The Looming U.S. Giant

On December 12 2012 10:12 heroyi wrote:
dont have enough grasp of the economic theories to give a rationale answer.

All I know is that college education system doesn't make sense. Go out and enrich your lives with education and become skilled but be buried in debt.

Then again, a lot of these debts have a high correlation with the degree and field chosen.

I know people who go get loans, student loans mind you, and use that money to go pay off a car, trips to Europe. I know people who have degrees in English and some bs in business and wonder why they cant land a job or hold a non-minimum wage job. People have this wrong illusion that if you hold this magical paper called degree then you are entitled to some 6 figure salary despite the quality of the degree...

On December 12 2012 10:15 FeUerFlieGe wrote:
If this continues, then in the future either:

a. People will stop going to University. University will once again be for the rich, outstanding students, legacy, ect, and most people will probably go to tech schools to get a degree.

b. Government gets it's shit together and improves the education system of this country.

I hope b.

On December 12 2012 10:16 forgottendreams wrote:


I agree, some people just go to college for the loans or to put off working on the farm or continuing the job at Wal Mart (who can blame them lol?). Fault certainly must attributed towards some of the degree consumers there taking an easy or BS art/business/architecture (sorry man.. gotta start somewhere) degrees. Some of these people earning these degrees don't know any better, some do but don't think far ahead of personal or aggregate societal consequences.

Perhaps then part of the solution is absolving or alleviating debt in degree areas that are important economically for the foreseeable future. However that too runs risk of over saturating those degree areas and putting strain on colleges nation wide to handle the incoming demand of those students switching over.

On December 12 2012 10:28 Klipsys wrote:
One of the problems is no accountability for people's majors. Really, anyone majoring in art history/English/ liberal arts better have a really good fucking idea what they're getting themselves into. Another issue is EVERYONE thinking they need to go to college. There is a stigma attached with not having a degree, and it's disturbing. We need to adjust our thinking to believe that trade-schools are just as worthy of an investment of time as a degree. Owning your own plumbing business is not an awful thing, and at this point plumbers are doing better than most 9-5 desk jockeys.

On December 12 2012 10:31 Skeltons wrote:
Can someone with a good grasp on economic theory attempt to describe how this bubble would burst? The subprime mortgage crisis dealt with tangible assets such as houses, cars, land, etc and massive overleverization, but this bubble does not seem to have tangible assets aside from an item that would occasionally be required to be put down as a security for mortgage (or loan in this case).

On December 12 2012 10:30 heroyi wrote:

Again, people don't understand when you have, for example, a business degree you aren't going to be using that degree as a ticket to riches. Instead you have to use the education you experienced while obtaining the degree to help you go take the initiative (working on resume, job experiences, insight to start a business etc...) NOT "oh hi, i got a bachelor in business, can i has 40000000000 dollar paycheck."

On December 12 2012 10:42 Sub40APM wrote:

But there are degrees like that. Any degree from an elite university ---> easy path to consulting or banking [well, less so now] that gets you a 75-125k job that does not use anything you learned in the previous 4 years. Law degree from an elite university does the same thing. The only thing that I used from law school at work was the existence of law-search engines.

But maybe people from the hard science side can speak of their experience re: using the things they've learned in school as a valuable job skill vs. the fact that they went to school is the reason they got a job.

Learning vs. Guild-like-entry-level-gate-keeping.

On December 12 2012 10:55 heroyi wrote:

Usually this happens if you choose a specific business degree. The example I use is of one where the majority of people get a very general and broad degree. Also it depends on the extracurricular things they have achieved (internships etc...) and even connections (a lot of times if you have connections and hold a degree from somewhere reputable, you can easily get a nice job like you described above).

I am talking about the people who get a degree in who knows what and do the bare minimum (strictly does only classes and graduate). These people will most likely not land a nice job that they keep envisioning themselves.

On December 12 2012 10:31 Skeltons wrote:
Can someone with a good grasp on economic theory attempt to describe how this bubble would burst? The subprime mortgage crisis dealt with tangible assets such as houses, cars, land, etc and massive overleverization, but this bubble does not seem to have tangible assets aside from an item that would occasionally be required to be put down as a security for mortgage (or loan in this case).

On December 12 2012 11:35 sam!zdat wrote:
In this case, that will happen when students start defaulting on their debt, die without paying it, and so on.

On December 12 2012 10:04 forgottendreams wrote:Someone pointed to the problem of the degree shoppers/consumers who crowd the degree field for no practical purpose other than to go to school, so self blame must be evident and pointed out in education somehow.

On December 12 2012 11:51 farvacola wrote:

Well, with any luck, that won't be the case with more fair student credit considerations.

On December 12 2012 11:58 Pseudoku wrote:
Maybe they need to implement a co-op system like at UWaterloo.

Co-op helps considerably (depending on program) with student expenses from my experience. Basically I haven't had to take a student loan since my first year (they actually wouldn't give me any loans because I was making enough money from my co-op job). I made enough from my co-op job to cover rent and tuition, plus have a good amount to spare [which means I can pay off my debt as soon as I graduate]. My co-op sequence does 4 months work, 4 months study, 4 months work, 4 months study, etc. so the 4 months you work covers (or helps) with the expenses from the 4 months of study.

Edit: It also gives 2 years of work experience before you graduate!

On December 12 2012 12:07 OsoVega wrote:
Stop guaranteeing student loans, and students won't be able to bid up tuition prices to the point where everyone needs a loan to go to university.

On December 12 2012 12:05 micronesia wrote:

I would be interested to hear of a proposed system that is balanced in that it does not make student debt into a noose around your neck and at the same time does not encourage 18 year olds to rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt at top schools, immediately declare bankruptcy, default on their loans, and start their credit history over, 7 years later, or however long the current rules are.

On December 12 2012 12:37 Souma wrote:
College is what you make out of it. It's not some magical entity that grants you +10 to job and life sk33lz. It is wise to intern, network, and study, or else you're not much different from what you were in high school once you graduate... just older, and more tolerant to alcohol.

On December 12 2012 10:28 Klipsys wrote:
One of the problems is no accountability for people's majors. Really, anyone majoring in art history/English/ liberal arts better have a really good fucking idea what they're getting themselves into. Another issue is EVERYONE thinking they need to go to college. There is a stigma attached with not having a degree, and it's disturbing. We need to adjust our thinking to believe that trade-schools are just as worthy of an investment of time as a degree. Owning your own plumbing business is not an awful thing, and at this point plumbers are doing better than most 9-5 desk jockeys.

