Biden administration announces partial student loan forgiveness

[laughing dog]

Woah.

That's what I've been sayin. The value of the degree should be influenced by the market. If the market needs 10 burger flippers the degree should be valued more then than when trying to get the same degree when the market has 15 burger flippers and the need is still 10. Like no shit dude!!! The demand is low so pay will reduce as workers compete for the position. Meanwhile, the folks that decide the cost of education don't care about all that, they just look at their own costs and for-profit margins. No wonder folks are struggling to pay off student loans. They'd (the schools) rather continue growth rather than let the market do its job.

And of course, the students who accept those loans are just as fucking out of their minds as the lenders and the schools are.

Both you and Fox are defining the "value" of a degree as its market value which ignores the value of the education in making the person a more knowledgable human being who is better able to to understand the world around them, make good decisions, and to better participate in civic life.

 

[Gospel]

Woah.

That's what I've been sayin. The value of the degree should be influenced by the market. If the market needs 10 burger flippers the degree should be valued more then than when trying to get the same degree when the market has 15 burger flippers and the need is still 10. Like no shit dude!!! The demand is low so pay will reduce as workers compete for the position. Meanwhile, the folks that decide the cost of education don't care about all that, they just look at their own costs and for-profit margins. No wonder folks are struggling to pay off student loans. They'd (the schools) rather continue growth rather than let the market do its job.

And of course, the students who accept those loans are just as fucking out of their minds as the lenders and the schools are.

Both you and Fox are defining the "value" of a degree as its market value which ignores the value of the education in making the person a more knowledgable human being who is better able to to understand the world around them, make good decisions, and to better participate in civic life.

I personally know some homeless and uneducated people who understand the world around them, make good decisions and are better participates in civic life than many well-educated people.

 

[Worldtraveller]

"I'm against making anything free because it can be abused" is the dumbest hot take argument against, well, just about everything.

EVERYTHING, free or not, can be abused. You would prevent (and I'll be generous here) 95% of people from getting any benefit at all because 5% of the people getting this benefit might not deserve it?

That "reasoning" could be used to elinimate pretty much every public service that exists.

 

[Politesse]

I think we should eliminate paid labor, you know how unscrupulous employees take advantage of it to cheat their bosses.

 

[laughing dog]

Woah.

That's what I've been sayin. The value of the degree should be influenced by the market. If the market needs 10 burger flippers the degree should be valued more then than when trying to get the same degree when the market has 15 burger flippers and the need is still 10. Like no shit dude!!! The demand is low so pay will reduce as workers compete for the position. Meanwhile, the folks that decide the cost of education don't care about all that, they just look at their own costs and for-profit margins. No wonder folks are struggling to pay off student loans. They'd (the schools) rather continue growth rather than let the market do its job.

And of course, the students who accept those loans are just as fucking out of their minds as the lenders and the schools are.

Both you and Fox are defining the "value" of a degree as its market value which ignores the value of the education in making the person a more knowledgable human being who is better able to to understand the world around them, make good decisions, and to better participate in civic life.

I personally know some homeless and uneducated people who understand the world around them, make good decisions and are better participates in civic life than many well-educated people.

Do you think if they were more educated that it would make them more knowledgable and improve their understanding of the world around them, make good decisions and be even better participants in civic life?

 

[Gospel]

Woah.

That's what I've been sayin. The value of the degree should be influenced by the market. If the market needs 10 burger flippers the degree should be valued more then than when trying to get the same degree when the market has 15 burger flippers and the need is still 10. Like no shit dude!!! The demand is low so pay will reduce as workers compete for the position. Meanwhile, the folks that decide the cost of education don't care about all that, they just look at their own costs and for-profit margins. No wonder folks are struggling to pay off student loans. They'd (the schools) rather continue growth rather than let the market do its job.

And of course, the students who accept those loans are just as fucking out of their minds as the lenders and the schools are.

Both you and Fox are defining the "value" of a degree as its market value which ignores the value of the education in making the person a more knowledgable human being who is better able to to understand the world around them, make good decisions, and to better participate in civic life.

I personally know some homeless and uneducated people who understand the world around them, make good decisions and are better participates in civic life than many well-educated people.

Do you think if they were more educated that it would make them more knowledgable and improve their understanding of the world around them, make good decisions and be even better participants in civic life?

I think they'd be doing exactly the same thing they are doing now. Which is helping the community while being the same wholesome people I've come to know them to be. Whether or not they'd be more or less helpful depends on many things but considering that there are plenty of well-educated assholes that are less civically productive & participate selfishly, I'm inclined to think you're giving schools too much credit.

 

[laughing dog]

Woah.

