Political Discussion

[Hemotep]

This week at work, we had a 1 hour team meeting turn into a debate about student loan forgiveness. This meeting is supposed to be show and tell on things we are working on and talking about new tech, but we didn't have much to talk about after the long memorial day.

The meeting started off with people asking each other what we did over the weekend and one of my co-workers mentioned he spent the entire weekend applying for Biden's one time adjustment to student loans that will provide forgiveness for people who now owe more than what they originally borrowed by wiping out interest that has been tacked on over the years.

Another of my co-workers, who is a tail end Gen X responded by saying he's against any kind of student loan forgiveness and it set the state to debate back and forth with him the entire hour.

His main gripes against any type of student loan forgiveness was the fairness of it. He kept saying over and over that he and his wife busted their asses off to pay off student loans early. There is no forgiveness for them, and it's not right to give it to others who took out loans for more than they could afford to pay back to likely get a useless degree such as phycology or art history.

Me and my other coworker tried to sum up what lead the the student loan crisis, and how it's a policy issue, not a matter of personal responsibility. How are generation was expected to go to college and for many of us, it wasn't an option, and that many of the people who got those useless degrees came from affluent families and don't have student loan debt. He didn't seem to believe this and kept looping back to it in his talking points.

But, to this co-worker, it's very black and white, and always a matter of personal responsibility. The only policy issue is that we approve loans for more than what people can afford to pay back and that we should denny people from being able to get said loans. But it's still a matter of personal responsibility, these people who took out the loans should have known what they were getting into and have the common sense not to if they have no plan or path to pay back their loans. All are examples of people owing more today, such as the one John Oliver gave about the women who took at a loan for 80k, paid on it for 10 years paying 176k to date towards it and still owes 76k were dismissed with she should never have taken out that loan.

As for the current adjustments the Biden administration is making, they are not right or fair because the terms of the loan should not be adjusted after you take them out. That's not right. If the loan was taking out with the terms that interest could be forgiven at the beginning then that's okay, but they should never change the terms of your loan after you take it out.


For a little background information on this coworker, he's left leaning, he's not a conservative in any means. A believe either his parents or grandparents immigrated from Armenia.

Mention to him that even those of us who are doctors can't find jobs that pay enough to cover our student loans. When you've reached that level then it absolutely is a policy issue and we need a reckoning with how poorly so many research scientist and teaching positions are paid. I made about double what I make now when I worked in the tech industry despite now having two more advanced degrees and arguably doing something way more valuable for society.

And honestly, I think it's way worse for those with most bachelor's than it is for those like me. I got lucky with my job out of college because I was in the right place at the right time and played my cards right. But my friends were not so lucky and most of my students today aren't either. A shit ton of jobs that require a degree start pay at $15 or less in most states. No one can afford to live on that or pay off student loan debt. We can't even think of saving for a down payment on a house. The economy is so lopsided that it's almost impossible for anyone who doesn't have financial help from their parents to use education as a stepping stone for class mobility or even class stability. We're solidly in a place where young people are statistically more likely to be worse off financially than previous generations. And by young that really means those who are 40 and younger.

 

[RenegadeMonster]

Mention to him that even those of us who are doctors can't find jobs that pay enough to cover our student loans. When you've reached that level then it absolutely is a policy issue and we need a reckoning with how poorly so many research scientist and teaching positions are paid. I made about double what I make now when I worked in the tech industry despite now having two more advanced degrees and arguably doing something way more valuable for society.

Examples like this did come up in our debate. His response was pretty much if you can't afford to pay back the loans you take out you shouldn't take out those loans. Take a different career path, learn a trade.

 

[Hemotep]

Examples like this did come up in our debate. His response was pretty much if you can't afford to pay back the loans you take out you shouldn't take out those loans. Take a different career path, learn a trade.

I did learn a trade, lol. And I get it, you'll never convince someone like him with evidence. But for everyone who says that, do they not realize that it costs money to learn a trade too? And there is a limit on the number of plumbers, mechanics, electricians, etc. that society can absorb and pay. And likewise, plenty of those folks also struggle to pay their bills. The myth of the "physical labor" trade route to success is just that, a myth for most.

 

[RenegadeMonster]

For me

I did learn a trade, lol. And I get it, you'll never convince someone like him with evidence. But for everyone who says that, do they not realize that it costs money to learn a trade too? And there is a limit on the number of plumbers, mechanics, electricians, etc. that society can absorb and pay. And likewise, plenty of those folks also struggle to pay their bills. The myth of the "physical labor" trade route to success is just that, a myth for most.

