Forgive Student Loan Debt to Stimulate the Economy

[Texsox]

You've never heard of anyone being turned away because they were over-qualified?

 

A seriously over-qualified candidate will want more money and more opportunity down the road, making them more likely to either be unhappy with their position or leave at the first opportunity.

 

Sure I have. But that usually is more their experience than education. We seem to be talking entry level.

 

The premise was, people would be better off without a college degree, that the degree will not earn them enough additional compensation to make up for the cost of the degree.

 

So why should high school diploma holders work these lesser paying jobs? Why aren't they going after higher paying jobs?

[StrangeSox]

Sure I have. But that usually is more their experience than education. We seem to be talking entry level.

 

The premise was, people would be better off without a college degree, that the degree will not earn them enough additional compensation to make up for the cost of the degree.

 

You're mis-stating the position.

 

The premise is that some people can be better off without a college degree. For many degrees, there is not enough additional compensation to make up for the cost of the degree.

 

Those estimates of "One million more!" include guys like the founders of Google who are billionaires. It isn't necessarily a realistic expectation.

[Texsox]

No, I didn't state my point clearly.

 

The college grad has a ton of debt and can't afford to take that job opening for $10. The HS grad, who has a significantly smaller debt load, can. Economics forces the debt-laden college grads to look for higher paying jobs or be unable to pay their bills.

 

The idea that college grads typically earn more isn't a bad one, but it isn't a hard-and-fast rule, either. It is heavily dependent on the degree you choose. Finance or software/ computer engineering? Yeah, you can make a good buck. Journalism? History? English? You could be stuck with a sales rep or sales assistant job making less than $30k very easily. Go into the trades and you can be making good money for years while your friends are racking up debt.

 

I'm by no means downplaying the importance of education or even education for knowledge's sake. However, I think its unfortunate that so many kids have it drilled into them that "no college=failure".

 

I agree with all that. And as I mentioned earlier, if the only thing you are looking for in a job is money, than perhaps working is a better way. But if you have a passion for History or English, there are careers that you can get that are more rewarding for that person than trades.

 

I would argue that if you are going into the trades, an apprentice program would be valuable. But if you decide to become an auto mechanic because you can make $45,000 a year but you love English. You just might be happier in the long run working at a book publisher for $30,000 a year.

[StrangeSox]

Again, coming out of high school I really didn't know what to do. In high school I worked on the school paper and it was okay, so I figured I'd follow my initial "dream job" and try to cover the White Sox and Bears like Gonzales and Haugh do. After all, "they say" do what you love. Little did I know how competitive the industry was and what people have to do to be successful. Our newspaper was monthly and when I reached college I was like a deer in headlights when I figured out the daily pressures of j-school. I took some assignments and wrote about the swim team. In high school I was a reporter and then I worked as an editor so I didn't really do all of the stuff reporters do my senior year of HS. I also was fascinated at broadcasting at one point but wasn't really a good source of talent. When I looked at Eastern I felt like it was the best department for me along with education, so I tried them all out. That's when I found out what the newspaper industry is really like and when I returned home my freshman year, I had no clue of what I was going to study for my freshman year. Journalism is an interesting topic, but I'm probably more suited for PR.

 

Any field. The other thing that kind of made me upset with journalism is that I didn't really meet people and couldn't go do what everyone else was doing and just hanging out after classes. I'm a 9-5 guy, not an 8-??? guy. If anything, I should have taken a lot more business and political science courses earlier on. I'll be on deadline in a job, but not if it's a job that is low paying with an industry in shambles where there aren't any guarantees in terms of real good jobs (such as my "dream job"). I don't mind putting work in and getting things done, I just didn't want to write for a living.

 

In just about any field, if you want to get ahead, you won't be a "9-5" guy.

 

There's nothing wrong with not wanting to write for a living, but don't let the long hours you've seen there be the main obstacle.

[Texsox]

You're mis-stating the position.

 

The premise is that some people can be better off without a college degree. For many degrees, there is not enough additional compensation to make up for the cost of the degree.

 

Those estimates of "One million more!" include guys like the founders of Google who are billionaires. It isn't necessarily a realistic expectation.

It also includes Bill Gates who dropped out.