On December 12 2012 12:41 theinfamousone wrote:


THIS

This is exactly right. I think literally the majority of Americans go to college because they think "it's what you do after high school" as goes the line from Orange County (the movie with Jack Black from 2002). If you don't go to college, then somehow you are only half a person. So they don't know what they want to do, but they know they have to eventually otherwise they'll hate themselves forever, and it only gets harder to finish a degree as you get older. Then they just take random classes for a few years racking up debt trying to figure out something they "like" (because Americans are so far removed from reality that they think any job you don't like doing you should either be a bitch/douche to everyone and take it out on them, or quit).

Well that's all well and good (not really but that's the expression) except for the fact that most people would rather learn about psychology, art, and dancing then math and chemistry (aka the hard sciences). Since Americans are so far removed from reality that life's not always like it is in the movies where you become a paleontologist like Ross in Friends, or do whatever Chandler did, sitting in an office getting paid a lot of money, or being an actor like Joey, and don't realize that in the real world half your day is working and it sucks (it's "work", if it was supposed to be fun, it would be called "play"), and the other half is trying to stay caught up with all of your home chores.

Until people get a clue, this will be an ongoing problem. The funny thing is, college really isn't really prepare you for your field very well most of the time. Most of what you do at work is a combination of on the job training, and having common sense, which taking multiple choice tests and copying and pasting essays from sparknotes sadly doesn't help with. I'm not saying an education isn't necessary for a lot of fields, but for at least half of what we would consider decent paying jobs, it shouldn't be required. What employers should be more concerned with is training people properly themselves, and then seeing how it goes on a probationary period. Then you've got people that are terrible at their job and/or hate their job.

tldr; Americans are terrible at picking majors and taking life seriously, and employers perpetuate the fallacy because they're too lazy to properly find the right people for the right jobs.

On December 12 2012 12:40 Sadist wrote:



It doesnt provide you a skill though. I found mechanical engineering to be so broad its almost like reading a pamphlet. If I had a tangible skill or something I'd feel more confident and feel like my time at college was worth it (I know it was worth it in a sense that it was basically required for me to get a job nowadays). I just feel like something is wrong, either with the curriculum or what is expected you or something. The way the system works nowadays from my experience is broken.

On December 12 2012 12:44 WTFZerg wrote:
Frankly, I have very little pity for people who go to college and rack up ridiculous amounts of debt without any thought or consideration to the future. Far, far too many students go to either private or out-of-state universities and end up paying $80,000 for a bachelor's degree they could have paid much, much less for if they bothered to actually shop around. Also, for whatever reason, a lot of people seem to look down on community colleges as somehow beneath them, when in reality doing your first two years at a community college not only reduces your out of pocket expenses, but all but guarantees your admittance to a state university so as long as you don't do abhorrently.

And another thing: Not everyone has to go to college. But, for whatever reason, people seem to look down upon those who work skilled blue collar jobs. Plumbers, electricians, carpenters, and HVAC personal all make respectable incomes without college education. Tech schools need to be more strongly emphasized by the high school system instead of this "GO TO COLLEGE" mentality that is poured down the throats of people who have no interest in it.

At the end of the day, were I not planning on going to school for Law, I would not even be in college.

On December 12 2012 12:54 forgottendreams wrote:


This is alot of the problem with social science peoples who say, well I respect blue collar or STEM but now that I've planned it its too late. While stating the problem you are still contributing the saturation of the law field.

I would know myself because I too am in law school. There's only one upshot for me in that Native American lawyers for tribes somehow still in demand economically by tribes, if I wasn't going to practice that I would be entering a mine field, and yet I know I'm contributing toward the problem. I always look back say, hell if I knew what a joke law school turned out to be I'd go to med school, yet I simply didn't.

On December 12 2012 12:44 Sadist wrote:



I agree with this all completely. IMO all of this you need to go to college thing is driven by employers.

On December 12 2012 13:05 theinfamousone wrote:
I have a few ideas on how the bubble will burst for those that are asking. One main problem is 50% of those who graduated a year ago are still unemployed. That's apocalyptically low as those are the future prime wage earners of the country (or at least supposed to be) and the rate you start out with has an immense bearing on the future of your career often times. When they can't pay back their loans, they're delinquent, those who are lending money to student shy away from it/require higher interest rates. Well students have to have that money so they're willing to pay the higher rates, well that makes those loan payments higher when they get done. Well that means more delinquencies. The cycle self reinforces until all hell breaks loose. Add on to that the fact that tuition rates rise on average 8% a year, far faster than inflation, and you can see how this situation is not sustainable. That's basically what happened to the housing market.

That's just the face value of the student loan bubble. One of the problems that isn't quite as intuitive is the long term problem that's more of an undertone, a hidden cost. Those hidden costs are that each $1 spent paying back these loans is less money people are spending on the goods and services that keep the economy afloat. For example. I am getting a pharmacy doctorate degree. This degree used to be a bachelor's degree up until ~15-20 years ago. So all those who graduated before they changed it to a 4 year professional degree had ~$130,000 + interest over 10-20 years, that they kept in their pocket that anyone who graduated after they made the new requirement such as myself do not have. Well, the problem is that that's $130,000 less money being spent on going out to eat supporting local restaurants etc. etc. that make the world go round. Then all the money those restaurant owners would've made doesn't get spent on whatever they would've bought etc. and down the line it goes. So as college tuition increases and interest rates increase, here comes more downward pressure on the economy.

On December 12 2012 12:10 micronesia wrote:

Is there evidence which shows that the federal involvement in student loans is what causes tuition to be so high?

Regardless, if your suggestion was enacted I wonder how many innocent students would get screwed by it even though they were actually going to get a good job and pay back their loan after graduating.

On December 12 2012 12:44 WTFZerg wrote:
Frankly, I have very little pity for people who go to college and rack up ridiculous amounts of debt without any thought or consideration to the future. Far, far too many students go to either private or out-of-state universities and end up paying $80,000 for a bachelor's degree they could have paid much, much less for if they bothered to actually shop around. Also, for whatever reason, a lot of people seem to look down on community colleges as somehow beneath them, when in reality doing your first two years at a community college not only reduces your out of pocket expenses, but all but guarantees your admittance to a state university so as long as you don't do abhorrently.

And another thing: Not everyone has to go to college. But, for whatever reason, people seem to look down upon those who work skilled blue collar jobs. Plumbers, electricians, carpenters, and HVAC personal all make respectable incomes without college education. Tech schools need to be more strongly emphasized by the high school system instead of this "GO TO COLLEGE" mentality that is poured down the throats of people who have no interest in it.

At the end of the day, were I not planning on going to school for Law, I would not even be in college.

