Atlanta's suburbs continue to become increasingly sophisticated (Doraville, Avera: insurance, employment)

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

Well I'm not a twenty something and I moan and groan about the cost of education as well.

I suspect that is true for a lot of folks, Roslyn. I've helped send a passel of younguns (and a few not so younguns) to school.

Still, the reality is that if someone is okay with attending one of our many fine state universities or technical schools the cost today is about the same as it was half a century ago.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with going out of state or attending a private school. But those are personal choices, not necessities, and one has to weigh the costs against the benefits. You know, the graduates of our state universities still do very well and they are extremely well represented in healthcare, science, business, law, the arts and just about every other field.

Will you make more money if you go to Stanford rather than Georgia Tech? If you choose Dartmouth over UGA Honors? Well, maybe, but everyone has to weigh that out and make a personal calculation.

For what it's worth, Roslyn, I'm really grateful that someone as smart as you has been willing to commit to helping others. Thank you.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by Onthemove2014

Yes, because black people caused the crash. They shouldn't have been giving blacks homes as they are all deadbeats and primal.

Where did I say that? Great intellectual response.

In the 1990s, Clinton and Congress repealed Glass-Steagall and passed changes to the Community Reinvestment Act. Yes...Democrats wanted to ensure that minorities (I never mentioned blacks) purchased and owned homes. They were concerned about perceived discrimination. They were concerned about the perceived lack of home ownership among minorities.

By the same token, George W. Bush also wanted to expand home ownership (remember the bamners and press conferences) and saw it as a way to move people into the middle class and up the economic ladder. In the process, the banking industry was all too happy to write loans for many, poor and minorities especially, who wouldn't normally and shouldn't have qualified for mortgages. Additionally, 100% and very low down payments were allowed which of course led to many of the current issues when values ceased to increase and started back down.

[Mishap]

The reasons behind the increase in the number of degrees/colleges is multi-dimensional. There's significantly fewer blue collar jobs capable of sustaining a family. It drives more people to degrees (whether or not they're suited for them) and more competition for college jobs (depressing wages).

Also, your assertion that college hasn't grown in cost since the '60s is off. This study says it's increased 368% since '81 which is 16 yrs shorter period than what you referenced (and after the worst of the stagflation '70's).

http://trends.collegeboard.org/downl...icing_2011.pdf

Even w/ scholarships/grants/etc, the real cost of tuition has gone up dramatically as state funding has stayed flat as students have increased. It's also visible in the rapid growth in loan debt. There are plenty of delusional NYU film students racking up debt to become hipster baristas but probably far more people are racking up mid 5 figures of debt just to make it through GT these days.

My Ivy league undergrad degree cost ~17k/semester in my last year ('03) and about $700/credit hr ala carte. GT was ~100/credit hr at the time. UGA now costs more than that for out of state ~39k/yr. GT tuition cost $1,207/semester in '99 and was $1,684 by '05 (40% growth in 6yrs not including fee increases). My last semester at GT MBA cost ~$900/credit hr for in-state tuition in '11.

Look at wage growth even for college grads since the early '00's and you'll see things are essentially flat. It's even worse for non-grads. That said, I think we've reached the point of diminishing returns. Pretty much any kid qualified for school gets in somewhere...places like University of Phoenix and its ilk are churning the remainder w/ the promises of riches that will never come.

[RoslynHolcomb]

I attended a state school arjay. Both times. In Alabama. Like I said, I was able to work/scholarship my way through undergrad. Grad school left me $40k in debt, AT A STATE SCHOOL. Worked in child welfare for fifteen years for virtually nothing, but I didn't mind because I was "making a difference." Money didn't matter or I wouldn't have gone into social work. After putting in all that time and effort I left because I had to choose betwwen nursing my son or staying at the agency. They wouldn't let me put a lock on my door so I could pump breast milk. That's when I discovered, money is the only thing that matters.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Onthemove2014

Do you have statistics to back up the bold. Seems a bit out of touch with globalization.

Sure, take a look at this:

Just take a quick look at the numbers. According to United Nations data, the U.S. is still the largest manufacturing country in the world. In 2009, American manufacturing output (in real terms) was nearly $2.2 trillion. That’s about 45% larger than China’s, at just under $1.5 trillion. (For statistical reasons, I chose to use figures that include mining and utilities as part of manufacturing.) Though China, of course, is growing very quickly, the U.S. has also maintained its global share of manufacturing, at 20% in 2009 compared to just over 22% in 1980. What’s more, American manufacturing is becoming more productive. In 2009, productivity in U.S. manufacturing increased by 7.7%, more than any other country followed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Read more: Can China compete with American manufacturing? | Business | TIME.com

As to big time manufacturing and other undertakings near here, consider some of these: Kia, Volkswagen, BMW and Mercedes auto plants; Caterpillar on the way; Gulfstream, Lockheed, Boeing, etc. in aerospace. Genuine Parts (31,000 employees); Home Depot; UPS; Yamaha in Newnan; RockTenn (26,000 employees); PrintPack, etc., etc.

