Helping the poor pay for college

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

MarshyMarsh
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:43 pm UTC
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby MarshyMarsh » Sun Feb 01, 2009 8:25 pm UTC

It isn't just the US in economic shit at the moment though, the only institution holdig its head above water currently is the EU countries who have adopted the Euro. However by focusing less on educated, there are less people to help rectify similar situations in the future.

Also as far as I am aware there are no Universities in the UK that can charge more than the Government agreed tuition (ironically set by people who when they were young had their University paid for). Even the second best (a very lose term) in the world (Cambridge), is only allowed to charge around £3000 a year tuition.

gibberishtwist
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:19 am UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby gibberishtwist » Sun Feb 01, 2009 9:15 pm UTC

.
Last edited by gibberishtwist on Fri Jun 23, 2017 10:22 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"We have reached the limits of what rectal probing can teach us."Image

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Yakk » Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:14 pm UTC

So, why not have a loan program for any public institution (or any private institution willing to accept public school price constraints and quality requirements)[1] that isn't means tested?

You go to the school, you get a loan of size X. The loan grows by (Prime+K%), even when you are at school.

Your income is garnished at 10% of your gross income to pay it back (usually done via the same mechanics as taxes). If you choose to get a job overseas, you are expected to continue paying 10%, or simply pay off the loan entirely. If you die before paying it back, the government pays back the person who loaned you the money.

This loan can be scaled to match the actual costs of educating the student, instead of the current under-pricing system (where most of the costs are carried by grants behind the scenes).

[1] Ie, in order to be eligible, the school has to agree to charge you no more than Y$ per year. This is to avoid private institutions simply inflating their costs by the amount of the public loan. The quality requirements are there to prevent "cash pump" institutions from developing.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

Maelstrom.
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:18 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Maelstrom. » Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:06 am UTC

Yakk wrote:So, why not have a loan program for any public institution (or any private institution willing to accept public school price constraints and quality requirements)[1] that isn't means tested?

You go to the school, you get a loan of size X. The loan grows by (Prime+K%), even when you are at school.

Your income is garnished at 10% of your gross income to pay it back (usually done via the same mechanics as taxes). If you choose to get a job overseas, you are expected to continue paying 10%, or simply pay off the loan entirely. If you die before paying it back, the government pays back the person who loaned you the money.

This loan can be scaled to match the actual costs of educating the student, instead of the current under-pricing system (where most of the costs are carried by grants behind the scenes).

[1] Ie, in order to be eligible, the school has to agree to charge you no more than Y$ per year. This is to avoid private institutions simply inflating their costs by the amount of the public loan. The quality requirements are there to prevent "cash pump" institutions from developing.


This sounds similar to the system set up in Australia. Here, the cost is split between you and the government. The goverment will pay a portion of the costs for anyone who studies, and you have to pay off the rest. However, the government will allow you to take out a loan of sorts to pay for your portion. To repay this loan, your income is taxed, varying by how much you earn. If you earn below ~$40,000, you are not taxed. Anything above, and you are taxed at an increasing amount. This way, anyone who wants to can attend university (assuming they have met prerequisites and grade scores from previous education - if applicable). Poorer people will not get taxed if they do not earn much after leaving university, while those that can afford to pay it back are taxed. You can pay things off up front if you want, and you get a very nice 20% discount if you do, but most people dont.

In my degree (Bachelor of Computing at the University of Tasmania), my fees after the goverment pays for their bit is around $2,500 a semester, depending upon which courses Ive taken for that semester. A three year course means the whole degree costs me about $15,000.

More information:
http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/Main/Quick ... CSHELP.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertiary_e ... _Australia (More useful than many of the government supplied documents I could find)

User avatar
waltwhitmanheadedbat
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:45 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby waltwhitmanheadedbat » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:15 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:I think the best system is probably some sort of a sliding scale for tuition fees, sort of like how income tax brackets are set up, that caps out at paying full tuition at maybe $50000 annual income. [emphasis added]


New York State's Tuition Assistance Program does this. It's intended to be complementary to Pell, so it's not a lot of money, those students in households between $35000-81000 annual income (or something like that) receive $500/semester.

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Azrael » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:04 pm UTC

Deleted posts: Was I unclear?

Natael
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:58 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Natael » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:49 pm UTC

Coming from California, which, despite the reputation for atrocious public education in the grade school level, has a really awesome program for low income people. My parents are dirt, bottom of the barrel poor, so I pretty much got the max out of this. California Community Colleges are I think $36 per semester unit for in state students, and like $130 for out of state. If you're poor you can apply for a board of governers waiver that gets rid of the tuition, plus between the state and feds, I was getting about $1500/semester in student aid that I could use for anything (mostly went to books and food). On top of going to school full time, I was making around $20k/year working full time, which was tough. California's state universities (both CSU and UCs are pretty good schools) cost $3000-$10000 per year, which, even taking out loans for, is pretty reasonable. I very easily pulled off a couple of associates degrees out of that, though have yet to go through a university.

Comparing that to most other states I've ran into, California has the best deal for poor students to be able to get educated. Their state community colleges have deals with the state universities for students to transfer, and many wind up having the same teachers teaching at both schools, so the quality of education is high. I think this is a very good system, and I fully support my tax dollars going towards educating people, for the sake of education if nothing else. It is worth my tax money to me just to being able to deal with more well learned people on a daily basis, and they tend to make up for it in taxes later.

As mentioned about the UK earlier, the US has the same issue with telling kids college is the most important thing, and ignoring trade schools. Plumbers, carpenters, lock smiths etc... take some definite intelligence and capability to do, and they pay well to boot, but are oft ignored and scorned compared to getting your degree, which goofs up the system.

BirdKiller
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 10:25 am UTC
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby BirdKiller » Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:08 am UTC

Isn't this one of the reasons why people pay taxes? So the government can hand out financial aid? If you look it that way, millions of people are already helping the poor pay for college. Same with paying state taxes so some portion of it supports public universities that have relatively low tuition rates.

almightyze
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:06 am UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby almightyze » Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:35 am UTC

I think I'll bump this up a bit, especially in light of the situation at NYU.

A big problem that most people don't realize is that, especially at private colleges, there is no oversight over where the money you pay for tuition and/or room/board is going to. Budgets are never disclosed in full to students and their families. As a result, a lot of private colleges have run up the bill on tuition, with some arts schools and liberal arts colleges competing with the Ivies for most expensive. Notably, the Ivies have effective programs for financial aid (and for good reason), but many of these other schools do not. Luck becomes a huge factor.