On December 12 2012 13:15 farvacola wrote:

This is not true in the case of private loans, which are making up an ever increasing portion of total student loan share, especially as state schools cut scholarship funds and students are forced to make up the difference. Private loans now account for $150 billion of total student debt. Again, a lot of people are making poor choices when it comes to allocating student loan debt, but the system is practically set up to encourage such behavior.

On December 12 2012 13:47 farvacola wrote:

For some folks, it is a bullshit excuse. But your anecdotal experience does not correlate with the overall picture of the current labor market in reference to entrance level debt and education value, and I'm inclined to think that you amongst a few others are simply expecting the worst when it comes to the plight of your fellow man. Instead of a knee-jerk "well its obvious all these stupid fucks are irresponsible, why couldn't they be like me!" why not go with an attempt at understanding that a huge number of people find themselves in places of financial distress by no agency of their own, whether that take the shape of a cosigner losing their job or a sudden illness that pushes back a degree a few years. For others, misfortune can come down to something as simple as not making it through the last stage of an interview repeatedly.

Let me put it this way. The US economy is currently undergoing a fair amount of international transitive distress as it is forced to change the manner with which it produces a labor force that better reflects global standards of skilled/unskilled labor costs and respective educational requirements. Additionally, banks in general are literally fucking everybody, even themselves. The entire system is being shaken and transformed, and yet a flimsy vilification of those with literally the least ability to change or weather the storm are who you are choosing to blame, and I really do not think this makes sense. Again, I recognize that part of moving forward is going to include more fiscal responsibility on the part of those who take on student loans, but this is only a small part of the overall problem.

On December 12 2012 10:42 Sub40APM wrote:

But there are degrees like that. Any degree from an elite university ---> easy path to consulting or banking [well, less so now] that gets you a 75-125k job that does not use anything you learned in the previous 4 years. Law degree from an elite university does the same thing. The only thing that I used from law school at work was the existence of law-search engines.

But maybe people from the hard science side can speak of their experience re: using the things they've learned in school as a valuable job skill vs. the fact that they went to school is the reason they got a job.

Learning vs. Guild-like-entry-level-gate-keeping.

On December 12 2012 13:00 WTFZerg wrote:


Never said I was going to work as a lawyer in any fashion, only that I plan on attending Law school.

Two reasons I'm pursuing law:
1) The law fascinates me.
2) I want to work in Federal law enforcement. Something like the FBI.

And, at any rate, with a Bachelors in Economics (in progress) and a Masters in Finance (next step) combined with an actually pretty decent resume (from retail to the USPS to database development for JPMorgan) chances are I will be able to find a job.

On December 12 2012 14:06 farvacola wrote:

Word, having come from a massive state school myself, I was surrounded by quite a few kids who were obviously only in Columbus to see the Buckeyes play and get fuckin hammered, so I can sympathize. And I do agree that the problem is quite complicated, though I do not see that as a reason to despair or not attempt to figure out solutions. Gotta at least try.

On December 12 2012 14:05 cavalier117 wrote:


except that doesnt happen at all.... anywhere...

i know your high school counselers and academic advisors tell you that you need perfect grades, and a vast array of extra curriculars and go to harvard to get the job of your dreams, but its not true.

in the grand scheme of things, employers only care about 2 things;
1: what experience do you have?
2: how do you know and what is your connections?

three stirling examples of people i know
1: BA in financing and Accounting from Duke Business school (top ten school for business) went for an emphasis on stock markets. had a decent internship and was tied for highest in class. bright future right? nope, his internship was in a management firm and really wasnt experience, and none of his references counted for anything either because they were not part of his field he wanted. its been 9 monthes, no job. (one thing to note here, he COULD get a good job in either financing or accounting, but he still wants into the trade markets so he's still trying)

2:got his BA in Business Administration, then went directly to grad school for his MBA. (in business school, your initially taught that getting your MBA is like climbing the top of the mountain, then basejumping back to earth to an easy job with a high pay, also read as BULLSHIT) he has graduated, MBA in hand, looking for a management position in several companies. none will hire him. Why? no management experience. let me put this into perspective. he grew up in the hometown as Cabelas (a billion dollar outdoors company) he went to school with the kids of the VPs and board of Directors. he started wortking for Cabelas, when he was 16, he got an internship with them through college, as an assistant to the VP of sales.(EVERYONE knew him) And when he graduated from grad school at 26, working for Cabelas for 10 years. they STILL wouldnt give him a position indicative to his qualifications. why? no actual management experience.

3:Friend graduated from a decent state college, in computer science. he was always a computer genius and we were pretty sure he was gonna get a job programming or coding. anyways. he went to New York to a Facebook event on hacking. successfully hacked whatever they presented him. and made friends with various ppl in the IT security at Facebook. Where's he at now? Living in Palo Alto working for FB in internet security (making bank)

what the story here? its not where you went to school, or what u did in it. Employers really dont care about your GPA (most wont even check it) so those extra ribbons you wore on graduation? yea they will continue to look good, in your closet. its about WHO you know, (networking will get you further in life than anything you will EVER do in college, so if you do anything in college, meet people with connections and hang on to them) and what you have done.

On December 12 2012 15:18 Skullflower wrote:
My only problem with college is that I really don't see the point of taking all these bullshit math classes when I'm not touching anything STEM related. Can anybody tell me why the fuck I need to pass Calculus to get a Business major?

On December 12 2012 15:18 Skullflower wrote:
My only problem with college is that I really don't see the point of taking all these bullshit math classes when I'm not touching anything STEM related. Can anybody tell me why the fuck I need to pass Calculus to get a Business major?

On December 12 2012 17:02 hp.Shell wrote:
This could potentially go on for a lot longer period of time (repay postponement), in fact it could go on indefinitely if the "student" remains enrolled in a university. All the person would have to do is take and pass 6 hours of classes every semester, take out more money than they need in student loans, and go drink wine in Europe with their harem of shopaholic girlfriends. Then if they never meet requirements to graduate they don't have to pay it back ever, as per the terms of the loan. Hell, I knew people who were majoring in just about every field of engineering because they didn't want to go work. There was one guy who had a major in electrical and computer engineering and was working on his computer science major, and he wasn't paying back loans because he's been in school for 10 years.

On December 12 2012 17:02 hp.Shell wrote:
This could potentially go on for a lot longer period of time (repay postponement), in fact it could go on indefinitely if the "student" remains enrolled in a university

On December 13 2012 01:18 micronesia wrote:

One thing to point out, although it doesn't invalidate your point, is that the un-subsidized portion of any loans will continue to accrue interest during this long period of being a student.

