Did you pay back your student loans.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

16 minutes ago, El Chapo said:

Obviously I didn't have the option to simply not eat for 5 years....or I might have considered it.

You had options. You chose this one. 

[Wallaby Damned]

On 11/29/2023 at 10:55 AM, Trailrider #896 said:

"Re-paid" up front driving around central Montana in a blue truck for a few years.  I do get a pair of free hearing aides and some batteries from the VA.  

@Trailrider #896 I did the same thing!  Babysat a fire truck for 4 years on a beach in Florida. Can’t hear anything but the ringing these days (*eeeeeeeeee) but I had an extra year left of the GI Bill after my undergrad so I started a masters degree. Fellowships paid the rest.
 

Maybe they’ll figure out how to interest the kids in serving again. 

[Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428]

No need. I did college the old way, I worked my way thru it and paid for it as I went. 

[Dusty Devil Dale]

7 hours ago, El Chapo said:

If my profession paid anything like first year MDs are paid, I'd have paid off my student loans a long, long time ago.
 

Speaking of being mistaken, do you have any idea what a first year MD is paid? 

I didn't think so. 

I will share my wife's experience.

 

After high school graduatiIon, she spent 4 years in a Ca State College, majoring in Zoology/pre-med with a minor in Chemistry.  She graduated 4.0, SCL. 

Then she attended UC San Francisco Medical School for 3 more years, for her MD degrees.   Then she served a 1 year non-paid General Medicine Internship, followed by 3 more years of non-paid Residency to become a Board Certified Specialist in Internal Medicne.  That is 11 years of higher education, during which she had zero income.  (Residents in those days worked 20-hrs on, 8 hrs off shifts. )

 

In her first year of private practice, in a small group practice, she made a whopping great $51,000.  We thought we were rich!  Ten years later she was in the $80K range. 

You see,  Internists are Adult, Non-surgical MDs. They don't do very many procedures, even though they have all the training and credentials.  Instead they see 25-35 patients per day, managing everything from Diabetes to Malaria or genetic disorders,  for which insurance pays them (these days) maybe $70 -$120/ visit.   Insurance paid much less in years past. Do the arithmetic. 

And out of that subtract office rental, medical supplies, staff wages and malpractice insurance costs.)

 

After 31 years in practice with a larger group practice, she finally retired at about the $105K range.  Then she took a retirement job for another 12 years working as a State MD.   The State salary was about 10% higher than her take home from private practice.  

 

I wanted to clarify for you the misconception that first-year MDs get paid boocoo bucks.  Some specialists  make very good money, but not all specialists do --- and all of them have extensive training costs and more than a decade without any income. 

 

But reality is that I'm not going to convince you, and you certainly aren't going to convince me.

So I think I'll sign off here and get some sleep.  It's way past my bedtime, and at 74 y.o., I have to work tomorrow. 

Somebody has to pay the cost of all this vote pandering.  

 

 

[Gungadin]

Tour a college with your kid sometime.  They are selling these 'foodcourts', the nice accomodations, activities (pool, ski slope, gun range, etc etc etc).  Big social life for 4-5 years.  What kid wouldn't want to do it?  It is not like 1980 when you had cafeteria food, one bathroom per hall and a phone in the hall.   Oh and kids got dropped off with no car on campus.  So yea you have the cost of the education (inflated) but the life style which is hugely inflated.

 

Most kids can commute to a college for 2 years, maybe a community college, while they prove themselves and settle into a major.  Parents need to strongly direct kids. my boy had clear skills and when he came to me and said I'm thinking about 'IT', I said 'No, that is not where your skill set is, you may be able to get a minor in IT son but God blessed you as and EE and programming is often important to EE's but it is specialized programming'.  

 

My Community College professors were as good as my university professors but they were mostly STEM classes.

 

Dirty secret, with a summer job most kids can get 2 years of community college with no debt.

 

Problem is that largely this is not about the education but 'the college experience'.

