Student Loan Forgiveness

[Murphy101]

30 minutes ago, Frances said:

I’m a big proponent of LACs and college liberal arts classes,but in general, I don’t think they are a very effective or efficient way for students to decide what they want to pursue for a career or course of study. Lots of the more marketable careers such as many tech, accounting, business, and healthcare fields wouldn’t even be represented in a liberal arts curriculum.

And countries that have basically free college for students aren’t in general having them try a bunch of things in college and then choose. They are being admitted for very specific programs after completing the necessary prerequisites in high school.

In my opinion, high school is the time to be exploring all sorts of different classes, both academic and CTE (career technical education), doing career exploration, job shadowing (such as at the program provided by my local hospital), etc.

I’m not saying we need to be like many countries and make students choose a career at a relatively young age and I’m all for encouraging students to take a variety of liberal arts classes, but I just don’t agree it’s the best way for students to figure out what they want to pursue for college and a career.

I’m struggling to even think of what liberal arts classes a student could take in college, but not high school. The only thing that readily comes to mind is philosophy (although my son did take a high school course), but that doesn’t lead to a major or career for very many people.

Liberal arts - arts.  Arts are the first thing cut in nearly any k12 system. By all means I do not suggest that a liberal arts college is the only option.  But the k12 system here is pretty derelict.  Many students in my state have their first encounter with programming, mechanics, various arts and engineering - either after high school or via concurrent enrollment the last 2 years of high school. Again because they need so much remediation at that point - that’s a huge impediment to what can be offered to them. 

[GoodGrief3]

18 hours ago, Frances said:

Actually, what we primarily do in this country is give public funded residencies and green cards for doctors to come from other countries to work in underserved areas.

Slightly different from the training slots issue to which you are referring, but I did want to respond to this comment. When I graduated with my nursing degree many years ago, I had my loans repaid in exchanged for serving off the road system in rural Alaska, and went on to work in various other underserved areas for several years. Granted, that experience was a number of years ago, but it was not my experience that the docs/other healthcare workers were international. For the most part, it was young domestic docs exchanging service for loan repayment (or some similar agreement made in med school). I believe the loan repayment option is still available for various high need professions through the US Public Health Service, though I have not looked recently.

[Frances]

2 minutes ago, GoodGrief3 said:

Slightly different from the training slots issue to which you are referring, but I did want to respond to this comment. When I graduated with my nursing degree many years ago, I had my loans repaid in exchanged for serving off the road system in rural Alaska, and went on to work in various other underserved areas for several years. Granted, that experience was a number of years ago, but it was not my experience that the docs/other healthcare workers were international. For the most part, it was young domestic docs exchanging service for loan repayment (or some similar agreement made in med school). I believe the loan repayment option is still available for various high need professions through the US Public Health Service, though I have not looked recently.

You need only look at almost any small town in the US, especially in the South, to see the large numbers of doctors from other countries. Each year a significant portion (about 20%) of medical residencies in the US are filled by graduates of foreign medical schools and most stay and practice here. Now granted, a portion of those are US residents who couldn’t get into a US medical school, so went abroad. But each year we import and train with taxpayer dollars through residencies lots of medical school graduates from other countries, despite turning away thousands of qualified US citizens from medical careers here due to a lack of sufficient training spots.

In fact, one argument often made for keeping the situation as it currently stands is that these foreign medical grads will take the jobs US grads don’t want. I can’t see as how we’ve ever tested that theory, as we’ve never produced enough doctors domestically, despite an abundance of qualified, interested students.

 

[Murphy101]

28 minutes ago, Frances said:

I think it is.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/see-how-student-loan-borrowing-has-risen-in-10-years

Yes, the average has increased. But $31k doesn’t seem like an amount to never be able to pay off, especially if someone doesn’t make interest only payments. Granted, I think the interest rates are ridiculous.

$30k is very much an amount that a large number of Americans would never be able to pay off.  Remember, we live in a country where a majority of people say they would not be able to come up with even 1k for an emergency expense. 

Here is a rather comprehensive bit of info. 
https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/

I wonder how many people under IBR qualify for $0 payments bc they make so little the calculated affordable payment is $0 per month? I’m having a hard time finding that info.

But just from the article you linked:

[quote]As prospective and returning college students weigh whether to borrow for school, they should also keep in mind that average debt figures only tell part of the story. 

"The total individual debt number doesn't really get to the heart of what people are experiencing," says Cody Hounanian, executive director of the nonprofit Student Debt Crisis Center. "We hear from borrowers every day who cannot afford their student loan payments, who cannot put food on the table. The average individual debt is usually somewhere in the $30,000 range, but when you look at the most distressed student loan borrowers who are in default, they are often in the single digits, less than $10,000."[/quote]

Thats a hard reality. And the rate of defaults seems to suggest that yes, $30k is an unpayable amount for many people. 

Edited April 1, 2022 by Murphy101

[fairfarmhand]

5 hours ago, ktgrok said:

Some places/states already HAVE free college for 2 yrs. This stuff has not happened in those places, so not sure why you are positive it would happen if it was 4 yrs instead of 2. 

(and I'm okay with free two years, and REASONABLE ways to finish up a 4 year degree after that will little debt.)

I asked this question earlier. In my state, the free college is paid for my lottery funds. Are there other states that do it in other ways?

Our taxes in TN have not gone up, because it was funded in a different way. Are there other options for paying for education besides taxation?

[Bootsie]

4 hours ago, ktgrok said:

For those that don't click to read it - out of 4.4 MILLION borrowers eligible for loan cancellation after 20 years of payments only 32 people - not 32 million, 32 people - actually had loans canceled. 

