Log in

View Full Version : Student Loan Debt Hell ... is a college degree still a 'good investment' ?



Pages : 1 2 [3]

Melonie
08-01-2011, 02:16 PM
^^^ understood ... i.e. that not working full time as a dancer is a voluntary choice that you would make in any case. However the point remains that, for other girls who may be having similar thoughts in regard to obtaining a 4 year college degree ( or ANOTHER 4 year college degree ), devoting 2 nights a week to dancing plus the balance towards studying ... versus devoting 5 nights a week to dancing ... DOES involve absorbing an additional 'lost opportunity' cost in excess of $100,000 over and above the cost of college tuition !!!

And yes my own viewpoint is somewhat different than yours. I viewed dancing as a means to produce maximum levels of income for a 10-15 year period ... after which my plans were to have built up a large enough savings and investments nest egg to allow me to retire outright from ANY line of work ( which I more or less accomplished successfully over a period of 12 years ). I understand that your viewpoint is different i.e. using part time dancing as a means to defray college costs, with your long term goal being the pursuit of a 'straight job' career for ~30 years after you graduate ( again ). While that certainly is a laudable goal, it's a 'different' goal.

Otoki
08-01-2011, 04:04 PM
^^^ understood ... i.e. that not working full time as a dancer is a voluntary choice that you would make in any case. However the point remains that, for other girls who may be having similar thoughts in regard to obtaining a 4 year college degree ( or ANOTHER 4 year college degree ), devoting 2 nights a week to dancing plus the balance towards studying ... versus devoting 5 nights a week to dancing ... DOES involve absorbing an additional 'lost opportunity' cost in excess of $100,000 over and above the cost of college tuition !!!

And yes my own viewpoint is somewhat different than yours. I viewed dancing as a means to produce maximum levels of income for a 10-15 year period ... after which my plans were to have built up a large enough savings and investments nest egg to allow me to retire outright from ANY line of work ( which I more or less accomplished successfully over a period of 12 years ). I understand that your viewpoint is different i.e. using part time dancing as a means to defray college costs, with your long term goal being the pursuit of a 'straight job' career for ~30 years after you graduate ( again ). While that certainly is a laudable goal, it's a 'different' goal.

Absolutely:) Your accomplishments are extremely impressive, and if I thought I wouldn't burn out I would pursue it. No matter what her future goals, a dancer should definitely maximize the opportunity dancing gives her. I went through a period of depression where I barely worked, and now I look back on that with irritation at the financial opportunities I missed out on. The earlier you start out saving lots of money, the more flexibility you have later down the line. If I hadn't been smart with my money there's no way in hell I would be able to go back to school and do so debt-free.:O

Melonie
08-02-2011, 03:39 AM
Your accomplishments are extremely impressive

Actually, they really aren't !!! In truth I had the advantage of the 'dot-com' tech boom, PLUS the real estate bubble boom, to provide a level of dancing earnings potential that is simply no longer possible today. An addition the recent commodity boom, and to some extent the preceding real estate boom, provided an investment earnings potential that some have described as 'once in a lifetime' opportunities.

Girls attempting to take the same approach today face a much lower dancer earnings potential because, by and large, the majority of strip club customers have less money to spend.

Back on topic, it is also arguable that the same economic conditions which created these earnings opportunities for myself as a dancer ALSO created uncharacteristically favorable opportunities for past US college graduates !! Thus the 'calculations' ( or, more accurately, the crystal ball gazings ) of future opportunities for future US college graduates 4 years from now have a large number of unknown variables. Again if a personal choice is involved that one wants to work in a particular field ... and a college degree is required in order to become 'qualified' to work in said field ... then obtaining that college degree is a necessary prerequisite pure and simple and 'cost versus benefit' issues are not major concerns. But if the goal is more general, i.e. obtaining a college degree in 'hopes' of earning more money in the future than it is possible to earn today, then asking 'cost versus benefit' questions is IMHO highly appropriate. As cited in the earlier example, if the 'real' cost of obtaining a college degree involves not only $30k + in direct college tuition costs, but also the 'loss' of a potential $120k + in additional earnings via full time dancing instead of attending college while dancing part time, the resulting 'cost benefit ratio' may very well be 'negative'.

~

Melonie
08-03-2011, 12:03 PM
I ran across this tidbit ... which shows that at least one in three US college graduates is now working at a job that doesn't require a college degree ...

http://www.wallstreetbear.com/image/Picture_40.png

Of course the subject that nobody wants to discuss is the probability that, as the US labor market continues to run on 'empty', jobs that currently don't require a college degree may START to require a college degree.

Melonie
08-03-2011, 12:40 PM
and for an even 'grimmer' picture ...

(snip)"Student loans will keep a lid on how high housing prices will recover once the economy does settle down. It is amazing to think that currently $1 trillion in student loans still need to be paid and the amount of student debt is only growing. The question of higher education worth always comes up during recessions. Yet the one thing that pundits miss, just like they missed with the housing bubble this last time around, is that we have an enormous market of subprime college players eating up a large portion of government backed loans. Of course these toxic outlets usually grab headlines once bubbles burst but you also have students going to top quality institutions that routinely charge $50,000 a year or more. This is similar to what was seen in the housing market. No one is disputing that a home in a nice area is valuable but to go into massive debt without really thinking about the underlying value is financially disastrous. Millions of Americans are in massive debt or are preparing to go into massive debt to pursue a college degree. How will this impact future home buyers as more and more people carry debt loads that amount to a pseudo-mortgage even before buying a home?"(snip)

(snip)"Finding a parallel to the housing market, this is the subprime market of education and there are billions of dollars that are being made. The argument goes that many of these students need these schools, loans, and grants because they come from lower income areas. Sounds like a familiar argument. Sure, it is nice to get people into homes but how many of those people kept their houses once the bubble popped? Not many. The mortgage brokers never cared about the people they suckered in aside from the commission they were going to churn. Wall Street didn’t care since they were hedged to win no matter what including siphoning off taxpayer bailouts. These for-profit schools use large amounts of their budgets to target these areas and slam students into these government backed loans and who really cares if the person even gets a job later on or even learns anything. It is appalling because there is lack of oversight and no accountability. These schools only survive because of government backing. Hey, if they want to lend their own money then go for it. I doubt they would and the results pretty much sum up the story."(snip)

http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/employment-status-college-graduates.png

(snip)"The above chart looked at the placement data for the class of 2010. What is troubling is the large amount of students working in fields that really don’t utilize their degree. 22 percent are simply not working which is disturbing. But then you have another 22 percent that are working in jobs that really don’t require a college education. Keep in mind this is data looking at college graduates. You can imagine how dismal the data is for those without a college degree. As we now know, the prospects of earning good money in manufacturing are now becoming more limited. So an education in a specific field is necessary at least going to provide some skills beyond the basic. Fields like engineering, accounting, and healthcare seem to have solid prospects but require specialized and long-term training. No going overnight to a crash course and being able to become a mortgage broker making six-figures. Those days are done. So why would people go into debt for tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars if the degree will not produce solid career results? It is one thing to have a basket weaving degree with no debt but another thing when you go into massive debt for it. I get the “knowledge” argument but nothing is stopping folks from going to their local library and reading the greatest books of all time (it also won’t cost you thousands of dollars).