 

Then after rich parents pay for 5 years of college or they are in debt $150,000 they graduate and come home to live with Mom and Dad...FAILURE TO LAUNCH.  If they can graduate and live with mom and Dad then they can do the first 2 years while living with mom and dad....

 

I don't buy it that these poor kids even need the debt, most a high percentage don't.  The taxpayer just paid for 4 years of fun.....

[Matthew Duncan]

Well son/daughter,

 

I can borrow against my retirement funds to pay for your college education and when I retire I’ll come live with you.  Or you can pay for your college education and there will be no need to live with you on my retirement.

 

Son/daughter which option do you want to go with?

 

Both of my children paid their own college debts within two years of graduating. Between attending classes, working and studying they did have any time to get into trouble.

[Lawdog Dago Dom]

I did the 2 year community college route. Only sometimes there was time and money for school; and sometimes there wasn't. It took me 8 years to get through a two year program.

 

By that time I had saved enough to go to the big university for my B.A. Also working sometimes two jobs at the same time.

 

I have a niece who insisted her parents send her to the big university for all four years, even though a community college was just around the corner. I tried telling them the CC was a better deal, but they gave in to what the princess wanted. It almost bankrupted them.

[El Chapo]

9 hours ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

Speaking of being mistaken, do you have any idea what a first year MD is paid? 

I didn't think so. 

I will share my wife's experience.

 

After high school graduatiIon, she spent 4 years in a Ca State College, majoring in Zoology/pre-med with a minor in Chemistry.  She graduated 4.0, SCL. 

Then she attended UC San Francisco Medical School for 3 more years, for her MD degrees.   Then she served a 1 year non-paid General Medicine Internship, followed by 3 more years of non-paid Residency to become a Board Certified Specialist in Internal Medicne.  That is 11 years of higher education, during which she had zero income.  (Residents in those days worked 20-hrs on, 8 hrs off shifts. )

 

In her first year of private practice, in a small group practice, she made a whopping great $51,000.  We thought we were rich!  Ten years later she was in the $80K range. 

You see,  Internists are Adult, Non-surgical MDs. They don't do very many procedures, even though they have all the training and credentials.  Instead they see 25-35 patients per day, managing everything from Diabetes to Malaria or genetic disorders,  for which insurance pays them (these days) maybe $70 -$120/ visit.   Insurance paid much less in years past. Do the arithmetic. 

And out of that subtract office rental, medical supplies, staff wages and malpractice insurance costs.)

 

After 31 years in practice with a larger group practice, she finally retired at about the $105K range.  Then she took a retirement job for another 12 years working as a State MD.   The State salary was about 10% higher than her take home from private practice.  

 

I wanted to clarify for you the misconception that first-year MDs get paid boocoo bucks.  Some specialists  make very good money, but not all specialists do --- and all of them have extensive training costs and more than a decade without any income. 

 

But reality is that I'm not going to convince you, and you certainly aren't going to convince me.

So I think I'll sign off here and get some sleep.  It's way past my bedtime, and at 74 y.o., I have to work tomorrow. 

Somebody has to pay the cost of all this vote pandering. 

 

At 74 years old, you certainly lived through different economic times than I am.  But since my wife is a medical professional and actually trains those residents, you could say I have a second row seat to it.  First year residents make more than I made for the first 9 years of my professional career, and the average first year physician post-residency makes 50% more than the average attorney (who also has a doctorate degree). 

 

I don't know what year you're talking about, but if we're talking about 40 years ago, $51k in 1983 dollars is equal to $160,441.93 in today's dollars.  That is over double the median household income in the United States today.  You were rich by any measure and if her salary continued even at that same level, that would create a comfortable early retirement for anyone who was even a little financially savvy.

 

I also think you have a very skewed view of what "bookoo bucks" are.  Even family medical practitioners make great money, even compared other occupations with advanced education and degree requirements, including accountants, pharmacists, and attorneys.  Specialists make even more, perhaps much more, but all physicians who are practicing are earning 2-3x the median household income their first year post-residency and it only goes up from there. 