Plus, many of these schools will figure out ways to keep them from having to cover all your expenses, so even if you are poor and lucky, it may not be enough. This is a big issue with urban schools, most of whom likely do not have enough housing to cover even a majority of their students: Odds are, if you are placed off-campus (by choice or otherwise), financial aid at these institutions will only cover up to full tuition, and nothing else. This probably is an unwritten standard at most colleges in the country, but it's a much more painful burden if you are, say, at an urban college in a city such as Boston or New York than in a state school in a rural area. That's why my student loan debts are steep: The majority of my private loans went towards paying the rent, primarily because of my concerns in earning enough bussing and hosting tables to pay rent, and at the same time not wanting to live in the student ghetto with 5 or 6 other people, especially with my condition. And I was particularly "lucky:" My latter years at this particular private college notorious for its financial aid (2nd only to NYU, usually...if you read up the reports, you'll know which one), I got a full grant, with some federal loans, and that covered all but a few hundred dollars in tuition and fees.

It makes me wonder if any of these private schools realize how over-the-top they are when it comes to tuition.
01010011 01110100 01101111 01110000 00100000
01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01101001
01101110 01100111 00100000 01100010 01101001
01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101110

Allah o akbar! Azadi!

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Izawwlgood » Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:56 am UTC

I fully support the notion of helping people goto school, be it loans or scholarships or whatever, but I think it's important to realize that student loans have their problems, scholarships often (as Az stated) only apply to the very impoverished, and, still, need based scholarships or loans are still subject to the notion that the wealthy can afford better education which makes more eligible students.

School SHOULD be available for all, and I think in America it largely is. Plenty of people from the bottommost rungs of the financial ladder make their way through the education system, treating it as an investment, rightfully so. I'm not saying it's easy, and yes, it should be MUCH easier.

But don't take away the notion of private schools. If wealth is unable to provide a standard for the cutting edge, the government sure as shit isn't going to when it's struggling to get everyone up to speed on algebra.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Blue_devil
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:12 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Blue_devil » Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:35 pm UTC

Really the truth of the matter is that the problem was at least partially created by government involvement in the first place. There are very strict and blanket guidelines on how a bank can act. Some of those rules apply to how much a bank can lend out relative to how much the bank has on hand to spend. Now although this is a good idea in theory, it really hurts when it comes to college tuition.

You see, student loans for college are some of the highest percentage loans. They are almost always paid back so they're a safe bet. However, what people don't realize is that they also aren't the most profitable of loans. So because of regulation that isn't comprehensive enough, and applied too much as a blanket, banks lend money to things that are more profitable than student loans.

With more comprehensive and less restrictive banking regulations (at least in the area of student loans), banks would be able to give out an almost unlimited amount of student loans (actually statistically speaking the more loans they gave out the safer the bet would be). Really there would be no huge disadvantage to the poor and hard working people in terms of college if only our banking system was more comprehensive (this is of course speaking of the U.S.).

I know full well how much college costs, I'm going to attend Duke University in the fall, and it's not cheap. However, the argument that the government not paying for college is classist falls short in that if government did pay for everyone's college (or just the poor's college) the majority of the burden would fall on the rich. Sure, they can handle it, but essentially it's a penalty for being well-off. It's still classist, people are just more accepting of classism when it's the well-off who are society's beasts of burden.

Also just as a general note over the tone of the discussion. I've noticed an overall lack of acknowledgment of our economic system from the perspective that brought it about. Many posters above have said something to the effect of, "GDP goes up, everybody wins," in regards to the benefits of government subsidized (or nationalized) colleges. What this ignores is the very foundation of our understanding of the capitalist system. It's not about the greater good and it can only function so long as the greater good is not the focus of the individual. Instead the greatest good comes as a result of the individual being trusted to look out for themselves. However, this may be a topic for another discussion.

My apologies to the non-American forum users. I am really only well acquainted with the U.S. government, and really know little to nothing of the forms used in other nations around the world beyond their structure.

phonon266737
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:41 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby phonon266737 » Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:34 pm UTC

While I am 100% behind federal funding for college, , in the United States it seems as though the system has blown up in an outrageous mess of expensiveness.
The popular "Direct Loans" program has tuition funds go directly from the federal government to the college or university. This sounds like a good thing: the college kids can't blow the federal money on booze (or food). Becuase of the vast depth of federal pockets, almost anyone can get as big a loan as they want.

Here's where the real problem starts: most colleges try to provide everything on the student loans and grant. Food? Use your federal loan to get a meal plan on campus? Housing: rent an apartment on campus with federal funds! It doesn't really matter that these things are much higher than market rate: they're on campus and a large portion of the people using these services aren't seeing the money in their hands anyay.
Imagine $800+ a month..for a half of one room in a dormitory.

The same mindset applies to tuition: because it's all going onto long-term loans with generous repayment terms,few people actually pay attention to theat number until the repayment grace period is up. Hardly anyone price-shops private university: the esence of "competitive pricing" seems gone from the college scene. At RIT, 6% per year tuiton increases have been the norm since I started here ( for any non math nerds, that's not "constant growth", thats called "exponential growth"; the price doubles every 72/N = 12 years . The same thing applies to any price inflation. ) And they still sell out all the on campus housing! You keep supplying more people with money to go to college, rates will continue to go up until there is enough housing and faculty to teach to all the new students. That involves a lot of capital up front: why not just charge more (at the equillibrium price, with greater demand) and not spend any money? Yes, subsidizing the poor is good, but there is certainly an optimum level, and (IMHO) the US federal government has exceeded that level.

It is ridiculous, and It seems to me clearly related to the fact that they roll everything into one bill. If you actually price shopped for food, housing, tuition, these things can actually be affordable, but when it's all in one bill you say "that is so expensive - I'm glad I can get a loan to cover it!"

[On a side note, I've been attending RIT for 5 years working on a BS/MS. By taking full-time internships four semesters , living off campus at 20% the cost of campus housing, and working during the school year I have managed to stockpile enough cash to repay all my loans upon graduation. But why should I - credit is tight and I have 30 years to repay these puppies at a low interest rate. Sounds like a good down payment for a house to me! Thank you direct loans!]

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Azrael » Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:29 pm UTC

Blue_devil wrote:You see, student loans for college are some of the highest percentage loans. They are almost always paid back so they're a safe bet. However, what people don't realize is that they also aren't the most profitable of loans. So because of regulation that isn't comprehensive enough, and applied too much as a blanket, banks lend money to things that are more profitable than student loans.