Let me be absolutely clear. I really do believe in people getting a college education. I also believe that owning a home is a smart thing. But there are major caveats to both of these. First, you have to measure the worth and value versus how much debt you will take on. Both of the previous decisions can be problematic if people over pay. There is a mythology around both of these sectors. I call this the “priceless” mentality. For example, some people will say, “good schools, setting roots, and having a place to call our own is priceless” so they justify ridiculous loan amounts for this belief. The same applies to a college education. Many in the public get fooled thinking that all colleges are created the same. They are not. A degree from a top 100 institution is not the same as one from the other 3,000+ colleges out there. Bubbles create massive price dislocations and we are definitely in one when it comes to higher education.(snip)

from


Note that the author has coined a new phrase which actually sums up the current situation very well ... "SUBPRIME COLLEGE STUDENTS" ... which essentially refers to the US gov't loaning / giving large amounts of tuition assistance money to ( typically low income ) college students to attend 'less than highly respected' colleges. Subprime students whose probability of graduation ... whose probability of landing a job that involves earning enough money to actually pay a significant amount of income taxes ( to offset the cost to taxpayers of the loan subsidies ) ... and whose probability of landing a job that actually provides enough after tax income to allow making payments on their student loan in a timely manner ... is fairly low. As the author points out, the US gov't is already 'on the hook' for $1 TRILLION dollars worth of student loans ... much of it to 'subprime college students' ... and thus faces a future replay of subprime mortgage delinquencies and defaults on student loans.

Unfortunately for the 'subprime college students', student loan debt backed by the gov't cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. As such, many are likely to be saddled with a multi-decade college 'mortgage' payment. And the existance / priority of this student loan debt will in turn make many of these 'subprime college students' ineligible for actual mortgages / auto loans etc. on the basis on an unacceptably high debt to income ratio. In fact the situation could get downright scary if adjustable student loan interest rates wind up jumping to 8-10-12% in the future.

~

mikef
08-03-2011, 03:12 PM
http://financemymoney.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/college-tuition.jpg


http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/sallie-mae-loans.png

I wonder if the costs would have risen so fast if there was no govt involvement in student loans?


Not really I don't..... And when do you suppose the austerity and hard times will come to college presidents?

Melonie
08-05-2011, 04:44 AM
And when do you suppose the austerity and hard times will come to college presidents?

If you're talking about the president of a 'public' university or community college, the answer is probably never. After all, their salary is being subsidized by taxpayers at several levels, from gov't funds transfers directly to the colleges, to gov't grant money coming into college coffers via tuition payments, to gov't backed student loan money also coming into college coffers via tuition payments. Much like the subprime housing bubble of a few years ago, as long as future students are able to access credit with no money down, and as long as a college education is still perceived to be a 'good investment', they'll keep enrolling and gov't cash will keep flowing from US taxpayers to the 'public' universities and community colleges !!!

The only significant difference, though, is that a college degree can't be foreclosed on if the 'buyer' fails to make timely payments on their student loan LOL. In reality this isn't all that funny since 100% of the fallout from delinquent student loans will wind up being borne by future US taxpayers - without having even the 'distressed sale' market value of a foreclosed home to help reduce the net loss !!!

innes
08-09-2011, 07:30 PM
From experience:
I graduated from college, top of my class, I've got a diploma and near perfect GPA. I have previous work experience.
Guess who can't get a job?
Two and a half months after I graduated, I *finally* got an interview - at a FAST FOOD PLACE. I could have gotten this job years ago. (I'm still waiting to hear back on whether or not I got this position).
I've applied everywhere! To jobs "above" me, to jobs I "should" have, to jobs "below" me ... everything.

I'm not in debt (thank goodness) as I worked my butt off during high school and college to be able to afford college ... but without a job right now I could go in debt :(

mikef
08-09-2011, 08:23 PM
SAN DIEGO, Aug 09, 2011 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Robbins Umeda LLP, a shareholder rights litigation firm, has commenced an investigation into possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of the law by certain officers and directors at Education Management Corporation /quotes/zigman/108913/quotes/nls/edmc EDMC -1.22% . Education Management is the second-largest for profit college chain, providing in class and online instruction to students in North America. The company was founded in 1962, and is headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

If you invested in Education Management and would like more information about your shareholder rights, please contact attorney Gregory E. Del Gaizo at 800-350-6003 or via the shareholder information form on our website.

Robbins Umeda LLP's investigation focuses on whether the directors and officers of Education Management harmed the company by breaching their fiduciary duties to shareholders. In particular, the firm is investigating allegations that fiduciaries harmed the company by authorizing the use of improper sales and recruiting practices to defraud federal and state government agencies out of more than $11 billion dollars in student aid. Additionally, the firm is examining allegations that officials at Education Management illegally paid and unfairly incentivized recruiters to enroll new college students, regardless of a candidate's previous educational background or the aptitude to meet minimum qualifications, like the ability to read and write.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/robbins-umeda-llp-announces-an-investigation-of-education-management-corporation-2011-08-09?reflink=MW_news_stmp



Ahhhh..... The govt gravy train..... Or how does that saying go..... The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Melonie
08-10-2011, 03:28 AM
Ahhhh..... The govt gravy train..... Or how does that saying go..... The road to hell is paved with good intentions

The 'gold foil hat' crowd will point out that this potential investigation is going to go nowhere. It's going to hit a brick wall at the point where the 'for profit' college attorneys point out that gov't run public schools provided every one of their new 'low income' college students with a high school diploma, and that gov't backed Sallie May screened and approved every one of their new 'low income' college students for a gov't subsidized student loan.