I wouldn't even be here right now if it wasn't for the COVID pause of payments toward our student loans, which I did not ask for and did not need.  It freed up $300 or so a month that even made it possible for me to do some of the things I had wanted to do for a long time, including cowboy action shooting.

 

Given the wide generational differences here, it's no wonder that perspectives are basically missing.  If I made $161k per year after a three year apprenticeship, I would have had no problem paying $230k in student loans in just a few years.  I could have probably lived a quite nice lifestyle along the way, too!  I would have dreamed of being in such a situation.  Nobody I know outside of health care professions is living like that at all, and I have plenty of friends from all sorts of occupations.

[Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life]

I never had any loans for my BS degree or my MBA.

 

I earned a 4 year athletic scholarship (football)  for my undergraduate degree. I knew I was not going anywhere beyond college with my football so I made sure I got a good education. I earned a BS in Mechanical Engineering with a 3.9 gpa and worked in aerospace engineering for my entire career. My company sent me to get my MBA and paid for everything. I retired as Manager of Production Engineering.

 

Today these kids borrow tons of money to get a degree in a Liberal Arts program that will never earn them lots of money. Sorry people......you borrow it, you pay it back......PERIOD!

[El Chapo]

15 hours ago, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said:

You had options. You chose this one. 

 

No, I chose PLSF.  And come February, I will be debt free!

 

I could have quit and chased money in the private sector and perhaps I'd earn enough to pay, but I have been a lifelong public servant, so once a few years passed, PLSF was a no-brainer.

[Mossy Horn Gent]

No college loans. I worked while I was at the University and kept my grades up to qualify for scholarships and graduate assistantships. Graduated with an MS degree.

[Dusty Devil Dale]

12 hours ago, El Chapo said:

 

At 74 years old, you certainly lived through different economic times than I am.  But since my wife is a medical professional and actually trains those residents, you could say I have a second row seat to it.  First year residents make more than I made for the first 9 years of my professional career, and the average first year physician post-residency makes 50% more than the average attorney (who also has a doctorate degree). 

 

I don't know what year you're talking about, but if we're talking about 40 years ago, $51k in 1983 dollars is equal to $160,441.93 in today's dollars.  That is over double the median household income in the United States today.  You were rich by any measure and if her salary continued even at that same level, that would create a comfortable early retirement for anyone who was even a little financially savvy.

 

I also think you have a very skewed view of what "bookoo bucks" are.  Even family medical practitioners make great money, even compared other occupations with advanced education and degree requirements, including accountants, pharmacists, and attorneys.  Specialists make even more, perhaps much more, but all physicians who are practicing are earning 2-3x the median household income their first year post-residency and it only goes up from there. 

I wouldn't even be here right now if it wasn't for the COVID pause of payments toward our student loans, which I did not ask for and did not need.  It freed up $300 or so a month that even made it possible for me to do some of the things I had wanted to do for a long time, including cowboy action shooting.

 

Given the wide generational differences here, it's no wonder that perspectives are basically missing.  If I made $161k per year after a three year apprenticeship, I would have had no problem paying $230k in student loans in just a few years.  I could have probably lived a quite nice lifestyle along the way, too!  I would have dreamed of being in such a situation.  Nobody I know outside of health care professions is living like that at all, and I have plenty of friends from all sorts of occupations.

You make a great case for why today's highly paid just-out-of-school folks should be able to afford their own debt.  The salaries are way inflated now too.  It is a matter of personal priority setting and taking responsibility.  They are "loans", not scholarships.  But the loan forgiveness has rendered them as the same.  Never mind that those who received scholarships had to earn them.  

 

Not all, but too many in the entitled generations (below age 40) seem to think somebody else is supposed to be responsible for providing their essentials and for assuring their economic comfort and convenience, so that  their own income can be available for discretionary spending.  Mom, dad, the taxpayers, anybody but them should take responsibility for their life.  

