Student loans

[Ben]

Regarding the "extended hanging out at college", student loans contribute a lot to that as well. When I attended UCSB, the average undergrad stay was 6 years. While it was a good school, it was also right on the beach, so it was also a party central school. I saw two different segments that seemed to extend their stays past 4 years: First, the kids who had good loans, because it "wasn't their money" so why not hang around longer since they're basically getting paid to do so, since they didn't have to start paying the loan back till they were done with college. Second, there was a decent sized contingent of kids at that school rolling into the parking lot in BMWs and Mercedes and other expensive vehicles. Trust fund babies whose parents paid for school, the car, and often bought a condo in town for the kids to stay in. Again, it wasn't their money, so why not drag it out?

Both cases were kids who didn't have to take any fiscal responsibility at the time of their college stay. No fiscal responsibility, so no responsibility period. People who had to pay their own way as they went, or saw their middle class parents struggle to pay, were more likely to get out in 4 years because they had a direct connection to what it took to get them through college.

[cordex]

When I attended UCSB, the average undergrad stay was 6 years. While it was a good school, it was also right on the beach, so it was also a party central school. I saw two different segments that seemed to extend their stays past 4 years: First, the kids who had good loans, because it "wasn't their money" so why not hang around longer since they're basically getting paid to do so, since they didn't have to start paying the loan back till they were done with college. Second, there was a decent sized contingent of kids at that school rolling into the parking lot in BMWs and Mercedes and other expensive vehicles. Trust fund babies whose parents paid for school, the car, and often bought a condo in town for the kids to stay in. Again, it wasn't their money, so why not drag it out?

I took six years to get a 4 year degree too.  But I paid for it myself and had zero debt when I finished.

[brimic]

Re: State funding 'cutbacks' to universities

These 'cutbacks' are they are called, are more often than not, decreases in spending increases meaning that the University board may ask for $10 million in spending increases for a budget term, and only get $8 million more from the state government. When this happens, the University folk and the left squawk about how "eeeebil republicans are cutting funding to the university system and presumably using the money to set up death camps."

This stuff is even more hilarious when Universities are audited, like UW-Wisconsin, and over a billion dollars in various slush funds are uncovered.

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2017/05/four-years-after-the-slush/

[Ben]

I took six years to get a 4 year degree too.  But I paid for it myself and had zero debt when I finished.

There are plenty of valid reasons to take more than 4 years, like working while paying your way through school, familial obligations, etc. I was referring to people that got their way paid, had nothing to do but go to school, and turned it into a party/6 year vacation opportunity. :)

No skin in the game, so they didn't take their opportunity seriously.

[dogmush]

Step 1:

Realize that there are no "kids" in college.  College students are 18 or older.  They are adults, and bear the responsibility of their decisions, good and bad.  The used car lot outside Ft. Bragg is taking advantage of stupid boots, but there is not a movement to payoff their Mustang's.

A LARGE part of many of the problems we have today is this willingness for society at large to pretend adults are children, and to search for excuses not to hold them accountable for their bad decisions.

If you think banks and the fed.gov shouldn't loan to students at ludicrously low interest rates (for unsecured loans) then we should change the laws that incentive that.  Less folks, and especially less poor folks will go to college, and I suspect that outcome is politically unattainable.

But adults that entered into voluntary agreements to pay for something they thought was valuable shouldn't be released from that just because it didn't turn out to be as valuable as they thought.  Where does it stop?  Can I get a loan on a Ferrari, and then have it forgiven when the car is no longer worth $300,000?

[Ben]

Step 1:

Realize that there are no "kids" in college.  College students are 18 or older. 

This is a very good point. The fact that "college kids" is popular vernacular is part of the problem. It seems to me pre-1960s it was "college MAN"(and I guess would have been "woman" too except for the era). It used to be that just getting into college showed you had some responsibility, but nowadays it's too often looked at as a long vacation between high school and real life. At least if someone else is footing your bill.

[brimic]

Step 1:

Realize that there are no "kids" in college.  College students are 18 or older.  They are adults, and bear the responsibility of their decisions, good and bad.  The used car lot outside Ft. Bragg is taking advantage of stupid boots, but there is not a movement to payoff their Mustang's.

When I was in college, 20-some almost 30 years ago, the biggest issue was credit card debt.
It was very easy to get a credit card as a college student, I had 2 of them... and graduated with about $5k in credit card debt.
I paid it off in about a year after getting my first job- lived in a really cheap apartment, drove a 10 year old vehicle, and lived very cheaply all around while making as large of payments as I could every month. I was long an adult by the time I got those cards and incurred that debt.
I knew guys/gals who took out multiple credit cards and ran them upwards of $20k, then when they were no longer credit worthy, got cards from places like 'bank of jamaica' and ran those up too, and had nothing to show for because they spent it on beer, pizza, or fashion. Weirdly, these people always had money to be 'the life of the party' or take expensive vacations, but it eventually came crashing down on them.