On December 12 2012 10:15 FeUerFlieGe wrote:
If this continues, then in the future either:

a. People will stop going to University. University will once again be for the rich, outstanding students, legacy, ect, and most people will probably go to tech schools to get a degree.

b. Government gets it's shit together and improves the education system of this country.

I hope b.

On December 12 2012 10:28 Klipsys wrote:
One of the problems is no accountability for people's majors. Really, anyone majoring in art history/English/ liberal arts better have a really good fucking idea what they're getting themselves into. Another issue is EVERYONE thinking they need to go to college. There is a stigma attached with not having a degree, and it's disturbing. We need to adjust our thinking to believe that trade-schools are just as worthy of an investment of time as a degree. Owning your own plumbing business is not an awful thing, and at this point plumbers are doing better than most 9-5 desk jockeys.

So here's the intuitive problem for me, the U.S. is continually going to trend toward a service side economy, especially for White Americans, then it will trickle down to Hispanics and some AA's and NA (Natives) here and there. Everyone wants a piece these days instead of settling for lower end jobs. This is logical, and completely rational so no one needs to feel bad about it.

On December 13 2012 04:47 Jermstuddog wrote:


My brother subscribes to this methodology of dealing with his loan and your point doesn't matter.

-He got 40k in loans to get his teaching degree.

-He discovered that in order to get a teaching license in California, you basically have to be an intern for 2 years.

-He can't afford to take 2 years off from getting paid as he is the sole earner in his family at around $15/hr with a wife and 2 daughters.

-He can't afford to pay back his loans

-Therefore, his ONLY option is to continue taking on student loans and continue going to school for free.

What happens when the house of cards falls down?

A broke man goes broke. Nothing to see here, move along.

On December 12 2012 10:24 Sub40APM wrote:
Pretty logical progression really. Death of blue collar jobs that afford middle class style life style ---> growing importance of college degree as a signal for employers 'look, iam more qualified' ---> growing demand for college ---> growing exploitation of people's hope for a better life by colleges to jack up tuition --> dilution of just a generic college degree --> increased competition for 'elite' degrees ---> higher costs all around.

On December 12 2012 10:30 heroyi wrote:

See now you sound like Rick Scott, gov. of FL, who wanted to inject more into the STEM classes and kill off other "non-important" majors like anthro, arts, etc...

People dont realize you CAN get a job with any degree but they don't realize that if you have/chose anthropology major...don't expect to have:
1) a high paying job out of school
2) a salary in that field in which that will comfortably help pay off your living conditions AND debts

Instead, to get a 6 figure salary with an Anthropology degree you gotta work your ASS off to get there. Because those are usually reserved in very high positions in that job field.

Again, people don't understand when you have, for example, a business degree you aren't going to be using that degree as a ticket to riches. Instead you have to use the education you experienced while obtaining the degree to help you go take the initiative (working on resume, job experiences, insight to start a business etc...) NOT "oh hi, i got a bachelor in business, can i has 40000000000 dollar paycheck."

edit:

Agree with everything said here.

People don't know how to feel when someone goes on about how they dont have formal education like college but yet do well financially cause of their job they own and run. It is always funny since education is so highly valued (which it should be however people shouldn't be/feel berated for not going to college)

On December 12 2012 12:10 micronesia wrote:

Is there evidence which shows that the federal involvement in student loans is what causes tuition to be so high?

Regardless, if your suggestion was enacted I wonder how many innocent students would get screwed by it even though they were actually going to get a good job and pay back their loan after graduating.

On December 13 2012 05:36 dreamsmasher wrote:


quite a bit actually, most of the money from tuition hikes doesn't even go towards better education, they go towards administrators and building the 'reputation' of schools. however students benefit disproportionately from 'reputation'. for example i go to a top 10 ranked engineering/business school, most of that money goes into making sure students like myself get better paying jobs etc... (indirectly), yet as a collective, myself (and people like me) represent only a fraction of people who attend school -- yet we all pay the same tuition.

administrators also make FAR more than professors do, and many times have zero background in education or anything education related. and with how tenureship incentive structures work (most professors don't give a shit about teaching, since it is unimportant towards obtaining money or tenureship). i've always felt this was extremely obvious, --anyone who has sat in an upper division math/science course is going to realize a) there are hardly any Americans in your class b) there are a substantial number of these classes that are very poorly taught by very bright professors who just clearly care more about research than teaching --> yet REPUTATION of the school is linked to research results, not teaching ability.

On December 13 2012 05:45 Daumen wrote:
I never rly understood the US- Forprofit school system, but basically its Universitys demand Money from the Students, right?
So then the Students need to loan Money (from Banks?), thats the Student loan? plx Educate me on this, I have no idea, also could someone plx tell me how much Money you need for this? (I heard that some ppl have to work like slaves to pay off the debt)

On December 13 2012 05:49 Alex1Sun wrote:

This is changing now.

Tenured positions are getting eliminated from universities across US. Most schools now mostly have adjunct professors who are only involved in teaching. They earn $2000-4000 per course per year (which results in $15000-$35000 annual salary for those who teach multiple courses in several universities).

Many universities now also have research professors. They do not teach, but have zero salary. They apply for annual research grants, which require a couple of months to prepare an application, and then there is %10-%20 probability to get a grant. If they fail to get a grant (most do fail), then they do not get paid and have to work for free in hopes of getting another grant.

Both types of professors often have supplementary part-time jobs as waiters etc. This trend is quickly growing.

On December 13 2012 05:17 Alex1Sun wrote:

I guess the real problem is a bit deeper. Why did all the blue collar jobs that afford middle class style life style die? Why does USA no longer need many blue collar workers?

IMHO the answer is threefold:
1. More automation (a lot of manufacturing is now done by robots, construction and farming involves much more machinery etc)
2. Loss of blue collar jobs to cheaper countries like China, India, Mexico etc.
3. Overall saturation and diminishing resources, i.e. very little unused land left in US, huge oil and industrial supplies imports (less easy to get resources left in US).

I guess you can't really revert these three phenomena bar some huge ecological disaster or a world war. The only possible ways forward are increasing inequality and debt or complete revamp of educational system. What do you think?

On December 13 2012 04:47 Jermstuddog wrote:


My brother subscribes to this methodology of dealing with his loan and your point doesn't matter.

-He got 40k in loans to get his teaching degree.

-He discovered that in order to get a teaching license in California, you basically have to be an intern for 2 years.

-He can't afford to take 2 years off from getting paid as he is the sole earner in his family at around $15/hr with a wife and 2 daughters.

-He can't afford to pay back his loans

-Therefore, his ONLY option is to continue taking on student loans and continue going to school for free.