I wouldn't say it's a myth right now, at least in this are there is a shortage of people who know those trades. Getting a job is easy, pay is often better than people who have bachelors degrees and best of all, you don't have student loan debt. You are not paying of debt for years, and can start accumulating wealth earlier. Chances are you likely also are in a union and have great benefits.

Learning a trade is much much cheaper than a college degree. The only time it costs you money is if you do it later in life. We have trade high schools that you go to from 9th grade through 12th grade, where half your day is learning your chosen trade. They are public schools. Graduates are recruited and companies often pay for their licenses and provide additional training for free.


I want to say, other than the experience learned from going to college, and looking good on paper, my bachelor's degree has been useless.

It's really only help me at the resume level, especially when companies throw on the degree requirement for a job posting. But said jobs never have required any skills I learned associated with my degree, nor paid me more for having a degree. I have always been paid less than those who do manual labor and now that I'm 38 and been at this long enough, starting to get a good salary and getting close to making 100k. But said good salary is still not enough. Because based the cost of living in this area, you need to make 100k or more to be living within your means. I'm still living paycheck to paycheck.

I also only got to the level where I'm at because people have left over the years. I have had conversations with HR about promotions over the year, and it was basically it's not in the numbers to have more senior level people. Either I had to wait for us to land work that requires one, or for someone to leave and that a promotion would not happen because I was ready or been with the company for years.

 

[RenegadeMonster]

Also, another example.

Entry level for what I do at my company has 40k salary.

My causing right out of high school got a union construction job. He's 8 years younger than me and started right off the bat making 110k being a laborer and have union benefits. Great retirement plan, healthcare completely paid for. No co-pays or deductibles.

He, I have a high deductible and healthcare is a little over $200 each month out of my paychecks.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Universities are designed to make money first and provide education second. The cost of everything is astronomical and is driven by student loans. If the loans were not so easily available, the universities would not be able to raise prices to match. Making a non-related - useless - 4 year degree a job requirement makes the problem worse as you have competition driving prices as well. The easy money has helped drive prices higher. The loan forgiveness program - if a borrow can qualify - eases some debt management and places a bet that benefiters will vote appropriately in return. You can draw a parallel to the start of Medicare and other insurance companies covering whatever Medicare covered. Once folks had coverage, they used it and hospitals ordered tests - just because the insurance covered it - whether needed or not.

 

[Hemotep]

For me


I wouldn't say it's a myth right now, at least in this are there is a shortage of people who know those trades. Getting a job is easy, pay is often better than people who have bachelors degrees and best of all, you don't have student loan debt. You are not paying of debt for years, and can start accumulating wealth earlier. Chances are you likely also are in a union and have great benefits.

Learning a trade is much much cheaper than a college degree. The only time it costs you money is if you do it later in life. We have trade high schools that you go to from 9th grade through 12th grade, where half your day is learning your chosen trade. They are public schools. Graduates are recruited and companies often pay for their licenses and provide additional training for free.


I want to say, other than the experience learned from going to college, and looking good on paper, my bachelor's degree has been useless.

It's really only help me at the resume level, especially when companies throw on the degree requirement for a job posting. But said jobs never have required any skills I learned associated with my degree, nor paid me more for having a degree. I have always been paid less than those who do manual labor and now that I'm 38 and been at this long enough, starting to get a good salary and getting close to making 100k. But said good salary is still not enough. Because based the cost of living in this area, you need to make 100k or more to be living within your means. I'm still living paycheck to paycheck.

I'm not denying that there are some routes that work out, but very few starting off in those fields make great money. I'm looking at national data on it, so I know there are places where it is different. But I also have students coming to college later in life after doing those jobs because their bodies are wrecked from the work. Insurance and medical costs can be sky high for contractors even with high annual earnings.

And your degree was what landed you where you are. Degrees aren't meant to teach job skills, they teach life skills. They teach people how to think and write and act professional. They're about expanding one's mind so that they can work in a way that doesn't require constant supervision. Yes many can do that without a degree and many jobs that require a degree shouldn't, but getting one shows a level of commitment and responsibility to employers. This is why I tell my students that in 90% of cases it doesn't matter what you major in. Do what you enjoy in school, because it's just having a degree that matters more often than not.

Nearly every lawyer I know has told me that law school didn't train them how to do anything they do as lawyers. They learned that on the job, but they never could get that job without a JD and passing the bar. Most programs don't train you how to pass the bar either. Students get out of their degree and education what they put into it.

Our society and education policies are fucked, but less education and more people not learning how to read and write at a fluent level is not the answer to a better society. That's how you get more propagandized and easily manipulated people.

