blows my fucking mind. What the hell is the point of having a federal minimum wage if states can set there own? I'm pretty sure people around here working minimum wage live with their parents. I don't see how its possible to afford even a basic apartment by yourself. When a state's minimum wage is lower than the federal, minimum wage workers are paid the federal rate. It's still ludicrously low, however, and insufficient to avoid death in many cases without any sort of other assistance.
Cost of living in places where the minimum wage is low is also low.
In cali minimum wage is 8, but the cost of living is high.
The less programs you have the cheaper it is to live somewhere, so in cali we got a shitton. I got relatives up in North Dakota where they don't have many state sponsored programs, and the cost of a million dollar home here costs about ~160k there. With the oil rush it might have changed, lodging is in demand.
|
On April 24 2012 03:12 Sox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 00:06 Stratos_speAr wrote:On April 23 2012 09:37 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 23 2012 09:22 Lightwip wrote:On April 23 2012 07:25 phar wrote:
I do not understand why people pay $30~$40k a year for Uni and major in fields where there are no jobs. Because no one has perfect foresight. While there are plenty of people who indeed can't predict the market, etc. Its hard to feel bad for the jobless history major that took out loans. That segment at least. I mean its true that it used to just be that a degree qualified you for things, but at the same time you're building a near zero safety net with it. You're at the bottom of the food chain of bachelors degree holders. The whole thing about your staple liberal arts degree being the majority of the unemployed is a myth. Read earlier in the thread. By the way, history majors have some very high employment rates coming out of college. Also, for us high and mighty business majors who get off on being the step above liberal arts in the degree food chain, I urge you to not completely discount what liberal arts does for all students. I can proudly say that studying philosophy has enhanced my abilities as an accountant, but I'm only one story. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903285704576556553753330210.htmlHere's the article from earlier in the thread. It's from Jan 2012. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-06/postrel-how-art-history-majors-power-the-u-s-.htmlThough I do agree with most liberal arts degree bashing in the thread, I only do so because I recognized its drop in value while I was attending school during and after the 2008 crash. I don't think it's fair to hold that standard of "I saw it coming why didn't you" for everybody because what about the Freshman class of 2008 who in 2006 and 2007 where told by their parents, teachers, pop culture, and society that they MUST go to college or flounder financially. There are a million different scenarios that played out during that crash and once the dust settled, we saw that the Liberal Arts majors are now deemed worth "less" than other majors. There is no easy way to reverse this mentality that college is essential because it is has been so deeply engraved in our culture by the baby boomers and their children. Just to tease out a personal antidote and help illustrate a bit, back in 2007 when I was considering which colleges to go to, my reasoning for not attending a JC was because that's where I thought failures went. That's where I thought the people who messed up during high school regained their footing. This way of thinking permeated throughout most of my high school peers because a) it held a lot of truth at the time since most students from my very good high school went to college, and b) I had been taught throughout my education that college is where you go if you succeeded (to any degree) in high school. Obviously I do not view JC the same anymore, but I clearly remember that being a reason for me NOT to go to a JC in 2007. I think what we are witnessing now as the student debt bubble readies to burst is a sharp change in ideology and eventually consumers (parents, students, etc) will view college more as an investment rather than a necessity. Unfortunately, this clashes with the old wisdom of college education automatically leads to a better life. This idea that college is necessary will take a long time to uproot out of our culture and be replaced. It's also sad because I believe that college can be the gateway to an advanced civilization, but not in its current form.
I agree with this. I was raised to get good grades in school, my parents and siblings went to college, my friends went to college, and it was (and is) as much a part of me as anything else.
And on a side note, though I got a EE degree, I took lots of 'soft' classes for my own enjoyment. I believe they did good things for me that can't be measured by its marketability.
|
Only in America
User was warned for this post
|
On April 24 2012 07:16 Cytokinesis wrote:
Only in America
Happy birthday dude, enjoy your maple syrup... 