What happens when the house of cards falls down?

A broke man goes broke. Nothing to see here, move along.

On December 13 2012 06:05 FabledIntegral wrote:


I know four separate teachers in CA that I went to undergrad with, all went into full time teaching the moment they graduated, none had 2 year internships. They are all elementary/middle school teachers. One of them I am close friends to. I believe they teach at private schools as opposed to public schools, if that's relevant, but they are still teachers nonetheless making around ~$40k+.

On December 13 2012 06:08 dreamsmasher wrote:


even worse more talented teachers who want to educate in secondary education (high school) often have the requirement to take close to teh same courseload as math/sci majors (lol they have to take more proof based math courses than I do), yet they are lucky to make even half of what my degree will eventually make (if they can even find a job at all)

On December 13 2012 06:12 FabledIntegral wrote:


Course load for an education degree is not hard whatsoever at UCI. Not sure what it's like at other schools, but it's not a hard major at all. I took a few midterms of my friend, with know prior knowledge of the class, in my free time and scored a B- and C+ on the two (they were able to keep copies of the midterms). Math/Sci majors have it ridiculous at UCI though, so maybe it's a bad comparison when the school is heavily weighted towards the sciences (and somewhat engineering).

On December 13 2012 06:00 dreamsmasher wrote:


only furthers my point thank you

some anecdotal evidence but in both my upper division stat classes Americans make up less than 10% of the classroom and in one of the classes, the professor literally just presented proofs that any textbook could have shown me, and i think attendance was something like 30% (I rarely went myself). this isn't because students are 'lazy' or 'unmotivated', but more due to the fact that 1) the professor rarely actually sets times that are within students ability to meet 2) he doesn't even answer EMAILS (i actually received an email saying too busy can't respond, and there were several no shows when I had previously set a meeting time). there were also zero quizzes, zero tests (only weekly homework and a final).

the professor is actually a really smart guy (quite apparent, he won some sort of distinguished award for research), and this has been going on (from what i've heard from students who had taken the class before). this isn't an isolated incident either, anyone who has been in engineering at any top research university can attest to the same situation.

i probably got an A in teh course, but not because of the class (independent study, video lectures from free sources like MIT opencourseware etc...)

On December 13 2012 06:17 dreamsmasher wrote:


it depends on what you want to educate. i know several mathematics education majors who have to take the exact same calculus courses as engineering/sciences (in fact they even have to take proof based linear, and linear II (things that aren't required for engineering), and a intro to real analysis.

as a whole yes, it isn't as difficult as engineering (since the rest of their courseload is more broad based, or they have to take lot of education courses as well), but i would say if such a student could excel at the aforementioned courses, they certainly have the mental capacity to pursue a better paying field yes?

On December 12 2012 10:31 Skeltons wrote:
Can someone with a good grasp on economic theory attempt to describe how this bubble would burst? The subprime mortgage crisis dealt with tangible assets such as houses, cars, land, etc and massive overleverization, but this bubble does not seem to have tangible assets aside from an item that would occasionally be required to be put down as a security for mortgage (or loan in this case).

On December 13 2012 06:21 Alex1Sun wrote:

But that is exactly the thing, which is getting eliminated now in many universities in US. Most teaching professors now are adjunct professors who only get paid as long as students like their course a lot. If the survey shows that the course given by a professor if not entertaining and enlightening, an adjunct professor is fired immediately. It is very easy to find a better professor with so many of them without a job. A university also pays an adjunct professor on average 5-7 times less than a tenured professor with the same teaching load, so a university can even lower a tuition fee or invest money in other areas. That's great for students.

On December 13 2012 06:23 dreamsmasher wrote:


wouldn't the best professors opt to focus even more time on doing research that not only increases their resume value, earning potential, and reputation?

On December 13 2012 06:22 FabledIntegral wrote:


You mean in the logic based courses?

It's all relative. Those are probably (and this is entirely an assumption) the hardest classes one would have to take. Just like people don't think Economics is that hard, but Econ majors at my school still have to take a few Econometrics courses, which can be extremely challenging (only courses I really struggled with myself). Honestly though, I wasn't aware "Mathematics Education" was a major. But if it is, it's not unreasonable at all to be expected to take math classes?

From what I'm aware the logic courses are not extremely in depth. Even if they are, I'm not sure how relevant the pay scale is to the discussion. Is your argument that they should be paid more? You do realize the average starting salary out of college is ~$32-38k, although this is probably due to an averaging of lowering paying $12-15/hr jobs and the higher $20-30/hr jobs.

On December 13 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote:



I dont have a good grasp on economic theory, but the tangible asset in this case is the student lol.
Or rather, his ability to work in the future.
The student is the colleteral.

On December 13 2012 06:28 dreamsmasher wrote:


isn't the point of education to increase the pool of students who have better developed skills? mathematics education in this country is ridic bad i think precisely because there is not good incentive structure for talented people who are good at both the technical knowledge and expressing that knowledge to other individuals. i know for a fact that I do well in many of those courses not because the teacher is 'so good', but because i'm good at teaching myself new things. i generally only go to class as a survey of the material and to ask very specific questions (and of course to pick up participation points if there are any or to pick up things that may not be in the book (usually very few, but can't rule out that possibility.


i'm not sure how the whole mathematics education thing works out, I just remember being quite surprised that a lot my fellow classmates were education majors

On December 13 2012 06:29 FabledIntegral wrote:


No, it would be the debt obligation. Think of it like a bond. Student loan debt has a value to whoever the debt is owed to.

If I owe you $1,000, you have an intangible asset. You have something owed to you. You'll receive interest payments from me and the principal $1,000 loaned out as well, meaning the value of the loan is in theory more than $1,000. At the same time, the value of the loan is reduced by various factors, such as inflation, present/future value differences (also interest rate flucutations in the market), and the chance you'll default on the loan.

Compounded with this is the need to maintain the loan (aka administrative expenses) and the need for a profit.

Student loans are slightly different, since you supposedly can't default on them. Regardless, the many factors listed can reduce the value of the loans that the banks (or whoever has the intangible assets) have. Say you could default on the loan. If many people default, not only will they lose the stream of income from these loans, but they'll also have severe decrease in value of the remaining assets, as they will drop in value as their perceived riskiness rises.

On December 13 2012 06:33 Rassy wrote:
Yes but that intangible asset, the debt, is backed by a tangible asset, wich is the student earnings potential?
The same way a mortgage is backed by the house.
Or am i missing something simple?

On December 13 2012 06:33 Rassy wrote:
Yes but that intangible asset, the debt, is backed by a tangible asset, wich is the student earnings potential?
The same way a mortgage is backed by the house.
Or am i missing something simple?