My private loans are at ~5% and the Federally backed loans are at ~3%. So, no. They are not some of the highest percentage loans.

User avatar
Sungura
When life gives you banananas, make bananana bread
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:32 am UTC
Location: AL

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Sungura » Mon Feb 23, 2009 2:51 am UTC

Yes, poor should be helped financially through college.

An interesting point was raised though with regards to the poverty line. My family is three (myself, brother, and mom) and the federal poverty line for 2008 (I don't have 2009 on hand) was $17,600 for three people (it's a different number based on how many are in the household). This is CRAZY low for those of you who have no clue as to how much it costs to live in the US in today's world. And being one of those families right above it but a mom with a chronic pain disease and hence lots of med bills, we are under. But things like that aren't taken into account. To give an example of how crazy the assistance system in the US can be...we cannot get food stamps, heating bill assistance, etc. However, a teacher who was just off work for the summer when we were at the place inquiring about such assistance programs could! We have yet to understand this.

Back to school though, the nice thing is, that schools often have additional forms for "extenuating circumstances"...so they took my FAFSA which showed I should still owe about $6000/year for school and then my additional forms I filled out about the medical costs and recalculated my "EFC" (Expected Family Contribution). Lots of trips back and forth to financial aid office, long story short, I did end up getting through undergrad for almost free between government aid and independent scholarships I won.

The system's not perfect, it's far from it, and unfortunately the "middle class" that have multiple kids in college are the ones that seem to get screwed the most. At least there is something though. And the loans are a bad idea...I can't afford college now what makes them think I can as soon as I graduate? I was blessed though, I made it through without taking the loans.
"Would you rather fight a Sungura-sized spider or 1000 spider-sized Sunguras?" -Zarq
she/<any gender neutral>/snug

User avatar
Minerva
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 2:58 pm UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Minerva » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:50 am UTC

A couple of decades ago, the past government in Australia made university education completely free for everyone. Well, that's nice, but in reality I doubt we'll ever see that again.

I think the Australian HECS/HELP/whatever-the-hell-they-call-it-now is a reasonably fair scheme which makes university accessible to everybody, as far as I can tell it works pretty well, and perhaps it's a model which would be good to emulate in other countries.
...suffer from the computer disease that anybody who works with computers now knows about. It's a very serious disease and it interferes completely with the work. The trouble with computers is you play with them. They are so wonderful. - Richard Feynman

User avatar
SacrificetotheGodsofSpeed
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 10:58 am UTC
Location: Just beyond the end of the world

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby SacrificetotheGodsofSpeed » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:04 am UTC

Here (New Zealand) We have a system where if your parents, or if youre over 25, you, earn less than a certain amount you can get your tuition paid for and get $155 a week from the government, and then you can borrow up to another $155 a week. If your parents earn over the threshold, you can borrow your tuition and $155 dollars a week. This is interest free for the period when you are studying, and for as long as you stay in the country and work.

There are a few problems with this system.

1) It means that the age when you are no longer considered a child in the eyes of the government has been raised to 25. Until then your parents have to support you, unless you're poor.
2) If your parents earn more than the threshold but have other circumstances which means they cant afford to pay for your education (In my case, because you have lots of brothers and sisters they need to feed and clothe) you are stuck, you have to both borrow money and work, because $155 a week is not enough to actually live on.
3) Your parents can come under the threshold, because all their income goes through family and business trusts. Thus you can be filthy rich and still receive assistance.

I want a reversion to the system which was in place until the early nineties, where higher education was seen as a public good, and was paid for entirely by the government.
But then he smiled at me, a sad, hopeless, desperate little smile and something went through my chest and it felt like an iron bar and it wont go away even though he did.

almightyze
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:06 am UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby almightyze » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:59 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:
Blue_devil wrote:You see, student loans for college are some of the highest percentage loans. They are almost always paid back so they're a safe bet. However, what people don't realize is that they also aren't the most profitable of loans. So because of regulation that isn't comprehensive enough, and applied too much as a blanket, banks lend money to things that are more profitable than student loans.

My private loans are at ~5% and the Federally backed loans are at ~3%. So, no. They are not some of the highest percentage loans.


Weird. My private loans are at 2.75%, my federal loans are at 4.2 and 6.8%. Ah well.

I think the feds do have the power to at least fix this situation. Not only by modifying the loan system and the Pell (RIP) Grants, but also forcing private schools to comply to reform by threatening to withdraw funding, which will guarantee a loss of students (and, as such, revenue). The private schools have exploited the situation like investors over a sub-prime mortgage.
01010011 01110100 01101111 01110000 00100000
01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01101001
01101110 01100111 00100000 01100010 01101001
01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101110

Allah o akbar! Azadi!

phonon266737
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:41 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby phonon266737 » Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:42 am UTC

I think the feds do have the power to at least fix this situation. Not only by modifying the loan system and the Pell (RIP) Grants, but also forcing private schools to comply to reform by threatening to withdraw funding, which will guarantee a loss of students (and, as such, revenue). The private schools have exploited the situation like investors over a sub-prime mortgage.


I totally agree. And until THAT problem gets fixed, the benefactor of increasing financial aid is the university, not the poor student.
BTW, The pell grant system recieved some 15 billion dollars recently.

User avatar
Iori_Yagami
Posts: 606
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 8:37 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Iori_Yagami » Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:38 am UTC

System here has both free (government-funded, that is) and paid Uni 'slots'.
The amount of free slots is limited, and only the academically best students can have them. They even get a smallish stipend. (not quite enough for macaroni, from my experience). All other slots are paid, but you do not have to be the best - only not fail exams for 3 times (when you drop out). Each year, after exams, those positions are reevaluated, and if someone got much better in their studies, and there is a free slot suddenly availabe (someone left Uni, for instance), you get moved to a free slot and don't have to pay anymore. They say that competition for free slots and stipends amongst students increased both the level of knowledge and plagiarism. (ironic, isn't it?) Also, if you work and get income, you cannot get a free slot, since it is for non-working students only. This is a controversial thing. Loans are not very popular, since there is no job guarantee whatsoever. There previously was an agreement between companies and Unis about providing specialists. Now it is gone because of unpredictability of the system. Also, there are benefits for special situations, such as: 'you are disabled', 'you are the only provider for the family', 'you had only one or zero parents', and such.
This is not ideal, but definitely better than what I read about here. Yuck!
They cannot defend themselves; they cannot run away. INSANITY is their only way of escape.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Izawwlgood » Wed Feb 25, 2009 2:42 pm UTC

Iori_Yagami wrote:Also, if you work and get income, you cannot get a free slot, since it is for non-working students only. This is a controversial thing.