 

I still have not seen any basis for why those who could not afford to go to college should now have to pay for the debts for others who were lucky enough to attend.   Likewise, I see no justification for requiring folks who worked their way or timely paid off their debt should have to pay for others.  If their education did not equip them to earn enough to pay their way, then perhaps they should have skipped the college, skipped the loans, and gone into one of the honorable trades.  Any economist would recognize their education as a losing business--i.e., where the investment fails to pay for itself.  So bankruptcy may be their solution, but others (creditors) have to pay those costs too, don't they. 

 

But it is a rhetorical deception to believe that  borrowers who went into public service are somehow working off their college debt.  They are being well paid for their time and service today, at the same salaries as others with no college debt load, and they have no salary deductions made against their remaining debt.  They received both the loan moneys and their present salaries.  Somebody else is being required to pay for both.

 

 

 

 

 

[El Chapo]

1 hour ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

You make a great case for why today's highly paid just-out-of-school folks should be able to afford their own debt.  The salaries are way inflated now too.  It is a matter of personal priority setting and taking responsibility. 

 

Not all, but too many in the entitled generations (below age 40) seem to think somebody else is supposed to be responsible for providing their essentials and for assuring their economic comfort and convenience, so that  their income can be available for discretionary spending.  Mom, dad, the taxpayers, anybody but them should take responsibility for their life.  

 

I still have not seen any basis for why those who could not afford to go to college should now have to pay for the debts for others who were lucky enough to attend.   Likewise, I see no justification for requiring folks who worked their way or timely paid off their debt should have to pay for others.  If their education did not equip them to earn enough to pay their way, then perhaps they should have skipped the college, skipped the loans, and gone into one of the honorable trades. 

 

But it is a rhetorical deception to believe that  borrowers who went into public service are somehow working off their college debt.  They are being well paid for their time and service today, at the same salaries as others with no college debt load, and with no pay deductions made against their remaining debt.  They received both the loan dollars and their present salaries.  Somebody else is being required to pay for both.

 

 

You must have missed the details in my post.   Zero other professions pay like health care.  If anything, your rally should be against health insurance and physicians that support those salaries. 

 

It seems that your beef is also with Congress.  You want to blame the recipients of benefits that our government created as a means to get the labor it needs to supply the services the public absolutely needs.  If you don't like their policy choices, you should vote for someone else.  But don't blame those of us who face difficult decisions under the existing policies that we didn't make. 

 

In my view, you sound just like the women in my 20s who wouldn't date me because I was in the military because they hated Bush's war in Iraq.  I did not vote to go to war in Iraq.  I answered my country's call and wrote Uncle Sugar a blank check that included "up to and including my life."  Yet they wanted to blame me for a politically unpopular war.  You want to blame student borrowers for bad policy decisions for which they are not responsible.  Your beef is with Congress.  Don't blame the debtors who were forced to make a tough choice under policies they didn't make.

 

If the government would end its subsides and meddling in the price of higher education, these problems would be gone overnight.  Universities wouldn't be able to charge monopoly money for education.  But those decisions were made long before I enrolled in college.  By that same token, when I was in high school and working 7 days a week after school for $5.40 an hour, it was your generation who encouraged me to go to school as if it would provide limitless high paying opportunities for work.  That was what we were told.  It turns out that even the highest paying occupations are a scam and the cost of the education to get there is a ripoff. 

 

This problem is likely to continue to get even worse in the future because instead of nuance, all we get our politics.  That means nothing will change, the government will continue manipulating the market for higher education, and the prices will soar higher than ever.  There is no reason the future won't resemble the recent past if no policy changes are made.

 

The bad news for your proposed solution is that short of winning the lottery, I couldn't pay anyway, so PLSF is the only realistic option at this point in my life.  The few in my courses who got the high paying jobs paid theirs a long time ago.   All but a few burned out and since left those jobs, but at least they were able to pay.  But out of 192 graduates, they only wanted the top 10%, so I was never afforded those options despite strong grades.

 

I am not under 40 by the way.

[Dusty Devil Dale]

16 minutes ago, El Chapo said:

 

You must have missed the details in my post.   Zero other professions pay like health care.  If anything, your rally should be against health insurance and physicians that support those salaries. 