Crazy shit happens here all day. Whats the situation like for education up north?
|
I think its extremely naive to believe that the government will reimburse student loan debt in any significant way.. Not only are financial institutions dependent on collecting on that debt in order to shore up their balance sheets, but the amount of money you would need to cover any significant portion of all student debt would be significantly larger than what the government has available.. Sorry kids, you're now debt slaves.. go get a a job.
|
Unemployed =! Underemployed
On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage?
It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible.
On April 24 2012 03:12 Sox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 00:06 Stratos_speAr wrote:On April 23 2012 09:37 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 23 2012 09:22 Lightwip wrote:On April 23 2012 07:25 phar wrote:
I do not understand why people pay $30~$40k a year for Uni and major in fields where there are no jobs. Because no one has perfect foresight. While there are plenty of people who indeed can't predict the market, etc. Its hard to feel bad for the jobless history major that took out loans. That segment at least. I mean its true that it used to just be that a degree qualified you for things, but at the same time you're building a near zero safety net with it. You're at the bottom of the food chain of bachelors degree holders. The whole thing about your staple liberal arts degree being the majority of the unemployed is a myth. Read earlier in the thread. By the way, history majors have some very high employment rates coming out of college. Also, for us high and mighty business majors who get off on being the step above liberal arts in the degree food chain, I urge you to not completely discount what liberal arts does for all students. I can proudly say that studying philosophy has enhanced my abilities as an accountant, but I'm only one story.
I would sure hope so, and I also hope you aren't the only story, since philosophy classes are mandatory if you want to become a CPA. I'm an accounting minor (my backup plan, which everyone should have one), so I know all the prerequisites for the CPA exam. Although I'm not sure if the philosophy, specifically ethics, classes are mandatory nationwide or just in California. Regardless, I've already taken it.
Also, how you view JC is no excuse. That doesn't mean the system is broken.
|
On April 24 2012 07:25 Jisall wrote:Happy birthday dude, enjoy your maple syrup... Crazy shit happens here all day. Whats the situation like for education up north?
Can't say school is free but the government pays for something like 80% of your tuition just because. You'd be hard pressed to have a loan over 50k for a degree (50k meaning living off of nothing but student loans). Only costs about 500$ a class per semester. Plus it's quite easy to pay back compared to the loans in the US, they forgive a lot of the debt once you graduate. (Out of my 40 thousand loan I only ended up having to pay back something like 20 thousand, in a lot of cases you only pay back the loans you got for living expense and not the actual classes). But things could have changed since I last checked.
I just think it's so crazy the situation in the US. Just seems so weird coming from a place where education is (relatively) cheap. It's not even like our taxes are much more than yours either. (A couple percent at most)
|
fabledintergrals way or the highway fellas!
|
My friend from China says that the government there only pays for the education of people who it considers to be worth while to society and produce wealth, aka people who want to become engineers and other similar fields. Dont know if it is actually true or not, anyone else heard anything like this?
|
They say that debt is not a problem as long as it is manageable.
The problem with United states is the interest rates on the student loans. You guys in the USA are paying ridiculous interest rates for loans on which people do not have a proper income to pay with. If the student loans was only affected by the CPI (like in Australia), there will be no problem, people can work even on minimal wages and still able to pay it off. At the moment, it seems like people are even having trouble with interest repayments which is a complete joke IMO.
US government needs a real wake up call fast. 8% loans (I hear from this thread) is just plain ridiculous, and if the government does really believe that education is the only way out of poverty then you need to treat the young citizens better.
|
On April 24 2012 07:28 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible.
Cost of living and rent must be much lower in the US than here.
|
On April 24 2012 13:18 -_-Quails wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 07:28 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible. Cost of living and rent must be much lower in the US than here.
Minimum wage covers rent, but it doesn't cover:
Food
Heat
Beer
Internet
Car
Bus pass
|
On April 24 2012 13:18 -_-Quails wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 07:28 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible. Cost of living and rent must be much lower in the US than here.
depends LARGELY where you live. if you live in a state like california where i am for example, cost of living is much much higher than most of the country.
|
On April 24 2012 13:25 mynameisgreat11 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 13:18 -_-Quails wrote:On April 24 2012 07:28 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible. Cost of living and rent must be much lower in the US than here. Minimum wage covers rent, but it doesn't cover: Food Heat Beer Internet Car Bus pass
Yeah it does and nobody is going to feel sorry for you because you can't have beer and a car (with a bus pass too lol). If you want more you need to produce more. If anything blame the government because of payroll taxes.