Did I say that?

I said that those places were doing it without the things you said would happen - the government forcing them into certain fields, etc. And I can certainly say those students have less educational debt than those who took loans for it. Which was what I was talking about. 

Did I say that the government would force them into certain fields if college was provided debt-free?  

Yes, students have less educational debt if someone else pays for it, but to me that should is not the sole criterion for making a policy decision.

[Bootsie]

2 hours ago, fairfarmhand said:

I asked this question earlier. In my state, the free college is paid for my lottery funds. Are there other states that do it in other ways?

Our taxes in TN have not gone up, because it was funded in a different way. Are there other options for paying for education besides taxation?

I am not sure what states are using lotteries to pay for education (especially higher education).  I do know that in most states, the state money going toward higher education has been drastically reduced in recent years.  In Texas, a lottery has been used to raise money for K-12 education.  I have not seen evidence that it has provided a large amount of funds for education.  Also, there have been many who have complained that statistically those from the lower socioeconomic groups play the lottery more often than those from higher socioeconomic groups and consider the lottery a regressive tax, although it is completely volunteer.  

[SKL]

2 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

$30k is very much an amount that a large number of Americans would never be able to pay off.  Remember, we live in a country where a majority of people say they would not be able to come up with even 1k for an emergency expense. 

Here is a rather comprehensive bit of info. 
https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/

I wonder how many people under IBR qualify for $0 payments bc they make so little the calculated affordable payment is $0 per month? I’m having a hard time finding that info.

But just from the article you linked:

[quote]As prospective and returning college students weigh whether to borrow for school, they should also keep in mind that average debt figures only tell part of the story. 

"The total individual debt number doesn't really get to the heart of what people are experiencing," says Cody Hounanian, executive director of the nonprofit Student Debt Crisis Center. "We hear from borrowers every day who cannot afford their student loan payments, who cannot put food on the table. The average individual debt is usually somewhere in the $30,000 range, but when you look at the most distressed student loan borrowers who are in default, they are often in the single digits, less than $10,000."[/quote]

Thats a hard reality. And the rate of defaults seems to suggest that yes, $30k is an unpayable amount for many people. 

I am sure there are some people who are struggling, but the fact that some people struggle does not mean that most US graduates can't ever hope to pay off their student loans.

A quick google tells me that the average US smoker spends roughly $5,000 per year on cigarettes alone.  The average house mortgage is over $200,000 and 44% of Americans have house mortgages.  If people are struggling financially, I really don't think student loans are usually the underlying cause.  Sometimes, probably yes, especially where people were scammed into borrowing for classes that could never pay for themselves.

Defaults aren't always because the loan is not payable ever.  It's often because a person early in his/her career either hasn't planned well [including not knowing about legitimate deferral or payment options], lost his job, or other issue related more to youth/inexperience than economics.  These issues are not necessarily permanent.  In my experience, the bank is happy to help with deferral / restructuring if someone has a problem.

And honestly, there are plenty of people without student loans who struggle to pay their bills.  At least getting an appropriate education can eventually provide an income buffer against ups and downs.

[SKL]

2 hours ago, fairfarmhand said:

I asked this question earlier. In my state, the free college is paid for my lottery funds. Are there other states that do it in other ways?

Our taxes in TN have not gone up, because it was funded in a different way. Are there other options for paying for education besides taxation?

Yeah and it's mostly low-income, uneducated people paying into the lottery.  Doesn't seem right to me.

[Bootsie]

4 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

This. Also why do people keep saying they will make better decisions if it costs them? 

Because economic theory and data back this up.  

[Bootsie]

2 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

$30k is very much an amount that a large number of Americans would never be able to pay off.  Remember, we live in a country where a majority of people say they would not be able to come up with even 1k for an emergency expense. 

Here is a rather comprehensive bit of info. 
https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/

I wonder how many people under IBR qualify for $0 payments bc they make so little the calculated affordable payment is $0 per month? I’m having a hard time finding that info.

But just from the article you linked:

[quote]As prospective and returning college students weigh whether to borrow for school, they should also keep in mind that average debt figures only tell part of the story. 

"The total individual debt number doesn't really get to the heart of what people are experiencing," says Cody Hounanian, executive director of the nonprofit Student Debt Crisis Center. "We hear from borrowers every day who cannot afford their student loan payments, who cannot put food on the table. The average individual debt is usually somewhere in the $30,000 range, but when you look at the most distressed student loan borrowers who are in default, they are often in the single digits, less than $10,000."[/quote]

Thats a hard reality. And the rate of defaults seems to suggest that yes, $30k is an unpayable amount for many people. 

Someone with $30,000 of student loan debt paid over 15 years, if the interest rate is 5%, would be a payment of $237 per month.  If someone who is college educated cannot secure a job in which they can make $237 a month payments, that suggests that their college education is not making them very productive.  It makes no more sense for the government to spend that money (which it does not have and has to borrow) to educate someone for such a low-productivity job. 

[Frances]

4 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

Liberal arts - arts.  Arts are the first thing cut in nearly any k12 system. By all means I do not suggest that a liberal arts college is the only option.  But the k12 system here is pretty derelict.  Many students in my state have their first encounter with programming, mechanics, various arts and engineering - either after high school or via concurrent enrollment the last 2 years of high school. Again because they need so much remediation at that point - that’s a huge impediment to what can be offered to them. 