[Mishap]

Originally Posted by neil0311

Where did I say that? Great intellectual response.

In the 1990s, Clinton and Congress repealed Glass-Steagall and passed changes to the Community Reinvestment Act. Yes...Democrats wanted to ensure that minorities (I never mentioned blacks) purchased and owned homes. They were concerned about perceived discrimination. They were concerned about the perceived lack of home ownership among minorities.

By the same token, George W. Bush also wanted to expand home ownership (remember the bamners and press conferences) and saw it as a way to move people into the middle class and up the economic ladder. In the process, the banking industry was all too happy to write loans for many, poor and minorities especially, who wouldn't normally and shouldn't have qualified for mortgages. Additionally, 100% and very low down payments were allowed which of course led to many of the current issues when values ceased to increase and started back down.

If that were the case, no white person would get foreclosed upon since they all had sterling credit and never overbought.

The CDO market made all risk good risk. The person could be white/black/fictitious but so long as someone signed a piece of paper saying they'd pay an interest rate (sometimes they didn't even sign) over the super low rates Greenspan held post 9/11, there was money to be made. The bigger the gap (in a functional mkt, the riskier the borrower), the more profitable the loan would be since banks no longer cared about the default risk once rolled into a debt product.

Go look up Golden West's Pick a Payment Option ARM loan (which later destroyed Wachovia). It could generate 5-6 figure up front commission to the broker for someone to promise to pay any amt they wanted toward a house they obviously couldn't afford since interest capitalized. Where was that defined in the CRA? Fannie/Freddie/FHA would never write a loan like that to anyone. Sliced/diced/obfuscated beyond all recognition and w/ a few morsels of FHA loans tossed in and you could claim it as a triple A rated investment that also paid a hearty dividend which the GSE (along w/ tons of investors) bought up for their high rating.

Fannie/Freddie didn't write no-doc loans. They bought them once they got reclassified as "CRA" qualified debt instruments but the crazy terms/option arms/teaser rates were all bank creations.

[Onthemove2014]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I suspect that is true for a lot of folks, Roslyn. I've helped send a passel of younguns (and a few not so younguns) to school.

Still, the reality is that if someone is okay with attending one of our many fine state universities or technical schools the cost today is about the same as it was half a century ago.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with going out of state or attending a private school. But those are personal choices, not necessities, and one has to weigh the costs against the benefits. You know, the graduates of our state universities still do very well and they are extremely well represented in healthcare, science, business, law, the arts and just about every other field.

Will you make more money if you go to Stanford rather than Georgia Tech? If you choose Dartmouth over UGA Honors? Well, maybe, but everyone has to weigh that out and make a personal calculation.

For what it's worth, Roslyn, I'm really grateful that someone as smart as you has been willing to commit to helping others. Thank you.

I am also wondering where the data shows that college cost have simply been keeping up with inflation. Tha goes against all common knowlege about tuition cost.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Mishap

Also, your assertion that college hasn't grown in cost since the '60s is off. This study says it's increased 368% since '81 which is 16 yrs shorter period than what you referenced (and after the worst of the stagflation '70's).

Mishap, it's possible to come up with all kinds of numbers if you throw private colleges into the mix.

And if someone wants to spend the extra money for private school that's their choice, but it's certainly not necessary. The kids who to to GT and UGA Honors could basically go anywhere.

But I'm comparing apples to apples -- namely, the cost of attending a public university in your own state. Here in Georgia we are extremely fortunate because we have at least two that are competitive with just about any school anywhere, and several others that are not far behind.

Despite that, tuition is still only about $9,000 per year. Adjusting via the CPI (as the College Board does), that works out to under $2,000 in 1965 dollars, which was actually more than in state tuition at that time.

If you keep a 3.0 the state will pay 90% of the $9,000.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Onthemove2014

I am also wondering where the data shows that college cost have simply been keeping up with inflation. Tha goes against all common knowlege about tuition cost.

See my post below.

If you want to calculate it for yourself go here for UGA tuition and fees ($9,472):

https://www.admissions.uga.edu/artic...attending.html

Then use one of the many cost of living calculators to determine what that would be 50 years ago:

Measuring Worth - Relative Value of the US Dollar.

[RandyWatson13]

Atlanta...where we pay taxes for sidewalk improvements that lead to nowhere and no one walks on them