Student Debt- Where Can We Draw The Line?

[arfink]

I have been reading articles like this lately:
http://www.reclamationsjournal.org/issue_debt_amanda_armstrong.htm

What do you guys think about student debt? Should people be incurring large amounts of debt to go to school? And more importantly, how can/should the big problem of over-indebted under-employed college students be fixed? Some young people have been suggesting just rebelling from the system, refusing to repay, and doing it in large enough number that the debt holders will just have to put up with it. But something in me says that's a very unjust way of dealing with the problem.

Another part of the problem I see is the death of American manufacturing. Service sector jobs are the dominant job position in the this country, while manufacturing is very small, and corporate/professional jobs are an even smaller segment. It would seem to me there are two obvious solutions, one of which is going to just spontaneously happen. One, people will just stop going to college and getting into this kind of debt. Two, people will have to begin making more money for non-professional jobs, since it's obvious in our country that we NEED people to work these jobs. We just need to pay them like we mean it.

In the meantime, what to do about the people who are stuck now? I am one of these people, by the way.

[rachael]

i'm po'

[Era Might]

We need an amendment to the Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of schooling." It should be illegal to require someone to have gone to a school in order to get a job (and it should certainly be illegal to require anyone to go to a school). If someone can do the job, they should be as eligible for the job as anyone else, and should not be discriminated against because they have not chosen to learn in an approved, expensive institution. Then, the government should redirect all the money it wastes toward "educating" us and instead foster alternatives where we can learn freely and at our own leisure. The system now puts all its resources into institutions, rather than resources. That needs to end. Institutions are never-ending drains on society. Resources are clearly defined and finite. Adults should have just as much a right to government funded resources as young people. There are a lot of possibilities to create a new system. For example, you could have a system where every citizen has a certain amount of "credits" that entitle them to use government funded resources, and they can use those resources whenever they like (at 16 or at 60 years of age), and there can be incentives to earn extra credits (e.g., by volunteering to help others use their resources you can earn more credits). These resources would not be institutionally defined...for example, if a citizen wants to use his credits to buy books rather than attend a school, he should be allowed to.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Era Might

[Brother Adam]

An Old Testament style Jubilee year.

If society as a whole decided that higher education needs to be free or that type of debt needs to be able to be bankrupted or forgiven, great. But yes, higher education is way overrated. I think it would be much better to learn a skilled trade for most people. And yes, I'm up to my eyeballs in school debt like everyone else.

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Brother Adam' timestamp='1318043509' post='2317772']
An Old Testament style Jubilee year.

If society as a whole decided that higher education needs to be free or that type of debt needs to be able to be bankrupted or forgiven, great. But yes, higher education is way overrated. I think it would be much better to learn a skilled trade for most people. And yes, I'm up to my eyeballs in school debt like everyone else.
[/quote]


I don't think that 'higher education is way overrated' but I do think it would be good to have more skilled trades training available and less emphasis on certificates and diplomas and degrees for their own sake. My brother's degree is in linguistics but he ended up in finance, and my aunt did a degree in social work and ended up as a travel agent! I don't think degrees are irrelevant (or I would have done post-graduate work myself) but there is a great 'paper chase' that often doesn't prepare one for the real world of work.

[CatherineM]

The GI bill after WW2 raised the US up to new heights. First we need to encourage training in trades that don't require college degrees otherwise in 20 years plumbers and electricians will be making 10 times as much as doctors due to scarcity. Second, we could make it so you have to be 21 to start college. That way you have 3 years to work to save money for college. You could also limit the amount of money you can go into debt for each level of degree.

[Luigi]

My personal recommendation: You can borrow up to the equivalent of two years' anticipated full-time salary.

Example: Ifyou're majoring ineducation, and the starting salary for a public school teacher in your home school district is $30,000/year, you should wind up no more than $60,000 in debt by graduation. That's on top of grants, student-worker income, etc.

You probably won't be able to pay it all back in two years - unless you move back home & your folks let you live there absolutely free - but it's a manageable amount if you repay it over five-six-seven-eight years.

[AccountDeleted]

Australia has an interesting system but I'm sure there are drawbacks as well, I just don't know them all. They have a scheme that used to be called the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) but now it has a different name because when the govt changes they usually change the names of govt schemes as well (go figure - change all the stationery!). Anyway, when I did my degrees, the govt paid the fees and I incurred the 'debt' but I didn't have to start paying it back until I started earning income, and then it was a part of my liabilities when I filed my income tax each year. They would calculate my earnings, and then set a percentage of that as my payment due for that year. If I had a tax refund due, they would deduct from that, but if I didn't, they would present me with a bill for that year. So if you had a bad year income wise, you weren't paying the same amount back as if you had a good year. And if you earned no income (for example, when I was in the convent), then you paid nothing back that year. I suppose this means that it takes a long time for the govt to be paid back, if they ever do get it all.... I only know my own personal circumstance.

