«

»

New higher education model in dire need, and for many good reasons (Updated)

With a kid that is graduating high school this year and going through this gauntlet, I can not stress how much I agree with the article titled our universities must stop charging so much, delivering so little and sending our kids into lifelong debt and the lessons it is imparting. Lets take a look here:

Universities charge too much, deliver too little and channel too many students into a lifetime of debt. Genuine reform requires market disciplines be brought to bear on those abuses.

Overall, college graduates in America still earn more and are less likely to be unemployed than their peers who never get a college degree. However, with so many recent graduates serving cappuccino and treading water in unpaid internships after graduation, a four-year diploma is not quite the solid investment it once was, and should not be so-often viewed as such a necessity by society.

Since 2007-08, the average pay for recent four-year graduates has fallen nearly 5 percent, while the average earning of a typical American worker, as tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is up 10 percent.

Graduates in high demand sectors can still earn good starting salaries and expect rising earnings as experience grows, but in many majors they increasingly face market conditions that have bedeviled skilled manufacturing workers for decades—there are simply too many folks chasing too few jobs.

Where to start. At the beginning I guess. College simply costs too much these days, and as the article points out, it delivers way too little in return. With the exception of a very few specialized degrees and fields of study, it is a horrible investment at the current costs, even if we are talking community or state schools. And the argument can be made that even for these fields that provide successful graduates with a much higher chance to make decent living and pay off their debt, the cost is still ridiculously high. Attending any degreed program at the elite schools? They are insane! Putting yourself into $125K of debt for a medical, engineering, business, or, to some extent a law degree, which is starting to lose its luster if you listen to the powers that be these days, makes some sense. But doing that for history, practically every “studies” degree, or something insane like French poetry of the 13th century that at best qualifies you to ask people at the drive through if they want fires with that or to upsize? You must be a masochist and crazy to boot.

I don’t even want to go too deep into how I believe, and based on the data and the people I have interacted with I think I am dead-on, that most degrees today amount to nothing more than years of lefty indoctrination and pretending lefty feelings and soft-core ideology masquerading as science, that basically cause more harm for the poor victims when they hit the real world outside the usual lefty bastions than it is worth. We have an army of fools that think just their degree, and in too many cases even those that couldn’t complete their college work at all, entitles them to a high paying job and a fast track to the top. After all, they know the right lingo and want to change the world! They have been told that they are special so often, for accomplishing nothing but the basics, that they have no clue what special really means. And racking up all that debt that amounts to something like a mortgage for a degree that leaves them ill prepared for the real world? They all believe that will soon be rolling in the dough as promised. Fucking idiots the lot of them. Who cares about how much debt they rack up? They certainly don’t seem to worry about it. At least until it is too late. And then they want government to bail them out for being idiots. Reality, lucky for those of us that have to function outside the ivory towers, has a quick way of correcting that bias, or at least of punishing it harshly, though. Some make it, but these are rather the exception than the rule, and that lesson needs to be hammered home. A degree for a degree’s sake, isn’t worth spit.

I think the biggest lies told to kids today are the one about how college will guarantee them a better future and/or how they should pursue whatever their dream is, regardless of cost and consequences. The truth is that certain fields of study and certain colleges do pay off. But those tend to be the fields where you seriously need to bust your ass to succeed. All nighters to produce papers about the evil of patriarchy or how America is evil because of whatever idiotic rationale, may score you big points and high grades with the marxist pretending to be teaching you something of value and feel like work, but you are just kidding yourself. And getting into the top colleges is also not something you do unless you are at the top of your game, or already come from legacy that can get you in over others (some more qualified, and others just entitled). And we do our kids a disservice when we, in order to avoid hurting their self esteem, refrain from telling our kids that not everyone can pull this off. Try as they might, the reality is that people have different skill sets and motivation levels, and no study program anywhere can make a slow and lazy SOB succeed at mastering the skills needed to work in some of the more complex disciplines. Just like we do them a disservice when we tell them to follow their dreams without pointing out that what they dream of doing isn’t going to leave them prepared to join the real world and find a decent paying job. Doubly so when they rack up insane debt getting there. They will pay for the rest of their lives for those dreams. A well rounded education could provide value, but these days the challenge is to actually find a well rounded education instead of what passes for that but is primarily a dysfunctional leftist propaganda mill.

