Late, Not Lost: The Economic Drag From the Millennial Generation (accounting, buy)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
what are you talking about? The average student is graduating with 25k in debt, I wouldn't exactly call that a mountain of student loans. Also, how did their parents generation create their kid's student loans?
For every student that graduates with 100k in debt there are hundreds that graduate with less than 5k. There are still smart ways to get a cheap education. Most state universities still have tuition at or around 8-10k/yr. Two years at a CC and 2 years at a State University you are looking at no more than 30k total for a college education.
Many students acquire too much debt because they act like that's not money and they don't have to do things with money in mind. So they kept changing majors, or float around, etc.
We are not falling behind. We are getting the best and brightest from other countries. Both parties are firmly in support of that. We remain as a leader in innovation. These best minds from other countries do not have very many opportunities in their home countries. I think it's progress that we are giving thee people a chance to make it. After all, they are not any less worthwhile people than the people in the US. They are hardworking. I don't see anything wrong with sharing opportunities globally. It's prejudice to just care about one country.
Who said anything about not utilizing talented immigrants as an additional resource in acquiring the best and the brightest and nurturing that? I made no such exclusion.
Also, I did not say we were falling behind, I presented a supposition, in the form of questions. You need to reread what I posted, and the post I was responding to, and take it in context. A straw man response on your part, to say the least.
Yet, it is certainly not prejudice to put one's own people and national interest first. That is just good common sense!
Here is what I posted, if it helps you comprehend my point any better:
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaker281
So, you do not think there is any benefit to society for nurturing our most accomplished students to higher levels? Suppose every other country nurtures their best and brightest, while we fall behind? Do you see that as a potential problem? Ceding math and science and research to our competitors? Becoming a nation of adequate minds versus a leader in innovation and advancement?
Is that not akin to letting our industry fall behind due to lackadaisical public policy, while other nations move to fill the void? A nation of merely adequate one-trick ponies?
Last edited by shaker281; 09-12-2014 at 01:04 AM..
1. Most state universities accept most credits from CCs, especially within the same state. You may have to take 70-80 hours instead of 60, but it's not like they would accept them and make them start over. They often don't accept the GPA, but the accept the credits.
2. I was under the impression everyone had to live regardless of whether they were or were not in school. I guess this isn't the case.....
I didn't know you couldn't work while in school, I also didn't know there was a required period of time you had to graduate in. Taking 6 years to complete a degree with little to no debt is not possible?
I guess you learn something new every day.
Yes, but by forcing a person to drag out their undergraduate education, you (1) hurt the economy by delaying their ability to increase their purchasing power, (2) disincentivize post-baccalaureate education, particularly for women, due to "biological clock" issues, and (3) cause income inequality to persist from generation to generation since those with well off parents can graduate much sooner and in better shape in terms of both academic merit and net worth.
Quite frankly, this hyper-Calvinistic mentality of asserting that all their difficulties are due to a lack of working hard enough drives me nuts. Is it really so horrible to help your fellow man/woman out a little? Can't you have some compassion once in a while?
This attitude of refusing to invest in the next generation will be the downfall of America as an innovative nation.
When you are old and decrepit and get very little SS because tax revenue comes from people who couldn't afford an education, you will realize the folly of your position.
Yes, but by forcing a person to drag out their undergraduate education, you (1) hurt the economy by delaying their ability to increase their purchasing power, (2) disincentivize post-baccalaureate education, particularly for women, due to "biological clock" issues, and (3) cause income inequality to persist from generation to generation since those with well off parents can graduate much sooner and in better shape in terms of both academic merit and net worth.
Quite frankly, this hyper-Calvinistic mentality of asserting that all their difficulties are due to a lack of working hard enough drives me nuts. Is it really so horrible to help your fellow man/woman out a little? Can't you have some compassion once in a while?
This attitude of refusing to invest in the next generation will be the downfall of America as an innovative nation.
When you are old and decrepit and get very little SS because tax revenue comes from people who couldn't afford an education, you will realize the folly of your position.
What is your position? Higher ed should be free and we should pay kids to get that education?