Thus the for-profit college attorneys will undoubtedly argue that if any 'fraud' actually occurred, it stemmed from gov't run public high schools certifying that their diploma'd graduates were capable of meeting minimum qualifications such as the ability to read and write !!! On the heels of the recent national publicity re Atlanta public school teachers caught 'doctoring' student grades, and the need for waivers to be issued re 'No Child Left Behind' student testing requirements, this lawsuit will undoubtedly be settled or dismissed rather than (re)opening the Pandora's Box of actual public school performance ( and particularly so for local public schools serving 'low income' areas ).

Again, in certain Washington corridors, there are those who look upon student grants and loans being provided for 'low income' college students as well intended. In other Washington corridors, student loans and grants to 'low income' college students are at least looked on as an alternative to social welfare benefits for a 2-4 year period as well as a way to keep 'low income' young people peacefully occupied.

However, this well intentioned policy has two serious consequences. The first is obviously that a large amount of non-bankruptcy dischargeable student loan debt will be hung around the necks of those 'low income' college students whether they graduate from college or not. The second, and IMHO more insidious, consequence is that employers recognize the de-facto sub-standard academic levels of for-profit colleges, community colleges, state colleges etc who are forced to 'curve' their grades to avoid immediately flunking out a huge percentage of their 'low income' students. Unfortunately, this reflects badly re the employers' perception of the academic abilities of EVERY student graduating from such colleges who submits a job application.

This of course was the basis behind my earlier caveat that, these days, all degrees are NOT equal in the eyes of future employers. Thus anyone considering attending a state college or for-profit college should thoroughly investigate how well or how poorly that particular college is rated among regional employers. And community college degrees are now being pretty much written off by employers as only being equivalent to a diploma from a highly rated high school !

~

mistresscyn
08-12-2011, 12:49 PM
As someone who's looking at having $40k in loans when I get finished this December, I can definitely say that I wished I'd not gone back when I did.

My degree is in Film and English and it isn't worth the paper it's printed on. My college his horrendous, and most Seniors graduate and never find a job in the industry. I've already been working in the film industry now for about 6 years. I've come a long way, but none of that required a degree, and most of the things I learned in class, I could've easily have taken a course/class with a better teacher, more convenient hours, and paid substantially less out of pocket.

I've since moved into pro-Domme work on a part-time basis and will be doing camming and phone work to build a fan-base/clientele to pay off my debt as it's one of the few viable career options I have with a decent potential to pay off a substantial portion of my loans within a years time.

Melonie
08-12-2011, 03:13 PM
^^^ at least you've got the 'qualifications' to do the camming and phone work that will allow you to avoid having that $40k in student loans be an 'Albatross around your neck' for the next decade !!!

I don't mean to be depressing, but just think of what your financial position could have been if you had not spent that $40k going to college, and had instead devoted a major effort to camming and phone work over the course of the last 4 years !!!

mistresscyn
08-13-2011, 03:06 PM
^^^ at least you've got the 'qualifications' to do the camming and phone work that will allow you to avoid having that $40k in student loans be an 'Albatross around your neck' for the next decade !!!

I don't mean to be depressing, but just think of what your financial position could have been if you had not spent that $40k going to college, and had instead devoted a major effort to camming and phone work over the course of the last 4 years !!!

I started in the adult industry as a non-nude paysite model when I was 19 yrs old, I'm 27 now. Due to a bad web master, lack of knowledge and motivation, I didn't succeed. I eventually left for more 'industry accepted' modeling to build a very impressive resume. (One of 4 that I have, so being in the adult industry for me isn't a necessity, but something that I'm choosing to do because of the $$$.)

I can also say with certainty that I wouldn't have had the balls back then to do what I do now. I've changed a lot as a person over the past 9 years.

As far as dropping out and going back to school, if I would've understood the issues with my college better, and had a stronger grasp on my career choices, I wouldn't have bothered.

I'm very fortunate that Domming (and the various ways I can Domme) is a choice open to me as that will allow me to pay everything off and help secure myself financially for the future.

La Maddalena
08-23-2011, 10:51 AM
I'm completing a master's degree now and I'm in a ton of debt. Now, I realize that most jobs care about experience more than they do about degrees. So, I'm competing with thousands of other students for internships (non-paid) just to get experience in my field of study. This means I will probably not get a paid job in my field for at least a year.

Melonie
08-23-2011, 02:26 PM
^^^ it's difficult to make a general statement in regard to what employers are actually looking for in the way of 'successful' job applicants. But a few common characteristics seem to repeat themselves.

- an employer wants to hire an applicant who can be immediately productive. Depending on the skill level of the particular job, this means that proven previous experience counts heavily.

- an employer does NOT want to hire an applicant who is overqualified. The reason of course is that the employer and applicant both know that the applicant's acceptance of 'under-employment' will also be followed by a continuing job search for something 'better' ... thus eventually leaving the employer with the bill for providing specific training to the overqualified former employee plus the need to seek and train a replacement.

- some employers place GREAT stock in the educational credentials of employees. This usually occurs when the employer must 'sell' those employee qualifications in order to bolster credibility. This usually applies to law firms, engineering firms, financial firms, gov't jobs etc. In such cases, a new graduate with an Ivy League or 'top shelf' degree may win out over an experienced earlier graduate from a state college or 'no name' college.

- I also hate to say this, but 'who you know' and 'who you blow' are NOT total figments of imagination ... and particularly so where young and beautiful female potential job applicants are concerned. Obviously major corporations have firm policies in place on the 'who you blow' aspect, but many smaller businesses do not. And in regard to 'who you know', it is often the case that hiring occurs as the result of word of mouth knowledge of a job opening passing between friends, family, former classmates, etc. - with the posting of said job opening never being publicly listed.

Kellydancer
08-23-2011, 09:17 PM
As someone who's looking at having $40k in loans when I get finished this December, I can definitely say that I wished I'd not gone back when I did.

My degree is in Film and English and it isn't worth the paper it's printed on. My college his horrendous, and most Seniors graduate and never find a job in the industry. I've already been working in the film industry now for about 6 years. I've come a long way, but none of that required a degree, and most of the things I learned in class, I could've easily have taken a course/class with a better teacher, more convenient hours, and paid substantially less out of pocket.