Liberal arts does not mean just arts. It means humanities, physical and life sciences, social sciences, fine and performing arts, etc. And I know you weren’t suggesting liberal arts colleges as the only option, just college liberal arts classes as the best way for a student to explore and figure out their path. And I disagree. Exactly the type of CTE classes you mention above combined with regular high school classes, career exploration, job shadowing, internships, jobs, etc during high school are the way for students to figure out their career path.

I don’t think we are using the same terms to mean the same things, so it’s hard to have a meaningful conversation.

Edited April 1, 2022 by Frances

[Murphy101]

27 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Because economic theory and data back this up.  

I don’t think the theory pans out with actual irl people though.  Because free or not the student does have a cost to bear for their education.  I don’t know anyone in college who isn’t very aware of how important their work prospects are.  It’s all they talk about. And most of them are working while attending. They have bills to pay. So I seriously question this theory and data. Can you site studies that show students on greater financial aid or given free college access put less focus on financial situations than those who go into debt for it?

22 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Someone with $30,000 of student loan debt paid over 15 years, if the interest rate is 5%, would be a payment of $237 per month.  If someone who is college educated cannot secure a job in which they can make $237 a month payments, that suggests that their college education is not making them very productive.  It makes no more sense for the government to spend that money (which it does not have and has to borrow) to educate someone for such a low-productivity job. 

What makes you think it is low productivity? And by the way, that sounds like a polite way to say they are lazy jobs?  Maybe the problem is hard working people getting burnt at both ends, high expenses and wages far below COL. 

[Murphy101]

9 minutes ago, Frances said:

Liberal arts does not mean just arts. It means humanities, physical and life sciences, social sciences, fine and performing arts, etc. And I know you weren’t suggesting liberal arts colleges as the only option, just college liberal arts classes as the best way for a student to explore and figure out their path. And I disagree. Exactly the type of CTE classes you mention above combined with regular high school classes, career exploration, job shadowing, internships, jobs, etc during high school are the way for students to figure out their career path.

I don’t think we are using the same terms to mean the same things, so it’s hard to have a meaningful conversation.

I agree we probably are not using the same terms. The terms look different from state to state too.  I like what you mention here. But the majority of high school students cannot take those things in high school here. There’s a lot of blocks to prevent it. And a lot of ignoring the k12 educational neglect too.  None of that job shadowing and such is an option for the majority of high schoolers here.

So from where I’m sitting, anyone who somehow manages to convince themselves to pursue education even after exiting our high schools should be encouraged to do so and every obstacle possible should be removed to help them. If they don’t know what they might be best suited to yet, then I’m not going to consider it a waste if they use a semester or 2 to explore their options to figure it out.  There’s literally trillions of American dollars spent on far worse things imo. And the numbers of illiterate is too shameful to fret over how we can reduce the number of people who actually wants to get an education by continuing things as they are currently. 

[Bootsie]

2 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

 

What makes you think it is low productivity? And by the way, that sounds like a polite way to say they are lazy jobs?  Maybe the problem is hard working people getting burnt at both ends, high expenses and wages far below COL. 

Pay is tied to productivity.  If a worker is not productive enough to be paid enough to pay back a student loan (hence pay for the education), then the education did not provide enough increase in productivity to make it a good investment.  I did not say anything about lazy jobs.  I can work hard all day making widgets.  If working as hard as I can I can make 20 widgets and people are willing to pay $10 to purchase a widget, the productivity of my work is worth $200--not any more.  

[Murphy101]

9 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Pay is tied to productivity.  If a worker is not productive enough to be paid enough to pay back a student loan (hence pay for the education), then the education did not provide enough increase in productivity to make it a good investment.  I did not say anything about lazy jobs.  I can work hard all day making widgets.  If working as hard as I can I can make 20 widgets and people are willing to pay $10 to purchase a widget, the productivity of my work is worth $200--not any more.  

That’s reductively simplistic.  But sure I’d be okay if we start paying the people who wipe our grandma’s butts at the nursing home $50 an hour for their currently low productivity work.

Why would our nation invest in education even if those people end up in low productivity, as you describe them, jobs? Because we need those jobs.  We need people to make widgets in our country.

[Bootsie]

2 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

I don’t think the theory pans out with actual irl people though.  Because free or not the student does have a cost to bear for their education.  I don’t know anyone in college who isn’t very aware of how important their work prospects are.  It’s all they talk about. And most of them are working while attending. They have bills to pay. So I seriously question this theory and data. Can you site studies that show students on greater financial aid or given free college access put less focus on financial situations than those who go into debt for it?

 

w23888.pdf (nber.org)This article provides information about the system in England, which has moved away from free tuition to charging tuition and a student loan program.  It points to the benefits of this change.

Human capital investment (psu.edu)This is an article that discusses the human capital returns of higher education.  

Both articles present extensive bibliographies if you are interested in learning more.

[Bootsie]

5 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

That’s reductively simplistic.  But sure I’d be okay if we start paying the people who wipe our grandma’s butts at the nursing home $50 an hour for their currently low productivity work.

Why would our nation invest in education even if those people end up in low productivity, as you describe them, jobs? Because we need those jobs.  We need people to make widgets in our country.

Why do we need people to make widgets in this country?   Why do people need to get a higher education to make widgets?  

To me there seems to be a big disconnect in how things are going to be paid for and who pays for them.  If the janitor at the university is going to be paid $50 per hour, someone has to pay that.  If university attendance is free, who is going to pay that salary?  Would you be willing to pay the salaries of the workers directly, and the salaries of the techs at the electric company who provide electricity to the university, etc. but are opposed to paying for the package of education (which includes salaries to all of those workers).  

[Murphy101]

17 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Why do we need people to make widgets in this country?   Why do people need to get a higher education to make widgets?  