 

Ok I will agree with some. In fact, now that I think about it, I will agree most. Especially in this economy. I have two kids graduating in a few years and the more kids I can discourage from going to college, the better for them

[kapkomet]

College is mandatory - I mean, we have to keep indoctrinating the liberal bias.

 

[Texsox]

College is mandatory - I mean, we have to keep indoctrinating the liberal bias.

You better go back for your PhD

[StrangeSox]

I agree with all that. And as I mentioned earlier, if the only thing you are looking for in a job is money, than perhaps working is a better way. But if you have a passion for History or English, there are careers that you can get that are more rewarding for that person than trades.

 

I would argue that if you are going into the trades, an apprentice program would be valuable. But if you decide to become an auto mechanic because you can make $45,000 a year but you love English. You just might be happier in the long run working at a book publisher for $30,000 a year.

 

It is funny that you mention History and English because those are the experiences I'm drawing from. One of my friends graduated from Lewis with a History degree. Her student loan payments are more than my mortgage + car payment. She works as a sales rep. assistant (order processing, customer calls, etc.) making close to your example salary. She works at the Route 66 museum in Joliet on weekends just to have something in the field she enjoys. But, realistically, how many options are there for a History major in that field vs. the potentially massive educational costs? My fiance was lucky to land a job as an editorial assistant with her English degree but many of her classmates were not. Again, what are the odds of even being able to work at the job you're passionate about?

 

Also, I'd like to revise your example salaries. Another couple of my friends are in the trades (electrician, plumber). They're both just shy of becoming journeymen and are holding off because the $40/ hr pay rate will mean less jobs in the current economy. They were making more than your $45,000 salary example since a year or two after highschool while the rest of us were racking up debt. Sticking with it, they can expect to make a very decent living; certainly just as much as many college grads could.

[StrangeSox]

It also includes Bill Gates who dropped out.

 

Ok I will agree with some. In fact, now that I think about it, I will agree most. Especially in this economy. I have two kids graduating in a few years and the more kids I can discourage from going to college, the better for them

Now I'm going to argue against myself sort of and pass along some advice I heard from a professor once by paraphrasing his story:

 

His son wanted to go into forestry but was discouraged by the very limited number of job openings. His advice was that, if there's only 100 new jobs openings in that field, you better work your hardest to ensure you're one of the 100 best.

 

I'm not arguing against education. I don't plan to ever stop learning. I'm arguing against the big rush to get millions of teenagers every year to start getting themselves into thousands of dollars of debt without really understanding or knowing what they want out of life.

[kapkomet]

You better go back for your PhD

 

 

Yea. Except I really can't right now.

[The Beast]

In just about any field, if you want to get ahead, you won't be a "9-5" guy.

 

There's nothing wrong with not wanting to write for a living, but don't let the long hours you've seen there be the main obstacle.

That's kind of the reason why I want to shadow certain people to see what they do for a living. Business as a major is generic so it will allow me to check out a variety of industries. The goal is to get a degree and shadow certain jobs over my breaks. You don't have to have a PR degree to work in PR, though you do need a teacher's cert and a master's degree for guidance counseling. Again, we will see what happens. Right now I just want to get my degree and see what comes my way. For all I know I'll end up being involved in a service organization. I'm still trying to figure out what really is my "life's work," though.

[Texsox]

It is funny that you mention History and English because those are the experiences I'm drawing from. One of my friends graduated from Lewis with a History degree. Her student loan payments are more than my mortgage + car payment. She works as a sales rep. assistant (order processing, customer calls, etc.) making close to your example salary. She works at the Route 66 museum in Joliet on weekends just to have something in the field she enjoys. But, realistically, how many options are there for a History major in that field vs. the potentially massive educational costs? My fiance was lucky to land a job as an editorial assistant with her English degree but many of her classmates were not. Again, what are the odds of even being able to work at the job you're passionate about?

 

Also, I'd like to revise your example salaries. Another couple of my friends are in the trades (electrician, plumber). They're both just shy of becoming journeymen and are holding off because the $40/ hr pay rate will mean less jobs in the current economy. They were making more than your $45,000 salary example since a year or two after highschool while the rest of us were racking up debt. Sticking with it, they can expect to make a very decent living; certainly just as much as many college grads could.