That's what I've been sayin. The value of the degree should be influenced by the market. If the market needs 10 burger flippers the degree should be valued more then than when trying to get the same degree when the market has 15 burger flippers and the need is still 10. Like no shit dude!!! The demand is low so pay will reduce as workers compete for the position. Meanwhile, the folks that decide the cost of education don't care about all that, they just look at their own costs and for-profit margins. No wonder folks are struggling to pay off student loans. They'd (the schools) rather continue growth rather than let the market do its job.

And of course, the students who accept those loans are just as fucking out of their minds as the lenders and the schools are.

Both you and Fox are defining the "value" of a degree as its market value which ignores the value of the education in making the person a more knowledgable human being who is better able to to understand the world around them, make good decisions, and to better participate in civic life.

I personally know some homeless and uneducated people who understand the world around them, make good decisions and are better participates in civic life than many well-educated people.

Do you think if they were more educated that it would make them more knowledgable and improve their understanding of the world around them, make good decisions and be even better participants in civic life?

I think they'd be doing exactly the same thing they are doing now. Which is helping the community while being the same wholesome people I've come to know them to be. Whether or not they'd be more or less helpful depends on many things but considering that there are plenty of well-educated assholes that are less civically productive & participate selfishly, I'm inclined to think you're giving schools too much credit.

The question you should be asking yourself is whether those well-educated assholes are less assholish than if they were not educated or more assholish?

I did not claim education made people good - I am claiming it improves them as a general rule. At least that is the goal of education.

 

[Gospel]

Woah.

That's what I've been sayin. The value of the degree should be influenced by the market. If the market needs 10 burger flippers the degree should be valued more then than when trying to get the same degree when the market has 15 burger flippers and the need is still 10. Like no shit dude!!! The demand is low so pay will reduce as workers compete for the position. Meanwhile, the folks that decide the cost of education don't care about all that, they just look at their own costs and for-profit margins. No wonder folks are struggling to pay off student loans. They'd (the schools) rather continue growth rather than let the market do its job.

And of course, the students who accept those loans are just as fucking out of their minds as the lenders and the schools are.

Both you and Fox are defining the "value" of a degree as its market value which ignores the value of the education in making the person a more knowledgable human being who is better able to to understand the world around them, make good decisions, and to better participate in civic life.

I personally know some homeless and uneducated people who understand the world around them, make good decisions and are better participates in civic life than many well-educated people.

Do you think if they were more educated that it would make them more knowledgable and improve their understanding of the world around them, make good decisions and be even better participants in civic life?

I think they'd be doing exactly the same thing they are doing now. Which is helping the community while being the same wholesome people I've come to know them to be. Whether or not they'd be more or less helpful depends on many things but considering that there are plenty of well-educated assholes that are less civically productive & participate selfishly, I'm inclined to think you're giving schools too much credit.

The question you should be asking yourself is whether those well-educated assholes are less assholish than if they were not educated or more assholish?

I did not claim education made people good - I am claiming it improves them as a general rule. At least that is the goal of education.

I hardly see the difference between the well-educated and the uneducated because It's not what you know, it's what you do with what you know. So yeah, I also don't claim that education makes people good or bad. Education has its advantages and disadvantages depending on who is being educated. It's a roll of the dice that the schools have no control over. What they do have control over is their pricing. I'm not saying that the markets should be the ONLY factor on their books I'm saying it should be added.

 

[Toni]

A couple of my kids obtained university degrees and opted, of their own free will, not to pursue careers directly related to their fields. Neither they, their father or I view that education or those degrees as a waste of money. The bulk of which came from parental pockets. Both are gainfully employed and self sufficient. For one, in particular, I think he’s perhaps making a mistake about his career path but he is a fully functioning, intelligent adult capable of making his own decisions and living with the consequences. He’s well aware that if he changed his career path a little, he could earn a lot more. I find it both frustrating and also admirable that he is choosing to follow his own path which is more to his liking rather than a path that would pay more but doesn’t interest him. I respect that he’s not motivated purely by money.

 

[Trausti]

What they do have control over is their pricing.

There’s no good reason for public universities to be unaffordable. The states can and should set a reasonable tuition rate for their schools. The public universities may have to get rid of some of the administrative fat they’ve put on in last few decades. Oh, well.

 

[bilby]

"I'm against making anything free because it can be abused" is the dumbest hot take argument against, well, just about everything.

EVERYTHING, free or not, can be abused. You would prevent (and I'll be generous here) 95% of people from getting any benefit at all because 5% of the people getting this benefit might not deserve it?

That "reasoning" could be used to elinimate pretty much every public service that exists.

