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.
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
12,342 posts, read 6,678,328 times
Reputation: 9119
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801
For parents, it was cheaper. I did not have the money to save for my daughter's college because of her father's addiction issues, divorce, debt from the marriage, single mother with no child support, blah blah blah, you know the story.
But by the time she went to college, my income had leapt significantly and her father had gotten himself together enough that he was making a decent salary with free rent as a building super. All of a sudden, together we made too much money to qualify for anything. All she was eligible for was the limited federal student loans she could take on her own.
Her father and I each took out those Parents Plus loans at 8.5% because we didn't know any better. The next year someone clued us in that daughter should apply for private loans and have us cosign and it would be cheaper. It was.
I paid off my share of those private loans years ago, having consolidated them with the Parents Plus loan, but my daughter still has some federal loans. She went on to get a Masters and a PhD, and that was on her alone. I don't know what her remaining debt load is, but I know she has been making payments.
Anyway, that's one answer to your bolded question.
Our last PLUS (2005) was ~2.0% in the era of 1% 6mn-T-Bills. IIRC.
We arbitrage the interest rate to total investment returns which was running 10%.
My biggest, EVER, financial mistake, was not to borrow to the full cost of attendence for DS's high priced university.
I'd know if the debt reduction applies to consolidated PLUS (now @2.875%). We are on the fast slope to paying off the loan with ~$20,000 remaining principal. Will be 82 at payoff
YLMV
Last edited by leastprime; 08-28-2022 at 01:18 PM..
I said up above that the government must start promoting jobs that require technological training even more than it promotes bachelor's degrees. Most people will not get bachelor's degrees and the country, frankly, doesn't need most people to have bachelor's degrees. Most people need training and certification in technological processes.
But right now, all a kid learns about from government (and I include teachers and school counselors as government" is college, college, college, college.
The entire education system is designed to prepare you for the next level of education. That's what it is, and yes that is a flaw and it needs to be worked on.
However, I suspect that if you tried to simply teach "technical processes," you would discover that your learners would need pre-requisite knowledge and skills to get to that point of being capable of learning said process in a timely manner. That would eventually require you to create a set of courses that would look...suspiciously... like a college program.
I know this because this is how we got college to be what it is in the first place.
E.g. why did we create the A&M colleges? For the fun of it? Or because the existing workers in agriculture & manufacturing needed to be more productive?
I mean, I only studied history in college, which was some damned useless stuff. But I did learn about how, when only 4% of the population went to college and most people didn't; the apprenticeship system in the 19th century wasn't working. We read a lot of contemporary sources from businesses complaining they could be more competitive if they had better labor. The workers were too ignorant & thus less productive... e.g. to be better farmers, merchants, etc... they needed to know math & science. That's why we created a bunch of what became the state universities, city colleges, and whatnot.
Get rid of the colleges and you'll just put us back in the situation we used to be, for which we created the colleges in the first place! We need to reform the system but not blow it up.
The U.S. does not produce a disproportionate share of bachelor level college graduates relative to our peers. We produce about 36%, which is in line with the rest of the developed world and probably about the right # to stay competitive.
What they don't have is a student loan crisis. So the problem is the way we're managing it and especially mismanaging the finances. Not the education itself
We probably don't need that much more than 36%. But less? Well, if you want to lose our global economic competitive edge, be my guest.
I can name you former world powers that chose to divest in educating their populace, and you can judge how that worked out for them.
Last edited by redguard57; 08-28-2022 at 02:46 PM..
Reason: wrote on phone - typos
The scam that many don't realize is if you go with an "income based" repayment plan, your payments don't cover the full amount of principal and interest accrued. The cycle never ends until you get a decent paying job.
Also, the state governments should have a say in setting prices for public universities. Put the teachers on government pay scales.
I went to state schools. The state sets the tuition. Then there's the fees which are almost as much as tuition. Textbooks which are hundreds every semester. I didn't live on campus. I was a commuter. But if one doesn't live near a college then there's room and board which is more than tuition at many state schools. Just because someone attends a state school doesn't mean it's cheap. Far from it.
The entire education system is designed to prepare you for the next level of education. That's what it is, and yes that is a flaw and it needs to be worked on.
However, I suspect that if you tried to simply teach "technical processes," you would discover that your learners would need pre-requisite knowledge and skills to get to that point ofbbeing capable of learning said process in a timely manner. That would eventually require you to create a set of courses that would look...suspiciously... like a college program.
I know this because this is how we got college to be what it is in the first place.
E.g. why did we create the A&M colleges? For the fun of it? Or because the existing workers in agriculture & manufacturing needed to be more productive?
I mean, I only studied history in college, which was some damned useless crap. But I did learn about how, when inly 2 or 3% of the population went to college and most people didn't; the apprenticeship system in the 19th century wasn't working. We read a lot of contemporary sources from businesses complaining they could be more competitive if they had better labor. The workers were too ignorant & thus less productive... e.g. to be better farmers, etc... they needed to know math & science. That's why we created a bunch of what became the state universities.