To me there seems to be a big disconnect in how things are going to be paid for and who pays for them.  If the janitor at the university is going to be paid $50 per hour, someone has to pay that.  If university attendance is free, who is going to pay that salary?  Would you be willing to pay the salaries of the workers directly, and the salaries of the techs at the electric company who provide electricity to the university, etc. but are opposed to paying for the package of education (which includes salaries to all of those workers).  

I am for a living wage for all work. Or a UBI which recognizes the cost of not having living wages.

Covid has highlighted many things. Our dependency of foreign widgets is one of many.  The financial edge of many essential workers is another.

That there are older generations taking heavily from the social system while also self-righteously claiming it’s some kind of character development for the next generation to have less improvement to their development and prospects is yet another.

I get that you just don’t want to support this. That’s fine. I’m okay with disagreeing.

Thank you for the links.  

[Carrie12345]

8 hours ago, Bootsie said:

Pay is tied to productivity.  If a worker is not productive enough to be paid enough to pay back a student loan (hence pay for the education), then the education did not provide enough increase in productivity to make it a good investment.  I did not say anything about lazy jobs.  I can work hard all day making widgets.  If working as hard as I can I can make 20 widgets and people are willing to pay $10 to purchase a widget, the productivity of my work is worth $200--not any more.  

Your premise doesn’t work in our society. At least, not in most sectors or with all our needs.
The oversees sweatshop worker putting your blouse together is not receiving a fair scale on the $40 you’re paying.  Is that a US college issue? Of course not. But it’s a US (and fairly global) culture/economy issue.

A teacher isn’t getting paid more if they have 30 kids in their classroom than if they have 18.
A social worker isn’t pulling in any revenue while protecting or assisting the vulnerable.
My local road master doesn’t get paid by the number of streets that need repair in a year.
The grocery cashier doesn’t get paid by the number of customers who come through or the number of items they have.
The janitor doesn’t get paid by the number of toilets that get clogged.
The EMT’s pay doesn’t change whether they have a dozen calls on a shift or none. Or if the patient lives or dies.

There are a TON of fields where we need people who are good at their kind of “widget”, and are available to widget on demand, but their value to society is not tied to the specific revenue their widget brings in.

Dh used to work for a company that was laser focused on each person’s revenue capabilities. Every single person became overworked and underpaid, because they were doing their revenue job and all of the support jobs that were necessary to make that happen.
Now he works for a company that pays people to do those support jobs even though they can’t be billed out, and it makes the revenue jobs more productive AND scale-able. (Is that a word?)

The value of people’s work cannot always be tied to what each individual is willing to pay, because we’re too dumb to recognize all the things that go into our lifestyles.


 

[Pawz4me]

8 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

That’s reductively simplistic.

Indeed.

I totally understand coming at issues from an economics standpoint, but what that's amounting to on these threads is a rather constant (and to me annoying) changing of the goal posts as far as the discussion goes.

[Faith-manor]

12 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

I agree we probably are not using the same terms. The terms look different from state to state too.  I like what you mention here. But the majority of high school students cannot take those things in high school here. There’s a lot of blocks to prevent it. And a lot of ignoring the k12 educational neglect too.  None of that job shadowing and such is an option for the majority of high schoolers here.

So from where I’m sitting, anyone who somehow manages to convince themselves to pursue education even after exiting our high schools should be encouraged to do so and every obstacle possible should be removed to help them. If they don’t know what they might be best suited to yet, then I’m not going to consider it a waste if they use a semester or 2 to explore their options to figure it out.  There’s literally trillions of American dollars spent on far worse things imo. And the numbers of illiterate is too shameful to fret over how we can reduce the number of people who actually wants to get an education by continuing things as they are currently. 

Amen!

[Faith-manor]

16 hours ago, fairfarmhand said:

I asked this question earlier. In my state, the free college is paid for my lottery funds. Are there other states that do it in other ways?

Our taxes in TN have not gone up, because it was funded in a different way. Are there other options for paying for education besides taxation?

We do not have free college in my state. Lottery funds supposedly go to k12 education. The lottery was sold to Michiganders in 1972 as a way to assure extra funding for schools. In 2020, 28 cents of every dollar of revenue went to the school fund. I have no idea what the operational costs of the whole thing are so no idea if that is low, average, or high.

 

[Murphy101]

56 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

We do not have free college in my state. Lottery funds supposedly go to k12 education. The lottery was sold to Michiganders in 1972 as a way to assure extra funding for schools. In 2020, 28 cents of every dollar of revenue went to the school fund. I have no idea what the operational costs of the whole thing are so no idea if that is low, average, or high.

 

Same here. It’s a scam at all levels as far as I can tell.

[Hilltopmom]

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

We do not have free college in my state. Lottery funds supposedly go to k12 education. The lottery was sold to Michiganders in 1972 as a way to assure extra funding for schools. In 2020, 28 cents of every dollar of revenue went to the school fund. I have no idea what the operational costs of the whole thing are so no idea if that is low, average, or high.

 

I believe they earmarked the lottery money for k-12 education but then cut the original money that had been going to k-12 education so there was no actual extra money going to Ed 

[Frances]

15 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

I agree we probably are not using the same terms. The terms look different from state to state too.  I like what you mention here. But the majority of high school students cannot take those things in high school here. There’s a lot of blocks to prevent it. And a lot of ignoring the k12 educational neglect too.  None of that job shadowing and such is an option for the majority of high schoolers here.