What do you mean, "could be"? It is being used for exactly that purpose.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Either future taxes will be higher than they would be without it, or future government services would be lower than they would be without it.

You are making assumptions about what the rich did with their tax cuts. According to your ideology, the rich do not eat their seed corn. If they invested the tax cuts, it is possible that they will boost economic growth and tax revenues in the long-run lower than they would have been without it.

Personally, I don't think that is likely, but the point is you cannot say for certain you will be harmed.

I don't support that Laffer curve garbage. I'm just saying you're doing the same thing in the other direction.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"I'm against making anything free because it can be abused" is the dumbest hot take argument against, well, just about everything.

EVERYTHING, free or not, can be abused. You would prevent (and I'll be generous here) 95% of people from getting any benefit at all because 5% of the people getting this benefit might not deserve it?

That "reasoning" could be used to elinimate pretty much every public service that exists.

No.

Note that I was specifically objecting to free, not to affordable.

I do believe college should be made affordable. We have seriously cut back funding for post-secondary education and that's a bad thing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What they do have control over is their pricing.

There’s no good reason for public universities to be unaffordable. The states can and should set a reasonable tuition rate for their schools. The public universities may have to get rid of some of the administrative fat they’ve put on in last few decades. Oh, well.

You keep obsessing about the administrative fat--while ignoring that the primary driver of the increased tuition is reduced government funding.

 

[laughing dog]

Either future taxes will be higher than they would be without it, or future government services would be lower than they would be without it.

You are making assumptions about what the rich did with their tax cuts. According to your ideology, the rich do not eat their seed corn. If they invested the tax cuts, it is possible that they will boost economic growth and tax revenues in the long-run lower than they would have been without it.

Personally, I don't think that is likely, but the point is you cannot say for certain you will be harmed.

I don't support that Laffer curve garbage.

The Laffer curve was a short-run argument,not one based on economic growth.

I'm just saying you're doing the same thing in the other direction.

Saying it is an empirical question is not going in either direction.

 

[Trausti]

What they do have control over is their pricing.

There’s no good reason for public universities to be unaffordable. The states can and should set a reasonable tuition rate for their schools. The public universities may have to get rid of some of the administrative fat they’ve put on in last few decades. Oh, well.

You keep obsessing about the administrative fat--while ignoring that the primary driver of the increased tuition is reduced government funding.

You’ll have to forgive me noticing that university administration has double or so in the last couple decades and armies of diversocrats hired.

 

[Worldtraveller]

"I'm against making anything free because it can be abused" is the dumbest hot take argument against, well, just about everything.

EVERYTHING, free or not, can be abused. You would prevent (and I'll be generous here) 95% of people from getting any benefit at all because 5% of the people getting this benefit might not deserve it?

That "reasoning" could be used to elinimate pretty much every public service that exists.

No.

Note that I was specifically objecting to free, not to affordable.

I do believe college should be made affordable. We have seriously cut back funding for post-secondary education and that's a bad thing.

But if you make it affordable, some people will abuse it.

As usual, you completely missed the point (of your own post even).

 

[Toni]

"I'm against making anything free because it can be abused" is the dumbest hot take argument against, well, just about everything.

EVERYTHING, free or not, can be abused. You would prevent (and I'll be generous here) 95% of people from getting any benefit at all because 5% of the people getting this benefit might not deserve it?

That "reasoning" could be used to elinimate pretty much every public service that exists.

No.

Note that I was specifically objecting to free, not to affordable.

I do believe college should be made affordable. We have seriously cut back funding for post-secondary education and that's a bad thing.

But if you make it affordable, some people will abuse it.

As usual, you completely missed the point (of your own post even).

Some people will abuse anything, no matter the price. Some people will encounter unanticipated difficulties during their post secondary education that will derail their education/life, etc. This is not abuse but more under the category of shit happens.

Everything is subject to misuse and abuse by some.

We cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

 

[Worldtraveller]

The corallary to that, and the worst part of Loren's objection (that he consistently brings up, regardless of the actual topic, and with no evidence) is that these systems and programs and services are always abused in some way by some small portion of the populace.

Loren would just restrict it so that onlyy the rich could abuse them....

 

[Gospel]

The corallary to that, and the worst part of Loren's objection (that he consistently brings up, regardless of the actual topic, and with no evidence) is that these systems and programs and services are always abused in some way by some small portion of the populace.

Loren would just restrict it so that onlyy the rich could abuse them....

The bloated cost to students is the current system being abused. The school suffers no loss when a student fails or doesn't put the education to use for any reason. They've got their money from lenders (dusting hands-off) and lenders have to get their money from the student whether that lender is public or private. Colleges aren't in any shortage of students since the system is set up to feed them clients, annually. What a racket.