 

I guess I should preface that while I am saying college degree, an apprentice program or additional training beyond high school would count as well. We were comparing someone with just a high school diploma.

 

No doubt, the trades are still a decent way to make a nice living. If that is what you enjoy doing, go for it. But if you don't like working outside, or doing physical labor, it just might not be worth it.

[StrangeSox]

I guess I should preface that while I am saying college degree, an apprentice program or additional training beyond high school would count as well. We were comparing someone with just a high school diploma.

 

No doubt, the trades are still a decent way to make a nice living. If that is what you enjoy doing, go for it. But if you don't like working outside, or doing physical labor, it just might not be worth it.

 

That's the crux of the argument, though: the expense of a college degree vs. potential increased earnings. It needs to be examined on a degree-by-degree basis as well, because a CS/EE degree will pay a lot more than a sociology degree.

[bmags]

As someone who once was curious about the field of journalism, and believe in what NorthSideSox72 has said, what are you intending to do with your journalism degree? I found out that I hated reporting, designing, taking pictures, deadline pressure among other things. This is why I'm completing a degree in another field.

 

 

I didn't expect to become such a topic of conversation.

 

First to address NSS, my point is the structure of bachelors degrees are stupidly rigorous. I think it's a terrible idea to require 9 hrs. of social science 9 hours of lab science 9 hours of humanities

 

Why not create a scale system? For instance, I wanted to take as many econ classes as I could because they interest me and would be helpful no matter, but once i hit 3, they were not productive in helping me graduate. I could take them out of curiosity, but curiosity came at a cost of $2000 a semester for another 3 hr. course. So instead I took japanese cinema, because i knew i wouldn't have to go, instead spent my time at the paper working and got 100% because the teacher didn't care. That class was $2000. That was buying GPA. That class made me an "educated person."

 

As for the beast, I loved journalism. I loved working at the paper. I loved the research. I loved finding the question that elicited an answer I didn't expect. I loved finding the question that elicited the answer I needed to have. I hated the story you thought would occur but learned that it was nothing. I loved when the nothing turned into the odd and interesting. And, oddly enough, I hated the writing. I love writing, but it is the absolute final step and you are rushing. The story is everything. However, I will not go into journalism because the structured newsroom they taught me in will not be a reality, copy desks are being eliminated, and the new media is something I don't have a knack for. I don't know what I'll do next, that's why I moved to Brazil. I'm not really worried, I have no doubt I have more ability and curiosity to do well than most everyone who may have chose a more relevant major for whatever job I choose. Business majors were a joke at my school, to me at least.

 

Seems like an editor would like you to know something about the story you are covering. So if, for example, the story was on a bio science, having a reporter who took a biology class would be kind of useful.

 

Tex, I get the impression that recently you don't understand how condescending you can come across, so I will tell you that this was condescending. For one, no, before going to a story the editor does not ask, okay, did you ever have bio 1000? You know why? Because if someone thinks they know a damn about biology because they took an entry level class in the course than they are arrogant idiots who will write a terrible story. I knew a lot about education policy and so I covered education. If they needed me to cover a bio story I would and would be effective because I know how to analyze data, and would speak to every relevant person on the subject. And that would be for a quick one up.

 

If an editor picks a journalist to cover a feature on an in-depth biology story because they took bio 101, they should be fired, or at least publicly flayed.

[The Gooch]

Tex, I get the impression that recently you don't understand how condescending you can come across, so I will tell you that this was condescending. For one, no, before going to a story the editor does not ask, okay, did you ever have bio 1000? You know why? Because if someone thinks they know a damn about biology because they took an entry level class in the course than they are arrogant idiots who will write a terrible story. I knew a lot about education policy and so I covered education. If they needed me to cover a bio story I would and would be effective because I know how to analyze data, and would speak to every relevant person on the subject. And that would be for a quick one up.

 

If an editor picks a journalist to cover a feature on an in-depth biology story because they took bio 101, they should be fired, or at least publicly flayed.