EDIT: oh and Silidons Cost of living in US is a lot lower than other 1st world countries. Plus minimum wage varies state by state so you cant use the location excuse. In SF minimum wage is $10.15
|
On April 24 2012 13:12 Zariel wrote:
They say that debt is not a problem as long as it is manageable.
The problem with United states is the interest rates on the student loans. You guys in the USA are paying ridiculous interest rates for loans on which people do not have a proper income to pay with. If the student loans was only affected by the CPI (like in Australia), there will be no problem, people can work even on minimal wages and still able to pay it off. At the moment, it seems like people are even having trouble with interest repayments which is a complete joke IMO.
US government needs a real wake up call fast. 8% loans (I hear from this thread) is just plain ridiculous, and if the government does really believe that education is the only way out of poverty then you need to treat the young citizens better.
It's 6.8% if you don't qualify for any of the extra help, otherwise it's 5.4%. If you're taking 8% you're usually delving into "plus" rate loans, which means you're taking out more than you need, since the basic loans should adequately cover your tuition + books.
The biggest group getting hit right now as we see are the people that are in the 6.8% section. These are the middle or middle-upper class usually (well, the parents. The kids themselves might be well off or shit broke depending on their parents generosity towards them). Those who are super poor usually get almost all of their tuition covered in financial aid, as well as rent.
Don't get me wrong though, 6.8% can still be a total bitch. As I've stated prior, I'd much sooner see the government simply lower the interest rate depending your status of employment and your income rather than simply forgive the debt. For example, 0% interest and defer payment for the first 6 months you're unemployed, maybe gradually climbs up to 2% after that (say if you're unemployed for 2 years it would hit 2%)... those making minimum wage 2.5%, etc.
On April 24 2012 13:18 -_-Quails wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 07:28 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible. Cost of living and rent must be much lower in the US than here.
As said earlier btw, at least according to this thread, it isn't 10% of your income earned/taxable income, but 10% of your discretionary income, which for a minimum wage person should be near 0.
Say you're working 40 hours per week making $7.25 an hour, or $290 a week. You're also receiving welfare if you're making this much. How much rent should you expect to pay? $500 to split a place with someone else? Surely you don't think someone on minimum wage should be living alone? If you have a wife, she's making $290 as well and paying half.
You're also probably on food stamps, so that cuts the cost of food. You're paying essentially $0 tax because of how little you make - especially since you're going to qualify most likely for tax credits. I imagine the biggest hit would be social security.
You could go to worse areas for less than $500 as well, but meh. I don't know if I could advocate that. Other things like car insurance, gas, etc. are where it will really hit you. If you're making minimum wage though, you should highly consider switching to public transportation. That's what a lot of people do. I used to take the bus to work back when I was making $6.75 per hour when I was 15, you save your money a lot faster that way.
|
On April 24 2012 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 13:12 Zariel wrote:
They say that debt is not a problem as long as it is manageable.
The problem with United states is the interest rates on the student loans. You guys in the USA are paying ridiculous interest rates for loans on which people do not have a proper income to pay with. If the student loans was only affected by the CPI (like in Australia), there will be no problem, people can work even on minimal wages and still able to pay it off. At the moment, it seems like people are even having trouble with interest repayments which is a complete joke IMO.