I've since moved into pro-Domme work on a part-time basis and will be doing camming and phone work to build a fan-base/clientele to pay off my debt as it's one of the few viable career options I have with a decent potential to pay off a substantial portion of my loans within a years time.

By chance is your college in Chicago? I graduated from school with a famous film department and I hear the exact thing there. My degree is in radio (oddly my MA concentration was film and concentration mainly). Most of the people I attended college with never found a job in their field. Many are working in jobs not requiring a degree like salesperson, telemarketer, bus driver, etc.

mistresscyn
08-25-2011, 11:02 AM
By chance is your college in Chicago? I graduated from school with a famous film department and I hear the exact thing there. My degree is in radio (oddly my MA concentration was film and concentration mainly). Most of the people I attended college with never found a job in their field. Many are working in jobs not requiring a degree like salesperson, telemarketer, bus driver, etc.

No, this is an un-famous school in Louisiana. But as we have the 3rd largest film market in the nation here, it's pretty tragic.

mikef
09-14-2011, 07:15 AM
Student Loan Default Rates Rise Sharply in Past Year
By TAMAR LEWIN

The share of federal student loan defaults rose sharply last year, especially at for-profit colleges and universities, where 15 percent of borrowers defaulted in the first two years of repayment, up from 11.6 percent the previous year.

According to Department of Education data released Monday, 8.8 percent of borrowers over all defaulted in the fiscal year that ended last Sept. 30, the latest figures available, up from 7 percent the previous year.

At public institutions, the rate was 7.2 percent, up from 6 percent, and at not-for-profit private institutions, it was 4.6 percent, up from 4 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/education/13loans.html


STUDENT DEBT: America's Next Bubble?


Figures provided by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York show that since 1999, outstanding student loan debt has grown by more than 511 percent. Over that same period, all other household debt in America – the sum total of all credit card bills, all auto loans, even all mortgage debt assumed during the great housing boom and bust that triggered the financial crisis – grew by about 100 percent.

Rising by $100 billion a year, outstanding student loan debt now stands at about $930 billion, and is expected to reach $1 trillion by year’s end.

“Student loan debt has become a macroeconomic factor; it affects the economy,” said Mark Kantrowitz, publisher of the financial aid website www.finaid.org. “Students who graduate with excessive debt are more likely to delay buying a car, buying a house, getting married, having children, saving for their retirement….They're spending less because they first have to tackle their student loan debt.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/19/student-debt-americas-next-bubble/

Melonie
09-15-2011, 04:53 PM
^^^ yup, total student loan debt now reportedly exceeds total credit card debt in the USA.

The kicker, of course, is that unlike unpaid credit card bills / car loans / mortgages etc. which are dischargeable via bankruptcy, student loan debt can only be gotten rid of by actually paying off the outstanding loan balance. Indeed in many cases these days, even if a new college graduate is lucky enough to land an entry level job, the available pay rate they receive from that entry level job combined with the monthly student loan payment cost may leave them with a net disposable income that falls below the official 'poverty' level ( without being eligible for the social welfare benefits and lower tax rates that would apply had their gross income actually fallen below the 'official' poverty level ).

Thus the author of your snippet is indeed correct that many recent college graduates are very likely to spend the next 10+ years renting cheap apartments, driving older cars, postponing marriage / children, and saving little or nothing from their paychecks, as they concentrate on staying current with their student loan payments. And falling behind on student loan payments only serves to extend the length of time that the student loan will continue to 'paralyze' their financial progress.

klaza
09-17-2011, 06:43 PM
It's possible to discharge student loans in bankruptcy, but it's very rare. Which does make sense - otherwise it would be too easy to declare bankruptcy after graduating before accumulating any real assets.

Students need to be smart about how they spend their tuition money. If you go to a private school, are you really receiving a superior education justifying the increased tuition and debt load?

Kellydancer
09-17-2011, 08:46 PM
- an employer does NOT want to hire an applicant who is overqualified. The reason of course is that the employer and applicant both know that the applicant's acceptance of 'under-employment' will also be followed by a continuing job search for something 'better' ... thus eventually leaving the employer with the bill for providing specific training to the overqualified former employee plus the need to seek and train a replacement.

I'm noticing this in interviews. For instance let's rate jobs from 1 (entry level) to 10 (upper management). I am say a 6 or so and am getting job interviews from 7-8. However, when I apply for jobs at 6 or below I rarely get calls and never get the job.

Melonie
09-17-2011, 11:29 PM
It's possible to discharge student loans in bankruptcy, but it's very rare

rare to the point of near extinction. The only student loans eligible for discharge via bankruptcy are loans made directly by banks / private lenders that do NOT have gov't guarantees.



I'm noticing this in interviews. For instance let's rate jobs from 1 (entry level) to 10 (upper management). I am say a 6 or so and am getting job interviews from 7-8. However, when I apply for jobs at 6 or below I rarely get calls and never get the job.

Yup. Most successful business operators thoroughly analyze their cost structures ... and employee training costs / turnover rate is usually a major component.



If you go to a private school, are you really receiving a superior education justifying the increased tuition and debt load?

Where private schools are concerned, a superior education may not be the only issue involved. See my earlier post regarding 'who you know'.

Eric Stoner
10-11-2011, 08:45 AM
I thought about starting a new thread on the affordability of college education but hesitated to do so to avoid anything too "political". Likewise, I hesitated to chime in on this thread for the same reason. However the questions of whether to go to college and how to pay for it are important for many S-webbers so I will try to raise the relevant issues in as neutral or an apolitical way as possible.

1. As many other posters have pointed out , whether or not to go to college is certainly a topical issue. Despite the exhorbitant cost, the fact remains that earnings for college grads are much higher than for non-college graduates. Likewise the unemployment rate for graduates is much lower than for those without a college degree.

2. The cost of college today is ridiculous. Inflation adjusted tution and fees have TRIPLED in the last 30 years. My alma mater is now charging students almost seven times what I paid about 30 years ago. The irony is that Federal aid to college education has more than quadrupled since 1980 and student loan debt is now greater than credit card debt. Currently it is more than $800 billion.