On December 13 2012 06:36 dreamsmasher wrote:


that most of the money going into education is for consumption purposes and not investment. most of the increase in dollars goes towards not providing a better education for students or making sure professors are teaching people in a better way, but towards conspicuous consumption ( better reputation, better facilities that only a fraction of students actually end up using) etc....

sorry quoted wrong post.

as a whole you need smart people to be able to pursue fields that aren't necessarily financially rewarding (well at least how things are set up now). why would anyone in their right mind pursue education, if they have the skills to do something that pays better.

if you follow the argument that better pay results in better performance (a very specious argument in of itself, but one that current economic is based on), then yes, at least that money should be used to increase who well students are taught (whether that be professor pay, setting it up so that professors have a better incentive to teach, provididing facilities that are useful for students to succeed etc..., not towards the increasing costs associated with administratiion, reputation (based on faulty measures), etc...

On December 13 2012 08:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:


...And horrible for professors? Are we just forgetting that part?



Your picture of what a job in education entails is grossly inaccurate.

On December 12 2012 13:02 FabledIntegral wrote:


Except employers aren't deluded like you think they are. Besides the fact that for certain majors, such as Engineering, Accounting, etc. it's 100% necessary to have a proficiency in the area (and if you don't have it, then they'll have to train you out of their own pockets), it's widely known that employers do NOT think university adequately prepares you for a career.

Rather, it's a method to weed out the driven from the mediocre. Why hire someone with a 2.5 GPA when you can hire someone with a 3.5 GPA? All things equal, someone with a 3.5 is a harder worker or is more bright. Sure, some people are better test takers than others. But it's an amazing signal nonetheless about your attributes. They want to see that you'll take that career seriously at their firm. They don't want you if you "oh, sounds like a good career" on a whim. They want to see that you've dedicated four years to learning the subject material as best as possible and have performed well in that area. That way, they know you're serious, motivated, and willing to stick around.

On December 13 2012 09:12 Stratos_speAr wrote:


While elementary school educators work the least, there aren't any educators (K-12 or professors) that get "large breaks" throughout the day, "significantly more" days off than a typical job, or massive summer breaks (the retirement benefits and job security are very questionable as well). Even elementary school teachers work all day, and when they're not teaching their class, they have several other faculty-related things to do (faculty meetings, workshops, homework to grade, extra tutoring, administrative appointments beyond their class, etc. etc.). Once you're into middle school or high school teaching, the workload is already higher than your average worker; not only do you have class throughout the day, but you have significantly more homework to work through, workshops and meetings to attend, etc. etc. Furthermore, this stuff goes on through the summer, too. Summer isn't just some kind of break for teachers like it is for young students; there are things like job evaluations, summer workshops (lasting days in some cases), and additional meetings to re-evaluate school and teaching policies. Sure, summer isn't as hard for teachers as it is for other professions, but teachers have a much higher workload during the school year than most professions do.

And don't even start with professors. They work far more than anyone else out there for far less pay.

On December 13 2012 09:23 Stratos_speAr wrote:


...But that doesn't happen. At least in Minnesota, teachers don't just get June-August off; while they get far more time off than usual, they still have to be around for administrative-related business throughout much of the summer. Yea, you can probably take a week vacation to travel here or there, but that's no different from other professions. Furthermore, teachers generally get paid far less during the summer or not at all.

On December 13 2012 06:04 forgottendreams wrote:


This is just an extremely good post and actually touches on a thread I made earlier back in the dizzle.

This succinctly summarizes the long term economic problems of the U.S.; the "automaton creep" is not going to stop anytime soon. Sure it's taking over menial jobs, but it's presence is slowly being felt in medicine and law even. What's going to be left are managerial roles, servicing roles or programming that are going to increasingly demand higher and higher education as competition is squeezed. Frankly, I don't exactly see a solution here quite yet...

On December 13 2012 06:05 FabledIntegral wrote:


I know four separate teachers in CA that I went to undergrad with, all went into full time teaching the moment they graduated, none had 2 year internships. They are all elementary/middle school teachers. One of them I am close friends to. I believe they teach at private schools as opposed to public schools, if that's relevant, but they are still teachers nonetheless making around ~$40k+.

I don't really pity him if that's his mindset. The wife should work as well. He should have saved up more money. He shouldn't have accrued 40k in loans for a teaching degree. And if your internship thing was true, if he planned on investing 40k into a degree, he should have took the damn time to see the prerequisites to get a job afterwards. You're telling me he only found out after he invested years of his time and substantial amounts of money what the market is like afterwards? That's pure stupidity, straight and simple.

It's not like he pays virtually any taxes or anything if he's working full time at $15/hr as a sole earner and has a spouse that doesn't work with two children. In fact, he's probably receiving welfare at that level. Part of it is on him to plan his life better and not mindlessly go down a certain path with no clear objective.

On December 13 2012 08:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:


...And horrible for professors? Are we just forgetting that part?

On December 13 2012 09:01 Sadist wrote:



My point was that my engineering courses didn't adequately prepare me for my career. Maybe it was because Mechanical Engineering is just too broad and shouldn't be lumped into one major.


Do you not see the problem with your post? If school is only meant to weed out the driven from the mediocre and employers know university doesn't adequately prepare you for your career.........

it means its a huge scam. You are paying tons of money for a slip of paper that HR uses to "weed people out". Thats just wrong. And because everyone KNOWS you can't get most positions without a degree nowadays the younger population has been taking it up the ass with the debt.

I had a scholarship so Im not in very much debt myself (only about 7k) but I can see from other peoples perspectives how broken the system is. I have empathy for the people who are 50k+ in debt with the job market being the way it is and with wages stagnating/going down. Adjusted for inflation in Engineering you start at a lower pay than previous generations and you most likely have fewer opportunities to make more money since less companies give yearly raises and shit than before.

On December 13 2012 10:16 FabledIntegral wrote:


It's not a scam because it's widely known (you might have missed out on that point though).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)

I learned about it as well as heard about it in high school quite a bit before I went to college. Not only was it formally "taught" (more so mentioned) by a teacher in a class, but it was considered common knowledge at the same time.

It's not wrong at all. There's nothing even remotely unethical about companies requesting people with degrees. All they say is "we have a job that has these requirements and will pay $X. Please apply here. We will select who we deem the most qualified. Here are our prerequisites." There is no problem with screening. If I start my own company, you're going to tell me there's something wrong with preferring to hired someone who has a degree rather than someone who doesn't? That's utter nonsense. I get to choose who I hire for my business.