They say that an education is always going to cost you pain or money, and if it costs you neither, then you haven't learned anything.

[charby]

Sortakindanotreally.

During the 90s state and local spending ramped up from $7,355 per student in 1992 to a high of $9,018 per student in 2000 (using inflation-adjusted 2016 dollars).  The low has been 2011 when it hit $6,320.   In 2016 it was back up to $7,642 per student.

All that said state funding variation for public schools had very little to do with actual tuition increases which have gone up significantly.   Nor would that impact the private schools whose prices went up way, way faster.  So ... no.

https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2018-figure-15b.png
https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/total-and-student-state-and-local-funding-and-public-enrollment-over-time

Then there is this:
https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2018-figure-3.png
https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/tuition-fees-room-board-over-time

I went to a state university in the 1990s and worked at a Tier 1 university from 2002 to 2015. I was on several committees that got to look at the budget (and provide some input) for 8 of those years there. In Iowa there was a decline of state funding starting in 1999/2000, state and fed used to cover about 70% of the cost of the education up to 1999 then it has declined below 50% in the 20-teens, IIRC many peer institutions were going through similar reduction in public money. I got a better offer to leave the university in 2015 so I don't know what percentage it is now. I do know that one used to be able to work a fulltime job in the summer and it would just about cover tuition, room and board for 2 semesters at Iowa public University up to the late 1990s.

The increase in enrollment from 2008-2014ish was due to the great recession, fulltime jobs that paid well just weren't there for many people during that time, so it made sense for many to wait it out in college for a better job market. I really can't blame any US president for that, just a shitty economic time for a lot of people.

something else to view https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/most-americans-dont-realize-state-funding-for-higher-ed-fell-by-billions

[cordex]

I went to a state university in the 1990s and worked at a Tier 1 university from 2002 to 2015. I was on several committees that got to look at the budget (and provide some input) for 8 of those years there. In Iowa there was a decline of state funding starting in 1999/2000, state and fed used to cover about 70% of the cost of the education up to 1999 then it has declined below 50% in the 20-teens, IIRC many peer institutions were going through similar reduction in public money. I got a better offer to leave the university in 2015 so I don't know what percentage it is now. I do know that one used to be able to work a fulltime job in the summer and it would just about cover tuition, room and board for 2 semesters at Iowa public University up to the late 1990s.

Charby, I'm not arguing that funding hasn't changed over time.  It has gone up and down many times.  However, the prices have consistently increased - significantly outpacing inflation regardless of what the government input has been.  The prices have increased much faster in private schools which receive far less overt government money (most of the money private institutions receive is laundered through student loans), so I'm not sure how you can claim the problem is just too little government money being thrown at college.

[charby]

Charby, I'm not arguing that funding hasn't changed over time.  It has gone up and down many times.  However, the prices have consistently increased - significantly outpacing inflation regardless of what the government input has been.  The prices have increased much faster in private schools which receive far less overt government money (most of the money private institutions receive is laundered through student loans), so I'm not sure how you can claim the problem is just too little government money being thrown at college.

it is one of many problems. Demand to go to school has increased, it takes money to hire new faculty away from industry/business (that usually pay better than a uni job), infrastructure needs built and maintained, etc. Can't blame university sports, for the most part sports programs are self funding and usually generate income for a university/college.

Private schools also usually have some wealthy alumni that donate to their foundations or for building projects. Faculty and staff are usually paid less too, usually because the demands of research is lower at many private schools, because most are primarily undergraduate with a few graduate degree options. I said most, not all.

This recent article spells a lot of that out. https://www.businessinsider.com/why-is-college-so-expensive-2018-4

[brimic]

Once again, saying the percentage of tuition paid by the state falling is not the same thing as the state cutting funding- it usually means that the universities increased tuition faster than the state increased funding... more often than not, as in my state, the state froze spending increases, which not the same as ‘spending cuts’ no matter how people want to spin it.

[Northwoods]

And while it does cost money to hire teachers, but the real money is for the administrators.  University of Michigan now has over 100 diversity administrators.  They need precisely none of them.  Factor in the bloat in other areas of administration and it's not hard to see where the majority of the tuition increases over the last 30 years has gone.

[MillCreek]

I would like to see more expansion of distance-learning and online options. WGU (Western Governors University) is very popular in this area for RNs getting a BSN, which is increasingly required for advancement in the nursing profession. My niece is getting her RN via an associates program at a local community college and will then enroll in WGU to finish her BSN. I have also heard good things about WGU for business and teaching graduate degrees, and it is much better regarded than the University of Phoenix.