 

This is kind of getting back at the point I was trying to make. The more a student can learn about a subject (i.e. taking more classes in it) the more efficient they will be in their career. The idea of a "well rounded student" is great in theory, but it doesn't seem to be as effective in actual practice. Taking an entry level chemistry class, and entry level biology class, and an entry level art class will not help 99% of students in other majors in regards to their careers. What we end up remembering and utilizing are the ideas that not only have been taught to us, but have been pounded into our heads and built upon with successive classes in the subject. For example, If I was journalist, and I had to write an article about geology (which I took freshman year) I can tell you that I would not have an advantage over anyone that never took geology because I really don't remember anything I learned in that particular class.

[kapkomet]

The point isn't about what classes you take, it's your ability to adapt and learn something that's not the subject that you're in. The point also is to be able to think critically about a subject you might not be an expert in.

 

bmags, I'll try to use an example. What guides your philosphy on global warming? Should you be guided on some scientific theories you might have learned in some science class, or should you be guided by some journalist who doesn't know a damn thing about it? I'm not mocking you here, I'm trying to ask a question that might make you see why sometimes a BIO1000 or a SCI1000 or whatever might become relevant.

 

For me, I'm in finance and accounting, yet I can see the relevance of taking general curriculum courses, because you have to be able to understand some things that might be out of your realm sometimes. What molecules make up that pharma product you're making? What chemicals are used in making that piece of steel lighter and used in an airplane? Why would you use titanium instead of aluminum? How does that explain cost differentials (of course that's more economics)... but I'm just throwing out some things to chew on here.

 

I ran across this quote from (oh s***... ) asshatery101, I mean Rush Limbaugh, that he said within the last couple of days, I guess:

 

"There's not a whole lot of critical thinking taught in schools. Kids aren't taught to make decisions. They're taught to feel and have reactions."

 

There's a lot of truth in that statement. And that's why, IMO, for a field like journalism, you want to be "well rounded". Feeling something is true, doesn't make it true. And that's what this "extra curriculum" helps with, IMO.

 

 

[iamshack]

The point isn't about what classes you take, it's your ability to adapt and learn something that's not the subject that you're in. The point also is to be able to think critically about a subject you might not be an expert in.

 

bmags, I'll try to use an example. What guides your philosphy on global warming? Should you be guided on some scientific theories you might have learned in some science class, or should you be guided by some journalist who doesn't know a damn thing about it? I'm not mocking you here, I'm trying to ask a question that might make you see why sometimes a BIO1000 or a SCI1000 or whatever might become relevant.

 

For me, I'm in finance and accounting, yet I can see the relevance of taking general curriculum courses, because you have to be able to understand some things that might be out of your realm sometimes. What molecules make up that pharma product you're making? What chemicals are used in making that piece of steel lighter and used in an airplane? Why would you use titanium instead of aluminum? How does that explain cost differentials (of course that's more economics)... but I'm just throwing out some things to chew on here.

 

I ran across this quote from (oh s***... ) asshatery101, I mean Rush Limbaugh, that he said within the last couple of days, I guess:

 

 

 

There's a lot of truth in that statement. And that's why, IMO, for a field like journalism, you want to be "well rounded". Feeling something is true, doesn't make it true. And that's what this "extra curriculum" helps with, IMO.

 

Kap, I learned more about how to think critically and analyze information I had no previous experience with or knowledge of in law school.

 

I was a history major and learned quite a bit of interesting stuff in undergrad, but the stuff that really makes a difference for me now, I learned all of that in law school.

 

I think more classes like ethics and logic should be focused on, as well as critical writing.

[kapkomet]

Kap, I learned more about how to think critically and analyze information I had no previous experience with or knowledge of in law school.

 

I was a history major and learned quite a bit of interesting stuff in undergrad, but the stuff that really makes a difference for me now, I learned all of that in law school.

 

I think more classes like ethics and logic should be focused on, as well as critical writing.

 

I don't disagree with that, but I also think that there's more to the "general ed" classes then just a blowoff or a way to make money. It's to get a grounding of certain basic elements.

 

You're right in the sense that (in my field) I didn't learn about contract law or GAAP in BIO1000. Sure, you're geared to learning to what you need to know as you zero in on what it is your career path is. But at a fundamental level, when you start college, the point is to be able to be taught to think critically about any subject matter. Not just "law", or "spreadsheets", or "journalism" (or to say, classes about writing style).