(1.) It does not hurt the economy for people to delay their graduation by a year or two if they don't want to take out student loans or can't make enough working to pay for it in 4. Many people graduate in 5 years. You are talking about a group of people graduating at 23-24 instead of 22. (2.) This is a joke, right? Women wouldn't go to college because 24 starts making it too late to give birth? Tell me you are joking. (3.) Again, we are talking about an extra 1-2 years here. You are pretending like poor people will take 10 years to graduate and rich people will take 2.
You are blowing this way out of proportion. There are still very easy ways to get a college degree. Where did I say that all their difficulties were due to not working hard enough? You put words in my mouth. I said there are still very easy and affordable ways to get a college education and all you did was pull excuses out of your behind.
You could very easily work part-time and pay for your living expenses. Then you could pay for tuition on student loans and get out with 20-25k in student loans. That is if you had absolutely no help from someone other than yourself. That is the price of a cheap car nowadays. The people that end up in mountains of debt largely have done that to themselves.
The list goes on: Tuition has gone up, but it is not outrageous (yet). There is also need based financial aid, the number of parents making good enough money to send their kids to school and completely disowning them at 18 are probably almost non-existent (although I am sure there are a few). So even if you are 18 and your parents can't afford to support you there is need based aid. This aid gets crazy at private universities where most of the times families that have under 50k in household income go for essentially free. The aid is also good for state universities, although not quite as good as for those private universities.
High Schools need to start educating kids on preparing to apply for college and understanding their circumstances. It doesn't make sense for a middle class kid (like I was) to go to those expensive private universities. My family can't afford it and I will just be saddled with 100k in student loans for a degree I could have gotten from a state university for a quarter of that. Those colleges and universities are for the rich and the intelligent poor.
We have this weird mentality that has been set in our brain that you need to go to the best college you get into. I don't get that. There are very few circumstances where it makes sense for someone to go to somewhere like Emory (for undergrad) and pay for it all in student loans instead of going to a state school like Missouri-Columbia, especially when you don't qualify for need based aid.
Ncole, hopefully you realize I am a Millenial as well the 2006 was the year I graduated college.
Like I said earlier, we are not behind. The timeline has just shifted to the right, which would only be a concern if the life expectancy remained the same between Baby Boomers and Millenials. Starting 3 years later doesn't really matter when you live 5 years longer.
Last edited by mizzourah2006; 09-12-2014 at 07:25 AM..
What is your position? Higher ed should be free and we should pay kids to get that education?
(1.) It does not hurt the economy for people to delay their graduation by a year or two if they don't want to take out student loans or can't make enough working to pay for it in 4. Many people graduate in 5 years. You are talking about a group of people graduating at 23-24 instead of 22. (2.) This is a joke, right? Women wouldn't go to college because 24 starts making it too late to give birth? Tell me you are joking.
I said it disincentivizes post-baccalaureate degrees, not baccalaureate degrees. Of course 24 is not too old to have a kid, I'm not crazy! However, if someone gets out at 24 and works for a couple years and re-enters at age 26 for graduate or professional school plus training (postdoc or residency) for 8 years, that puts them to 34. At this point it is getting more urgent to have a child for biological reasons before it gets too late.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
(3.) Again, we are talking about an extra 1-2 years here. You are pretending like poor people will take 10 years to graduate and rich people will take 2.
I finished in 3 years because I didn't have to work. It would have taken me 7 years had I been forced to support myself. It is very difficult to earn enough to fully cover all living expenses (including the big ones like housing) without a college degree and without working so much that you have no time left over for school.
You have to take a certain number of credit hours each semester or else your loans will threaten to start coming due. Not everyone is able to handle that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
You are blowing this way out of proportion. There are still very easy ways to get a college degree. Where did I say that all their difficulties were due to not working hard enough? You put words in my mouth. I said there are still very easy and affordable ways to get a college education and all you did was pull excuses out of your behind.
We clearly have a disagreement on how easy or hard that is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
You could very easily work part-time and pay for your living expenses. Then you could pay for tuition on student loans and get out with 20-25k in student loans. That is if you had absolutely no help from someone other than yourself. That is the price of a cheap car nowadays. The people that end up in mountains of debt largely have done that to themselves.
