Do you even understand the change here? Before, the government would pay a bank $6 to give you a $5 loan. Now they are just giving you the $5 loan directly - something they already did in many cases. There is no expansion of government here; it saves money without dropped or expanding any services.
cml750, my census form can a question that asked if I would like to see the government take over "internet posting duties" for "posters similar to but not limited to cml750." I answered "yes" just because I was in a hurry. Sorry, bro.
Here's a page ripped from my Book of Marx: Corporate subsidies are like "handouts for the poor", but for entities that are considered people, albeit with less shame and loathing from Rush and Beck.
Rather blatant hypocrisy and corruption... A huge student loan scam With the help of Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., for-profit colleges are massively ripping off U.S. taxpayers
GOP radicals hating a democratic policy? Nothing new here. We can at least see half the country is not brainwashed with "Christian ideals" and GOP bull****.
The idea that most people will have to take on debt for education is reminiscent of late 19th century when then-monarchs stopped resisting education of the masses once they realized how profitable and sustainable it would be to cap the education below their own and further profit by raking in cash. This would keep them ahead of the masses for some time. Little did they know how long this would be allowed to last in various forms. There is a total attack on education systems globally, these things should be taken more seriously. Over the years, teachers have been paid less, students charged more, Exec admin paid more, ratio of admin/student shot up, etc. Higher educational institutions are run exactly like corporations, and there is zero proof that the corporate model is appropriate for the goals of education, and in fact there is proof to the contrary. An organisation doesn't have a single brain, a collection of individuals can not successfully pursue MAX profit and MAX education without having their interests conflicted IMO. It's a damn shame. Education should be free, and educators should never have to worry about money or compliance with adinistrative for-profit beaurocracies. Students should have more say in what they learn as they learn more, and some topics should drop in and out based on relevance to this day and age and the future. I look back at my macro and micro economics courses. Those were brochures for capitalism, not Economics books. Exactly the same books used thousands of kilometers away. #endrant
Without reading or knowing anything about it, I will bet you a University of Phoenix Masters that those that voted for the bill did it because they are in the pocket of the for-profit higher education biz, an industry which exists solely because of cheap student loans (...and then the borrowers default at super-high rates...) Sound familiar? Their model is egregious - it's basically a vehicle to siphon money away from social programs into private pockets by selling sub-JUCO level education at 4x the price. To top it all off, they basically have of the highest level of executive compensation to profit ratios of any industry. It's redistribution of wealth, plain and simple, but to people who are smart enough to have figured out a loophole in the system. Oh, and guess who is one of the biggest cheerleaders for this travesty?
We need to completely separate school and federal bureaucracy. Eliminate the Department of Education and the federal student loan program. The government is making education too expensive.
On the contrary private education will make education MORE expensive and many will not be able to pay for it. Of course dumb voters are exactly what the GOP want so they can blindly follow their dogmatic policies. Oh I'm also guessing we should teach religion and creationism in school now too, huh?
I agree that the ratio of administration to faculty is too high. I disagree with the premise that education should be free. It is already highly subsidized via the state school system. This is why you can get a 4-year engineering degree from UT for ~$10k-12k/year if you're a Texas resident. That is a freaking bargain as you'll graduate making roughly $$65k/yr. That will be easily paid for.
The student loan industry really is a scam as companies like Sallie Mae and others (SLM) are able to milk the government backing of these loans. These loans cannot be defaulted on even in bankruptcy and then the companies charge the government to go after the loans once they've defaulted. The excess credit though has contributed to the 300%+ inflation in education, which trumps even healthcare inflation.
22% Graduation rate? And students can waste government loans on that garbage. Second post you've had about religion in schools, which has nothing to do with the topic. It'd be a beautiful world if higher education was free. BUT there are already too many people that go to college thinking it's the necessary step after high school. These students are disruptive and damage the learning environment for other students. By making higher education free, more people who have no business attending universities would enroll. I wish young adults could be rewarded by taking two years off after high school and getting a full time job. I imagine if people were encouraged to work a lower end job for a while they would either work harder in school when they enrolled, or decide that school isn't the best option for them. I remember Obama wanted to do this through government service, I hope he is able to in his second term.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying about people who shouldn't attend university going. But I think people who go only to get a better job really shouldn't go either in a perfect world. I think only people who want more education should go. Yes, that will make you better at your job and is valuable to have. But college should not be job training or at least only job training. It should be about educating yourself and making yourself better more than a fast track to a job.
I think college is becoming a way to fleece young people. Most everything I do now I could have done with a a high school education. Sometimes I don't remember how to do a laplace or Fourier transform or even do some of the more complicated derivations or integrations, but it takes me a couple of minutes on wikipedia to figure it out. The worst are the private schools. They offer degrees that have no value, but are charging ivy league prices. I think the best bargains are the good state schools.
Disagree - one of the reasons for the huge disconnect between job openings and number of unemployed is that our workforce doesn't have the requisite skills. Too many college students are getting non-value added liberal arts degrees, and not enough college students are pursuing technical degrees in areas such as math/science/engineering/computer science. This is why U.S. employers have to offer so many H1 visas to import the talent that we can't grow locally. Moreover, fields such as accounting, nursing, pharmacy, etc offer clearly defined career paths for graduates. Going to college for 4-years to "discover oneself" is a waste of time and money, and will lead to no job after graduation.
This is commonly cited - and often promoted by high-tech companies - but it really isn't necessarily accurate. In general, the data seems to suggest that H1 visas are simply preferred because those employees are (a) cheaper and (b) more dependent on the company and thus less likely to pursue other opportunities. There is lots of data on it, so here's just one article on the overall labor issue: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2009-07-08-science-engineer-jobs_N.htm
There has to be a balance. If you do a 4 year fluffy liberal arts program and don't come out with any real skills or expertise, that is ignorant. But I also think you're doing a disservice to yourself if you zone in on a very technical degree and don't learn how think critically and see the big picture. Those are the skills needed to lead, manage, and grow, and if students/schools ignore that kind of teaching we end up promoting technicians to managerial positions and they run departments or companies into the ground or are easily influenced and can make bad decisions. I suppose that kind of teaching is best reserved for grad school but I think it's important to have some in undergrad.
Most Americans are not libertarian ideologues. They prefer if they can get their insurance or education loans cheaper without having banks and insurance companies skim off money for fat cat CEO salaries and stock options. It must be frustrating to be a libertarian.
rhad Thanks that was incredibly informative. Missed it the first time. A single mom at work with a BA working as a clerical worker is having her paycheck garnished because of student loans.