 

It seems that your beef is also with Congress.  You want to blame the recipients of benefits that our government created as a means to get the labor it needs to supply the services the public absolutely needs.  If you don't like their policy choices, you should vote for someone else.  But don't blame those of us who face difficult decisions under the existing policies that we didn't make. 

 

In my view, you sound just like the women in my 20s who wouldn't date me because I was in the military because they hated Bush's war in Iraq.  I did not vote to go to war in Iraq.  I answered my country's call and wrote Uncle Sugar a blank check that included "up to and including my life."  Yet they wanted to blame me for a politically unpopular war.  You want to blame student borrowers for bad policy decisions for which they are not responsible.  Your beef is with Congress.  Don't blame the debtors who were forced to make a tough choice under policies they didn't make.

 

If the government would end its subsides and meddling in the price of higher education, these problems would be gone overnight.  Universities wouldn't be able to charge monopoly money for education.  But those decisions were made long before I enrolled in college.  By that same token, when I was in high school and working 7 days a week after school for $5.40 an hour, it was your generation who encouraged me to go to school as if it would provide limitless high paying opportunities for work.  That was what we were told.  It turns out that even the highest paying occupations are a scam and the cost of the education to get there is a ripoff. 

 

This problem is likely to continue to get even worse in the future because instead of nuance, all we get our politics.  That means nothing will change, the government will continue manipulating the market for higher education, and the prices will soar higher than ever.  There is no reason the future won't resemble the recent mast if no policy changes are made.

 

I am not under 40 by the way.

To be honest, I didn't carefully read the above.  My issue is not with details of individual occupations or contracts.  My issue is with inequity.  Party A benefits, but Party B has to pay for it.  The SCOTUS also saw it that way.  But our President quickly announced he would work around their holding and is making a show of following through.  (Isn't that an "insurrection"?)

 

The simple truth is that the President is not intending to actually forgive any loans.  They fully expect to be sued again and be overturned again by the SCOTUS --but not until AFTER they've secured the 813,000 votes of people receiving the hollow promise of a gift of debt forgiveness.  After the votes are cast, they know they can fail on their promise with a good excuse.  

So we shouldn't get too worked up over the taxpayer impacts.  Rather we should be addressing the dishonesty.   

 

BTW, this is a good discussion, but it is drawing very close to a political debate, which is out of place here in the Saloon.  Don't be surprised if moderators close, move, or remove us.   I'll apologize in advance for my part in taking this there.  DDD

[watab kid]

On 11/30/2023 at 8:58 AM, Dantankerous said:

Perhaps college endowment funds should be used to pay back college loans?

NOW THERE YOU GO - lets put it on the back of the institutions that caused the debts , i like that idea , if "forgiveness" is all the thing lets make the debtors and indebted share that burden - NOT THE TAXPAYERS that got nothing from the experience or benefit from the results 

[Dantankerous]

One has to wonder about the amount of degrees that are actually worth in future earning potential what kids are paying to achieve them these days. 10% at best?

 

A previous poster nailed it on the head when he mentioned "the college experience."  Over the last 10 years I have heard so many of my peers who are parents of high school and college aged kids saying that they loved their time in college in the 80s and early 90s and they want their kids to have the same experience, but at what cost I ask. A lot of my peers because they are paying for their kids's "college experience" will not be able to retire until they are a 157 and a half years old with the debt they are amassing to entertain their kids, or perhaps live vicariously through their children's overpriced college experience.

 

 Granted, wages have not kept up with inflation and I see a lot of young people wondering to themselves how  the hell they're ever going to be able to buy a house or afford to start a family especially if they are paying back a $100,000+ in school debt at age 22.  Thank God some of these kids are figuring it out and by that I mean not buying into this college scam that so many these days do.

[Eyesa Horg]

Funny how the folks that don't bother to pay their loans and even admit they won't, don't mind my paying it for them and have a convenient excuse of how it's ok.