3. Attention today is focused on "for-profit" colleges but another irony is that "non-profit" colleges have higher profit margins . Huh ? What ? Eric : Non- profit colleges don't have "Profits". That's why they call them "non-profit". Actually they do and they are increasing far beyond the rate of inflation. A profit is defined here as money exceeding the cost of educating a student. Non-profits take the excess money from undergraduate education and spread it around the campus to subsidize research, graduate education, majors and departments nobody is interested in ,athletics, cultural activities, excess compensation and blatant featherbedding.

4. If you compute all the input costs of educating a student from professor salaries to photocopying, it costs roughly $8000 a year to educate an undergrad at a RESIDENTIAL college. But private universities are charging an average of $37,000 and public universities are charging in-state residents ( legal or not ) an average of $16,000. The money these colleges take in does NOT include endowment giving , Federal, corporate and institutional grants.

Rather than make a blanket statement, I think I can stay within the permissible parameters by just raising the question as to how much of this is caused by Federal aid including Pell grants and student loans ? In other words the virtual Federal takeover of student loans is likely to increase what colleges are charging. Without them , colleges would be forced to REDUCE tuition to make themselves more affordable. Let's leave out any discussion of whether or not the Federal government should be doing these things. The fact is that for now, we have these programs and their effects on the cost of college is clear. Just as the Fed pumped up the housing bubble by pumping out money , so too the Federal government is pumping up college costs. It is another irony that they have done so as part of a well intentioned effort to make college more affordable and more accessible to more people.

Another question is whether for-profit colleges and on-line universities are doing the same or better for less ? Any grads or students from either or both care to share their first hand experience ? Any regrets on missing out on the "college experience" ?

Kellydancer
10-11-2011, 11:58 AM
I can't answer that since I attended several non profits. How it went for me is this: I attended a junior college for a year since I got a free ride. Not many know this but if you graduate top 25% of your class and decide to attend a community college they will usually pick up the whole tage. Everything was included, tuition, fees, books, even got a stipend that was pretty generous. Then after the year I went to a religious college but only went a semester. After that I started stripping and attended art college where I graduated. I then went to a public grad school.

I can't speak for all of these schools since I only used the job services at the two schools I actually graduated from. The art college job center is worthless unless you have connections. Grad school job services did help me with my resume and periodically have job fairs. I did get one of my jobs from attending the grad school and got many interviews from attending the art college.

I do know a few who attended the for profit schools and have heard they found jobs but they were often lower jobs. One of my former employers refuses to interview people from for profit schools because "it's not a real school". Many employers have that attitude.

One other thing about the art college is that I felt I was paying for the name. It's a well known school and many people who go into the vision, performing and media arts attend the college. However, it was a piss poor excuse for a school. It had open admission, which meant anyone could attend. Because of this many classes were watered down. I usually had all the work done by the middle of the semester. They also didn't offer a student center or a fitness center. I understand they do now as well as dorms (it was a commuter school when I attended). The equipment was very outdated and they were teaching us things on this equipment long out of style. Plus we were also paying "student fees" on every class, for things like paper. Also, they charged us all this money for activity fees and most of the activities were of a politically nature (won't go there due to the political ban).

Krill_
10-11-2011, 09:51 PM
just raising the question as to how much of this is caused by Federal aid including Pell grants and student loans ? In other words the virtual Federal takeover of student loans is likely to increase what colleges are charging. Without them , colleges would be forced to REDUCE tuition to make themselves more affordable. Let's leave out any discussion of whether or not the Federal government should be doing these things.

It's a fair question as to whether the easy availability of student loans is a contributor to rising tuition, however the risk of experimenting to see if reductions force schools to reign in cost should be obvious. As a first step I think the Obama administration did a good thing shutting down subsidies to private lenders for federally guaranteed loans; the next step should probably be looking at amounts and more academic merit based qualifications.

Also I think you have it the wrong way around with "programs of little interest". It's cheap to teach humanities and when a history major is paying the same tuition as a mechanical engineering major, it's the history major doing the subsidizing. Some universities have already started moving towards real cost per credit rather than flat rates.

Eric Stoner
10-12-2011, 09:35 AM
It's a fair question as to whether the easy availability of student loans is a contributor to rising tuition, however the risk of experimenting to see if reductions force schools to reign in cost should be obvious. As a first step I think the Obama administration did a good thing shutting down subsidies to private lenders for federally guaranteed loans; the next step should probably be looking at amounts and more academic merit based qualifications.

Also I think you have it the wrong way around with "programs of little interest". It's cheap to teach humanities and when a history major is paying the same tuition as a mechanical engineering major, it's the history major doing the subsidizing. Some universities have already started moving towards real cost per credit rather than flat rates.

Easy does it with the "politics". I refrained and so can you.

I understand your point concerning the varying cost of various courses but there is no reason to go there. The issue is the AVERAGE cost of educating a student versus what the colleges are actually charging. It's an interesting question whether at some point we will have "no-frills" universities where the students do the reading and watch the lectures on line. Then mail in their papers and tests and get graded. We will still have things like the LSAT and GRE to guage actual student achievement and performance. What you miss out on are the community and comraderie of university life ; living away from home ; personally interacting with the professors etc. My guess is that for a lot of people the trade-off would be well worth it based on radically reduced costs.

Here's another issue , especially for the public universities : How much subsidizing ought there be ( by both the taxpayers and tuition paying students ) for low demand majors ? If economics and engineering are in greatest demand and offer the best chance of of post grad employment why should things like "Women's Studies" ; "African -American Studies" ; Art History or even Classical Languages be subsidized ? The obvious answer is that it would mean the death knell for "Liberal Arts" which is arguably not a good thing. Not good for students and not good for society at large. Many employers have expressed preference for well rounded graduates so the English Departments ought to be safe. But ultimately it comes down to how much Liberal Education we can afford and are willing to pay for.

Kellydancer
10-12-2011, 01:05 PM
I think students should be told that the whole thing about employers wanting anyone with a degree is a myth. I know when I started college back in the early 90's I was told that employees just wanted degreed, didn't care what degree. This is a lie and I've known people in worthless degrees who found that employers didn't hire them because of this.

However, many employers want general degrees instead of a specific degree. Certain degrees are sort of a catch all, if this makes sense. I have a communications degree, which is a general one, as is business. In college I concentrated major wise on radio and minor wise on marketing but neither are listed on my degree it just says communications and business. Oddly I always state my minor is marketing but rarely do I list my broadcasting major. I see a lot of employers asking for these degrees because the thought is with them they have fantastic writing and logic skills. I have never seen ads looking for a womens study degree unless it was for a women organization or for teaching.