[brimic]

And while it does cost money to hire teachers, but the real money is for the administrators.  University of Michigan now has over 100 diversity administrators.  They need precisely none of them.  Factor in the bloat in other areas of administration and it's not hard to see where the majority of the tuition increases over the last 30 years has gone.

They are never going to cut back on the sacred cows and fat like faculty/administration, SJW intersectionality degrees, or the profession sportsball farm system.

[Scout26]

Prior to 2008-2009, student loans were issued by banks.  Since they are in the business of making money (Rule #1 Don't lose money.), they were somewhat circumspect in who they gave money too.  (Engineering degree?  Here's some cash.  Gender Studies?  Try that other bank down the street.)

So the Democrats said "Banks are mean and unfair!!  We'll have the Fed.gov run the student loan bidness because it can do a much better job !!"  So as part of Obamacare the student loan program became a Fed.Gov program.  It was even touted that it would be a moneymaker for the feds.  IIRC, the "profits" from the student loan program went into the CBO scoring of Obamacare to make it "revenue neutral".   

So after that, the money taps opened and Uncle Sugar couldn't hand out loans fast enough. It didn't matter if they thought you could repay it with the income  from your Ethnic studies or Journalism degree, have some more cash.    And suddenly after all the years of "free money" Uncle Sugar wants his cash back, and the vig on top of it too.   

Now it's a "crisis" and since Fed.gov screwed it up.  We need more Fed.gov to "fix" the problem the Fed.gov created in the first place.   

Perhaps if we did go back to sane lending in the student loans, and actually cut the money to schools (dramatically reducing the number of administrators), then we could get back to "kids" being able to work a summer job and part-time during the school year to pay for college.

[charby]

Prior to 2008-2009, student loans were issued by banks.  Since they are in the business of making money (Rule #1 Don't lose money.), they were somewhat circumspect in who they gave money too.  (Engineering degree?  Here's some cash.  Gender Studies?  Try that other bank down the street.)

So the Democrats said "Banks are mean and unfair!!  We'll have the Fed.gov run the student loan bidness because it can do a much better job !!"  So as part of Obamacare the student loan program became a Fed.Gov program.  It was even touted that it would be a moneymaker for the feds.  IIRC, the "profits" from the student loan program went into the CBO scoring of Obamacare to make it "revenue neutral".   

So after that, the money taps opened and Uncle Sugar couldn't hand out loans fast enough. It didn't matter if they thought you could repay it with the income  from your Ethnic studies or Journalism degree, have some more cash.    And suddenly after all the years of "free money" Uncle Sugar wants his cash back, and the vig on top of it too.   

Now it's a "crisis" and since Fed.gov screwed it up.  We need more Fed.gov to "fix" the problem the Fed.gov created in the first place.   

Perhaps if we did go back to sane lending in the student loans, and actually cut the money to schools (dramatically reducing the number of administrators), then we could get back to "kids" being able to work a summer job and part-time during the school year to pay for college.

Well the feds backed/subsidized/guaranteed the federal student loans, so banks didn't/couldn't say no on which major you chose. Maybe if you took out additional loans banks decided, but not for up to the annual limit of the FFEL. https://www.forbes.com/2010/05/10/student-loans-hcera-leadership-education-fox.html#5407d6576edd

[charby]

And while it does cost money to hire teachers, but the real money is for the administrators.  University of Michigan now has over 100 diversity administrators.  They need precisely none of them.  Factor in the bloat in other areas of administration and it's not hard to see where the majority of the tuition increases over the last 30 years has gone.

I don't disagree with that at all, seems like a PhD administrator/manager has to surround themselves with other PhDs (and PhD salaries) where someone with a BS/BS or work experience would be just fine as a member of their management team.

I also don't understand why a MA/MS can't teach the freshman/sophomore classes instead of needing a PhD.

[MechAg94]

They are never going to cut back on the sacred cows and fat like faculty/administration, SJW intersectionality degrees, or the profession sportsball farm system.

At Texas A&M, the sportsball farm system funds itself.  I am pretty sure the entire athletic department is self funded though I am sure that includes donations.  Texas A&M is also in the top 10 of universities for overall athletic revenue so that is maybe not the average example.    

I guess I do not put athletics in the same ballpark as trash degrees and excessive administration.  I think most of the problem is the govt backed student loans that are handed out too easily and lack of adequate outside auditing. 

[Ben]

I also don't understand why a MA/MS can't teach the freshman/sophomore classes instead of needing a PhD.

This was often done in the UC system when I attended.