I had a long chat with my kid. We discussed college, his capabilities and limitations, the cost, and most important of all, making sure he got a skill set that would allow him to make a decent living without hocking his future to do so. The first thing he was concerned about, probably because he was well aware of my career in IT and the stories of so many people that suffered as jobs where outsourced or done away with, was viability of the job he would do. He also wanted to avoid debt of any kind, as much as possible. We put a plan together, and then a back up plan for if that falls through. I helped him do that with an eye on making sure he ends up being productive and able to work and make a decent living while targeting his strength in such a way that it would result in a valuable skill set. I wonder how many parents actually have the tough talk and make sure their kids knows that they are not interested in making college a 4, or more, year party for their kids, primarily because they would then be doing said kids a huge disservice. Most of them are likely as ill informed as their kids about the cost-return ratio.

Colleges are now glut with “free money” that is far from being free, giving loans to people that should have never gotten them – just like they did during the big socio-engineered housing market debacle – and returning in all but a few specialized cases far too little for the insane costs. This model can, and should, simply not survive. And this brings us back to the gist of the article:

Well run institutions—which seriously evaluate and become transparent about the prospects for a decent enough paying job after majoring in art history vs. mechanical engineering—would have little problem getting private underwriters to help them finance such ventures.

Schools that take students money and deliver too little for it, would then go the way of Circuit City and the St. Louis Browns, and stop blighting the futures of young people.

Online education, baby! Interactive classes that do more than spout bullshit leftist concepts, cost less than $10K for a degree that is less liberal propaganda, fluff, and a lot more about inculcating a skill set that employers would actually find value in and want. And a system that is reality based and no longer sells the young a huge lie so liberals can funnel more sheep through the indoctrination machine. That’s what we need. Some degrees will unavoidably require colleges maintain the models we have today, but the ones that are disproportionately populated by and intended to be liberal propaganda machines are going to all take a hit. Or at least they should. And everyone should be thought basic economics, the constitution – the real stuff those dead white slave owners they now are thought to despise by the leftards and how it made this nation great – and that you need to actually do the work before you get the rewards. You are not entitled just for showing up. This is not little league, where everyone gets a trophy just for showing.

The quicker the current college model implodes and gets replaced with something that adds more value and costs a lot, lot less, the better it will be for our kids. Not to mention that it will do away with the indoctrination machine that has done so many people a huge disservice for the last 30 years. The left won’t let that happen without a fight though. They don’t really much care if these useful idiots get jobs or not, are not straddled with insane, life crushing, and binding debt, as much as they care that these institutions crank out more drones for the movement.

UPDATE: Looks like other people are also getting wise that the current system < a href="http://news.yahoo.com/moodys-now-negative-outlook-u-universities-153241853.html" target="_new">is not ging to get better the way it exists today.

32 comments

No ping yet

  1. Seattle Outcast says:

    I’ve found that engineering and/professional certification to be far better paths than the current, hideously outdated “liberal arts trains you to think” approach. Oddly enough, your average proponent of liberal arts as a universal balm is unable to use rational approaches to problems as they consider “feelings” to be as important as actual data.

    I’d guess that college, as it currently exists, is wasted on 90% of recent high school grads. Most people would benefit from putting it off for a few years and wait until they start thinking and behaving like adults instead on large teenagers.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

      
  2. Dave D says:

    Not sure how your states do things, but here in Michigan, over 75% of the college debt falls on the parents. Kids can only borrow about $5K/year throught the federal gov, then can either borrow (with cosigner) at near-credit card rates or have mom and dad get Plus loans to pay the rest. It’s a ridiculous sham and has wrecked my retirment planning. My third is coming up on college next year and we are desperately trying to get her some volleyball money at a D2 or more academic money at a D3 school to try to help, but I can tell you I have little hope of reiring before ~75 if I have to pay full price for her education too.