The amount of former classmates I know with degrees in worthless degrees working jobs that don't require them is astounding. Many are working as cashiers and a few others are bus drivers. I know if I had to do it again I'd probably get a degree in something more valuable.

Krill_
10-12-2011, 05:39 PM
The issue is the AVERAGE cost of educating a student versus what the colleges are actually charging. It's an interesting question whether at some point we will have "no-frills" universities where the students do the reading and watch the lectures on line. Then mail in their papers and tests and get graded. We will still have things like the LSAT and GRE to guage actual student achievement and performance. What you miss out on are the community and comraderie of university life ; living away from home ; personally interacting with the professors etc. My guess is that for a lot of people the trade-off would be well worth it based on radically reduced costs.

What you're describing is reality. Online courses are a joke, and for-profit online universities are one of the best rackets going. One often cited statistic is Phoenix University graduating 4% of its online students within a 6 year period, and that's at one of the supposedly reputable online universities. That is shockingly bad. There's also issues with job placement and student / teacher relationships that never develop for job placement and recommendations.

Having said that, one thing that I must say is awesome with online learning is free online lectures that many universities are now making available to the public.

lokikola
10-12-2011, 05:46 PM
deleted

Eric Stoner
10-13-2011, 07:00 AM
What you're describing is reality. Online courses are a joke, and for-profit online universities are one of the best rackets going. One often cited statistic is Phoenix University graduating 4% of its online students within a 6 year period, and that's at one of the supposedly reputable online universities. That is shockingly bad. There's also issues with job placement and student / teacher relationships that never develop for job placement and recommendations.

Having said that, one thing that I must say is awesome with online learning is free online lectures that many universities are now making available to the public.

You've hit the nail on the head but I think there are a LOT of reasons for such a low graduation rate at Phoenix et.al. The six year rate at a LOT of lower grade public colleges and universities isn't all that much better.

As you say , there are services and benefits that come with a "real" college that you can't get online.

Eric Stoner
10-13-2011, 07:08 AM
I think students should be told that the whole thing about employers wanting anyone with a degree is a myth. I know when I started college back in the early 90's I was told that employees just wanted degreed, didn't care what degree. This is a lie and I've known people in worthless degrees who found that employers didn't hire them because of this.

However, many employers want general degrees instead of a specific degree. Certain degrees are sort of a catch all, if this makes sense. I have a communications degree, which is a general one, as is business. In college I concentrated major wise on radio and minor wise on marketing but neither are listed on my degree it just says communications and business. Oddly I always state my minor is marketing but rarely do I list my broadcasting major. I see a lot of employers asking for these degrees because the thought is with them they have fantastic writing and logic skills. I have never seen ads looking for a womens study degree unless it was for a women organization or for teaching.

The amount of former classmates I know with degrees in worthless degrees working jobs that don't require them is astounding. Many are working as cashiers and a few others are bus drivers. I know if I had to do it again I'd probably get a degree in something more valuable.

I'm going to admittedly cross the line a bit to make a larger and relevant point. I have long thought that certain majors like Women's Studies and African-American studies do little more than build self esteem among the students and provide employment for a lot of middling and mediocre academics. Cornel West is a prime example. Not according to me ; but his peers consider his "scholarship" a worthless joke. He is the poster man for worthless courses. I say "worthless" because how many employers are seriously interested in hiring an African American studies major ? Or as you point out, what job skills do you get by majoring in Women's Studies ?

These areas of study also let the poobahs of academia feel better about themselves and their institutions by promoting diversity and letting students feel better about themselves. That's all fine and dandy except that EVERYONE pays for these "feel good " programs that have little to no practical value for the students.

Melonie
10-13-2011, 10:27 AM
circling back to the central thread topic, indeed many employers now regard community college 2 year degrees and for-profit 2 year degrees as 'worthless' from the standpoint of improving the expected productivity of graduates over the expected productivity of other job candidates without a 2 year degree. Obviously there may be exceptions, and especially so when the 2 year degree is in a highly techical field.

For better or worse, the same sort of 'stigma' is now being projected on 4 year degree holders from for-profit colleges and from certain state colleges. Arguably, this is just another extension of the widening 'gap' between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots' ... in the sense that prospective employers give increased weight, increased hiring probability, and increased starting salary levels, to 4 year degree holders from Ivy League and other 'name' schools. This is based on an employer perception that the academic standards of the Ivy League and other 'name' schools are now significantly higher than those of for-profit and/or state colleges offering the same degrees.

In either of the above cases, the blunt point to consider is that college students attempting to earn a degree at 1/3 or 1/4 the tuition cost of the equivalent Ivy League or 'name' college degree may not in fact get 'equal value' from prospective future employers after they graduate from a for-profit or state college. This leads to yet another equation of the true cost of the degree when 'lost opportunity cost' i.e. not earning a paycheck while studying for 2-4 years, and 'costs of living' for those 2-4 years, are also considered. If these factors are taken into account for an exotic dancer, where the 'lost opportunity cost' of not dancing full time in order to study could add up to $200,000+ over a 4 year period, the actual net cost differential of attending an Ivy League or 'name' college versus a for-profit or state college may only be on the order of 25-33%. If this 25-33% net savings results in a permanent pay rate differential, and/or a longer time period to be hired at an entry level job, and/or a higher probability of being hit with future layoffs, the decision to pursue a for-profit or state college degree may indeed be a net money loser.

Agreed that de-facto 'cost shifting' occurs on a routine basis regarding the actual costs incurred by colleges to offer different degree programs, programs of differing 'popularity' thus differing number of enrolled students over which to spread the costs, while charging a 'one size fits all' tuition rate per credit-hour. But in terms of the central point of this thread, that merely means that the student loan balance will be higher than it otherwise might have been.

~

Kellydancer
10-13-2011, 11:25 AM
I'm going to admittedly cross the line a bit to make a larger and relevant point. I have long thought that certain majors like Women's Studies and African-American studies do little more than build self esteem among the students and provide employment for a lot of middling and mediocre academics. Cornel West is a prime example. Not according to me ; but his peers consider his "scholarship" a worthless joke. He is the poster man for worthless courses. I say "worthless" because how many employers are seriously interested in hiring an African American studies major ? Or as you point out, what job skills do you get by majoring in Women's Studies ?