US government needs a real wake up call fast. 8% loans (I hear from this thread) is just plain ridiculous, and if the government does really believe that education is the only way out of poverty then you need to treat the young citizens better. It's 6.8% if you don't qualify for any of the extra help, otherwise it's 5.4%. If you're taking 8% you're usually delving into "plus" rate loans, which means you're taking out more than you need, since the basic loans should adequately cover your tuition + books. The biggest group getting hit right now as we see are the people that are in the 6.8% section. These are the middle or middle-upper class usually (well, the parents. The kids themselves might be well off or shit broke depending on their parents generosity towards them). Those who are super poor usually get almost all of their tuition covered in financial aid, as well as rent. Don't get me wrong though, 6.8% can still be a total bitch. As I've stated prior, I'd much sooner see the government simply lower the interest rate depending your status of employment and your income rather than simply forgive the debt. For example, 0% interest and defer payment for the first 6 months you're unemployed, maybe gradually climbs up to 2% after that (say if you're unemployed for 2 years it would hit 2%)... those making minimum wage 2.5%, etc. Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 13:18 -_-Quails wrote:On April 24 2012 07:28 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible. Cost of living and rent must be much lower in the US than here. As said earlier btw, at least according to this thread, it isn't 10% of your income earned/taxable income, but 10% of your discretionary income, which for a minimum wage person should be near 0. Say you're working 40 hours per week making $7.25 an hour, or $290 a week. You're also receiving welfare if you're making this much. How much rent should you expect to pay? $500 to split a place with someone else? Surely you don't think someone on minimum wage should be living alone? If you have a wife, she's making $290 as well and paying half. You're also probably on food stamps, so that cuts the cost of food. You're paying essentially $0 tax because of how little you make - especially since you're going to qualify most likely for tax credits. I imagine the biggest hit would be social security. You could go to worse areas for less than $500 as well, but meh. I don't know if I could advocate that. Other things like car insurance, gas, etc. are where it will really hit you. If you're making minimum wage though, you should highly consider switching to public transportation. That's what a lot of people do. I used to take the bus to work back when I was making $6.75 per hour when I was 15, you save your money a lot faster that way.
Is the $500 per week or per month?
|
The thing about minimum wage jobs is that they usually don't come with 40 hours a week. And with many employers, it's difficult to get a second job, since they like you to have "open" availability rather than a set schedule of hours. And yea, maybe at the end of the day you can pay for rent, food, utilities, and gas without a negative balance. But then the day that your car breaks down and you need a $500 repair, well, tough luck. Random things happen in your financial life, additional costs that are not part of your monthly bill cycle. And it's this that pretty much makes minimum wage very difficult to live off of.
Of course, I say this from the perspective of not receiving any sort of welfare or government aid.
|
On April 24 2012 14:52 shinosai wrote:
The thing about minimum wage jobs is that they usually don't come with 40 hours a week. And with many employers, it's difficult to get a second job, since they like you to have "open" availability rather than a set schedule of hours. And yea, maybe at the end of the day you can pay for rent, food, utilities, and gas without a negative balance. But then the day that your car breaks down and you need a $500 repair, well, tough luck. Random things happen in your financial life, additional costs that are not part of your monthly bill cycle. And it's this that pretty much makes minimum wage very difficult to live off of.
Of course, I say this from the perspective of not receiving any sort of welfare or government aid.
I hope I didn't imply it was easy or anything of that sort. Yeah, it'd be a complete bitch, and with no safety net or health insurance you'd always be living on edge.
On April 24 2012 14:10 -_-Quails wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2012 13:12 Zariel wrote:
They say that debt is not a problem as long as it is manageable.
The problem with United states is the interest rates on the student loans. You guys in the USA are paying ridiculous interest rates for loans on which people do not have a proper income to pay with. If the student loans was only affected by the CPI (like in Australia), there will be no problem, people can work even on minimal wages and still able to pay it off. At the moment, it seems like people are even having trouble with interest repayments which is a complete joke IMO.