    This parent debt is not dischargable and currently running at about 8% interest. A TOTALLY fucking ridiculous situation brought on my the irresponsibly high cost of tuition (rising at over triple the rate of inflation and starting salaries since 1982) and the hyper-availability of government loans/grants/etc. They apparently will STILL lend me money for my 3rd childs college, even thought I can barely afford to pay what I already owe back now.

    My MAJOR problem right now is that my term life insurance is about to end and I am nearly uninsurable now (diabetes and high BP), so I will have to pay TONS for a policy to cover this debt so my wife is not wiped out if I die. I have to believe that LOTS of middle class parents are in the same boat as me if their kids are going to the same schools.

    When I went to school (’82, MSU), I paid for all of it from loans and my mother wasn’t unduly burdened with having to give up her retirement to put me through college. Never thought I’d have to do this, as I wasn’t really paying attention from the time of my graduation to when my son went to college in 2006. A real shock!

    You might also criticize my allowing my kids to go to expensive schools, and not community college and night school, but I have always valued education (I went to college for 10 years!) and really value getting them off to a good start in the right environment. I know, …….stupid!

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  3. Hal_10000 says:

    The thing is that university hiring for actual teaching faculty has been flat. There has been amazing administrative bloat with six figure salaries for various deans, associate deans, vice-deans, etc. The problem is there is no pressure to cut any of that.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

      
  4. Argive says:

    The thing is that university hiring for actual teaching faculty has been flat. There has been amazing administrative bloat with six figure salaries for various deans, associate deans, vice-deans, etc. The problem is there is no pressure to cut any of that.

    THIS.

    Since the 1990s or so, the salaries for administrators have gone through the roof (for reasons that escape me), while schools focus on cutting full time professorial positions (tenure-track or not) as much as possible in favor of adjunct professors. Adjuncts typically get paid very little, have no benefits, and their workloads are often very high. Graduate students share much of the burden as well.

    Lots of schools have also started going on building sprees: new dorms, new gyms, new everything. Often the schools do this whether or not they actually need the buildings, since what they’re really trying to do is attract new students. Interestingly, schools can be quite honest about that:

    Diehl: This is a marketing tool. We were behind the boat a little bit. James Madison had already built the facility, UVA had built the facility — all the schools that we were competing against.

    They’re treating students like customers. The problem here is that 18 year olds generally aren’t well-informed decision makers.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      
  5. ilovecress says:

    Obviously my experience is with the UK system – but I think there are some similarities – even if the problems aren’t as large in scale as the US system.

    Obviously as a Liberal Arts grad, I disagree with SO (and probably all of you) on the value of the degree. But one thing that I do think is that as they aren’t empirical, then they are really hard to assess, and as such not too hard to pass. You can tell a bad engineer from a good engineer as the skills are inherently applied in the assessments. With a liberal arts degree, you only really find out how good someone is at applying those skills a few years later once they’ve applied them in the market.

    In the UK, the ‘knowledge economy’ is the fastest growing market in the country. Employers are crying out for people who are ‘trained to think’. The problem is they also need people who know how to apply that thinking – and that’s not something that is often taught – or reflected in the grade. A 3 year degree in English Literature or French History is actually just the first part – it’s like doing the theory before the practical. The application part should come next. It’s the way law degrees are structured, and I think that reality needs to be made clear to kids looking to go down the liberal arts route.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6

      
  6. salinger says:

    Since the 1990s or so, the salaries for administrators have gone through the roof (for reasons that escape me), while schools focus on cutting full time professorial positions

    I wonder how much this parallels the increase in executive pay vs workers in the private sector? (I’d also be interested in citations for this assertion)

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

      
  7. AlexInCT says:

    The thing is that university hiring for actual teaching faculty has been flat. There has been amazing administrative bloat with six figure salaries for various deans, associate deans, vice-deans, etc. The problem is there is no pressure to cut any of that.

    This sounds too much like…..

    STAY WITH ME…

    G-O-V-E-R-M-E-N-T!