[Calamity Kris]

On 11/30/2023 at 7:58 PM, John Kloehr said:

One of the things which might help loan repayment is to not provide loans on majors with little employment demand.

 

CoViD did present challenge across industries for new graduates, the crash of '08 stressed the entire economy, but certain careers have higher demand than others. If you want a degree where there is a worker shortage, government loans make sense. If you want to strike out in a low-demand field, pay your own way.

 

I couldn't agree more.  My sister took out lots of loans and grants to complete a BS in................Ornithology.  {The study of birds}.  She spent 10 years in junior college {No kidding} going to school part time, then 6 years at the university level, again attending only part time.  She did not work through this whole time frame so she could "focus on school".  She completed her university studies 10 years ago and still doesn't have a job of any kind.  She is overjoyed her debt is being forgiven....................... 

 

I was the opposite.  I started working in a factory right out of high school to be able to earn my own way.  I started college when I had enough money to be able to pay for it.  I selected a field that the company would help pay for.  If I kept my grades up, which I worked hard to do, the company re-reimbursed me at a specific percentage.  When I completed my degree, I received a promotion and a bonus with a stipulation that I had to remain with the company for a specified period of time after graduation or pay the money back.  I stayed and it worked well for me.

[John Kloehr]

1 hour ago, Calamity Kris said:

 

I couldn't agree more.  My sister took out lots of loans and grants to complete a BS in................Ornithology.  {The study of birds}.  She spent 10 years in junior college {No kidding} going to school part time, then 6 years at the university level, again attending only part time.  She did not work through this whole time frame so she could "focus on school".  She completed her university studies 10 years ago and still doesn't have a job of any kind.  She is overjoyed her debt is being forgiven....................... 

 

I was the opposite.  I started working in a factory right out of high school to be able to earn my own way.  I started college when I had enough money to be able to pay for it.  I selected a field that the company would help pay for.  If I kept my grades up, which I worked hard to do, the company re-reimbursed me at a specific percentage.  When I completed my degree, I received a promotion and a bonus with a stipulation that I had to remain with the company for a specified period of time after graduation or pay the money back.  I stayed and it worked well for me.

With no slight on your sister intended, I present a completely unrelated story.

 

It is about a young lady who wanted to become a nurse, which is and was an in-demand profession. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

 

I had an opportunity to get the 4-year degree I never needed before, but had made some social observations over time. Seeing things like a bunch of young folks at a diner all having breakfast, together, but each person seemed to be interacting with their phones more than with each other at the table. I wanted a reset not just technically but also socially. And I had an opportunity to go to college where most of the students were young enough to be my kids.

 

But first, in order to meet the standard for this program, I had to take some classes at the local community college. And there was a time limit between starting and finishing along a minimum GPA requirement.

 

Which brings us to chemistry. I need to take Chem 1A. And because I am part of a  program, I had to pull my transcripts from high school... And I earned a C in high school chem so good not take the 1A class, I needed to take bonehead chem first. Which would likely count me out of the program due to time constraints... Unless I took bonehead in summer school, I still had 2 weeks to sign up and that class still had 4 seats available. I'll get to the nursing candidate in a bit, have not forgotten her.

 

I did check and found I could apply for an appeal and a waiver, I also met the professor for the bonehead class, then went to the school bookstore.

 

At the bookstore, I sat down on the floor with the textbook for Chem 1A. Started paging through it. In high school, be had a simple Bohr model of the atom, with electrons in orbits around the nucleus. This book showed "orbitals," regions of probability (Heisenburg stuff) which accounted for the angle for how molecules form. Other alien concepts... With now only 3 seats available, I spoke with the professor again, cancelled plans for an appeal and waiver, and signed up for the summer class.

 

Show up for the first day. This class is 6 hours per day, 5 days per week, for the entire "double" summer school session. The professor explains we will be doing nothing else this summer, to seriously reconsider taking any other classes in combination with this class, that we will be doing about 6 hours of homework each night. And if anyone can not do this, to drop and take it at a slower pace during the regular school year.