 

[RenegadeMonster]

Universities are designed to make money first and provide education second. The cost of everything is astronomical and is driven by student loans. If the loans were not so easily available, the universities would not be able to raise prices to match. Making a non-related - useless - 4 year degree a job requirement makes the problem worse as you have competition driving prices as well. The easy money has helped drive prices higher. The loan forgiveness program - if a borrow can qualify - eases some debt management and places a bet that benefiters will vote appropriately in return. You can draw a parallel to the start of Medicare and other insurance companies covering whatever Medicare covered. Once folks had coverage, they used it and hospitals ordered tests - just because the insurance covered it - whether needed or not.

Also, because money was so freely available through student loans, states cut their education budgets to balance their books.

In 1990 states covered 70% of the cost of tuition at in state schools, students were only responsible for 30%. Today it's a 80/20 split where 80% is the students responsibility.

They passed the expense to their kids to balance their state budgets today. Or rather, over the last 3 decades.

 

[Hemotep]

Universities are designed to make money first and provide education second. The cost of everything is astronomical and is driven by student loans. If the loans were not so easily available, the universities would not be able to raise prices to match. Making a non-related - useless - 4 year degree a job requirement makes the problem worse as you have competition driving prices as well. The easy money has helped drive prices higher. The loan forgiveness program - if a borrow can qualify - eases some debt management and places a bet that benefiters will vote appropriately in return. You can draw a parallel to the start of Medicare and other insurance companies covering whatever Medicare covered. Once folks had coverage, they used it and hospitals ordered tests - just because the insurance covered it - whether needed or not.

Unfortunately this isn't true. Most universities are nonprofits and hardly bring in enough to pay their staff. When school used to be cheaper it was because the states and federal government gave them the money. But when colleges started opening admissions to women and minorities, neoliberalism took root in the governmental policies which shifted the cost on to the student. Rising costs of tuition are a direct result of that. Faculty pay has sunk and they move to low paid part time adjuncts because they don't have the money to pay more teachers. They've also wasted money on administrators and sports, but the points above still stand for public schools which account for most all American graduates.

 

[Hemotep]

Also, because money was so freely available through student loans, states cut their education budgets to balance their books.

In 1990 states covered 70% of the cost of tuition at in state schools, students were only responsible for 30%. Today it's a 80/20 split where 80% is the students responsibility.

They passed the expense to their kids to balance their state budgets today. Or rather, over the last 3 decades.

You have that backwards though. The budgets weren't cut because of student loans. Student loans were made available and easy to get because the budgets were cut!

 

[RenegadeMonster]

You have that backwards though. The budgets weren't cut because of student loans. Student loans were made available and easy to get because the budgets were cut!

I think we are both right.

Budgets being cut was one of the reasons why student loans were made more available and easy to get. So that anyone could get a college education.

However, once that happened, it gave many state legislators an excuse to further cut. John Oliver gave several examples of this happening.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Unfortunately this isn't true. Most universities are nonprofits and hardly bring in enough to pay their staff. When school used to be cheaper it was because the states and federal government gave them the money. But when colleges started opening admissions to women and minorities, neoliberalism took root in the governmental policies which shifted the cost on to the student. Rising costs of tuition are a direct result of that. Faculty pay has sunk and they move to low paid part time adjuncts because they don't have the money to pay more teachers. They've also wasted money on administrators and sports, but the points above still stand for public schools which account for most all American graduates.

Please note I did not say the teachers were getting the money.....

Also, in re-reading your reply - what does opening admissions to women and minorities have to do with anything? Anyone wishing to go to college has the right to attend. That statement can be interpreted as blaming a color/gender blind admissions policy for high cost of higher learning.

 

[RenegadeMonster]

Please note I did not say the teachers were getting the money.....

Also, in re-reading your reply - what does opening admissions to women and minorities have to do with anything? Anyone wishing to go to college has the right to attend. That statement can be interpreted as blaming a color/gender blind admissions policy for high cost of higher learning.

Think back to American history and the civil rights movement.

For example, when schools were integrated, closing the public school and white families moving their children to private schools in parts of our country.

Or closing of public pools rather than integrate.

It's about creating warriors to prevent minorities from being part of the white exclusive club. The same thing happened to women, but not to the same extent.

It's all about control, and trying to make barriers to change.

 

[Hemotep]

Please note I did not say the teachers were getting the money.....

Also, in re-reading your reply - what does opening admissions to women and minorities have to do with anything? Anyone wishing to go to college has the right to attend. That statement can be interpreted as blaming a color/gender blind admissions policy for high cost of higher learning.