These areas of study also let the poobahs of academia feel better about themselves and their institutions by promoting diversity and letting students feel better about themselves. That's all fine and dandy except that EVERYONE pays for these "feel good " programs that have little to no practical value for the students.

I actually think that too. I was told long ago that worthless degrees are there for the less achieving students so they feel their degree is important. However they get the degrees and find no jobs are available. I'll even go further and say many degrees accomplish that as well now. If I knew then what I know now I would have majored in something like business instead of just getting a minor. At least though in my degree I was required to take a lot of courses like economics and marketing that have value. I originally considered some kind of theatre or dance degree but not much use for those either (though to me they are more worthwhile than women studies or African American studies). They are far from the only worthless degrees.

I think this goes back to what I always say and that is college has become an extension of high school. People who never should have gone to college are now attending. Because colleges tend to make more from these students (because they tend to take longer to graduate and often require remedial classes) they offer these degrees for them. Then of course they water down the other courses so they don't feel bad (because heaven forbid we upset kids who aren't as academic as others). We all pay the price because it lowers the value of degrees and people often go in debt to pay for the paper.

Eric Stoner
10-13-2011, 12:31 PM
^^^ Both you and Mel are pretty much ending up at the same place via slightly different routes.

Sad though it may be the plain facts are that :

1. Too many people are going to college.

2. Too many are attending who would be better served by some other type of training.

3. College costs are out of control.

4. A degree is NOT worth what it once was. There are even plenty of Ivy League degrees that have little to no value to many prospective employers.

5. Student debt is out of control.

All that being said, there are ways to limit and control the cost of college :

1. Take as many AP courses in high school as possible. When I was in high school we had a grand total of one (1) AP course. Today, many high schools have as many as 10 or 12.

2. Go to a "public" in state school whenever possible.

3. Apply for as many scholarships and grants as you possibly can. Applying for a lot of these things has almost become a lost art. There are books and websites devoted to the whole application process that can help walk you through applying for a lot of possible sources of college money. The worst they can do is say : "NO". There are also web-sites devoted to helping you graduate college with low to no student loan debt.

4. Many employers still have programs that pay for college or college courses.

Kellydancer
10-13-2011, 12:44 PM
I'm definitely in agreement with her. I know when I was in school there were only a few AP classes, but several honors courses which at that time were pretty much the same. In hindsight it would have made more sense for me to take those classes.

But yes, way too many students are attending college who would be better served by trade schools. But the problem is many of the trade schools are closing. I've mentioned this before but when I was in school we had college prep route and work study route. Those students in the remedial classes or deemed not smart enough (obviously it was worded differently)were encouraged to attend classes at the vocational school and it was set up junior and senior year these students would attend half classes there and half at high school. I don't know much else except that these students were graduating school and had actual careers in hairstyling or mechanics. This vocational school closed a few years back because the high schools now encourage everyone to attend college.

Of course now there is what I call the "easy A" classes where everyone gets an A no matter how good. Teachers are now told to give good grades in many classes. So many don't know how well they are really doing.

Speaking of the employers that pay for classes, my last employer did that and most of the companies I've been interviewing for also offer these. While I would love to go and get another degree I will not unless someone else pays for it. My former employer wanted me to get an accounting degree but I was laid off before it happened.

I will say though that so far grad school is not open to everyone and I hope it never is. I suspect it will be though. When I was in grad school and got my first test I was stunned because unlike college, which was mostly t/f, multiple choice, etc, grad school tests are hard. You need to do an essay and write out the answers and all without notes.

mistresscyn
10-13-2011, 03:54 PM
I think students should be told that the whole thing about employers wanting anyone with a degree is a myth. I know when I started college back in the early 90's I was told that employees just wanted degreed, didn't care what degree. This is a lie and I've known people in worthless degrees who found that employers didn't hire them because of this.

However, many employers want general degrees instead of a specific degree. Certain degrees are sort of a catch all, if this makes sense. I have a communications degree, which is a general one, as is business. In college I concentrated major wise on radio and minor wise on marketing but neither are listed on my degree it just says communications and business. Oddly I always state my minor is marketing but rarely do I list my broadcasting major. I see a lot of employers asking for these degrees because the thought is with them they have fantastic writing and logic skills. I have never seen ads looking for a womens study degree unless it was for a women organization or for teaching.

The amount of former classmates I know with degrees in worthless degrees working jobs that don't require them is astounding. Many are working as cashiers and a few others are bus drivers. I know if I had to do it again I'd probably get a degree in something more valuable.

I think colleges need to offer more practical life classes and push for more internships within their field. I only consider a degree "worthless" if you never use it. I'm about to finish my undergrad in Film with an English minor. (My actual major is film, theater, and communications, so I'll have to see how that comes up on my degree.)

Three Stories, Three Outcomes:

-I have a friend who graduated in Int'l Studies a few years ago. She went to get a job in her field and was denied because she didn't have any internship experience. She spent the next year doing crappy internships and working crappy retail positions she could've done in college. She finally went to S. Korea to do TESL. She's been there ever since and has managed to tour most of Asia and pay off all her student loan debt in the process.

-My roommate graduated magna cum laude about a year or two ago with a Media Production degree and a minor in photography and something else I can't remember. She's since gone to work at a leasing office after getting out of the retail industry, and is now a Property Manager at a tiny 8-plex for her Dad. She has yet to start paying off her $75k in student loan debt and is just grateful that it's gone into collections and she no longer has to pay the interest on it as well. (She'd planned on consolidating her loans, but that ended when the new college loan rules went into effect.) To top this off, she's realized that after doing student films/internships, and finally coming to "Hollywood South" that she doesn't actually want work in the Entertainment Industry. She's currently doing alcohol promos and her family is pushing her to get a generic desk job. (She also isn't having much luck with Domming, so I don't know how things are going to work out for her in the long run.)

-I'm about graduate college at the young age of 27 (lol) with a "C" gpa and $35k of student loan debt. I'm figuring that when I get a chance to start domming full-time that I'll make enough money to pay off my entire student loan debt in less than a year. (This is based off of realistic earning percentages I've seen from other dommes, cam performers, etc.) Oddly, I plan on applying the little I've learned in my major in college (my minor/various electives were more informative), with opening my own clip store/doing web cam shows. I figure that if I want/need to quit, that I'll have the option for an "early retirement" in about 3 years after touring the US, Europe/Asia, and buying a house. From there I can jump back into the film industry and possibly move into IATSE or discretely TESL.