Get rid of the colleges and you'll just put us back in the situation we used to be, for which we created the colleges in the first place! We need to reform the system but not blow it up.
The U.S. does not produce a disportionate share of bachelor level college graduates relative to our peers. We produce about 36%, which is in line with the rest of the developed world and probably about the right # to stay competitive.
What they don't have is a student loan crisis. So the problem is the way we're managing it and especially mismanaging the finances. Not the education itself
We probably don't need that much more than 36%. But less? Well, if you want to lose our global economic competitive edge, be my guest.
I can name you former world powers that chose to divest in educating their populace, and you can judge how that worked out for them.
I hear the same complaints today. Despite American workers putting in more than 40 hours a week and being more educated, American workers are never productive enough it seems. There is always something lacking. Makes me wonder if the issue really lies with the businesses.
It must have been terrifying when the money lenders put a gun to your head and forced you to sign.
There's no need to be a jerk. Student loans were the only way I and many people were able to attend college. I'm a first generation college student. No one really explained how much debt you'd actually incur while signing the documents in the financial aid window. When you're 18 you don't realize that by the time you graduate that you'll owe just as much in interest as the loan was for! That's ridiculous. The government shouldn't be making that amount of interest from borrowers. You seem to forget that we pay taxes, too.
Your family pays more in taxes than 10K .........again you might want to revisit that statement out of its sheer stupidity. Your family income exceeds $68,000, not really impressive for the whole family to make 68K and pay in over 10K in taxes.
Now if you claimed they paid 100K a year in taxes that might be more of an impact statement.
You claim that you paid double the minimum is the problem! Got a credit card? If you paid double the minimum would you expect it paid off in 10 years? I think they even show you if you paid the minimum it would take 17 years to pay off this bill (or something ridiculous like that). If you paid 10 years in on a 30 year mortgage.........guess what it isn't paid off either! Google an amortization table, punch in the values and you can see exactly what you owe after X number of payments/years whatever.
The cyclical reasoning in your last sentence showing all of the government spending is less important than your 10K is crazytalk.
Oh, BTW when you got the free Covid relief money last year, did you send it all to the student loans?
Why are you so rude? Do you get your jollies off by being a condescending troll?
The entire education system is designed to prepare you for the next level of education. That's what it is, and yes that is a flaw and it needs to be worked on.
However, I suspect that if you tried to simply teach "technical processes," you would discover that your learners would need pre-requisite knowledge and skills to get to that point ofbbeing capable of learning said process in a timely manner. That would eventually require you to create a set of courses that would look...suspiciously... like a college program.
It must start in high school. Rather, no later than high school. BTW, I didn't say "technical processes," I said "technological processes." There is a difference.
Quote:
I know this because this is how we got college to be what it is in the first place.
E.g. why did we create the A&M colleges? For the fun of it? Or because the existing workers in agriculture & manufacturing needed to be more productive?
Right.
Quote:
I mean, I only studied history in college, which was some damned useless crap. But I did learn about how, when inly 2 or 3% of the population went to college and most people didn't; the apprenticeship system in the 19th century wasn't working. We read a lot of contemporary sources from businesses complaining they could be more competitive if they had better labor. The workers were too ignorant & thus less productive... e.g. to be better farmers, etc... they needed to know math & science. That's why we created a bunch of what became the state universities.
Get rid of the colleges and you'll just put us back in the situation we used to be, for which we created the colleges in the first place! We need to reform the system but not blow it up.
I didn't say that. I said, specifically, "technological."
Quote:
The U.S. does not produce a disportionate share of bachelor level college graduates relative to our peers.
I also didn't say that.
Quote:
We produce about 36%, which is in line with the rest of the developed world and probably about the right # to stay competitive.
If that 36% was actually in STEM rather than mostly arts and humanities...and the lower end of arts and humanities at that.
But the problem comes earlier, in high school, where the system is set up as though 100% of students are going to college. That's why most high schools only have college prep curricula and not the robust technology-prep curricula for the >60% of students who will never get bachelor's degrees.
Other countries that have "free college" don't just have free university...they also have free technological training (what they also call "college") for their majority that aren't getting university degrees. They don't teach at the lower levels only for university. They make the distinction much earlier and start teaching earlier in that direction.
There's no need to be a jerk. Student loans were the only way I and many people were able to attend college. I'm a first generation college student. No one really explained how much debt you'd actually incur while signing the documents in the financial aid window. When you're 18 you don't realize that by the time you graduate that you'll owe just as much in interest as the loan was for! That's ridiculous. The government shouldn't be making that amount of interest from borrowers. You seem to forget that we pay taxes, too.
I hear the same complaints today. Despite American workers putting in more than 40 hours a week and being more educated, American workers are never productive enough it seems. There is always something lacking. Makes me wonder if the issue really lies with the businesses.
Industrial capitalism chases the tail a lot. The system needs perpetual growth.
The wall we're running into now re: education, is that we've basically educated everyone we can in the way we conceive of education. More college isn't the answer, and those with college are seeing diminishing returns. But less college will make things worse. We need to do education better.
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.