Also, if you think someone who goes into a mechanical engineering career would not benefit significantly more from a Mechanical Engineering major as opposed to an Economics major, you're crazy. I don't know anything remotely even about Mechanical Engineering. I don't even know anything about basic vocabulary. In fact, I'm not even 100% sure what a Mechanical Engineer even DOES in the first place. My only impression is that they ensure the constructural integrity of a building.

I have limited empathy because there's little reason to accumulate $50k in debt in the first place. If you were working part time during college, had very cheap rent (because you had 2 roommates in the same room), ate frugally, went to community college, saved during the summer, etc. you should not be in disproportionate amounts of debt. If you didn't have a job and decided to go to a 4-year university anyways and just took out loans, lived on campus with one of those ridiculous school meal plans, and spent $20 per day on food, then you're an idiot in my eyes.

On December 13 2012 10:20 Sadist wrote:


We are going to have to agree to disagree. My only class that prepared me for my current job was Senior Design (in essence managing a project from start to finish yourself). the only classes were almost always too basic or a waste of time altogether.

IMO its a scam and tuition is going to keep rising regardless of how well students are educated.

On December 13 2012 10:23 FabledIntegral wrote:


Then you did not get a typical engineering job, I would assume. Of course, that's a major assumption, but I can't imagine learning the fundamentals of the purpose of engineering would not be at the very least relevant to your profession. I mean, is your job title "Mechanical Engineer"? I'm not saying it should have prepared you fully, anecdotally I've heard engineers (in the broadest sense of the term) tell me they've utilized around ~10-15% of what they learned.

On December 13 2012 09:43 Jermstuddog wrote:


I really dislike the attitude and side of the argument you take with such highlights as "he should have saved more money", "he should have thought more about his degree", and "it's not like he's paying any taxes anyway".

None of those deal with the problem that a dude with a college degree has no way to enter the field of his choice due to having to work to feed his family and not being able to participate in a very specific 'after-schooling' credentialing program that generally takes over a year to complete and provides a very modest raise afterward.

You are busy attacking the character of a person who pursued a higher degree with the best of intentions and sure, maybe a bit of ignorance, when the whole point has nothing to do with him, but the system that is in place here.

You think my brother is the ONLY student debt holder who has no intention or means to pay back his loan?

You think what he's doing is not a common practice in this nation?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but of all the people I know with significant student debt, only ONE of them is doing anything to deal with it in the intended fashion of paying it back. Everybody else is busy with paying the bills of life and looking for a way to extend the duration of their loan so that they never ever have to actually pay.

Cry more about how irresponsible my brother is. In the mean time, the college loan bubble will burst.

On December 13 2012 10:31 Sadist wrote:



I work in automotive and deal with plastics. Im effectively a manager of a component on a vehicle. I learned very little if anything about manufacturing, plastics, tooling etc.


Theres tons of things in my job that I deal with that an academic environment would be PERFECT to learn the training for. And it would be applicable to basically any type of manufacturing, not just automotive. But of course those classes werent offered.

My point I guess is, I feel like for what the cost is, you dont get very much aside from a piece of paper. I think that is wrong. With the competitive job market, you basically need a degree whether its applicable or not. This is driven by HR and costs being cut for training/mentorship programs when you are hired. Universities and students know this so costs are going up and the actual education is mediocre at best.

On December 13 2012 10:48 Stratos_speAr wrote:


...So, if you are fortunate enough to find a job at all (let alone one that works with you going to school), a decent enough place to live at a cheap price, people to live with, and sacrifice good opportunities (there's a reason people try to go to higher-end schools; having a community college degree doesn't exactly make you competitive), then you can maybe get by without accruing debt.

And your last paragraph is ridiculous. This is such a huge issue because it isn't just the people at the margins not getting jobs; it's huge chunks of recent graduates who are doing well in school but still have to build up debt and then can't find jobs.

On December 13 2012 09:23 Stratos_speAr wrote:


...But that doesn't happen. At least in Minnesota, teachers don't just get June-August off; while they get far more time off than usual, they still have to be around for administrative-related business throughout much of the summer. Yea, you can probably take a week vacation to travel here or there, but that's no different from other professions. Furthermore, teachers generally get paid far less during the summer or not at all.

On December 13 2012 09:37 Alex1Sun wrote:

Well, look at Japan.

Automation is far beyond that in US, big population on a tiny peace of land, no resources, all manufacturing either done by robots or moved to China.

Results?

Great living standards and life longetivity, extremely low crime rate, very low unemployment, little inequality and small external debt.

If not for 2011 tsunami, Japan would be even better.

A lot of it has to do with proper education and good conditions for high tech businesses.

Sure, students in Japan also have to take loans, and it's difficult for many to find a good job straight after graduation, but in general the situation looks better than in US. US needs a revamp of its educational system.

On December 13 2012 12:04 forgottendreams wrote:


Well, generally Japan is the shining example, the summit of economics. Obviously it would be nice to be them, relatively homogenous, non adversarial, longer hours and so forth but I'm just not sure this is really possible for the hulking mass of multiculturalism and regional differences that is the U.S.

Any general thoughts on how to overhaul the US education system? I mean collegiate wise, the answers for overhauling the K-8 system are a little more apparent and would be controversial over here (a flexible, but rigorous nationally mandated curriculum, cutting back of books and longer hours would hit nerves of both liberals, conservatives and corps unfortunately).

On December 13 2012 12:20 FabledIntegral wrote:


Japan is also one of the most depressed nations in the world. And yeah, as mentioned, extremely long hours, insanely high pressure....

On December 12 2012 12:10 Pseudoku wrote:


I think UWaterloo's co-op system is nice for this. The Government of Ontario [Canada] gives businesses who hire co-op students some tax credits [http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/credit/cetc/]. I will get my degree with little to no debt while gaining 2 years of work experience in a related field.

On December 13 2012 13:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:


So the system is always fine and the fault is always on the individual? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Post-secondary education is (barring extreme luck) the only way to achieve social mobility, and so you're essentially blaming individuals for wanting to improve their socioeconomic status and doing it by the only means available, and debt is, for the majority of students, the only way to pay for school. No one is saying that people shouldn't have to pay their debt back; the problem is that the ridiculous cost of college (which equals extreme amounts of debt) coupled with the improbability of obtaining a decently-paying job after college results in impossible debt scenarios.

On December 13 2012 14:14 Stratos_speAr wrote:


Not only do you continue to completely miss the point, you have this fairy tale-esque view of the world that doesn't conform to reality.

