Slashdot Mirror
Writer: "Why I Defaulted On My Student Loans"
schwit1 writes: There are some valid points raised in Lee Siegel's 1,100 word rant against college loans (if not so much against college education). There are also some bad ones. But two things are clear: the words "personal" and/or "responsibility" were used precisely zero times. Siegel, who described himself as "the author of five books who is writing a memoir about money," is hardly a glowing advertisement for the return on nearly a decade in university just to achieve a Master of Philosophy degree.
Siegel says, "As difficult as it has been, I’ve never looked back. The millions of young people today, who collectively owe over $1 trillion in loans, may want to consider my example. It struck me as absurd that one could amass crippling debt as a result, not of drug addiction or reckless borrowing and spending, but of going to college. ... The rapacity of American colleges and universities is turning social mobility, the keystone of American freedom, into a commodified farce. If people groaning under the weight of student loans simply said, 'Enough,' then all the pieties about debt that have become absorbed into all the pieties about higher education might be brought into alignment with reality. Instead of guaranteeing loans, the government would have to guarantee a college education."
Siegel says, "As difficult as it has been, I’ve never looked back. The millions of young people today, who collectively owe over $1 trillion in loans, may want to consider my example. It struck me as absurd that one could amass crippling debt as a result, not of drug addiction or reckless borrowing and spending, but of going to college. ... The rapacity of American colleges and universities is turning social mobility, the keystone of American freedom, into a commodified farce. If people groaning under the weight of student loans simply said, 'Enough,' then all the pieties about debt that have become absorbed into all the pieties about higher education might be brought into alignment with reality. Instead of guaranteeing loans, the government would have to guarantee a college education."
"Gimme"
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
I agree the current way of funding uni in the U.S. is bad. However, if the government guarantees a uni attempt at a degree, how does the government put a price on it? Is Harvard comparable to Ohio State University? Does a uni degree attempt become another entitlement? Entitlements are already breaking the U.S. budget.
Maybe the U.S. could fund degree attempts at state unis. The problem there is that states have been pulling money out of higher ed. then turning around and claiming their state schools are still state schools. The some of the increase in tuition at state schools is directly the result of the state legislatures pulling money out. The legislators then turn around and claim there is a crisis in higher education with ever higher costs for the average person.
Proof this guy is a financial idiot, "You might want to follow these steps: Get as many credit cards as you can before your credit is ruined." Yeah- get as many credit cards as you can, because you're so awesome at paying back things you owe. Although I might agree with the sentiment behind the article- schooling can be cost prohibitive, and rich people can make tons of money off people just trying to better themselves, I totally disagree with the author's reasoning, logic, and their lack of responsibility.
Why should I guarantee a college education to anyone with my hard-earned tax dollars?
Now take out that "college" part and wonder why you're allowing public schools at all.
Because I'm a victim
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Any degree worth getting can easily repay itself. 1) Get a useful degree, 2) Go to a state school, 3) Quit the narcissist entitlement mentality.
Education has the best ROI, but like any investment you still have to watch how and what you invest in.
Regardless of what has happened to social mobility in the last 30 years, it hasn't affected the author of this article because he is 57 years old. He went to college in the 80's when college was not nearly as expensive. I went to college at the turn of the century and even then it was cheap enough you could pay over half of your college expenses by working part time at minimum wage.
This guy is simply a sociopathic asshole who is just being provocative to get page views. He stopped paying his bills because he is an entitled prick, not because of the federal loan apparatus he is complaining about in the article. I have real sympathy for the problems younger millenials are having because of the rising price of college, and it is shameful for this author to exploit them like this.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Why is higher education only useful for helping you making money? THat is not what it is for! If so, art history would never have been an option for a major to begin with. It is to get an education. ANd that should be available to everyone for as cheaply as possible. If you get a major that is "useless", it shouldn't doom you to a fate of crushing debt for the next thirty years. Crappy job, maybe. But getting a high-paying gig is NOT why you go to school and learn philosophy.
Unless of course, you think that only the wealthy should be able to learn anything about art history...
The hundreds of thousands of dollars are a part of the problem. There is no reason a bachelors degree should cost that much regardless of the institution you go to, and regardless of whether it is in computer science or art history. The loans themselves aren't the problem, aside from enabling the actual problem - that tuition costs are being allowed to grow without bounds. There is no reason a bachelors degree that costs as much as a house should be simply waved off as "a fact of life".
At this point in time, it is becoming more and more possible to get the equivalent of a university degree without going through the university system, and this is a great thing. I agree with you about the idea of "getting an education" vs. getting vocational training.
I have a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science which enabled me to have a nice career and was definitely worthwhile financially, but I also recognize the incredible value of a general liberal arts education in terms actually knowing something useful, but which doesn't directly translate into a marketable skill. Some of my most valuable classes weren't related to my major.
The United States in particular is suffering greatly from an electorate that is woefully ignorant of the history of the Republic, and that of Western Civilization and the philosophical and scientific developments of the last two millennia (and more). This is complete omitting another problem which is the increasing political bias of universities and what they teach, but you're right about one thing. My computer science degree wasn't an "education" by itself, only part of one. However, given that university education costs have risen more rapidly in recent years than anything else in our economic oeuvre, including healthcare, shows that something is really wrong with the system, and some serious checks and balances are needed, specifically in terms of real competition.
That said, at the end of the day, I would never consider that a history degree or a philosophy degree or an English degree would leave you in a position to be able to easily get a decent job, compared to STEM- and business-related degrees, and no one can ignore those economic realities.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Um not the loans are EXACTLY the problem. Tution grows without bounds because everybody smart enough to graduate from college does recognize it has great value, both in the direct economics of employable and the more intelligible things like connections with other people you make and knowledge and thinking skills that really will enable you to make better more informed decisions in the future.
A college education IS VALUABLE, exactly how valuable is difficult to quantify. So now you make large sums of unsecured monies available to young people many of whom have never seen or worked with an account balance that large before and surprise surprise they are willing to spend it. They don't have an appreciate for how much work it might be to pay that back. What they do see is that Crazy Go Nuts University has a new fancy new recreation facility and bigger dorm rooms than Podunk College. Its difficult to compare the actual education quality but dorm and recreation facilities are things you can see. Podunk has no choice if they want to continue to attract students they have to build these things.
In order to build that stuff they raise tuition, which they can because people are paying with loans anyway and everyone qualifies!
If it was not for government secured loans college cost expansion would probably mostly track with inflation. After all with the exception of some leading edge research schools, almost all the cost would be salary if you take away the billion dollar construction projects.
Price insensitivity is the reason costs have gone up, if you can't afford CGNU's 40K tuition you might very well choose Podunk's $12K tuition and lack of fancy building and giant rooms if the alternative is no college for you. If we just got rid of Sally Mea and college loans need to be secured with some kind of collateral or simply small enough lender were willing to fork over on credit history alone, the problem would solve it self.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Nobody owes you a career... Absolutely 100% agreed.
But I have an ethical objection to considering universities as jobs factories. They are not. They never have been. If you want job training, you can go to a VoTech and learn a marketable skill and that will give you a much better ROI, if that is all you are concerned with.
I don't buy it that we can't afford to educate our young people. It is absolutely an attainable goal. You handwave it away by saying the world isn't fair. I agree. But that does not mean we should lie down and accept things that are possible to change. University of California used to be free. Think about that. And the same generation that benefited from free or near free college is remarkably callous towards students that suddenly need to pay $100k for a four year degree in-state. It doesn't have to be this way.