 

That nursing candidate... She also was under a special program. She would get all of her expenses paid when she transferred to a state school after two years. And I was talking to her at the end of the first day. She just could not understand how the professor would not understand students, particularly adult students "had lives."
 

In talking to her, she had no spouse, no kids, no mortgage, no trappings of a member of community. She had a sh*t job, a sh*t car, no prospects for advancement based on her high school diploma from some years prior. But she had a life!

 

I had all the other stuff. A different life. Student loans got me through paying my bills while I retooled and reset to a new generation.

 

I never worked in my field again after the degree but do not consider it a waste, the reset was worth it and took me in new directions. and I did pay off the loans in full with interest.

 

That girl? Im sure she has a different sh*t car, is working a different sh*t job, and still has her life which was clearly more important than the hurdle that first summer school bonehead chem class presented in our lives. When the regular school year began, I learned dropped out of her program.

 

At least your sister did eventually complete her program and I am not convinced she will get away without her loans following her. But maybe she could join a college as an adjunct professor or similar, lead field guides for bird watching in her area, associate with the national parks, something... There are ways to offset or reduce the cost of the loans and remain in good standing. 

 

Beyond an annual turkey or eggs for breakfast, I have no special need for bird knowledge but your sister does have deep knowledge and training and should not waste it. Colleges, nature conservancies, scouting troops, plenty of ways for her to do something with it. Your sister, thank God, does not sound like the nursing mandate I would never want near me when I am sick. She did at least finish.

 

[Gungadin]

CS Lewis at the  end of Screwtape Letters has an addendum called 'Screwtape Proposes a Toast' written Circa 1963 about where he sees the education system going.  Seems he had pretty good vision.

 

We now have an intelligentsia which, though very small, is very useful to the cause of Hell

 

The basic principle of the new education is to be that dunces and idlers must not be made to feel inferior to intelligent and industrious pupils.  That would be 'Undemocratic'.

 

In this sense we  know that the new definition of equality (democratic) is equality of results not of opportunity or a legal liberty.  the new Equality definition is a first cousin of socialism.

 

Bernie Sanders suggested everyone go to college so we have the most educated workforce in the world but an education void of valued learning has no value.  We will have an unlearned 'educated' workforce.  Careful how they change definitions.  Before any conversation anymore you have to define the words we are using.  Modern Sporting Rifle=Assault Weapon=Weapon of War.  Sex.  Education......

 

Let no man live who is wiser or better or more famous or even handsomer than the mass.  Cut them all down to a level: all slaves, all ciphers, all nobodies.  All equals.  Thus tyrants could practice, in a sense, "democracy".  But now "democracy" can do the same work without any tyranny other than her own.  No one now need go thru the field with a cane.  The little stalks will now of themselves bite the tops off the big ones.  The big ones are beginning to bite off their own in their desire to Be Like Stalks.  

 

https://www.samizdat.qc.ca/arts/lit/Toast_CSL.pdf

[John Kloehr]

2 minutes ago, Gungadin said:

CS Lewis at the  end of Screwtape Letters has an addendum called 'Screwtape Proposes a Toast' written Circa 1963 about where he sees the education system going. 

Mark Twain made similar observations much earlier, have no time to look up quotes though.

 

But he saw how the ability of common people to convert between units such as bushels and pints was getting lost. And how this would hurt farming among other industries.

 

About half way between Mark Twain and CS Lewis, Roosevelt introduced the New Deal implementing Social Security and making a generational shift from the farm to the city possible.

 

Unfortunately, as Mark Twain observed, the younger generation was dumbed down and so was mostly useful as driven labor (interchangeable cogs as part of the machine of industry)  than as self-motivated industrious individuals. But they did have the promise of social security when they got old.