So from where I’m sitting, anyone who somehow manages to convince themselves to pursue education even after exiting our high schools should be encouraged to do so and every obstacle possible should be removed to help them. If they don’t know what they might be best suited to yet, then I’m not going to consider it a waste if they use a semester or 2 to explore their options to figure it out.  There’s literally trillions of American dollars spent on far worse things imo. And the numbers of illiterate is too shameful to fret over how we can reduce the number of people who actually wants to get an education by continuing things as they are currently. 

I’m sorry to hear things are so terrible for k12 in your state. They are not great here either, but certainly I know parents arranging job shadows for their kids and pre-pandemic, our large hospital had a structured program for people of all different ages and career stages. I also am very happy that my large school district puts lots of resources into its CET program, as it has been research proven to increase engagement and graduation rates for any student who takes even one class, even if they don’t eventually go the big-tech route.

While I also have no issue with a student exploring careers at 18 if they have had no previous opportunities, at least here, doing it for more than one semester could end up costing them two years, unless they end up just doing a general AA to transfer, as many programs have application deadlines way in advance of fall start dates. From just about every perspectives, including time and $ for all involved, it ultimately seems to make the most sense to push for major improvements at the k12 level.

[Bootsie]

5 hours ago, Carrie12345 said:

Your premise doesn’t work in our society. At least, not in most sectors or with all our needs.
The oversees sweatshop worker putting your blouse together is not receiving a fair scale on the $40 you’re paying.  Is that a US college issue? Of course not. But it’s a US (and fairly global) culture/economy issue.

A teacher isn’t getting paid more if they have 30 kids in their classroom than if they have 18.
A social worker isn’t pulling in any revenue while protecting or assisting the vulnerable.
My local road master doesn’t get paid by the number of streets that need repair in a year.
The grocery cashier doesn’t get paid by the number of customers who come through or the number of items they have.
The janitor doesn’t get paid by the number of toilets that get clogged.
The EMT’s pay doesn’t change whether they have a dozen calls on a shift or none. Or if the patient lives or dies.

There are a TON of fields where we need people who are good at their kind of “widget”, and are available to widget on demand, but their value to society is not tied to the specific revenue their widget brings in.

Dh used to work for a company that was laser focused on each person’s revenue capabilities. Every single person became overworked and underpaid, because they were doing their revenue job and all of the support jobs that were necessary to make that happen.
Now he works for a company that pays people to do those support jobs even though they can’t be billed out, and it makes the revenue jobs more productive AND scale-able. (Is that a word?)

The value of people’s work cannot always be tied to what each individual is willing to pay, because we’re too dumb to recognize all the things that go into our lifestyles.


 

I am not understanding your argument.  I did not say anything about a fair scale on $40 that is being paid.  There is a big difference on pay being based upon what can be billed and pay being based on productivity.  Perhaps my example was not clear.  It is meant simply to be a starting point for understanding the wages a company will be willing to pay for workers.  If there are other support jobs that are necessary to enable the worker to make 20 widgets that can be sold for $10 each, then the amount available to pay the workers is $200.  The company cannot continue to pay that worker and the support workers a total of more than $200--they cannot create money at of thin air.  That is, of course, simpler to discuss when talking about a simple manufacturing process.  But, the same concepts and laws of economics hold when we look at more complex systems;.  If we understand the easy, simply situation then we can begin to build a model with the more complex nuances.  

If people are too dumb to recognize all the things that go into their lifestyles, then who is smart enough to value people's work?  If people are not smart enough to recognize things and are not willing to pay for them, they won't have them.  The payment system is something that encourages people to look at what it costs in resources to provide a good or service and evaluate whether they value that or not.  

[Murphy101]

19 minutes ago, Frances said:

From just about every perspectives, including time and $ for all involved, it ultimately seems to make the most sense to push for major improvements at the k12 level.

Zero argument from me on that. Totally agree. But when no one wants to teach in our schools bc the pay and benefits and the job suck, it’s going to be a long time before that changes and I don’t think improvements in access and costs in HE will hurt k12. 

[Bootsie]

1 hour ago, Hilltopmom said:

I believe they earmarked the lottery money for k-12 education but then cut the original money that had been going to k-12 education so there was no actual extra money going to Ed 

It is not simply that, the money that was supposed to be raised theoretically by the lottery has not materialized as much as people were hoping that it would.  For about $5 billion in revenue each year it produces about $1 billion for the Texas School Fund.

[ktgrok]

Education is not just about how much money the person can turn it into. Look at Covid. How much better would we be - how many lives saved - if people had a better understanding of biology?

[Bootsie]

Just now, ktgrok said:

Education is not just about how much money the person can turn it into. Look at Covid. How much better would we be - how many lives saved - if people had a better understanding of biology?

And how much better it would be if people had a better understanding of economics.

[Murphy101]

19 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Education is not just about how much money the person can turn it into. Look at Covid. How much better would we be - how many lives saved - if people had a better understanding of biology?

 

15 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

And how much better it would be if people had a better understanding of economics.

It’s not an either or.

As for this particular discussion, I don’t think it’s that we do not understand the economics. It’s that not everything is supported by a pure capitalist economic theory.

There’s no money in educating k12. No one is willing to pay even $20 per student widget to their teacher.  And most kids do not grow up to be engineers and surgeons and tech founders. But we still need educated people in our society.

[Faith-manor]

3 hours ago, Hilltopmom said:

I believe they earmarked the lottery money for k-12 education but then cut the original money that had been going to k-12 education so there was no actual extra money going to Ed 

That sounds exactly like what my state would do!

