Student loans to hit 1 trillion this year.

[Win]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
Why are these loans GOVERNMENT guaranteed. Why not have the schools themselves on the hook?

Not going to happen since the student loan industry has been fully nationalized.

Should a mechanic be put on the hook for your credit card payment?


Well he can be on the hook if services aren't effect. And credit card debt is dischargable and based on current ability to pay. Student loans are not. Rather than credit card payment, warranty work would be a better analogy anyway. Borrowing money to pay for college is more like a gamble, as is a business loan.


But most business lenders actually want some assurance they will be repaid in a timely manner, and seek collateral for the loan. And every business loan I have ever received required my personal guaranty on the loan, regardless of the entity receiving the loan, so you can't just bankrupt the failed venture and walk away from it.

I can't help but think that the abundance and cost of these schools is directly related to the easy money that they get the benefit of, without any reciprocal risk. And if states are in fact giving less subsidies to the schools, where is the corresponding tax reduction to the real property owners? Not only have there been no tax reductions around here, but they are soaking the stupid and poor with a lottery to fund educations insatiable appetite for more and more easy money.

 

[Blaze]

Quote..."To see increases of 20 percent, as we saw in California, to see gains of 15 percent in other states, is simply unprecedented," Hartle said. "Tuition is simply being used as a revenue substitute in many states."
Link

 

[wallyuwl]

Originally Posted By: VeeDubb
Ok a couple people have misunderstood me now so it is probably on me to communicate better. That Wisconsin example was just that: an example. And I do not have a bias against private schools in general. You give me a kid out of Harvard or Yale vs Arizona State. It's a no brainer.

The point is this: if a kid pays more money to attend a perceived inferior school, I want to know his thought process. And I give him a chance to explain his reasoning. It is not do or die. i mentioned in one of my last posts that if the kid can explain why the rankings are flawed and why he was justified in paying the big bucks, he gets big points from me. But that reason better be the way a business person thinks (ie ROI) rather than other reasons that are not important for a business. I recruit for our business unit. And despite what wallyuwl says about brain development of young kids, I do come across 22 year olds who have unbelievable business intuition. They are rare but they are there. Sure there are some kids who need more time, but when I find one that already has "it" it is not my job to make excuses for kids that don't.



You are still making a judgement about what the "better school" is, at least partially based on "rankings." But you said you don't know or care about how the rankings are constructed by the ranking agency.

I know you said you give props to the job applicant who can explain why they chose one supposedly inferior school over another based on their perceived (or the real) problems with the rankings.

The problem is still this: you are judging a 22-23 year old adult on how they went about making their college choice as a 17 year old kid. You are saying that you expect a 17 year old kid to know the intricate details about how different college ranking agencies rank colleges and universities? I've been at several universities as a student and instructor over the last ten years, and this is stuff I didn't know until I learned about it when I took some extra Graduate level education courses (for an additional Graduate certificate). Even if they know the differences/flaws in college rankings as a 22 year old, you are still asking the question "how did you make your college decision?". They are going to tell you what they were thinking five years ago. The whole premise of the question is invalid.

 

[VeeDubb]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: VeeDubb
Ok a couple people have misunderstood me now so it is probably on me to communicate better. That Wisconsin example was just that: an example. And I do not have a bias against private schools in general. You give me a kid out of Harvard or Yale vs Arizona State. It's a no brainer.



That depends upon the major/concentration area. In my field, Harvard and Yale would be low on my list. having those names doesnt impress me, and more makes me feel that the person is trying to come across as fancy and smart, when in reality if they wanted to be that way, they might have gone to Wisconsin, Minnesota, Delaware, etc. Private Ivy league? Princeton maybe...



I'm going to stop giving specific examples. Too easy to take out of context.

You are absolutely right that nothing is absolute.

 

[VeeDubb]

Originally Posted By: wallyuwl
Originally Posted By: VeeDubb
Ok a couple people have misunderstood me now so it is probably on me to communicate better. That Wisconsin example was just that: an example. And I do not have a bias against private schools in general. You give me a kid out of Harvard or Yale vs Arizona State. It's a no brainer.

The point is this: if a kid pays more money to attend a perceived inferior school, I want to know his thought process. And I give him a chance to explain his reasoning. It is not do or die. i mentioned in one of my last posts that if the kid can explain why the rankings are flawed and why he was justified in paying the big bucks, he gets big points from me. But that reason better be the way a business person thinks (ie ROI) rather than other reasons that are not important for a business. I recruit for our business unit. And despite what wallyuwl says about brain development of young kids, I do come across 22 year olds who have unbelievable business intuition. They are rare but they are there. Sure there are some kids who need more time, but when I find one that already has "it" it is not my job to make excuses for kids that don't.