    Massive bloat of non productive people, while those that actually do shit, there are a few or the whole thing would implode, are the first to be hammered, laid off, or disposed off.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

      
  8. Seattle Outcast says:

    Not sure how your states do things, but here in Michigan, over 75% of the college debt falls on the parents.

    Certainly a sign of living in the 19th century, when the only people that went to college were the offspring of the wealthy and about 6% of the population attended college at all. Why parents are held responsible for the educational pursuits of their adult children in the 21st century is a complete fucking mystery. What’s more, how do they intend to collect if the parents just say “not gonna happen, go find someone else to soak for cash” – file a lawsuit?

    One of my coworkers took out a second mortgage to pay for his kid’s college – while he managed to pay it off, the kids don’t seem very interested in taking care of him in his retirement, and he’s broke and two years away from collecting social security. People will be a lot more interested in making sure that their education is worth the cash it costs if it comes out of their own pocket – spending other peoples’ money certainly doesn’t lead to wise investing decisions.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

      
  9. Seattle Outcast says:

    When it comes to being “trained to think”, I’ve never met anyone with a degree in the liberal arts that can “think” nearly was well as they tell people they can. Nor can they actually define what it means to be “trained to think”, and why their degree in theater arts, french poetry, or 8th century sculpture would make them better at “thinking” than someone who majored in physics, engineering, or writing software.

    And where on earth did they come up with the idiotic phrase “trained to think”, and why do they still keep using it?

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

      
  10. AlexInCT says:

    People will be a lot more interested in making sure that their education is worth the cash it costs if it comes out of their own pocket – spending other peoples’ money certainly doesn’t lead to wise investing decisions.

    Seems to be the overriding problem in modern Western states and what is dragging us all into oblivion. So many people seem convinced they are noble and good because they believe in using government to coercively take from producers to do whatever “good things” give them the warm & fuzzies. There are days where I wonder if I am not just stupid for staying the course and being responsible when everyone around me seems hell bent on not doing any of that and then they still get rewarded for this behavior.

    When it comes to being “trained to think”, I’ve never met anyone with a degree in the liberal arts that can “think” nearly was well as they tell people they can.

    I will second that, but boy do they believe they are fucking locical geniuses despite the evidence to the contrary.

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

      
  11. Dave D says:

    Sally:

    The private sector is MEAN and LEAN. Not too many adminstrators and very different from academia. You class warfare morons just can’t let it go, can you? Executive salaries are a drop in the bucket of corporate costs…… My benefits cost about double my salary. Mostly due to high health care, retirement, and insurance costs my comapany needs to take out to employ me (a middle-level researcher). That collectively DWARFS our CEO and upper level salaries.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

      
  12. salinger says:

    Little Davey,

    If you believe the private sector is lean and mean – I have a bridge to sell you. The insane inflation of wages at the top end EVERYWHERE over the last couple decades is what is sinking this country. The concentration of wealth into fewer and fewer hands allows this elite cabal to make the rules which surprisingly – benefit them. Academia, Wall Street, golden parachutes for people who run corporations into the ground, slaps on the wrists if anything at all for corrupt bankers, regulators and the regulated in a no lose game of musical chairs.

    I do find it interesting though, when a derivatives manipulator makes millions while producing nothing but a complicated algorithm (if even that) the free marketeers cry that exorbitant salaries are needed to attract the best and brightest; but if someone in academia also makes an exorbitant salary – well that’s robbery.

    I contend that both are equally out of line.

    Hot! Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8

      
  13. Argive says:

    Salinger: Check out How The University Works by Mark Bousquet. Chapter 1, specifically.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  14. salinger says:

    Check out How The University Works by Mark Bousquet

    You’re preaching to the choir. I rag on MFA programs being nothing but a Ponzi Scheme every time one invites me in to teach. I recommend to the students they take some “real world” classes before they graduate and let them know what they are in for if they want to take their degree and teach.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

      
  15. Hal_10000 says:

    When it comes to being “trained to think”, I’ve never met anyone with a degree in the liberal arts that can “think” nearly was well as they tell people they can.