Not at all. That's like blaming the victims who are most screwed by the policies. Legislators started to shift the costs onto students when admissions were opened to all. They never had a problem footing the bill with tax dollars when it was almost exclusively white men going to college. But many in this country have no problem with giving civil rights in one hand while making it hard for the folks who get them to do anything with them once they get them. No different then when Black soldiers returning from WWII were denied GI Bill benefits. Or when Black widows were denied social security benefits. Our country likes to pretend it's not racist, but instead of doing things openly, they do it in shadier ways that still discriminate. It's not their fault, they're the target and the victims of it far more than white men. Of course now many white men are victimized by it too, just fewer are. Look at who holds the most student loan debt and who holds the least. Black folks, who far less often have generational wealth to help pay for college, end up with far higher debt loads upon graduation. On the surface the policies look "fair" but the effects have been far from it. Despite that, women and folks of all races are graduating from college at far higher rates than men now. It's also happening at a time when the attitude has turned against college. There's a lot of very solid research on the feminization of poverty that shows how historically fields that used to pay well stopped paying well when they became more female led, and the same is now happening with college. It's not the sole cause of it by any means, but the data still shows that it has an effect on the overall problem. And I'd have to write out a book here to show all the evidence of how these policies have targeted Black folks, but that starts at K-12 education and is like an avalanche from there.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Think back to American history and the civil rights movement.

For example, when schools were integrated, closing the public school and white families moving their children to private schools in parts of our country.

Or closing of public pools rather than integrate.

It's about creating warriors to prevent minorities from being part of the white exclusive club. The same thing happened to women, but not to the same extent.

It's all about control, and trying to make barriers to change.

I was in the 3rd grade when integration occurred and we has classmates of color for the first time. I did not get relocated to a "white" only school nor did anyone I knew at the time. What we did was make some new friends. There were exceptions - always are - but we did not have any major problems in Cocoa, Florida. As a side note - my parents were raised in Georgia during the Depression and I got to hear descriptive words referencing minorities and immigrants growing up. None of those words were ever repeated to our own children. Generational progress is being made!

 

[SnowmaNick]

Universities are designed to make money first and provide education second. The cost of everything is astronomical and is driven by student loans. If the loans were not so easily available, the universities would not be able to raise prices to match. Making a non-related - useless - 4 year degree a job requirement makes the problem worse as you have competition driving prices as well. The easy money has helped drive prices higher. The loan forgiveness program - if a borrow can qualify - eases some debt management and places a bet that benefiters will vote appropriately in return. You can draw a parallel to the start of Medicare and other insurance companies covering whatever Medicare covered. Once folks had coverage, they used it and hospitals ordered tests - just because the insurance covered it - whether needed or not.

I don’t agree with your primary argument that universities are designed to make money as their primary goal. I agree tuition has gotten out of hand and universities have spent money in areas that don’t primarily focus on education (lots of administrators, sports, nicer buildings and student centers, and did I mention sports?) but states cutting funding has had a tremendous impact on tuition costs. Land grant/state universities had a dual factor problem in the late oughts, cut funding and a surge in applications. The latter one had a foreseeable drop off, when the national economy eventually got healthier. The former didn’t.

In the long run, it’s similar to a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs saying, spend money and effort on diplomacy or spend it on ammunition. The states cut funding, tuition became untenable. We can “bail” the students out, or as a country reap the consequences of people not buying homes, investing, putting off or foregoing having kids.

This started due to policy changes. It needs to end with policy changes.

(*Disclosure: I have already paid off my student loans. I have worked no collar to white collar, and white collar won in my book. The toll my body took from my no collar and green/brown collar days was and is a hell of a lot more than what student loans cost. My undergrad degree taught me more and was more useful than my graduate degree, which was hella overpriced.)

 

[Bob from Florida]

I don’t agree with your primary argument that universities are designed to make money as their primary goal. I agree tuition has gotten out of hand and universities have spent money in areas that don’t primarily focus on education (lots of administrators, sports, nicer buildings and student centers, and did I mention sports?) but states cutting funding has had a tremendous impact on tuition costs. Land grant/state universities had a dual factor problem in the late oughts, cut funding and a surge in applications. The latter one had a foreseeable drop off, when the national economy eventually got healthier. The former didn’t.

In the long run, it’s similar to a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs saying, spend money and effort on diplomacy or spend it on ammunition. The states cut funding, tuition became untenable. We can “bail” the students out, or as a country reap the consequences of people not buying homes, investing, putting off or foregoing having kids.

This started due to policy changes. It needs to end with policy changes.