This strikes me as an awful thing.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Yakk » Wed Feb 25, 2009 3:42 pm UTC

Sure, no guarantee of income when you graduate. But there is no guarantee that society will get "what it paid for" when they pay for your education.

The idea of a loan system is that the person can invest in their own education regardless of their current financial situation. The goal isn't to give a free lunch. (The free lunch portion is often done via funding the university directly)
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Iori_Yagami
Posts: 606
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 8:37 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Iori_Yagami » Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:06 am UTC

Izawwlgood:
Oh, crap. I mixed it up, sorry. Free slots are available to everyone who's good, it is stipends that are paid to non-working students only. Makes sense.
You realize that the idea behind it is: If you can work already, you can probably live by and allow other students to get it. Besides, the whole idea (which I support immensely) - you can't both work and study and do each one to your best or even properly. Maybe you will do both barely acceptably. I saw TONS of examples where students leave off for work with minimum knowledge and don't train their brains well enough to make any career progress, they are stuck forever doing grunt work. At the time they sneered at their co-students for being 'useless academics' with no 'real world practice'. Pfffft, theoreticians!
However, the proverb has it: "for everything there is its own time", time to learn, time to work, time to marry... Doing everything in a hurry and half-assed is like trying to sit on 2 chairs: it is uncomfortable and in the end you'll likely fall down.
Yakk:
Maybe it is the only solution in such an unpredictable system. However, seeing people working for 20-30 years just to finally pay off debts and own the place they live in,... so sad.
They cannot defend themselves; they cannot run away. INSANITY is their only way of escape.

almightyze
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:06 am UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby almightyze » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:25 am UTC

Yakk wrote:Sure, no guarantee of income when you graduate. But there is no guarantee that society will get "what it paid for" when they pay for your education.

The idea of a loan system is that the person can invest in their own education regardless of their current financial situation. The goal isn't to give a free lunch. (The free lunch portion is often done via funding the university directly)


Would be reasonable, if the costs were justified. The problem with it is, majority of loans out there are going towards students who are:
A. Out-of-state students who get their tuition/room and board jacked up because of their non-residency
B. Students who go to private schools, whose tuitions are unchecked

Really, much of the problem is bent on the university. While state schools have a minimal degree of justification, most private schools have no justification or explanation as to the rapid increase in tuition in the past two decades. With most private schools, the rate of inflation would prolly tack tuition and room and board to be around 25k, at most. Yet most are 15 to 20k more. Why? Nobody knows, nobody asks.
01010011 01110100 01101111 01110000 00100000
01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01101001
01101110 01100111 00100000 01100010 01101001
01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101110

Allah o akbar! Azadi!

phonon266737
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:41 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby phonon266737 » Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:56 pm UTC

My university claims they must raise tuition to pay for energy - they claim spending $40,000 a day for electricity and heating. There are about 10,000 people on campus any given day.

What they can't tell me is where its all going, and why a medium-sized campus with approximately 50 large, presumably well-insulated buildings is using the energy of ten thousand homes. In fact, I don't even think they know.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Yakk » Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:31 pm UTC

almightyze wrote:
Yakk wrote:Sure, no guarantee of income when you graduate. But there is no guarantee that society will get "what it paid for" when they pay for your education.

The idea of a loan system is that the person can invest in their own education regardless of their current financial situation. The goal isn't to give a free lunch. (The free lunch portion is often done via funding the university directly)


Would be reasonable, if the costs were justified. The problem with it is, majority of loans out there are going towards students who are:
A. Out-of-state students who get their tuition/room and board jacked up because of their non-residency

Actually, I think you might mean "unsubsidised" rates. Ie, they pay the full load of the cost of a university education, or close to it?

B. Students who go to private schools, whose tuitions are unchecked

Sure, and if you go to a private school, you need to find a source of funding. Having a guarantee to be able to afford an arbitrary private school seems ... overkill.

It is true that there is the issue that private schools are tempted to raise tuition to match the income of the parents + amount the student can borrow.
Really, much of the problem is bent on the university. While state schools have a minimal degree of justification, most private schools have no justification or explanation as to the rapid increase in tuition in the past two decades. With most private schools, the rate of inflation would prolly tack tuition and room and board to be around 25k, at most. Yet most are 15 to 20k more. Why? Nobody knows, nobody asks.

Because the rate of inflation in the costs facing the poorer quartile is much lower than the rate of inflation in the upper quartile in the USA, due to the increasing gap between rich and poor. As the expensive parts of the university are upper quartile employees, one would expect a higher than average for the economy cost inflation.

Another issue is that more and more students want the 'best' education, so demand is skyrocketting. And there is still only one Harvard (for example).

Another issue is the easy loans, and the willingness for students to go into debt to go to a 'good' school.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Ixtellor » Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:27 pm UTC

mewshi wrote:So, in general, we are in favor of such ideas? Awesome.

I think that, especially in the "land of opportunity", it is ridiculous to expect someone who didn't sleep in a silver cradle as an infant to work three times as hard to get to the same point in life. Essentially, classism is the same as racism.

Just read this quote from my aunt, and replace "lower class" with "<colour not needed due to Fat Tony's birth>" or something, and replace "upper class" with "<colour not needed due to Fat Tony's birth>" or whatever.

"It's perfectly fine to expect lower class people to work harder to get to the same point as someone who is from the upper class. God didn't intend for everyone to have the same journey."

Expecting someone to work harder just because they weren't born into the right family is just plain wrong.


Well that is based, IMHO, on the false assumption that we all deserve the same things. You don't deserve a college education. It is desireable, and has tons of benefits and positive externalities, but it is not somthing "owed" to anyone.

In some cases people will inherit wealth that has been passed down from generation to generation (Kennedy's and Bush's) but in most cases people will have a 'step up' because their parents DID work extra hard to make sure their kids would have advantages.

Saying it is the same as racism is not a good analogy.
Black people in the 1960's had poor parents because their parents were not allowed to get an education. So there was no conceivable way that they could ever have a 'step up' and in many cases regardless of your willingness or commitment would be unable to move up.