    In my personal experience, there is actually something to this. In astronomy, I’ve seen a very sharp difference between people coming from a liberal arts background and people coming from a pure science background. The liberal arts types tend to be MUCH better at communicating. Writing papers, giving talks, doing outreach to the public. I knew one student from a very good university who was awesome at physics but was almost illiterate when it came to writing proposals and papers.

    Also important because many people will not go on to have a career in their majors. So a broad education does help. It doesn’t help if you’re an idiot anyway but it does help if you’re smart.

    Alex, I was going to post this but I think it’s good for the discussion here. Turns out — haha! — that new Obamacare are going to hurt adjuncts and cut their hours. These are the guys who teach at community colleges and stuff (I was one) for a pittance to build their credentials. So the pay scale is going to be EVEN MORE skewed toward pencil pushers and away from teaching profs.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

      
  16. Dave D says:

    Unhhhhh I WORK in the private sector for a fortune 100 chemical company. I know EXACTLY what our CEO’s and VPs make. They live/eat/breathe their jobs and it costs lots of them their health and relationships. But keep pushing that class warfare shit. Keep your eyes on that little ball the collectivists want you to see while they enslave the rest of us working folk and then claim to fight for your pitance left after taxes. The revolution is not that far away…….. Too funny!

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

      
  17. salinger says:

    Oh, I get it. Every single private sector business just happens to be run exactly like the one you are employed by. My mistake, how could I have been so narrow minded?

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

      
  18. salinger says:

    Argive - this blog has some interesting points and links to some other decent articles.

    My whole career is based on practical purposes for creative writing. I worked in manufacturing as an engineer then manager for 23 years before my avocation took off enough that I was able to quit my day job. I do believe that time spent “in the real world” is a major reason for my current success and I try to impart this on the kids I work with now.

    In my opinion liberal arts terminal degrees are (for the most part) a colossal scam. But – I think the business world as a whole is also a colossal scam.

    There are two sets of rules – one for the elites and one for the grunts and too many of the grunts refuse to see or admit this because they have the pipe-dream of some magic day becoming part of the elite and enjoying the spoils of a stacked system. This holds true in the private sector as well as in the arts.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

      
  19. AlexInCT says:

    Alex, I was going to post this but I think it’s good for the discussion here. Turns out — haha! — that new Obamacare are going to hurt adjuncts and cut their hours

    .

    Unfortunately I find very little to laugh about this Hal. This phenomenon is going to be wide spread and will disproportionately impact people that where already on the margin and struggling to make ends meet the hardest.

    The side effect of socio-engineering bullshit intended to force companies – because to the left these things are just entities instead of a group of people that have a financial interest in something – to give free shit that isn’t close to being free, is that the people that do the bean counting in these “companies” will see the light, which in this case means that going down the free healthcare path is going to result in bankruptcy, then decide to do whatever it takes to avoid the catastrophic consequences of the “free shit” socio-engineering assholes. Where ever they can, they will reduce the number of people they will need to give the free shit to.

    But have no fear. This is not truly an unintended consequence. It is a one of the many such “features” the Marxists built into the damned thing from the start. The more pain this stuff causes to the system and the people, the closer they come to convincing people that the single payer system that allows government to control everything health care related, but especially access to care for people, which in turn means they get to control people, is a good solution when it is not. They have spent the last 3 or so decades piling on regulations and meddling with the private healthcare system, with the sole intention of driving the thing into the ground, while pretending that what they want is to fix it or help. The end goal was always to overload and destroy it so people were left with no other choice but what they wanted to do from the start but could never convince people to go along with while the system worked.

    This strategy seems to be playing itself out all over the place. They are doing more of the same to the economy. Once the thing is so destroyed that there is no alternative, the serfs will accept whatever totalitarian system that their masters can convince them will guarantee that practically everyone else will be right there suffering with them. Misery loves company, and the one thing these collectivists can always deliver on is misery and death.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

      
  20. AlexInCT says:

    Oh, I get it. Every single private sector business just happens to be run exactly like the one you are employed by. My mistake, how could I have been so narrow minded?