So, for example, if I wanted to continue now onto a doctorate (I have my Master's) then I could use this scheme again, they would pay for it, and I would pay back a certain amount each year as calculated until it was paid off.

One of the drawbacks that I know of is that I can't do a lower certificate now and get govt subsidy. So, for example, I wanted to do a Certificate in Aged Care (I was a nurse, but now they want caregivers to have this certificate as well) it would cost me $3000 for the 8 week course, and the govt won't help because I already have a higher degree in a different field (education).

I am sure that there are possibilities if the government really wanted to help out with higher education and skills training. catherinem has some good ideas and there must be lots more!

[missionseeker]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1318044963' post='2317784']
The GI bill after WW2 raised the US up to new heights. First we need to encourage training in trades that don't require college degrees otherwise in 20 years plumbers and electricians will be making 10 times as much as doctors due to scarcity. Second, we could make it so you have to be 21 to start college. That way you have 3 years to work to save money for college. You could also limit the amount of money you can go into debt for each level of degree.
[/quote]


I don't really like that idea. I started college when I was 17. I went to two private schools. (so.. very $$). I had about 14k in loans, which is really not bad. (and I've already paid back about 2k). But it's because I worked my butt off through school. I paid more than 10k out of pocket through payment plans while I was in school. I worked and worked and worked and paid it (yes, for those wondering, I paid it, not my parents). I don't think I would have gone if I had to wait until I was 21. And I didn't go to school to get a degree. I went to school to study something.

Edited October 8, 2011 by missionseeker

[Winchester]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1318043411' post='2317770']
We need an amendment to the Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of schooling." It should be illegal to require someone to have gone to a school in order to get a job
[/quote]
If I run a business, should I not be able to set hiring requirements?

[Winchester]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1318044963' post='2317784']
The GI bill after WW2 raised the US up to new heights.
[/quote]
http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

[Era Might]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1318108404' post='2318113']
If I run a business, should I not be able to set hiring requirements?
[/quote]
Sure, you can determine what are the qualifications for the job, but you should not be able to discriminate against someone for not having met those qualifications by going to a school, anymore than you should be able to discriminate against them for being from a certain country.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Era Might

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1318117411' post='2318149']
Sure, you can determine what are the qualifications for the job, but you should not be able to discriminate against someone for not having met those qualifications by going to a school, anymore than you should be able to discriminate against them for being from a certain country.
[/quote]
I certainly hope that our local hospital requires the doctors they hire to have gone to medical school. I don't care if they are from Mars so long as they can pass the licensing exams.

[Era Might]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1318117636' post='2318150']
I certainly hope that our local hospital requires the doctors they hire to have gone to medical school. I don't care if they are from Mars so long as they can pass the licensing exams.
[/quote]
We probably have very different views on hospitals, but I view them as as I view schools: they create the illusion of health for everyone and divorce us from our own autonomous action. The professionalization of health (by which healthcare has become an institutional service that only doctors are allowed to deal in) has led to the same situation that schools have created: massive debt and inability to pay for the services we are told we need. So, instead of investing in neighborhood medical workers who can deal with common problems, we invest in a system built around health institutions like hospitals where doctors, like teachers, have become a sacred caste, and where most of the stuff doctors do benefits the rich who can afford expensive medical care...common medical problems could be just as easily dealt with by investing in a system of local medical workers...but this would not fit in with our system where, as I said before, we invest in institutions rather than resources. Healthcare, like learning, like living, is no longer something we do for ourselves, it's something we have done for us.

Edited October 9, 2011 by Era Might

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1318043411' post='2317770']
We need an amendment to the Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of schooling." It should be illegal to require someone to have gone to a school in order to get a job (and it should certainly be illegal to require anyone to go to a school). If someone can do the job, they should be as eligible for the job as anyone else, and should not be discriminated against because they have not chosen to learn in an approved, expensive institution.[/quote]
I tend to be against compulsory education myself (why waste resources babysitting people who have no ability for or interest in learning at the expense of those who do?).

However, the government setting demands on what qualifications (or, rather, lack of qualifications) private employers must set for employees is certainly no less tyrannical or problematic. Besides it being an instance of government meddling where it has no right, it would be extremely problematic at the practical level. There are plenty of jobs (usually low-paying) for which no formal education is really necessary. However, to demand that employers set no minimal educational standards for many professional or technical jobs requiring specialized knowledge would just be ludicrous - particularly for entry-level positions in which the prospective employee has no working experience.

[quote]Adults should have just as much a right to government funded resources as young people. . . .[/quote]
I think much of our current problems are due to the idea that everybody is entitled to an ever-growing set of government funded resources.