[Gungadin]

Most of us are capable enough that thru a combination of intelligence and work ethic we CAN obtain success.  Could we all work harder and obtain a higher level?  Surely.  If I am happy with my current level then I should be intellectually honest that I am not willing to do 'X' to get to the next level.  What kills me is the growing number of people that think they deserve a level that is not commensurate with the value they add.  Sadly there are a lot of jobs where people are simply interchangeable carbon modules.  Get out of that position or accept that anyone can be taught your job in a short period.  First generation 'americans' recognize the great opportunities we have, they value education, they embarrass a lot of us that have become soft and entitled.

 

I really do feel bad for these college students that take on big debt.  They are sold and want to buy a bill of goods.  A college education is not a right nor is the access to $ if you don't qualify.  Is it fair that rich kids get to go and poor kids don't?  As a parent I'd argue that I worked for my kid opportunity.  Do I want 'qualified' poor kids to go?  Hell yea. 

[Ozark Huckleberry]

Yes, there are existing laws that provide the means by which people can get student loans paid off by taxpayers in return for public service, or out of pity. Where those laws apply, fine -- we're stuck with it until the laws can be fixed to make the beneficence more of an investment in needed skills than a sop to political support. The administration's arrogance in 'adjusting' the terms of the program to expand the pool of slurpers at the trough is a transparent ploy for votes -- dumping national resources into a voting bloc, an act in the same vein as selling off the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to artificially reduce the deficit and temporarily bring down prices at the pump.

 

When someone rationalizes public funds paying off private education expenses by pointing to the high cost of education, it conveniently ignores the market disruption caused by the government providing a ready supply of money for people to tap into for education. Take away the, 'I'm-on-the-hook-for-this-loan' consideration, and plenty of people are willing to jump in to programs of study that feed their ego, not their budget. The ready supply of funds to consumers frees education institutions from market considerations that would normally move them to keep their costs down.

 

It's not just the taxpayer that gets the hook. Expanding government largesse to 'forgive' loans puts more money into circulation, that drives inflation. Inflation is a tax on savings and investment -- and that is stealing from working people's pasts -- the sacrifices they made, the sweat they poured out, the things they denied themselves and their families out of prudent consideration for their futures -- to pay for someone else's future.

 

If it's a matter of people getting suckered into taking out loans they can't afford, then I have to wonder -- why the hell do we expect those same people to make rational decisions when they vote? If we say 18-22 year-olds can't understand simple economics regarding loans, debt, etcs -- why do we allow them the opportunity to choose a representative to be part of making decisions that are in the best interest of the nation?

[Calamity Kris]

19 hours ago, John Kloehr said:

With no slight on your sister intended, I present a completely unrelated story.

 

At least your sister did eventually complete her program and I am not convinced she will get away without her loans following her. But maybe she could join a college as an adjunct professor or similar, lead field guides for bird watching in her area, associate with the national parks, something... There are ways to offset or reduce the cost of the loans and remain in good standing. 

 

Beyond an annual turkey or eggs for breakfast, I have no special need for bird knowledge but your sister does have deep knowledge and training and should not waste it. Colleges, nature conservancies, scouting troops, plenty of ways for her to do something with it. Your sister, thank God, does not sound like the nursing mandate I would never want near me when I am sick. She did at least finish.

 

 

No slight taken.  In the interest of time, I omitted some information in my presentation.  Namely, my sister used school as a vehicle to avoid work, otherwise, she would have tried to get a job in the 10 years she's been out of school.  She mentioned one time her professors told her she should look into another major because she lacked the drive and aptitude to excel in her chosen field.  She told them to pound sand.  My brother and I believe she was graduated just to have her move along and free up grant money for students who have the drive to do well and get advanced degrees.

 

I agree she should not waste her degree, unfortunately, she is.  She is nearly 60 years old.  Obtaining an advanced degree in a field one finds enjoyable sounds wonderful.  However, that endeavor is usually undertaken as something pursued in retirement.  She has had no career.  She has no retirement.  We're not sure what she's waiting for but she's waiting........  No amount of coaxing from anyone in the family has convinced her to find a better path.

 

Just like you would not want your nursing school drop-out tending to you, I would not want to go on a birding excursion being led by my sister.