Kellydancer
10-13-2011, 06:24 PM
I firmly believe in internships and did quite a few in college. The colleges I attended required all students to do an internship. Strangely as far as I'm concerned my degree comes into play often when it comes to jobs. More than anything though my SKILLS play a bigger part, some I learned in school, others at work or taught myself.

I often wonder though with those who have these rather specific degrees how they can get decent jobs. I would assume they go into them hoping to get into an organization where they would come in handy.

GlamourRouge
10-18-2011, 11:18 AM
I only consider a degree "worthless" if you never use it.

I don't think that's true. What about me, for example? I have undergrad and grad work both in psychology, and I use that information every day of my life, and especially in dancing & camming. I'm sure I would be making half of what I'm making now if I didn't have that knowledge. I also feel like it improved my mental health and my quality of life in general.

So while I've never technically "used" my degree to stay (I quit) in a vanilla psychology job, it has helped tremendously. Then again, maybe I will use it at some point because I am only in my early-to-mid 20s. But the point is, I don't think its so cut and dry.

_Elle_
10-18-2011, 12:17 PM
I will graduate in May with a bachelor's of science in business from a private college with a 3.7 gpa. I haven't done any internships, but I really should- my school has internship fairs and offers a lot of help when it comes to getting them. The hold up right now is that I have a 2.5 hour commute to school (I totaled my car, too) and the fact that I really have no desire to work in the corporate world. I feel I will make far less at entry level than I will dancing and building my dancewear business.

I get frustrated with school and think that it is worthless. Truly- it isn't. I've had good marketing, human resources, management, and leadership courses. I've learned a lot and have been able to polish my business skills. However, I don't think it is worth the 80k in loans I will graduate with. Hopefully, I can get motivated to find an internship or two and at least try out the 'real job' world.

Melonie
10-18-2011, 05:49 PM
^^^ you hit on the root question yet again. Nobody is disputing the fact that obtaining a college degree of any kind has 'value'. However, the question is whether the total cost of tuition, PLUS the lost opportunity cost of studying instead of doing some other activity that would have produced income, is 'worth it' compared to the added 'value' gained from obtaining the degree.

Eric Stoner
10-19-2011, 08:00 AM
^^^ you hit on the root question yet again. Nobody is disputing the fact that obtaining a college degree of any kind has 'value'. However, the question is whether the total cost of tuition, PLUS the lost opportunity cost of studying instead of doing some other activity that would have produced income, is 'worth it' compared to the added 'value' gained from obtaining the degree.

That IS the $100,000 question isn't it ?

It is interesting to read the personal stories here on S-Web and compare them to the spoiled brats of "Occupy Wall St. " Most of the posters here paid for college themselves and tried to take courses relevant to earning a better living. In contrast, read what some of those demonstrators majored in and it's no surpise why many "cannot find jobs". Ironically, when surveyed , a LOT of them are employed.

Likewise, there is a LOT less bitching here about the debt incurred for college. Just acceptance that loans had to be taken out to pay for school. In contrast the demonstrators are "demanding " that their student loans be forgiven.

I don't want to get any deeper into this for the usual "political" reasons but I couldn't resist commenting on the contrast in attitude between most of the posters here and the demonstrators.

mikef
10-19-2011, 01:27 PM
Likewise, there is a LOT less bitching here about the debt incurred for college. Just acceptance that loans had to be taken out to pay for school. In contrast the demonstrators are "demanding " that their student loans be forgiven.




It's still early.... The cry will grow...... This nation (Not a political statement ;D ) socializes it's losses.

Kellydancer
10-19-2011, 01:49 PM
Well, I do complain about my student loans because my debt has not paid off even now. I'm not alone though and this recession is proving nothing is safe. However, because of my skills I have no doubt it will eventually. This is why I switched several minors. I will say though that many students (mostly recent grads)have this attitude that they are owed something. I never thought that.

mistresscyn
10-19-2011, 05:59 PM
I don't think that's true. What about me, for example? I have undergrad and grad work both in psychology, and I use that information every day of my life, and especially in dancing & camming. I'm sure I would be making half of what I'm making now if I didn't have that knowledge. I also feel like it improved my mental health and my quality of life in general.

So while I've never technically "used" my degree to stay (I quit) in a vanilla psychology job, it has helped tremendously. Then again, maybe I will use it at some point because I am only in my early-to-mid 20s. But the point is, I don't think its so cut and dry.

I don't doubt that the knowledge gained in college isn't useful. I use my degree every single day. When I edit clips for site, when I write for a magazine or other publication, when I get hired for an acting gig, etc. There probably isn't a week that goes by that I don't use something I learned in relation to my degree.

However, do I think my degree is worth $35k? No. I could've learned everything I learned in college through workshops, classes, and demonstrations that probably would've cost me half of that. Hell, maybe even a quarter of that. And I would've had full control over who I studied with and how long. (There was a lot of things I couldn't take in college because they wouldn't have counted towards my degree, couldn't get into due to pre-reqs, etc.)

So do I need to use my degree to make it worth it? Technically yes because it doesn't justify the cost of the degree.

Melonie
10-19-2011, 10:52 PM
So do I need to use my degree to make it worth it? Technically yes because it doesn't justify the cost of the degree

Please note that the following comment involves nothing personal, and is only intended as 'food for thought'. However, this approach is in many ways equivalent to an 'emotional' investor doubling down on a losing investment !



I will say though that many students (mostly recent grads)have this attitude that they are owed something. I never thought that.

... arguably based on the old paradigm that investing time and money to obtain a 4 year+ college degree will ALWAYS result in a 'comfortable middle class' lifestyle. Well, they invested the time and effort, and they invested ( borrowed ) money, and there's no 'payoff' waiting for them ! Thus they feel they have been 'cheated' and therefore don't need to make payments on their ( losing ) investment.



It's still early.... The cry will grow...... This nation (Not a political statement ) socializes it's losses

... perhaps for some, i.e. the officially 'poor'. However, student loan debt has now reached the 1 trillion dollar level, which exceeds the total amount of US credit card debt !!! There's simply no way for US taxpayers to absorb that kind of 'hit' ... and especially so when it would benefit upper middle class name college graduates !

~