    Actually Sally, the ones that are not seem always to be the huge multinational conglomerates that have their top guys in bed with government, and in particular, democrats in government. GE, BoA, Citigroup, GM, and AGI, just to name a few, all have massively overpaid top level execs, abuse their employees, overpay their senior management, and in general would long ago have gone belly up if they where not in bed with these politicians that cover for them. I should have added Freddie and Fannie Mae too, which pretend to be private but are really government entities, but I didn’t want to add distractions. The quickest way to address the disparity in pay in the private sector would be to get government out of bed with the biggest offenders.

    Anyway, if you want to see inefficiency and waste, with top heavy scumbags fucking over the people they work for, at its best, look at government. It’s not just what these people get paid or their benefits, and while the massive amount of tax payer money getting flushed down the toilet is something to cringe about, the power these scumbags wield and the perks they get from that power, are the biggest issue. They make what you seem to be so pissed off about at private corporations, even the big conglomerates, look like a kids play. And yet, people like you who believe government is the answer to all problems will defend that abuse while going bonkers over much less in the private sector because of your brainwashed leftard beliefs/indoctrination, and not even be bothered by it.

    There are two sets of rules – one for the elites and one for the grunts and too many of the grunts refuse to see or admit this because they have the pipe-dream of some magic day becoming part of the elite and enjoying the spoils of a stacked system.

    In my experience the elites are always the ones in government, or the people in bed with government. The problem is always government in either case. But people like you remain blind to that one glaring fact.

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

      
  21. salinger says:

    But people like you remain blind to that one glaring fact.

    You know – there is a lot in what you just wrote that I have already agreed with – but you are just such a fucking dick you can’t even see it. The problem with “people like you” is that you say and think in terms of “people like you.”

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

      
  22. Dave D says:

    Your class warfare mantra trumps any agreement , imo. Stupid/lazy/simply not true.

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4

      
  23. salinger says:

    Your class warfare mantra trumps any agreement , imo. Stupid/lazy/simply not true.

    So it is class warfare to think the fact that financial regulators routinely switch from executive positions in financial institutions to their roles as the people who make the rules for those institutions with impunity is wrong? You think this is a good thing? How?

    It’s class warfare to suggest that the current University System is a Ponzi Scheme? You think that there should be high paid administrators and then a serf system of grad students teaching? Why?

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3

      
  24. AlexInCT says:

    So it is class warfare to think the fact that financial regulators routinely switch from executive positions in financial institutions to their roles as the people who make the rules for those institutions with impunity is wrong?

    Lets get one thing clear, the people that make the rules are the politicians. Contrary to your class warrior talking points, businesses react to the rules the politicians impose. When those rules are absolutely stupid and destructive, which they practically always tend to be, no matter how well sold the scam government concocted is to ell it to the class warrior’s fan base, people that have to live with the shit sandwich are going to find a way to feed it to the dog, so they can get away from the table. That is something you socio-engineering class warrirors either refuse or pretend to not understand. Nobody is going to willingly grab their ankles so the elites, which contrary to the left’s stupid narrative are always the god damned politicians and their small circle of friends, can get more power and wealth.

    It is not an accident that while millionairs account for less than 1% of the population that their representation in government always tends upwards of 50%, with some of the wealthiest people in the country being donkey politicians. Look it up.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

      
  25. ilovecress says:

    “… the elites, which contrary to the left’s stupid narrative are always the god damned politicians and their small circle of friends, can get more power and wealth.”

    Haven’t you just succinctly articulated the ‘left’s stupid narrative’ right there?

    Although I guess the point we’d disagree on is that whether or not the people who ‘make’ the rules are politicians or not. Or rather the motivation behind the ‘scam’ as you put it. If a politicians desire is to increase money and power – what drives their decisions? – I would contend it would be catering to those who can help them increase their money and power. And that would be corporations, richer people and media.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

      
  26. AlexInCT says:

    Although I guess the point we’d disagree on is that whether or not the people who ‘make’ the rules are politicians or not. Or rather the motivation behind the ‘scam’ as you put it. If a politicians desire is to increase money and power – what drives their decisions? – I would contend it would be catering to those who can help them increase their money and power.