(*Disclosure: I have already paid off my student loans. I have worked no collar to white collar, and white collar won in my book. The toll my body took from my no collar and green/brown collar days was and is a hell of a lot more than what student loans cost. My undergrad degree taught me more and was more useful than my graduate degree, which was hella overpriced.)

I am okay with "disagreeing". A large issue - in my view - is large scale misunderstanding by the general public of TINSTAAFL. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Biden's apparent goal of bailing out - not just forgiving interest - has a cost to everyone. We can speculate which course of action has "greater cost", but we don't really know until that course is pursued. Down here in Florida, the State Lottery was originally sold to the voters as "funding" education. What it really did was allow prior state funding to be used elsewhere with the Lottery making up for some of that. Classic "shell game". Like in the original Tim Burton Batman movie - Jack Nicholson - Joker here - lures the population to their doom with his "free money" promises - politicians have their version.

Failure to consider the "Long View" in favor of "Short term" results may ultimately be our "epitaph".

A number of years ago I got to know an engineer from Germany during one of my out of state training sessions. I learned that the State covered healthcare, education through a college degree, and a retirement plan for their citizens. The cost was a 55% tax rate on income. Everyone also got 6 weeks vacation plus 2 weeks holidays per year regardless of years of employment. Now - I have not verified this through independent research, perhaps some German members can speak to this, if accurate those numbers may not be such a "bad" thing. It would be a "lively" topic here in America. The companies with the "most to lose" - healthcare related - would be very imaginative with propaganda to maintain the "status quo".

 

[Nee Lewman]

My wife works for a global company and does work with people all over the world. Every European Nation has better access to healthcare, more vacation time, better work weeks, etc.

 

[Joe Mac]

I am okay with "disagreeing". A large issue - in my view - is large scale misunderstanding by the general public of TINSTAAFL. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Biden's apparent goal of bailing out - not just forgiving interest - has a cost to everyone. We can speculate which course of action has "greater cost", but we don't really know until that course is pursued. Down here in Florida, the State Lottery was originally sold to the voters as "funding" education. What it really did was allow prior state funding to be used elsewhere with the Lottery making up for some of that. Classic "shell game". Like in the original Tim Burton Batman movie - Jack Nicholson - Joker here - lures the population to their doom with his "free money" promises - politicians have their version.

Failure to consider the "Long View" in favor of "Short term" results may ultimately be our "epitaph".

A number of years ago I got to know an engineer from Germany during one of my out of state training sessions. I learned that the State covered healthcare, education through a college degree, and a retirement plan for their citizens. The cost was a 55% tax rate on income. Everyone also got 6 weeks vacation plus 2 weeks holidays per year regardless of years of employment. Now - I have not verified this through independent research, perhaps some German members can speak to this, if accurate those numbers may not be such a "bad" thing. It would be a "lively" topic here in America. The companies with the "most to lose" - healthcare related - would be very imaginative with propaganda to maintain the "status quo".

It’s very much the European model in general outside probably the uk and here which are maybe sitting a little bit more in the middle of them and you. Higher Education in the uk is beginning to unravel in a similar way to yours right now.

EU law guarentees a statutory minimum 20 days annual leave a year. There is an eu average of 10 days public holidays on top of that but it of course varies from country to country, it’s 9 here in Ireland.

It’s no utopia and there are still issues around funding things with aging populations but in comparison to what I read of the American experience on here it certainly feels more humane.

 

[Bob from Florida]

It’s very much the European model in general outside probably the uk and here which are maybe sitting a little bit more in the middle of them and you. Higher Education in the uk is beginning to unravel in a similar way to yours right now.

EU law guarentees a statutory minimum 20 days annual leave a year. There is an eu average of 10 days public holidays on top of that but it of course varies from country to country, it’s 9 here in Ireland.

It’s no utopia and there are still issues around funding things with aging populations but in comparison to what I read of the American experience on here it certainly feels more humane.

It is very difficult to gauge other places based on reading on the internet. Actually living there is almost always different that what gets reported. That being said, a major problem that I can see is affordable housing. When we bought our starter house in 1983, it was $61,000 for a 3 bedroom 2 bath 2 car garage 1225 square foot on 1/3 acre. Interest rates were 13.5 % - we refinanced twice and still live in this “paid off” house. Something equivalent is over $300,000 now and at current 7% 30 year rates is significantly higher payments than we had. Incomes have not kept pace with this and after years of low interest loans under 4% inflation finally caught up with us. The market is having a hard time with high prices and high interest. Something has to give- another housing bubble burst seems likely to correct prices. Prices and financing such as it is - makes home purchases very difficult for the up and coming generation…..