First off, the problem isn't that people have to pay for education; I explicitly said that. The problem is that the system is so fucked up that the only route to social mobility is one where crushing student debt is largely unavoidable. Furthermore, your concept of how financial aid works is horribly inaccurate. "Financial aid" that is given to those without money is usually just more loans that further the debt problem. You really just sound like some privileged white guy who doesn't understand the reality of the problems faced by those that are worse off.

On December 13 2012 14:37 Souma wrote:
There are different types of financial aid. There are grants, there are subsidized loans, unsubsidized loans, scholarships, and work study.

On December 13 2012 15:10 Energizer wrote:


I'd like to see you try borrowing 50k from the U.S. government and then try to give the finger to the IRS when they come to collect. Seriously, go ahead and do it, I'm very interested in the outcome.

In truth you have a very skewed view over what classifies as personal choice. While sure its a "choice" to go to college, its also a "choice" to pay your taxes. In both cases it isn't really a choice at all as its really an ultimatum. In truth what future does anyone who doesnt have a college education have when all employers have started making a 4-year a requirement for the most basic of jobs?

Then you continue onwards to saying how it would be awful for our taxes to increase to pay for the education of these people. To which I say, "WHAT?!" Even after I graduate and choose to stay in America I'd be willing to continue paying taxes on education even though I myself wouldn't personally be invested in it because I don't want to live with a bunch of stupid people. Remember - one day you will most likely need surgery, however minor. You cant tell me you are perfectly fine with someone who has an AA conducting surgery on you (because he couldn't afford to go to med school) just for the sake of not having to pay an extra amount of taxes. And if that is indeed the case, you are an extremely selfish person that obviously cares little about making the world you live in better for everyone.

I'm just amazed at how you try to rationalize an inhospitable environment for college students by saying "No, its really this easy!" Without taking into consideration that not everyone has mommy and daddy to rely on for housing, or that not everyone has a choice to be frugal with their money when they have expenses they need to pay or completely disregard the fact that jobs today that dont require a degree (Which is basically a waiter/pizza delivery) Aren't receiving enough hours to pay for their overinflated degree (in truth the most you can really expect is 20).

On December 13 2012 12:32 chenchen wrote:


I think that a much better example for "success" would be Sweden.
Higher GDP per capita than Japan. Higher standard of living than Japan. Almost matches longevity of Japan.
Consistently rated as one of the happiest countries in the world.
Much lower suicide rate.

Free/dirt cheap education from primary through postgraduate . . . . lol

On December 13 2012 14:55 FabledIntegral wrote:


Financial aid is typically specifically aid that is like a grant. Subsidized/unsubsidized loans on the other hand are referred to as student loans. Maybe not all places have this vocabulary and I'm wrong, but this is the impression I'm under.

On December 13 2012 15:51 Energizer wrote:


To qualify for that Financial Aid you essentially have to be living on your own and have no one claim you as your dependent (as you need to be making less than ~$25k). Yet that cutoff range completely screws over those who stay with their parents as they cannot afford to live on their own, thus forces loans. And I said the IRS collects because if you choose to not pay back your loans, your wages/tax refund can be garnished by them.

On December 13 2012 15:51 Energizer wrote:


To qualify for that Financial Aid you essentially have to be living on your own and have no one claim you as your dependent (as you need to be making less than ~$25k). Yet that cutoff range completely screws over those who stay with their parents as they cannot afford to live on their own, thus forces loans. And I said the IRS collects because if you choose to not pay back your loans, your wages/tax refund can be garnished by them.

As for my analogy of taxes it is exactly the same as not going to college. There is no real choice as there are no employers who hire those without some type of degree "because they can". Just like there's no real choice to not paying taxes otherwise the IRS starts garnishing everything they can from any income you earn. And yes I do know that there is a vast amount of people who are forced to relocate to their parent's house and thats because of the overinflated amount of people with degrees that enter the market, and while sure some people may have picked a harder degree to get a job with than others, the fact remains that 50% off everyone who gets a degree wont get a job anytime soon.

I also find it hilarious how you think that just because the jobs I listed pay tips, therefore must be high paying. You obviously have never worked as a server so let me give you some grips of reality. In truth most restaurants only pay on average $3/hr as a base, nothing more. Sometimes you get lucky and end up getting $4 but usually its within the $2-$3 range. Then you have to consider that most restaurants limit you to at most 3, maybe 4 tables. While sure that sounds nice at first, you then have to realize that those tables are never always filled except for maybe 2 rotations during rush hour (lunch/dinner) the rest of the time you're working on half that at best. Not to mention there are the bad tippers, the no tippers, the people who decide to spend more than an hour at your table tippers... all screw with your total pay/hour. At the end of the day you would be lucky to make anything higher than $50 on tips, and yet that would be your pay. Oh! And you also dont work more than 30 hours a week as businesses just hire more servers to avoid hitting that 30 hour limit before obamacare starts affecting their business.

I'm still baffled that you believe the current system is fine where you force college students to just take out loans for their education - It fails to solve the underlying issue which the the immense amount of debt that student loans have which is caused by vastly overpriced education which has no limitations to how much they can charge. There really is no reason why the government shouldn't be paying for college students to finish their education in the same way many governments in Europe already do. All it does is ensures that the overall population acquires advanced education which in turn (in economic terms) increases human capital and gives some options for people to start their careers in whatever field they wish to specialize in without need of worry over how deep their pockets can go.

On December 13 2012 16:20 Joedaddy wrote:
The first and best place to start in cutting the expense of higher education is textbooks. Out of my 5 classes this past semester the cheapest book I bought was $89.00 and the most expensive was $249.00. The best part? The $249.00 was loose leaf paper with 3-hole punches. There was no binding and no way to sell it back.

I don't know about you guys, but I don't remember seeing a book at Barnes&Noble for 249 bucks, ever. Its a racket, and how they've avoided price fixing accusations is beyond me (tin foil hat? maybe, but screw those guys!)

Seriously though, this is one area where I'd be all for some government regulation. I'm sick to death of paying thousands of dollars every semester so I can sit in a class and listen to a bunch of fresh out of highschool kids opine about the leadership qualities of Lady Gaga. There needs to be accountability for the professors and the material being taught if they are going to be the benefactor of taxpayer dollars. I'm tired of having classes where it takes the professor 3 different attempts and 50 minutes to figure out how to get the right answer to a question from last week's homework.

There is a lot of fraud, waste, and abuse in higher education. Colleges are getting fat off the government's teat and steadily pushing prices higher and higher while the quality of their service seems to be getting worse and worse. Cut the fat and you could educate 2 people for the current cost of 1. Schools would comply because they know that federal student aid is a big part of their bread and butter.

/rant off