You are still making a judgement about what the "better school" is, at least partially based on "rankings." But you said you don't know or care about how the rankings are constructed by the ranking agency.

I know you said you give props to the job applicant who can explain why they chose one supposedly inferior school over another based on their perceived (or the real) problems with the rankings.

The problem is still this: you are judging a 22-23 year old adult on how they went about making their college choice as a 17 year old kid. You are saying that you expect a 17 year old kid to know the intricate details about how different college ranking agencies rank colleges and universities? I've been at several universities as a student and instructor over the last ten years, and this is stuff I didn't know until I learned about it when I took some extra Graduate level education courses (for an additional Graduate certificate). Even if they know the differences/flaws in college rankings as a 22 year old, you are still asking the question "how did you make your college decision?". They are going to tell you what they were thinking five years ago. The whole premise of the question is invalid.


Ok wally, I give up. Tell me what you'd do. You've reviewed hundreds of applicants and narrowed it down to 15 that look great. Two kids blow you away with their ability to do those things you claim young kids shouldn't be able to do. The other ones give generic answers. What's next? Do you throw darts at a board?

 

[mechanicx]

I agree too much "easy" money is being provided to colleges. I would add that student loans are based upon a student being in good economic standing and class year. It seems to me students and federal funding and loans are setting tuition costs. Certainly not the students or market supply and demand. And if a student completes their degree, it's not entirely their fault if economic conditions make it not possible to repay the loans.

 

[wallyuwl]

Originally Posted By: VeeDubb
Ok wally, I give up. Tell me what you'd do.


I would come up with and ask questions that relate to what the person knows, how they think, how they would fit into the company, and what their values are at the present time.

 

[VeeDubb]

We DO ask those questions. They are interviewed by several people. The question I mentioned is not the only question we ask.

 

[VeeDubb]

Win, there is no "objective" evidence in the same way there is little evidence to support case based questions in interviews. These are very popular in the business world. This isn't Moneyball. This is gauging inductive reasoning based on limited data. And yes, there is unavoidable subjectivity and anecdotal elements to it.

 

[wallyuwl]

Originally Posted By: VeeDubb
We DO ask those questions. They are interviewed by several people. The question I mentioned is not the only question we ask.


Well obviously. But you are also asking at least one question (why/how they chose the college they did) that is filled with flaws. But you wouldn't ask the question if you didn't use it in the evaluation process. So you are asking an invalid question, and judging the applicant based on their answer to that invalid question.

 

[VeeDubb]

Wally, we are not going to get full objectivity or make zero Type I errors with any criteria. How bout we stop recruiting from good schools because rankings are flawed? How bout we recruit from Devry rather than Berkeley because once in a while a Devry kid can outperform 90% of Berkeley kids? Those "fit" questions you espouse? Tell me how bulletproof they are.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
Why are these loans GOVERNMENT guaranteed. Why not have the schools themselves on the hook?

Not going to happen since the student loan industry has been fully nationalized.

Should a mechanic be put on the hook for your credit card payment?


A mechanic can put a lien on your car if you don't pay the bill. I.E. your check bounces, or you just don't come pick up the car.

Ditto for those who do home repairs.

So why not the other way around. If a shop does work, but it's not done right, a consumer can dispute credit card charges.

So where is the student's recourse if they are sold a bill of goods educationally speaking?

I'm thinking a great way to have that happen AND get the government nose out from inside the tent is to have the loan programs run by the schools with the schools on the hook for the loans if their students can't pay.

 

[wallyuwl]

Originally Posted By: VeeDubb
Wally, we are not going to get full objectivity or make zero Type I errors with any criteria. How bout we stop recruiting from good schools because rankings are flawed? How bout we recruit from Devry rather than Berkeley because once in a while a Devry kid can outperform 90% of Berkeley kids? Those "fit" questions you espouse? Tell me how bulletproof they are.


Your flawed reasoning, and an invalid question you ask to applicants, has been exposed, so now all you have to resort to is hyperbole. That isn't going to convince anyone of your perspective. You also apparently have no idea what a Type I error actually is, in the statistical sense.

 

[VeeDubb]

Wally, hyperbole? You are cornered and you won'tanswer the questions. I asked you legit questions.

1. Is it or is it not true rankings are flawed?

2. Is it or is it not true not all Berkeley students will outperform all Devry students?

3. Is it or is it not true that you have zero evidence that your fit question is any superior to my question gauging a kids reasoning process for choosing the school he chose? What would a fresh out of college student know anything about the importance of fit in the business world? Remember, his brain is still developing.


And since you do like to lecture, why don't you tell me the meaning of a Type I error.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
... And if a student completes their degree, it's not entirely their fault if economic conditions make it not possible to repay the loans.