This is not the case today, and certainly not the case for the largest segment of poor people in the US today, white people. If your white and poor, it is going to be a big reflection on your work ethic and commitment to education. A college degree is life changing and there is a reason why EVERYONE tells you to get an education. Some minority groups will be confronted with institutional racism and have to overcome it, which is why I am for the Michigan and Texas college entry systems, to level the playing field.

To repeat your quote:
I think that, especially in the "land of opportunity", it is ridiculous to expect someone who didn't sleep in a silver cradle as an infant to work three times as hard to get to the same point in life.


No it isn't. Thats how you go from being poor to being wealthy. There is no guarentee in the constitution to being wealthy or material possessions. You have to go out and earn them.

Ixtellor
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

User avatar
mewshi
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:36 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby mewshi » Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:35 pm UTC

No it isn't. Thats how you go from being poor to being wealthy. There is no guarentee in the constitution to being wealthy or material possessions. You have to go out and earn them.

Ixtellor


Um... dude. That's my whole issue right there! "You have to earn them". How exactly has a person born into a rich family earned the right to college any more than anyone else? If a rich person and a poor person get the same scores and everything (which is unlikely, due to the educational disadvantages faced by the poor), what has the rich kid done to earn a college education more than the poor kid? Nothing.

This is *not* about equality of outcome; this is about equality of opportunity. You're confusing the two.

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Ixtellor » Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:31 pm UTC

mewshi wrote:How exactly has a person born into a rich family earned the right to college any more than anyone else?


First,
How exactly has a person born into a rich family earned the right to [A large house and european vacation] any more than anyone else?

Answer: They didn't. Their parents did.

Secondly, just because your poor doesn't mean you don't get to go to college. If you try hard in sch00l and get good grades and do well on entrance exams, the price of education will almost never been an impediment. Today all the ivy leagues, tailor the price of admission to your families income and if you are below a certain level, all expenses are paid for you.

Furthermore, there is growing and vast system of 2 year colleges where the tuition is laughable.

Aside from minorities who are suffering institutional racism as a barrier to getting into college, no poor person really has any excuse to not get into or attend college.

And lastly, there is not right or guarentee to go to college. Its a privilege.

mewshi wrote:If a rich person and a poor person get the same scores and everything (which is unlikely, due to the educational disadvantages faced by the poor), what has the rich kid done to earn a college education more than the poor kid? Nothing.


Again, how is the poor person unable to go to college? Or do you mean to an expensive private sch00l? Or do you highly competitive large State schools? For every University of Texas there are 3299 University of Texas at [Town Name Here].

Are you arguing that getting an education at all of the Ohio State schools are inferior to THE Ohio State University?

mewshi wrote:This is *not* about equality of outcome; this is about equality of opportunity. You're confusing the two.


I still fail too see, perhaps you can show me, how poor people don't have an opportunity to go to college.

If I had to guess what the real reason poor people attend college in small numbers, it would be because they are not taught those values at home and the importance is not stressed in the same way it is in wealthier homes.

I taught sch00l at the poorest school district in all of Texas and followed that up by teaching at one of the wealthier ones. My anecdotal first person experience is that the kids at poor sch00l are not receiving anywhere near the parental support, encouragment, or set of educational values that kids in wealthier schools receive. Money is probably one of the very last barriers poor people have to overcome, if a barrier at all. (see City Colleges = cheap)

Ixtellor

P.S. All the educational studies out these days suggest that city college provides an education on par with larger schools, and that people who go to city colleges for their first 2 years, graduate at higher rates than students who go straight to large 4 year schools. (see College Board studies on 2 year colleges)

[edit] changed spelling of that scho.ol word because someone is really really gay with two much time on their hands.
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Yakk » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:35 pm UTC

mewshi wrote:Um... dude. That's my whole issue right there! "You have to earn them". How exactly has a person born into a rich family earned the right to college any more than anyone else? If a rich person and a poor person get the same scores and everything (which is unlikely, due to the educational disadvantages faced by the poor), what has the rich kid done to earn a college education more than the poor kid? Nothing.
The rich kid's parents earned the right to provide their kid with an easy ride, if they want to.

They have also earned the right to provide you with an easy ride. But they probably don't want to.

The rich kid? She gets an easy ride if and only if her parents give her an easy ride, pretty much.

It takes lots of resources to put someone through a good education system. There are three ways to pay for it:
1> Convince the person, or someone who likes that person (say, their parents, or someone giving to a scholarship fund), to pay for it.
2> Arrange for loans so that person can pay for it using their income later on.
3> Tax the general population to give that person an education.
4> Don't give it to that person.

Now, paying for a 250,000$ education for every citizen of the country isn't very practical. And yes, you can get degrees that cost a quarter million dollars.

So suppose you have a limited budget (no money tree). Is it more effective to lend people money to educate themselves, or just give them money gratis to educate themselves? Per unit of money spent on each person educated.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

almightyze
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:06 am UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby almightyze » Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:26 am UTC

Yakk wrote:Actually, I think you might mean "unsubsidised" rates. Ie, they pay the full load of the cost of a university education, or close to it?

That's what I was referring to in the "justification" of state schools' actions in this regard in the latter part of the piece. Sorry if it wasn't clear.

Sure, and if you go to a private late night double feature picture show, you need to find a source of funding. Having a guarantee to be able to afford an arbitrary private late night double feature picture show seems ... overkill.

It is true that there is the issue that private schools are tempted to raise tuition to match the income of the parents + amount the student can borrow.


Tempted? They take refuge in audacity with such a tactic because nobody bothers to ask and be nosy about it. Now, I'm not saying that schools shouldn't profit from tuition. But if that's their goal, then they should be upfront and transparent about it, and not make every effort to squeeze as much profit as possible (like, say, the investors who caused the GD credit crisis). I mean, many vocational and technical schools are at least upfront about where the money is going, and public schools have a certain obligation to make available to the public this information. While private schools do not need to, it would benefit them to be transparent about their operations to students/families.

Really, much of the problem is bent on the university. While state schools have a minimal degree of justification, most private schools have no justification or explanation as to the rapid increase in tuition in the past two decades. With most private schools, the rate of inflation would prolly tack tuition and room and board to be around 25k, at most. Yet most are 15 to 20k more. Why? Nobody knows, nobody asks.

Because the rate of inflation in the costs facing the poorer quartile is much lower than the rate of inflation in the upper quartile in the Obamaland, due to the increasing gap between rich and poor. As the expensive parts of the university are upper quartile employees, one would expect a higher than average for the economy cost inflation.