Include interest pushes it to more like $55,000 in debt, using your own examples!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
The list goes on: Tuition has gone up, but it is not outrageous (yet). There is also need based financial aid, the number of parents making good enough money to send their kids to school and completely disowning them at 18 are probably almost non-existent (although I am sure there are a few). So even if you are 18 and your parents can't afford to support you there is need based aid. This aid gets crazy at private universities where most of the times families that have under 50k in household income go for essentially free. The aid is also good for state universities, although not quite as good as for those private universities.
High Schools need to start educating kids on preparing to apply for college and understanding their circumstances. It doesn't make sense for a middle class kid (like I was) to go to those expensive private universities. My family can't afford it and I will just be saddled with 100k in student loans for a degree I could have gotten from a state university for a quarter of that. Those colleges and universities are for the rich and the intelligent poor.
We have this weird mentality that has been set in our brain that you need to go to the best college you get into. I don't get that. There are very few circumstances where it makes sense for someone to go to somewhere like Emory (for undergrad) and pay for it all in student loans instead of going to a state school like Missouri-Columbia, especially when you don't qualify for need based aid.
I agree with you on these points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
Ncole, hopefully you realize I am a Millenial as well the 2006 was the year I graduated college.
Like I said earlier, we are not behind. The timeline has just shifted to the right, which would only be a concern if the life expectancy remained the same between Baby Boomers and Millenials. Starting 3 years later doesn't really matter when you live 5 years longer.
What's the point in living longer if you're going to use it as an excuse to take longer to get anything done?
What is your position? Higher ed should be free and we should pay kids to get that education?
(1.) It does not hurt the economy for people to delay their graduation by a year or two if they don't want to take out student loans or can't make enough working to pay for it in 4. Many people graduate in 5 years. You are talking about a group of people graduating at 23-24 instead of 22. (2.) This is a joke, right? Women wouldn't go to college because 24 starts making it too late to give birth? Tell me you are joking. (3.) Again, we are talking about an extra 1-2 years here. You are pretending like poor people will take 10 years to graduate and rich people will take 2.
You are blowing this way out of proportion. There are still very easy ways to get a college degree. Where did I say that all their difficulties were due to not working hard enough? You put words in my mouth. I said there are still very easy and affordable ways to get a college education and all you did was pull excuses out of your behind.
You could very easily work part-time and pay for your living expenses. Then you could pay for tuition on student loans and get out with 20-25k in student loans. That is if you had absolutely no help from someone other than yourself. That is the price of a cheap car nowadays. The people that end up in mountains of debt largely have done that to themselves.
The list goes on: Tuition has gone up, but it is not outrageous (yet). There is also need based financial aid, the number of parents making good enough money to send their kids to school and completely disowning them at 18 are probably almost non-existent (although I am sure there are a few). So even if you are 18 and your parents can't afford to support you there is need based aid. This aid gets crazy at private universities where most of the times families that have under 50k in household income go for essentially free. The aid is also good for state universities, although not quite as good as for those private universities.
High Schools need to start educating kids on preparing to apply for college and understanding their circumstances. It doesn't make sense for a middle class kid (like I was) to go to those expensive private universities. My family can't afford it and I will just be saddled with 100k in student loans for a degree I could have gotten from a state university for a quarter of that. Those colleges and universities are for the rich and the intelligent poor.
We have this weird mentality that has been set in our brain that you need to go to the best college you get into. I don't get that. There are very few circumstances where it makes sense for someone to go to somewhere like Emory (for undergrad) and pay for it all in student loans instead of going to a state school like Missouri-Columbia, especially when you don't qualify for need based aid.
Ncole, hopefully you realize I am a Millenial as well the 2006 was the year I graduated college.
Like I said earlier, we are not behind. The timeline has just shifted to the right, which would only be a concern if the life expectancy remained the same between Baby Boomers and Millenials. Starting 3 years later doesn't really matter when you live 5 years longer.
Include interest pushes it to more like $55,000 in debt, using your own examples!
That # is for a full course load. Why anyone would take 150 credit hours when it only takes 120 to graduate is beyond me.