But isn't that where this whole thing started? If a kid wants to study art history or portugese literature or some other arcane subject, well good on them, but when there are limited, in the best of times, economic benefits for that kind of knowledge, who should foot the bill for that mostly useless schooling? I don't see why joe taxpayer, who had nothing to do with that bad decision, should pick up the tab. Let the kid, his parents, or the school pick it up.

And some people take way too long to get through school. I had friends that took 5-6 years to get one degree. Why should people be allowed to borrow money year after year and run up a big loan balance because they want to loaf through school? They shouldn't.

 

[wallyuwl]

Originally Posted By: VeeDubb
Wally, hyperbole? You are cornered and you won'tanswer the questions. I asked you legit questions.



Won't answer your questions? You said: "How bout we stop recruiting from good schools because rankings are flawed? How bout we recruit from Devry rather than Berkeley because once in a while a Devry kid can outperform 90% of Berkeley kids? Those "fit" questions you espouse?"

Those are not questions in context. That is a rant using false pretenses.

You admitted that you are bad at communicating what you are trying to say. This is another example. If you can't even tell when you are, and are not, asking a legitimate question you actually want an answer to, I can't continue. You also have reading comprehension issues, continuing to rant about a "fit question" I never asked.

You'll never admit you asking a 23 year old their thought process about a decision they made when they were 17 is invalid. I get it. You'll never admit your bias toward large public institutions. I get it. You'll never admit that you judge an applicant based on your perception of different institutions (both in a singular sense and categorical sense), partially based on rankings that you admittedly don't understand and don't care to understand. I get it.

Like you said, I'll never be applying to your company. We can both be happy about that. I still feel bad for the applicants.

Regarding the type I error thing, I actually don't like to lecture at my students. I teach in more interactive ways, and allow my students to acquire information on their own. So I'll let you do the same. A simple Google search that would take thirty seconds would tell you what a type I error is. In that same amount of time you can probably find out what a type II error is, too.

And with that, I'm off to attend a seminar to learn ways to improve my use of a piece of technology I already use, so I can be an even more effective instructor.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
I'm thinking a great way to have that happen AND get the government nose out from inside the tent is to have the loan programs run by the schools with the schools on the hook for the loans if their students can't pay.

Interesting idea, but the only way that will happen is if government mandates it, so it won't really be getting the government out of it.

On going policy will allow people that engage in "public service work" to have their tuition forgiven after 10 years. This limitation on having to pay back loans will have additional inflationary pressure on college tuition as well.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
I'm thinking a great way to have that happen AND get the government nose out from inside the tent is to have the loan programs run by the schools with the schools on the hook for the loans if their students can't pay.

Interesting idea, but the only way that will happen is if government mandates it, so it won't really be getting the government out of it.

On going policy will allow people that engage in "public service work" to have their tuition forgiven after 10 years. This limitation on having to pay back loans will have additional inflationary pressure on college tuition as well.


Sure can get the government out of it. They stop guaranteeing the loans. The suggest if they want student loans to continue, that THEY work with the banks to guarantee the loans themselves.

One aspect of the problem is there is a third party who is on the hook for the loans if the student do not repay.

Get that third party out of the equation. Make it so that only the school and the bank are on the hook if the student doesn't repay.

Once it's their money at risk, they'll pay closer attention to the student, the school and the degree program.

 

[VeeDubb]

Your really amazing. You seem to know a lot about what is going on in someone else's head. In fact, a year ago, a nephew of mine was deciding between Berkeley and Stanford. I told him Stanford and listed all the reasons. So much for my public school bias.

The moral of the story is you don't know as much as you think you know. You are very book smart but are frankly clueless sbout the real world. You are unqualified to lecture as much as you do about situations you've never been in.

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
... And if a student completes their degree, it's not entirely their fault if economic conditions make it not possible to repay the loans.


But isn't that where this whole thing started? If a kid wants to study art history or portugese literature or some other arcane subject, well good on them, but when there are limited, in the best of times, economic benefits for that kind of knowledge, who should foot the bill for that mostly useless schooling? I don't see why joe taxpayer, who had nothing to do with that bad decision, should pick up the tab. Let the kid, his parents, or the school pick it up.

And some people take way too long to get through school. I had friends that took 5-6 years to get one degree. Why should people be allowed to borrow money year after year and run up a big loan balance because they want to loaf through school? They shouldn't.


I don't really disagree but if a college degree amounts stricly to job training, then how about employers help pick up the tab more? That would better match students with job openings. Not everyone who can't repay their loans are studying in arcane majors. With loans the taxpayer is not really on the hook that much. Blame can go all around but it is the student saddled with non-dischargable debt. And it's very hard nowadays to complete a bachelor's within 4 years with all the add ons. Taking 5 years is not necessarily loafing.