I'll go ahead and say that the first half of your first sentence has incredibly awkward phrasing and hard to decipher, thus I disregard it. As per your other sentence: Is that not one of many purposes of a school's endowment, to pay for the more expensive professorships? If that were the case, then that would not directly translate into a student's tuition, unless a portion of the tuition does go toward the endowment. But that is again something we are not given disclosure on. Lack of disclousure is the reason why the student union at NYU is barricaded right now. The key here is transparency: Much of the debate would be a little less unnerving and complicated if schools disclosed their budgets, explain tuition hikes, and explain and discuss methods of reducing the ensuing damage. Thus we can fully address the issue of affordability of going to college (because, let's face it, it's not simply an issue of the poor anymore).

Another issue is that more and more students want the 'best' education, so demand is skyrocketting. And there is still only one Harvard (for example).

Correction: More and more parents want their kids to have the "best" education, so that they are not marked as failures in that their children carry the stigma of being non-college-graduates. The socioeconomic/cultural stigma of a college education has become so pervasive in society that what is lost is the fact that many college-bound students lack the will, the capability, or the interest in such an education. But I will go no further there, that's another subject worth another thread that may/may not have been discussed.

Another issue is the easy loans, and the willingness for students to go into debt to go to a 'good' late night double feature picture show.

Accessibility is an issue, I do agree with you on that. But once again, we have to take into account that it's the university that raises the stakes. It's the university that exploits this debt obligation by raising the tuition or reducing methods of financial aid (i.e., refusing to help out with room and board/housing if the student decides/is forced to live off-campus). In poker terms, the loan company is the way students call on bets by the dealer (i.e., university). The university sees the call and will always raise.
Last edited by almightyze on Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:54 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
01010011 01110100 01101111 01110000 00100000
01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01101001
01101110 01100111 00100000 01100010 01101001
01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101110

Allah o akbar! Azadi!

User avatar
Iori_Yagami
Posts: 606
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 8:37 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Iori_Yagami » Fri Feb 27, 2009 9:08 am UTC

Paid education instills segregation and maintains the existance of classes. This is obvious at least to me. This not nearly as bad as ancient castes or medieval classes, but still.
However, the whole thing whether classes are a good/bad, natural/artificial, essential/burdening thing is debatable.
They cannot defend themselves; they cannot run away. INSANITY is their only way of escape.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Yakk » Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:25 pm UTC

I'll go ahead and say that the first half of your first sentence has incredibly awkward phrasing and hard to decipher, thus I disregard it.

It is a relatively basic financial fact about the current curve of how we spread resources around.

In the past 20-odd years, income growth among the wealtheir deciles has outgrown the income growth in the lower deciles. At the same time, the prices of goods consumed by the wealthier deciles has also gone up faster than the goods consumed by the poorer deciles. There has been an inflation gap.

As higher education is often consumed by the richer deciles, and a huge portion of the costs comes from paying the richer deciles money (the salaries of instructors, at higher-end private schools, is often quite high...)

Is that not one of many purposes of [filtered word -- probably education institution]'s endowment, to pay for the more expensive professorships? If that were the case, then that would not directly translate into a student's tuition, unless a portion of the tuition does go toward the endowment.
The endowment pays for some of it -- but even then, the more expensive professors spend more of their time on research than on teaching.

High end private schools are mainly research institutions, and (as a low-paying side job) educate students. And yes, I said low-paying -- as a percentage of their budgets, the tuition money is relatively low.

But that is again something we are not given disclosure on.

Sure. And if you don't think you are getting what you are paying for, don't go to such a private school. There are plenty of options -- Harvard only has a monopoly on being Harvard, not on education.

Correction: More and more parents want their kids to have the "best" education, so that they are not marked as failures in that their children carry the stigma of being non-college-graduates.

/shrug, the students are adults perfectly capable of saying 'no, I will not go to school.' Their parents might 'cut them off' in response, but they are adults, and they can live with the consequences.

Regardless of their motiviations, large numbers of people going through it. Even if they are being pressured to do it. That's close enough to 'wanting' that I won't distinguish.
Accessibility is an issue, I do agree with you on that. But once again, we have to take into account that it's the university that raises the stakes. It's the university that exploits this debt obligation by raising the tuition or reducing methods of financial aid (i.e., refusing to help out with room and board/housing if the student decides/is forced to live off-campus). In poker terms, the loan company is the way students call on bets by the dealer (i.e., university). The university sees the call and will always raise.

There are multiple universities.

I will agree that, barring draconian rules, there will always be a school that is beyond the financial means of some student. Will it be so much better that the other schools are crap in comparison? I doubt it.

You can shop around and find a school in your budget. Getting a 4 year degree at a good institution is affordable by almost every student in the nation -- getting one at the best intitution on the planet, isn't. (There isn't enough _room_ at the best institution, and a good chunk of what it makes it so good is how much money it can spend on being good).

Iori wrote:Paid education instills segregation and maintains the existance of classes.

So does merit-based qualification for education, except the 'classes' are different.

I am in favor of lending people money for an education. Let them understand how much it costs, so they have _some_ price sensitivity. If you fully fund education, there is no price sensitivity on the part of the students -- which means you have to place all of the price controls at the command level on the supply side. And if you consider 'equal education' more important than 'good education', you end up adding draconian laws that make providing an education outside of the price-locked system illegal.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Philwelch » Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:34 pm UTC

mewshi wrote:And, while I understand the purely capitalist argument that the money must come from somewhere, it sickens me that a little rich bastard can go to an Ivy league school because daddy's rich, while the girl who worked her ass off all through school has to work 2 jobs and live on 4 hours of sleep just to get through a lower-level school. It's just bizarre that we, as a nation, allow this sort of thing.


The rich girl going to Harvard goes to Harvard because her daddy's paying for the brand name, not because it provides that much of a better education. In fact, most of your name-brand schools really make a real difference only for graduate and professional degrees.

I'm not saying a B.A. from Harvard isn't better than a B.A. from Ohio State. I'm saying the B.A. from Ohio State makes a much better cost/benefit.

Paul Graham argues that credentials (including the name brand of the school you went to) are becoming less and less important.

Yakk wrote:In the past 20-odd years, income growth among the wealtheir deciles has outgrown the income growth in the lower deciles. At the same time, the prices of goods consumed by the wealthier deciles has also gone up faster than the goods consumed by the poorer deciles. There has been an inflation gap.

As higher education is often consumed by the richer deciles, and a huge portion of the costs comes from paying the richer deciles money (the salaries of instructors, at higher-end private schools, is often quite high...)