US government needs a real wake up call fast. 8% loans (I hear from this thread) is just plain ridiculous, and if the government does really believe that education is the only way out of poverty then you need to treat the young citizens better. It's 6.8% if you don't qualify for any of the extra help, otherwise it's 5.4%. If you're taking 8% you're usually delving into "plus" rate loans, which means you're taking out more than you need, since the basic loans should adequately cover your tuition + books. The biggest group getting hit right now as we see are the people that are in the 6.8% section. These are the middle or middle-upper class usually (well, the parents. The kids themselves might be well off or shit broke depending on their parents generosity towards them). Those who are super poor usually get almost all of their tuition covered in financial aid, as well as rent. Don't get me wrong though, 6.8% can still be a total bitch. As I've stated prior, I'd much sooner see the government simply lower the interest rate depending your status of employment and your income rather than simply forgive the debt. For example, 0% interest and defer payment for the first 6 months you're unemployed, maybe gradually climbs up to 2% after that (say if you're unemployed for 2 years it would hit 2%)... those making minimum wage 2.5%, etc. On April 24 2012 13:18 -_-Quails wrote:On April 24 2012 07:28 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2012 03:20 -_-Quails wrote:On April 23 2012 04:35 Figgy wrote:On April 18 2012 09:25 acerockolla wrote:
I don't like it either. Last time I read it, it only forgives the debt of those not earning beyond a certain threshold. What's the point of making bad decisions consequence free and penalizing those that are successful? If anything, they should simply make student loans harder to receive. Too many people see it as free money and gobble up as much as they can. 10% of your income for 10 years is still huge when you are making minimum wage. It just means that those leaving university not able (or capable) to get a job won't be completely boned their entire life. Being able to pay back $20,000 when making 7$ (Yes, the minimum wage in the USA is an absolute joke, it's even lower in some states) an hour in the USA is a terrible spot to be in. There is a reason there is so much poverty and crime compared to other first world countries. ...I knew the minimum wage was low in the US, but that's insanely low. How do you even make rent on that kind of wage? It's more than enough to make rent. What it isn't enough is to support a family. Thus, if you're making minimum wage, you're in no financial situation to start a family, and if you try to do so anyways, you're financially irresponsible. Cost of living and rent must be much lower in the US than here. As said earlier btw, at least according to this thread, it isn't 10% of your income earned/taxable income, but 10% of your discretionary income, which for a minimum wage person should be near 0. Say you're working 40 hours per week making $7.25 an hour, or $290 a week. You're also receiving welfare if you're making this much. How much rent should you expect to pay? $500 to split a place with someone else? Surely you don't think someone on minimum wage should be living alone? If you have a wife, she's making $290 as well and paying half. You're also probably on food stamps, so that cuts the cost of food. You're paying essentially $0 tax because of how little you make - especially since you're going to qualify most likely for tax credits. I imagine the biggest hit would be social security. You could go to worse areas for less than $500 as well, but meh. I don't know if I could advocate that. Other things like car insurance, gas, etc. are where it will really hit you. If you're making minimum wage though, you should highly consider switching to public transportation. That's what a lot of people do. I used to take the bus to work back when I was making $6.75 per hour when I was 15, you save your money a lot faster that way. Is the $500 per week or per month?
Per month. It'd definitely be on the lower end of things but you could manage. I mean, I personally for the first three places I lived in spent $375, $250, and $480 per month (in that order) for places, finally upped it to $520 and my own room (first time!) where I'm living now. It's not a family environment, but as I said before, minimum wage isn't meant to support families.
|
On April 24 2012 12:17 lordofsoup wrote:
My friend from China says that the government there only pays for the education of people who it considers to be worth while to society and produce wealth, aka people who want to become engineers and other similar fields. Dont know if it is actually true or not, anyone else heard anything like this?
You can only get into the top high schools in China if you score very well on entrance exams (yes high schools have entrance exams). If you aren't up to snuff by the time you're 14, you get shunted to worse schools.
Uni in China is insanely cheap though. Full ride scholarships are not really common, even for pretty good students at top engineering Unis. I talked to a bunch of EE guys at Beijing Institute of Technology, for instance (like top 10 EE in the country there), basically nobody was on a full ride.
Still really, really fuggin' cheap. Cheaper housing too, unlike US college dorms which are a complete racket.
And yes, they have a higher emphasis towards technical degrees (a large number of unemployed technical graduates too). Also they have class and study for like 10~14 hours a day. So... yea. Hard to find a seat to study in open classrooms / libraries even at like 8 am on a Saturday towards the beginning of a semester at a good Uni.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