[iamshack]

I don't disagree with that, but I also think that there's more to the "general ed" classes then just a blowoff or a way to make money. It's to get a grounding of certain basic elements.

 

You're right in the sense that (in my field) I didn't learn about contract law or GAAP in BIO1000. Sure, you're geared to learning to what you need to know as you zero in on what it is your career path is. But at a fundamental level, when you start college, the point is to be able to be taught to think critically about any subject matter. Not just "law", or "spreadsheets", or "journalism" (or to say, classes about writing style).

 

Oh, I couldn't agree more. In fact, many people seem to think law school is similar to undergrad in that you choose a major. This is simply not the case. You take a core curriculum and using the principles of that curriculum, you learn to analyze and process all sorts of information and data.

 

It seems to me that an undergrad core curriculum should focus more on the critical thinking skills necessary be successful in most white collar jobs and then worry about handing out a well-rounded education. If one doesn't get the critical thinking part first, he most likely isn't going to really understand or retain the subject matter anyway.

[Texsox]

That's the crux of the argument, though: the expense of a college degree vs. potential increased earnings. It needs to be examined on a degree-by-degree basis as well, because a CS/EE degree will pay a lot more than a sociology degree.

 

Actually I will reject that argument (wow, what a surprise)

 

Some careers pay less, some more. Some people are happy working any job as long as it pays well. Others want to follow their passion. So sure, you should pick a major based on cost/benefit, others should not.

[iamshack]

Actually I will reject that argument (wow, what a surprise)

 

Some careers pay less, some more. Some people are happy working any job as long as it pays well. Others want to follow their passion. So sure, you should pick a major based on cost/benefit, others should not.

None of that changes whether it is financially advantageous to an individual, or our nation, for that matter, for our young people to attend college in the current economic climate.

[StrangeSox]

Actually I will reject that argument (wow, what a surprise)

 

Some careers pay less, some more. Some people are happy working any job as long as it pays well. Others want to follow their passion. So sure, you should pick a major based on cost/benefit, others should not.

 

You're not rejecting the argument, you're deflecting and shifting goalposts. The argument isn't "what makes people happiest" but what makes the most financial sense.

 

I'm going to back iamshack here and say that logic and ethics courses should be mandatory parts of any curriculum.

[The Beast]

Actually I will reject that argument (wow, what a surprise)

 

Some careers pay less, some more. Some people are happy working any job as long as it pays well. Others want to follow their passion. So sure, you should pick a major based on cost/benefit, others should not.

I often wonder if it is possible to do both. One of my passions, like everyone elses on this board, is the White Sox. My other passion is the Bears, another helping people and another when I think about it is influencing and persuading others. So really what does that translate to? Several options. J-school, political science, business and counseling education or psychology.

 

I fall under the category of social and enterprising occupations. These include teaching, psychologist, manager, lawyer, etc. Ultimately, this is probably why a liberal arts education fits best.

 

So to say that I'm just working toward my passion or just towards money isn't exactly accurate, but I would fall under the people who work because it pays well and it is satisfying.

[The Gooch]

I often wonder if it is possible to do both. One of my passions, like everyone elses on this board, is the White Sox. My other passion is the Bears, another helping people and another when I think about it is influencing and persuading others. So really what does that translate to? Several options. J-school, political science, business and counseling education or psychology.

 

I fall under the category of social and enterprising occupations. These include teaching, psychologist, manager, lawyer, etc. Ultimately, this is probably why a liberal arts education fits best.

 

So to say that I'm just working toward my passion or just towards money isn't exactly accurate, but I would fall under the people who work because it pays well and it is satisfying.

 

I'm kind of the same way. I'm actually attending graduate school for Industrial Organizational Psychology in the fall, which is a good mixture business and social science. Now if I could find a spot in the White Sox organization after I graduate I will have everything covered lol.

[Texsox]

You're not rejecting the argument, you're deflecting and shifting goalposts. The argument isn't "what makes people happiest" but what makes the most financial sense.

 

I'm going to back iamshack here and say that logic and ethics courses should be mandatory parts of any curriculum.

 

Ok. But which career makes the most financial success is a terrible yardstick for most people.