Yeah but how many higher-end private schools are there? There's only 50 top-50 universities by definition, and there's hundreds of good universities in the U.S.. In many fields, a professor makes 50-60k starting salary if they can get a job at all, which is pretty crap pay for a Ph.D. (consider that a bachelor's degree + 5-7 years work experience, an MBA or JD + 2-4 years work experience, or an MD all pay more in many cases).

I think if there's gonna be public assistance for education, it should be loan-based, or perhaps highly conditional. Many fields are just plain not worth the public paying for more graduates in. I don't want to start any religious wars so I'll pick on my own degree. There's no need for us to educate more philosophers. There aren't enough faculty positions for all the philosophy Ph.D.'s we're training right now. The best philosophy grad student I knew couldn't even get into a Ph.D. program. All that we as a society would really gain as ROI from subsidizing more philosophy students is, quite frankly, allowing a few young adults to put off productive adulthood for a few years. Whereas training more engineers would substantively grow the economy, and training more doctors (especially with subsidies instead of loans!) would lower the costs of health care (but probably not that much).

Now, as it turns out, the more economically useful degrees also happen to usually pay more. Which means that there's a positive ROI on an individual basis for them. Which further means that if we just give everyone loans, folks will have to make one of two choices: (1) get a degree that will pay for itself in the long run or (2) if they think their not-well-paying degree is really all that precious and valuable regardless of its ability to pay itself off, they can pay for it. Either way there's no free lunch.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

almightyze
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:06 am UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby almightyze » Fri Feb 27, 2009 9:36 pm UTC

Yakk wrote:
I'll go ahead and say that the first half of your first sentence has incredibly awkward phrasing and hard to decipher, thus I disregard it.

It is a relatively basic financial fact about the current curve of how we spread resources around.

In the past 20-odd years, income growth among the wealtheir deciles has outgrown the income growth in the lower deciles. At the same time, the prices of goods consumed by the wealthier deciles has also gone up faster than the goods consumed by the poorer deciles. There has been an inflation gap.

As higher education is often consumed by the richer deciles, and a huge portion of the costs comes from paying the richer deciles money (the salaries of instructors, at higher-end private schools, is often quite high...)

My bolds.
Now all that I can actually understand. It would have made a bit more sense if you simply just said there was an inflation gap between rich and poor as the original phrase. But, as Azrael seems to think you're not going to last long around here if you keep up your current behavior.

Is that not one of many purposes of [filtered word -- probably education institution]'s ??? endowment, to pay for the more expensive professorships? If that were the case, then that would not directly translate into a student's tuition, unless a portion of the tuition does go toward the endowment.
The endowment pays for some of it -- but even then, the more expensive professors spend more of their time on research than on teaching.

High end private schools are mainly research institutions, and (as a low-paying side job) educate students. And yes, I said low-paying -- as a percentage of their budgets, the tuition money is relatively low.

Well, that much I can agree with you with (especially with Johns Hopkins a few of the Ivies), but it doesn't necessarily dictate many expensive private schools. Schools that specialize in the arts, i.e., art schools, music schools, performing/media arts schools, come with a steep price tag, but don't have that research justification in play.

Sure. And if you don't think you are getting what you are paying for, don't go to such a private school. There are plenty of options -- Harvard only has a monopoly on being Harvard, not on education.

Hard to justify. Besides the capitalistic undertones of that argument, the simple suggestion of transferring or dropping undermines the whole point of their argument: That they want to stay, they just feel like the costs outweigh the benefits.

There are multiple universities.

I will agree that, barring draconian rules, there will always be a school that is beyond the financial means of some student. Will it be so much better that the other schools are crap in comparison? I doubt it.

You can shop around and find a school in your budget. Getting a 4 year degree at a good institution is affordable by almost every student in the nation -- getting one at the best intitution on the planet, isn't. (There isn't enough _room_ at the best institution, and a good chunk of what it makes it so good is how much money it can spend on being good).
Let me start by saying that you should really stop comparing everything to Harvard (I know you didn't say it here, but given the number of times you've mentioned it, it's implied). It may be considered the name that foreigners think of for the best education in America (and perhaps is at the center of the meta-argument), but it really isn't the best. The scope is limited, the education is extremely rigorous, and it's not even considered top of the line in certain fields (take Business, for example. You may have better connections, but Bryant and Butler (for example) do a better job teaching business and economics). So it's bad even as a euphemism for "the best education/institution."

Now that I've said that, let me continue, Harvard-free.

Your argument for "shopping around" would be practical and sound if the following existed:
1. Schools have similar financial aid packages
2. Schools have similar schedules/deadlines for admission.
Of which, you understand, they DO NOT on both.
Even if one were to set a bar for which they will not exceed, some schools that cost above that bar can compensate by giving a generous financial aid package or scholarship package that brings them below the bar. Some schools will only offer financial aid on tuition and fees and not housing, or some only will offer aid on housing if you live on-campus (common case with city schools). And there are those with horrendous financial aid packages that are below the bar. Of course, these things we will not know unless we apply and get accepted, and applying to several schools gets pretty expensive quick. Plus, there is the deadline issue: Some schools have early deadlines for admission. Some don't even send out acceptance notices until after those early deadlines, and have late deadlines themselves. Some schools give you a very small window for which to declare admission. Some have rolling admissions. All of this makes determining whether or not you want to go to a specific school or not very difficult and very stressful. This makes "shopping around" an extremely difficult proposition.
01010011 01110100 01101111 01110000 00100000
01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01101001
01101110 01100111 00100000 01100010 01101001
01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101110

Allah o akbar! Azadi!

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Yakk » Fri Feb 27, 2009 9:59 pm UTC

Well, that much I can agree with you with (especially with Johns Hopkins a few of the Ivies), but it doesn't necessarily dictate many expensive private schools. Schools that specialize in the arts, i.e., art schools, music schools, performing/media arts schools, come with a steep price tag, but don't have that research justification in play.[/quote[
Sure. Then go somewhere else? Or maybe because they have large theatres and studios?

Hard to justify. Besides the capitalistic undertones of that argument, the simple suggestion of transferring or dropping undermines the whole point of their argument: That they want to stay, they just feel like the costs outweigh the benefits.
By capitalistic, you mean free choice for the providor and the consumer?

I'm all for having state run schools. But I see nothing wrong with other people opening up private schools. And I'm OK with ridiculously expensive private schools existing, if people want to pay for them out of their own pocket.