[SKL]

18 hours ago, Bootsie said:

Someone with $30,000 of student loan debt paid over 15 years, if the interest rate is 5%, would be a payment of $237 per month.  If someone who is college educated cannot secure a job in which they can make $237 a month payments, that suggests that their college education is not making them very productive.  It makes no more sense for the government to spend that money (which it does not have and has to borrow) to educate someone for such a low-productivity job. 

I would add that $237/month is less than $1.50 per hour for a full-time employee.  If you spend 4+ years getting an education that doesn't get you at least a $1.50 raise over a high school diploma, something is not right.

[Carrie12345]

2 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I am not understanding your argument.  I did not say anything about a fair scale on $40 that is being paid.  There is a big difference on pay being based upon what can be billed and pay being based on productivity.  Perhaps my example was not clear.  It is meant simply to be a starting point for understanding the wages a company will be willing to pay for workers.  If there are other support jobs that are necessary to enable the worker to make 20 widgets that can be sold for $10 each, then the amount available to pay the workers is $200.  The company cannot continue to pay that worker and the support workers a total of more than $200--they cannot create money at of thin air.  That is, of course, simpler to discuss when talking about a simple manufacturing process.  But, the same concepts and laws of economics hold when we look at more complex systems;.  If we understand the easy, simply situation then we can begin to build a model with the more complex nuances.  

If people are too dumb to recognize all the things that go into their lifestyles, then who is smart enough to value people's work?  If people are not smart enough to recognize things and are not willing to pay for them, they won't have them.  The payment system is something that encourages people to look at what it costs in resources to provide a good or service and evaluate whether they value that or not.  

But both the starting end ending points are inherently flawed, except potentially when discussing entirely frivolous items, although they too begin with cost of raw materials and human labor which, apparently, is widely subjective. 

When you take your your widget maker, your widget marketing person, your widget shipping/handling/cashiering/whatever, and your wicket company owner and your $200, and hold $100 for overhead, payout $10 to the maker, $10 to the staff, $30 to marketing, and $50 to the owner… the widget maker is getting a made up value based on what the owner feels like.
AND THEN that widget maker can’t even strike out on their own because we’re such fans of non-competes. They can’t make a widget for anyone else for 1, 2, 5, even 10 years if they leave.

I understand your argument that actual money doesn’t come out of thin air…though it sort of does… but value really does, sadly. And the people setting the value are scary.
We’re not valuing teachers. Social workers. Road crews. Waitstaff. Shelf stockers. Chicken farmers. Strawberry pickers. The guy who cleans ER puke. The woman who helps people put their dentures in their mouths. The people tending to babies M-F, 8-6 so parents can pay bills with their de-valued teacher, social worker, waitstaff, shelf stocking, farming, picking, pukey, old people need money.
While the biggest widget company owners shelter money and frolick about the universe. NOT on the “productive value” of their particular college degree, if they even have a degree at all.

[Bootsie]

5 hours ago, Carrie12345 said:

But both the starting end ending points are inherently flawed, except potentially when discussing entirely frivolous items, although they too begin with cost of raw materials and human labor which, apparently, is widely subjective. 

When you take your your widget maker, your widget marketing person, your widget shipping/handling/cashiering/whatever, and your wicket company owner and your $200, and hold $100 for overhead, payout $10 to the maker, $10 to the staff, $30 to marketing, and $50 to the owner… the widget maker is getting a made up value based on what the owner feels like.
AND THEN that widget maker can’t even strike out on their own because we’re such fans of non-competes. They can’t make a widget for anyone else for 1, 2, 5, even 10 years if they leave.

I understand your argument that actual money doesn’t come out of thin air…though it sort of does… but value really does, sadly. And the people setting the value are scary.
We’re not valuing teachers. Social workers. Road crews. Waitstaff. Shelf stockers. Chicken farmers. Strawberry pickers. The guy who cleans ER puke. The woman who helps people put their dentures in their mouths. The people tending to babies M-F, 8-6 so parents can pay bills with their de-valued teacher, social worker, waitstaff, shelf stocking, farming, picking, pukey, old people need money.
While the biggest widget company owners shelter money and frolick about the universe. NOT on the “productive value” of their particular college degree, if they even have a degree at all.

Who do you think sets value?  

[Murphy101]

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

Who do you think sets value?  

Employers decide how much of their profit should go for paying employees. 

[Frances]

10 hours ago, ktgrok said:

Education is not just about how much money the person can turn it into. Look at Covid. How much better would we be - how many lives saved - if people had a better understanding of biology?

Or statistics. But I have to say that the statistics my husband took at the local CC and the biology and chemistry some of my son’s friends took seemed more middle school level than college level. 
 

But again, biology is a class all high school students should have access to. At least here, you are just as likely if not more likely to have a bad biology teacher at the CC as you are at the high school. I’d venture that your chances are actually much better to have a good high school biology teacher. Most CC profs are stringing together numerous part time gigs with no benefits. Only a small portion of the faculty is full-time with benefits, while at least all of the k12 teachers have that.

[Bootsie]

3 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

Employers decide how much of their profit should go for paying employees. 

I don't think it works that way.  First, many employers are not for-profit--the federal government, school districts, universities, some hospitals, etc.  Also, employers pay their employees during times when their profits are zero (or even negative).  So, the school district doesn't say, "Let's pay our janitor 1% of our profits."  Even in for-profit situations, I have not seen it work that way.  I haven't seen my local plumber (and employer) decide that he will pay his receptionist x% of profits.  I have seen him see that the competitive market price is $x to hire a receptionist--if he wants the work of the receptionist, he must pay his receptionist at least that amount, regardless of how much of his profit he thinks "should" go to his employees.  

[Bootsie]

I was not aware of England's move to a tuition based higher education system over the past couple of decades.  Their student loan system is income based--you only make payments when your income is approximately $25,863.50.  Then the payments are 9% of your monthly income over that threshold.  So, someone making $50,000 per year would have a payment of about $181 per month.  Interest begins while you are in school.  For many borrowers the interest rate is the RPI ( measure of inflation) plus 3%--that would currently be an interest rate of about 10.5!  Repayment is withheld from your paycheck.  Any amount that is not repaid after 30 years is forgiven.  Student loans: a guide to terms and conditions 2022 to 2023 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

[Carrie12345]

9 hours ago, Bootsie said:

Who do you think sets value?  

Depends on the sector!
Elected officials technically set bare minimums, but we all know how to do basic math and that that doesn’t work. Even then, “we” exploit systems to pay waitstaff a different, lower minimum, migrant workers even less, and utilize foreign systems that are as bad or worse than our own migrant systems.

The people who run my local social services can’t authorize pay increases. Numbers are set by gov’t officials.

My township gov’t hasn’t changed its budget for salaries since 2013.

One of our local restaurants doesn’t allow tipping with credit cards, which very much impacts wait staff’s income.

As an individual, I can go buy a hammer from the DG or the family owned hardware store and the DG employee is going to get $10/hr either way.  The family, however, will see my little purchase reflected a tiny bit in their income.

Bezos and the upper people he hires set the value of their employees at every level, so long as it’s over $7.25 unless they’re doing some other funny business.

My local home cookie maker sets her own value in accordance with her demand. The GSUSA sets their cookie value based on what the manufacturers have already determined, in addition to their organization’s needs. Few people reject those fundraising cookies for price, because of where the profits go (also controversial, but still) and because they’re that dang good.  Well, and some kids are ruthless, lol.  

The plumber *does set his receptionist’s monetary value. He’s legally responsible for making it at least $7.25 (unless it’s a relative), and of course his revenue comes into play; if he doesn’t make a million dollars, he can’t pay them a million dollars! But, if he clears $60k after expenses, company investments, and the value he placed on himself, he can choose whether to pay them $15k or $45k. Or even 60, total.
He might get more qualified applicants at $45k, or he might see if there are enough qualified but desperate people to snag someone at a lower rate.

I can tell you people aren’t out picking tomatoes on most farms because the pay is fair.   As an individual, I purchased my tomatoes from the farm I know best (where my kids were pickers and everyone is paid over minimum wage, with safe work practices) or from retailers who have agreed to the Fair Food Program’s requirements… which still aren’t good enough, but they’re steps. And Wendy’s refuses to participate, so I will never touch their food.  My valuation might not push the needle very far, but it’s literally the least I can do to participate.

It goes both up and down the chain.

And much of my economic participation promotes exploitation. Because my options, our options, are so freaking limited.  How many people can even consider going to a family hardware store vs. DG or Lowe’s? It isn’t because there aren’t enough families who wish to own hardware stores. Or independent salons. Or book stores. Or bakeries. Or boutiques. And on and on. Great big corporations can get many more people to buy things cheaper and pay people less, who have to buy things cheaper so people have to be paid less, and everything is cheap so there’s nowhere to get paid more.

Inflation is, of course, and important thing to talk about.  But I find it baffling that it gets so much attention while we continue to race to the bottom.  “How little can I get away with” is the theme.  Dominos’ signs aren’t advertising $15 out of the goodness of their hearts.  Look closer, and it means “up to, with tips”. And is based on customers with little to no access to real pizza at an affordable price… which is disappearing even further because we can pass off a $7.99 pie to our kids as “pizza is pizza” and kids are desperate for pizza, while the good pizzeria can no longer sustain its family due to buying in smaller quantities at higher prices and needing a living wage.
It’s no longer a Tony’s vs. Carlos’ friendly competition. It’s small business owners vs. large corporations.

I know this has veered so far from the OP. I’m just so frustrated by how we’ve been conditioned to ignore real life and real people in exchange for a made up system that lies to us about success in a million different aspects, including college loans, that all come together to make rich people richer.  And the majority of us don’t have the ability to opt out and focus on the societal glue that’s coming apart.

[Ting Tang]

22 hours ago, SKL said:

I would add that $237/month is less than $1.50 per hour for a full-time employee.  If you spend 4+ years getting an education that doesn't get you at least a $1.50 raise over a high school diploma, something is not right.

I worked in the nonprofit sector. It wants highly educated (graduate-level) people but is a notoriously low-paying field.  New programs have sprang up since I chose that path, thank goodness.  The problem is the people attracted to that field often do not come from extreme wealth and many have high student loan debt.  

[SKL]

30 minutes ago, Ting Tang said:

I worked in the nonprofit sector. It wants highly educated (graduate-level) people but is a notoriously low-paying field.  New programs have sprang up since I chose that path, thank goodness.  The problem is the people attracted to that field often do not come from extreme wealth and many have high student loan debt.  

True.  One knows going in that this is not a well-paying field.  I am not sure what the solution is.  We clearly need educated people in social work, for example, and not just sheltered do-gooders from wealthy families.  We either need to pay more for human services jobs or provide more affordable education for people going that route.  Forgiveness for people in certain jobs in low-income communities would be one thought.  I know that was a thing for teachers, but it should probably be broader than that.

Edited April 3, 2022 by SKL

[Ting Tang]

20 minutes ago, SKL said:

True.  One knows going in that this is not a well-paying field.  I am not sure what the solution is.  We clearly need educated people in social work, for example, and not just sheltered do-gooders from wealthy families.  We either need to pay more for human services jobs or provide more affordable education for people going that route.  Forgiveness for people in certain jobs in low-income communities would be one thought.  I know that was a thing for teachers, but it should probably be broader than that.

Yes.  I thnk I didn't know how low-paying it was. In my case, I also did not understand the magnitude of my student loan debt and private loan, fluctuating interest rates. My parents had a lousy marriage, and after my freshman year, I was on my own to figure out how to finance what I had started---despite having a partial academic scholarship.  I remember going to one financial aid counseling session at school just before my freshman year, and it wasn't really helpful when I found myself in a bind.  Private loans were so easy to take out, too easy.  I also had not originally planned a career in nonprofit. I planned on law school but went to grad school after some things happened both during school and with my family.  I look at what college costs these days, it's nuts, and wages have gone up, but it still feels impossible.  Making major life decisions when you lack wisdom and real life experience sometimes doesn't pan out well.  I definitely hope to help my children make better decisions. 

Edited April 3, 2022 by Ting Tang

[KidsHappen]

On 3/31/2022 at 7:42 PM, Bootsie said:

You do not have to answer this personally, but I am trying to make sense of these numbers.  If I read this correctly you are saying that student loan payments are $800 per month, you have paid them for 10 years and you have 10-15 years to go.  If I assume an 8% interest rate, paid off at $800 per month for 25 years, that would be over $188,000 of debt that is being paid off.  

That is in line with our situation. We pay approximately $2000 a month (well will again once this grace period is lifted) and have already paid well over $100,000 (more than we borrowed) and still owe $200,000. We will never pay off our student loans. I don't want to go into the whole long story of how this happened but I can assure you we did not party our way through college.

[Carrie12345]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

True.  One knows going in that this is not a well-paying field.  I am not sure what the solution is.  We clearly need educated people in social work, for example, and not just sheltered do-gooders from wealthy families.  We either need to pay more for human services jobs or provide more affordable education for people going that route.  Forgiveness for people in certain jobs in low-income communities would be one thought.  I know that was a thing for teachers, but it should probably be broader than that.

Yes, yes, and yes.
But non-low-income communities also need social workers, and hypothetically non-indebted social workers still need fair incomes. Otherwise it’s glorified volunteering, and most people can’t afford to do immerse themselves in trauma out of the goodness of their hearts.

[Frances]

17 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

Yes, yes, and yes.
But non-low-income communities also need social workers, and hypothetically non-indebted social workers still need fair incomes. Otherwise it’s glorified volunteering, and most people can’t afford to do immerse themselves in trauma out of the goodness of their hearts.

If they could get the program to be administered correctly, it’s my understanding that this is precisely why they instituted the student loan forgiveness program for those working for non-profits, including government agencies.

[Pawz4me]

19 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

Yes, yes, and yes.
But non-low-income communities also need social workers, and hypothetically non-indebted social workers still need fair incomes. Otherwise it’s glorified volunteering, and most people can’t afford to do immerse themselves in trauma out of the goodness of their hearts.

I know two young people, one with a four year psychology degree and one with a master's in social work. The psychology degree young person took an administrative type job with a hospice/palliative care organization and the MSW took a job doing home health checks with another hospice/palliative care agency. These are jobs that very much need doing. Both loved the jobs. Neither stayed very long. Even though one had no college debt and one had very little, neither position paid a real living wage. Both have moved on to other jobs with better pay, better schedules, more benefits, etc. And yet . . the previous jobs they were doing need to be done.

I don't know what the answer is.

[Bootsie]

8 hours ago, Carrie12345 said:

I can tell you people aren’t out picking tomatoes on most farms because the pay is fair.   As an individual, I purchased my tomatoes from the farm I know best (where my kids were pickers and everyone is paid over minimum wage, with safe work practices) or from retailers who have agreed to the Fair Food Program’s requirements… which still aren’t good enough, but they’re steps. And Wendy’s refuses to participate, so I will never touch their food.  My valuation might not push the needle very far, but it’s literally the least I can do to participate.

 

This is the market at work!  You value tomatoes grown and picked a particular way and you are willing to pay for that value.  You are unwilling to pay for tomatoes grown and picked another way and you avoid purchasing them.  The market respects those values.  Other people, have different values and the market respects those values.   You and I may not agree with those values, but it is not our place to dictate what others should value.  I LOVE bell pepppers; I am willing to pay several dollars for a bell pepper; I do not expect someone else to pay several dollars for my bell pepper simply because I like them and value them highly.  I don't care too much for brussel sprouts; I will not pay several dollars for brussel sprouts; I do not value them highly--but if someone else values them and wants to encourage the growing and harvesting of brussel sprouts in a particular way the market allows for them to encourage what they value.

My disconnect comes when I hear people talk about how important education is, how much they value education but then say that they value it so much they shouldn't have to pay for it, someone else should provide it for them.  

 

[shawthorne44]

On 3/31/2022 at 8:41 PM, Frances said:

The only way I can see going that route is adopting the European model of university education and different apprenticeship and training programs. So students are tracked from younger ages and university is only for a select portion of the population.

I agree.  Where we are seriously failing is in K12.    You shouldn't need a BS to get a decent job.   In High School I'd had an exchange student friend from Sweden.  She was on the Engineering track in Sweden and when she graduated from high school she could get a job as the equivalent of an Engineering Tech.  She completely coasted in everything except English and American History because it was so easy compared to what she was used to.  It used to be that a high school diploma wasn't just proof that you more or less showed up to school.   It was worth something.