I went to graduate school. I received a 10k/yr stipend for working. I was able to live on my own on 15k/yr. The additional 5k I took out in Student Loans. If you work 25 hours a week and make $11.54 an hour you will make 15k/yr.
So you are talking about post-BA programs? Now I'm confused as to what you are expecting or asking for.
What would a perfect educational world look like to you? Is it your expectation that any amount of schooling someone wants should be subsidized by the US citizens?
I studied with flashlights when our electricity went out, and when I was 18 it all paid off with a full-ride scholarship to George Washington University in DC.
That's an interesting anecdote, but I have some questions. Why does someone with a full ride need to be working that many hours?
It appears that she wasn't completely truthful. A full ride covers tuition and room and board. Part of room and board is a meal plan.
Who said anything about not utilizing talented immigrants as an additional resource in acquiring the best and the brightest and nurturing that? I made no such exclusion.
Also, I did not say we were falling behind, I presented a supposition, in the form of questions. You need to reread what I posted, and the post I was responding to, and take it in context. A straw man response on your part, to say the least.
Yet, it is certainly not prejudice to put one's own people and national interest first. That is just good common sense!
Here is what I posted, if it helps you comprehend my point any better:
National borders and nation states are arbitrary and artificial. As people like to say, "the border crossed us." People are just people, regardless of where they come from. Despite our talk about inclusivity, too many Americans both left and right are all about exclusivity. It is a shame.
That # is for a full course load. Why anyone would take 150 credit hours when it only takes 120 to graduate is beyond me.
Very few students take the bare minimum but even making a partial concession and saying they'll take 130 hours (In Arkansas, you need 124, not 120, BTW.), that's still $39,000 in tuition alone if it's a value of $9,000/year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
I went to graduate school. I received a 10k/yr stipend for working. I was able to live on my own on 15k/yr. The additional 5k I took out in Student Loans. If you work 25 hours a week and make $11.54 an hour you will make 15k/yr.
So you are talking about post-BA programs? Now I'm confused as to what you are expecting or asking for.
I'm saying, if your undergrad takes 6 years because you had to work a whole lot, then even if you don't work outside the school during grad school, you're still 2 years behind. If it take 7 years, that's 3 years behind. In many fields you don't really get fully into the profession until you're 30 or 32, even if you did undergrad in 4 years. If undergrad takes 7 years because you had to work full time, you'd be 33 or 35 even with no further delays during grad school. This gives you a very narrow window of time to have kids, with zero room for error or bumps in the road, at least for women. Past the age of about 38, childbearing becomes quite a risky and unpredictable proposition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
What would a perfect educational world look like to you? Is it your expectation that any amount of schooling someone wants should be subsidized by the US citizens?
If it were up to me, there would be a single age at which parents are expected to support you, and then not expected to do so after you reach that age. Or perhaps one age if you are a full time student and another if you're not (e.g. 18 if not/22 if so).
However, what we have right now is a real mess. If you're over 18, you cannot legally force your parents to chip in one dime, and yet, if you're under 24, the government looks at your parents' income when determining the award of financial aid for college, unless you're married or in the military.
This is wrong. Either you're an adult when you're 18 or when you're 24, not both at the same time. The system we have now essentially takes away aid to a person due to money they do not legally have access to - their parents'.
How wrong is that? It's like saying you have to pay taxes you can't afford because your ex-spouse earned a lot this year, and at the same time you can't collect any spousal support. I'm sure you'd be very upset if this happened to you, and rightly so. It is, simply put, a double standard - if you can't access the money, it shouldn't be held against you.
All I ask is that we apply the same principle to everyone, including college students. Is this really too much to ask?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
That's an interesting anecdote, but I have some questions. Why does someone with a full ride need to be working that many hours?
It appears that she wasn't completely truthful. A full ride covers tuition and room and board. Part of room and board is a meal plan.
Apparently it's a difference of terminology/semantics - she's stretching the term "full ride" beyond its normal meaning. But it's still a valid point, just that the scholarship does not cover living expenses.
Every generation says that until they hit about 30 and wake up. Remember that todays Corporate management was yesterdays hippy.
Or flapper, beatnik, slacker, punk, etc...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