    Actually ilovecress, they do not have to cater at all: all they need is to make it impossible for these big corps to survive without seeking protection and favoritism from government through them. That’s why the dems can both demonize Wall Street and take oodles and oodles of money from them. They know that even if Wall Street despises them and their talk, Wall Street needs them and the favors only they can hand out. The system is so rigged that if you are a big and slow monster protecting your interests, the best way to do so is by buying politicians to write laws that protect your interests/monompolies. These opportunist politicians got it made. Heads they win, tails you lose.

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

      
  27. ilovecress says:

    Alex, I think we’re saying exactly the same thing – except you’re using ‘impossible to survive’ and I’m using ‘make a crap tonne of money’. Either way, both parties scratch each others back for mutual gain.

    By the way, I don’t think this is an American thing, it’s the same in the UK and even little old NZ.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

      
  28. AlexInCT says:

    Alex, I think we’re saying exactly the same thing – except you’re using ‘impossible to survive’ and I’m using ‘make a crap tonne of money’. Either way, both parties scratch each others back for mutual gain.

    Cress, I agree we are saying the same thing. My point however is that contrary to the believe that the rich fat cats have the upper hand, something that might have been true 50 years ago, the people with all the cards, especially these days, are the politicians. In fact, the only way to put any kind of dent into this broken system is for us to deprive the politician of the ability and power to keep this scam going. We can rail and rant against the evil rich all we want, but they are the junior players, and the politicians are all laughing all the way to the bank while we are distracted and wasting our time.

    By the way, I don’t think this is an American thing, it’s the same in the UK and even little old NZ.

    I know. And I hate it. It’s crony capitalism, which for all intents and purposes is what fascism was all about. The state doesn’t directly control the means of production, but they have total and ultimate power because they control the very laws and viability of any and all commercial entities. This disgusting affair between government and the te corporate world stands in the way of people really being able to pursue prosperity without being part of the rigged and corrupt game. But if you want to bring it down you focus on the politicians. Contrary to the narrative they hold all the power.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      
  29. Miguelito says:

    The timing of this article seems quite fortuitous. But an avg $3k/month? That’s awfully steep.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  30. CM says:

    By the way, I don’t think this is an American thing, it’s the same in the UK and even little old NZ.

    Nonsense, we’re perfect. ;-)

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  31. Miguelito says:

    They’re treating students like customers. The problem here is that 18 year olds generally aren’t well-informed decision makers.

    Hence the stupid deals with credit card companies that cut the college some money too. Even when I was still in school you’d see the things trying to sign up people all over the place, and that was 15+ years ago (and I took extra years wasting some time in college). Now they’re often tied into the student’s pre-paid accounts making it easy for them to slide into credit usage.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  32. dbaggins says:

    Speaking as a recent grad who’s been working for the past 2 years it’s pretty scary to see what some of my peers have paid for school. I went to a Canadian university in my own province with a fair bit of scholarship money and my total net out of pocket was just 10k which meant that I was able to graduate with no student debt. I was fairly fortunate and was able to land a junior gig in financial services which has put me on a good track going forward, both in terms of saving money and garnering the experiences that I’d need to proceed in my field. When looking at my peers which consist of a large number of Ivy leaguers I’m pretty happy about the fact that I don’t have six figures of student debt to worry about. Although I wish I could have gone to a good state school I knew financially it was going to be a real stretch as up until my 3rd year of high school, my parents were making around 20k a year which was barely enough for us to get by on, let alone pay for school (and to be perfectly honest, I couldn’t have asked them for anymore than that as these were people that sacrificed good jobs in China to come over and restart their lives for my sake, something I’ll always be grateful for). The experiences and people I’ve met at my Canadian school have also be really formative to my own development and I doubt I’d have anything close to half the maturity and humility that I’d have today if not for them, so in a way, I’m pretty thankful especially considering that the best asset that I’ve built for my self over the years was learning to think constructively and analytically as opposed to earning a degree. In my experiences on the job thus far, having the latter is not an indication that you have the former by any stretch of the imagination.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      

Comments have been disabled.