I'm even OK with the ridiculously expensive schools having a possibility of being better than the public schools. Note that there is no guarantee.

As it happens, I'm mentioning Harvard as a well known school that is also extremely expensive. It is the extreme cost of going to Harvard that I'm talking about mainly. I happen to have crunched the numbers on that school -- I could use other examples, but then I'd have to actually make sure they cost a lot to attend, and I'm lazy.

Feel free to produce an easy to read and verified schedule of top-notch expensive schools, so I can broaden my examples. Barring that, I'll cite Harvard. It is expensive, has a financial aid package, and I'd argue that even its bad programs probably are high enough in quality that the country couldn't afford to give everyone that level of education gratis.
Your argument for "shopping around" would be practical and sound if the following existed:
1. Schools have similar financial aid packages

Financial aid is just a variation in price, as far as the consumer is concerned. Sure, it is annoying obfuscated variation in price. I'd think that a "cost clarity act" that required schools to be clear in the prices they charge to be more reasonable than direct control over the prices that a school charges.

As it happens, at least high-end act like a monopoly, and customise their prices to the percieved ability to pay of their consumers.

Multiple 'ivy league' schools even agreed to cease offering non-needs tested scholarships in order to cease competing with each other. It's a pretty clear cartel based behavior, and that should be hit with the legal beat stick.

And yes, making the 3rd largest financial decision of one's life should take 100s of hours of work and knuckle-biting (behind getting married and buying a house).
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

ZeroSum
Cooler than Jeff
Posts: 2903
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 10:10 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby ZeroSum » Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:25 pm UTC

Yakk wrote:Multiple 'ivy league' schools even agreed to cease offering non-needs tested scholarships in order to cease competing with each other. It's a pretty clear cartel based behavior, and that should be hit with the legal beat stick.

At least before August of '08, not sure if it's been going on longer, multiple ivy league schools were setting systems in place to ensure that they were extending acceptance letters regardless of income and that they would be able to ensure than anyone they accepted could find the financial means to attend through loans, government backed and private, grants, scholarships and financial aid directly from the school. I think Harvard started it and Yale was jumping on the idea as well.

An anecdote about finances and my conclusion because of this anecdote: Students should never say "I can't go to college because I can't afford it." If that's happening that's a failure either in society's helping hand or the information given to the student. I say this because when I got my BS I left school with less than $7k in debt after buying a car and had an EFC of $0 for all four FAFSA forms I filled out. Out of pocket I personally paid $2k over the time I was in school for tuition and books and my extended family paid $4k, including a $2k laptop that I could have survived without. I found programs that gave me free room because I was doing work-study or I couch-surfed with friends or family. I worked 20 hours/week for most of the time I was in school to help pay for myself. I could have left school with about $15k in debt instead if I'd taken loans out for room and board. $15k is a very reasonable amount to pay off over a 30-year period at ~3-5%.

Comic JK
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:08 pm UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Comic JK » Mon Mar 02, 2009 3:37 am UTC

Despite the lack full government support for university students, as in Europe, smart, poor kids in the US still get a free university education. At a minimum, they can attend the Honors program at their public city or state university, which in my city/state means free tuition, free room and board, a free laptop, and a yearly stipend.

Attending a private university is trickier (besides one such as The Cooper Union which has no tuition), but still, the top universities will generally cover you. I have a friend studying at Columbia who gets everything covered plus a stipend, because of his low family income, and the same is true at other Ivy-League schools. I'm in favor of government help in most things, including student loans, but the current US system works fairly well. Certainly the US has the majority of the world's best universities, far more than Europe which has roughly the same wealth and population.
Image
A webcomic funnier than life itself. Updated Monday-Friday.

dbh2ppa
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:53 am UTC
Location: Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby dbh2ppa » Mon Mar 02, 2009 3:48 am UTC

i believe in helping the poor get an education.
i do no believe in helping anyone pay for college.
educational resources should be available for free (or at a moderate price, with aid to those who can't afford it), and "degrees" should be certifications that you have certain knowledge/skill, regardless of the manner in which it was acquired (school, apprenticeship, autodidactism, research or even experience).
i know, i know... not realistic within this system, but i've never been able to distort/bend/mutilate beautiful ideas to fit within the system.
-----
please ignore the errors in the above post. i'm not currently fluent in english, mainly because it's not my mother tongue, but also because i'm sleepy... always.

psychaotix
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:55 am UTC

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby psychaotix » Tue Mar 03, 2009 11:59 am UTC

I know it isnt quite the same, but the scheme COULD be feasible.

Here in South Australia, for students of low income (Less than a certain level of Income per annum gross,) The Government offers a scheme called the "School Card." In a nutshell, it alklows low income families to send their kids to school at a subsidised or waived fee. The sheme is "Asset tested" meaning that you need to state precicely what your income is, along with your particulars, including your Centrelink Reference Number*1 and other stuff. The forms are sent off and your school is notified, along with you.

There is no reason why the scheme cannot be adapted to university use, particularly for areas of the workforce that are suffering from a shortage of skilled workers that require a minimum of tertiary education.

Obviously, it would be impossible to ask the government to foot the bill for each and every student on this scheme, so the universities would need to come on board as well, and offer subsidised course fees for the people on the scheme.

*1 The Centrelink Reference number is equivalent to the US Social security number.

http://www.decs.sa.gov.au/goldbook/pages/school_card/schoolcard/ Some details on the scheme from the official page.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Helping the poor pay for college

Postby Yakk » Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:18 pm UTC

dbh2ppa wrote:i believe in helping the poor get an education.
i do no believe in helping anyone pay for college.
educational resources should be available for free (or at a moderate price, with aid to those who can't afford it), and "degrees" should be certifications that you have certain knowledge/skill, regardless of the manner in which it was acquired (school, apprenticeship, autodidactism, research or even experience).
i know, i know... not realistic within this system, but i've never been able to distort/bend/mutilate beautiful ideas to fit within the system.

Nevermind the system. Testing if someone has a certain knowledge/skill is ridiculously hard. Universities do it by facing the student with a torrent of assignments, tests and exams, with the goal that the easiest way to get through the multi-year torrent is to actually learn the material (note that it isn't the only way to get through it -- cheating and other methods can work).

To pass a given one-sitting test, usually the easiest way is to study 'to the test' -- which is a form of cheating, in a sense, because the test is attempting to evaluate your ability to master the subject, not do the test. Studying 'to the test' for an entire university career... is less practical... than doing it for a single test.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests