You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
|The Market Ticker Single Post Display (Show in context)||
User: Not logged on
|User Info||We Can't Do Anything About.....; entered at 2017-08-05 19:36:18|
Registered: 2017-06-16 Los Angeles, Ca
Well, for the record I've never recommended anyone to go to college, and I would probably consider in general college administrators some of the biggest crooks, and then the NCAA in particular (the student-athlete is a huge con).|
Clearly colleges have gotten out of control, but they have been for a long time. With the NCAA, it's a clear case I think of being in violation of federal labor laws and collusion, but that's an aside. But the rhetoric continues. How many politicians have we heard say something like this: it's vital to the welfare of society. Then if it's so vital then why can't the loan be discharged? I mean they can put leans on your social security--remember that thing they sold you as something you're entitled to.
But the student loan trap is anything but good for the welfare of society.
1. At some point it's not feasible to study subjects that do need access to resources like just about any science (since our current body of knowledge has become quite large), so we begin to suffer there.
2. And there's this con game about lending. We have this notion that ALL debts must be paid. But is this something we would actually want in society at large? So, say ALL debts are guaranteed to be paid back, then a lender would just lend to anyone with any crack pot idea. Actually, you wouldn't even need an idea, a lender would just lend to anyone to secure the loan since it's guaranteed.
By NOT guaranteeing loans this puts an onus on the lender to evaluate what they're lending against. Here lender and the borrower have incentives to work together. In a situation of an absolutely guaranteed loan...then why would anyone do anything as a job other than lend money? And why would the lender make any assessment of that loan if not outright work against you. Actually, if the guarantee was discharged immediately upon default, then they would have an incentive to work against you so they could be paid out sooner.
This is why liberal bankruptcy laws are so necessary because it forces the lenders to at least attempt to place money in productive things AND to work in achieving that production (that is they apply to all loans and can be discharged on demonstration of, well, being broke, not just because you don't feel like paying). I would go so far as to say no one can with certainty evaluate a 4+ commitment. I don't know, you may get hit by a car, develop cancer, war breaks out, etc. In this case, if you were to go bankrupt the lender has an incentive to assist you. That potential of assistance than the lender has to build into the interest rate.
This narrative of the moral superiority of the lender is not just a myth, it's an outright con.
Of course there's other factors that are pushing kids into college, and that is the growing number of employers requiring a college degree for entry or advancement. Some have argued that this in many cases can be discrimination. Jobs where an advance degree can be shown to have a direct impact on the chosen profession (like a physicists needing to know physics) and/or requiring state licenses )like law, medicine, etc). But what of jobs that just require just a general degree? I'm personally not sure. But some have argued that a high school degree or equivalent (GED) AND a skills test directly pertaining to the job requirements should be sufficient to demonstrate competency.
Some would argue discrimination along the lines of race and income, but there's also someone just being self-educated and who can demonstrate the needed skills. Where a general college degree is required and it can't be shown to have direct impact on the job (which it likely couldn't be shown or else the requirement wouldn't be so general).
The perverse impact that it has on someone is that corporations are taking advantage of the student loan debt to push if not violate labor laws because they can literally spit in your face and there's nothing you can really do or go because you need the job. So the question becomes, is there a perverse effect developing between employers and college tuition?
There's actually some court precedence in this matter.
They don't have to actually collude to create a perverse environment as there's a feed back mechanism in the ecosystem--much like divorce lawyers, they don't collude to drag cases out and exasperate the situation, it's just develops and reinforces itself because both sides lawyers benefit. That's pretty much how all ecosystems in nature have developed without being telelogical.
Then if it's the case that there's an 18 year old with no support community or that support community itself is just as misinformed or causing the perverse behavior or simply they are unadvisable, well, then there's an even deeper problem, especially if this is on a large scale. Or it becomes a slippery slope if we indirectly imply then that an 18 year old can't understand a contract or it's implications, then it begs the question: is 18 a proper age to be considered an adult?