BF2S Forums Moody’s Sounds the Alarm on Student Borrowing

Jay wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Jay wrote:

I disagree vehemently. There is nothing wrong with privatization, it's the government subsidies that drive up costs.

But in the US you have a problem with this. In other countries where these things are more heavily subsidised by the government the problem is far less severe. How do you make a case to support your assertions when what is happening in the real world tells a very different story?

Is it going to be the age old story of "other countries can get away with it because they're not the US, there are other factors here"?

The facts are that the costs in many of these systems which are highly privatised in the US and highly socialised elsewhere in the developed world, such as higher education and healthcare, are rising far faster in the US than anywhere else. You can scream about mitigating circumstances all you like, but you're wrong.

Jay wrote:

You can't hand free money to private companies and expect them to not try to rape the government for all that they can get away with. Our system would be a lot less broken if the government would stop trying to 'fix' issues. Mixing socialism into our capitalistic system just creates opportunistic leeching.

I don't view college degrees as 'essential services' anyway. They're a nice thing to have, but hardly necessary to succeed in the world, or wouldn't be if everyone wasn't walking around with them due to free handouts.

You don't consider a system of higher education to be an essential service?

That's pretty silly.

I'm not wrong at all Berster. Tuition costs are rising so quickly in the United States because student loans and financial aid are handed out like candy. Because student loans and aid are handed out so freely, tuitions rise. If we had a national university system this would not be an issue because the government could cap the cost of tuition in order to decrease its own costs. This is not the case, nor will it ever be the case. Thus, the only solution is to get the government out of the loan business.

Jay wrote:

And no, I don't believe that higher education is an essential service. The vast majority of college graduates don't even work within the fields they studied at university. All a college degree tells employers is that the applicant is tenacious enough to complete a course of study, and that they have the ability to learn the skills the company will have to teach them if they are employed. Do you think my fiancee's English degree helped her in her job in IT marketing? Not one bit.

Is it nice having an educated workforce? Sure. But it's a luxury rather than a necessity.

Last edited by Jay (2011-08-07 13:05:23)

Bertster7 wrote:

Jay wrote:

Why are you taking the hyperbolic approach so early in an argument? "What would happen if there were no graduates?"

When did I ever say anything remotely similar to that?

You even agreed that the value of a college degree has been watered down immensely in just your own country, let alone mine. Has it improved your nation? Or has it just led to people having inflated opinions of what they think they should earn after graduating?

I don't understand how you go from me wanting to eliminate government subsidies so tuitions can find their own equilibrium point, to me wanting to eradicate higher education altogether.

See the above post.

You said you don't view higher education as an essential service. That's very clear cut.



Degrees have been devalued by the number of people who have them. The funding side of this has nothing to do with it. It's all about relative levels of academic excellence. The solution is to bring up the levels of academic achievement required to go to university and make it more difficult to obtain degrees. That makes them more valuable.

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

???

http://www.mlive.com/business/west-mich … neeri.html
http://www.engtrends.com/IEE/0502C.php
http://education.yahoo.net/articles/six … egrees.htm

or, if you want to look at supply and demand...

Nowhere in any of those links did it say anything about not enough engineers. Hell one of the articles is titled "Engineering Degrees Rising and Demand Falling - A Forthcoming Crisis? And What Will Be the Impact on Enrollment?" I didn't see the 60K number anywhere either.

Bertster7 wrote:

Stimey wrote:

He said it isn't for everyone.
So you eliminate every university in the country?

Who said anything about eliminating every university in the country?

Did you not understand the point about essential services not needing to be for everybody? They are simply services which need to exist.

Saying higher education is not an essential service is the same as saying it would be ok to have no universities (not having the service exist).

Bertster7 wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

http://www.mlive.com/business/west-mich … neeri.html
http://www.engtrends.com/IEE/0502C.php
http://education.yahoo.net/articles/six … egrees.htm

or, if you want to look at supply and demand...

Nowhere in any of those links did it say anything about not enough engineers. Hell one of the articles is titled "Engineering Degrees Rising and Demand Falling - A Forthcoming Crisis? And What Will Be the Impact on Enrollment?" I didn't see the 60K number anywhere either.

What about here:

http://education.yahoo.net/articles/six_in_demand_degrees.htm wrote:

#5 - Engineering Degree

It might surprise you to learn that engineering degrees are ranked fifth in terms of employment - and not first - but don't start feeling sorry for engineers just yet. According to a survey by the National Association of Colleges and Employers, eight of the top 10 best-paid majors are in engineering.

Desirable Degrees:
Biomedical Engineering
Civil Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Network Engineering and Administration
Programming and Software Engineering

Average Starting Pay:
Petroleum Engineering: $90,000
Computer Engineering: $59,298
Mechanical Engineering: $60,598

Stimey wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Stimey wrote:

He said it isn't for everyone.
So you eliminate every university in the country?

Who said anything about eliminating every university in the country?

Did you not understand the point about essential services not needing to be for everybody? They are simply services which need to exist.

Saying higher education is not an essential service is the same as saying it would be ok to have no universities (not having the service exist).

So should the government start paying for my restaurant and grocery bills?
Food is pretty essential.

Jay wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Jay wrote:

Umm, ok, we'll get right on your government mandated entrance requirements for private universities idea right away.

You're complaining about the government funding people? If they only funded people who were really, really good - this wouldn't be a problem.

Not government mandated entrance exams. Government requirements in order to receive any sort of subsidy.

Oh, ok, how about government funding only for pre-approved degrees? The government should set quotas for every degree amirite?

Why is your solution always more governmental interference to solve prior government interference?

Bertster7 wrote:

Jay wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

You're complaining about the government funding people? If they only funded people who were really, really good - this wouldn't be a problem.

Not government mandated entrance exams. Government requirements in order to receive any sort of subsidy.

Oh, ok, how about government funding only for pre-approved degrees? The government should set quotas for every degree amirite?

Why is your solution always more governmental interference to solve prior government interference?

It's not.

My solution is to raise the bar academically. In a privatised system this is unlikely to happen naturally as it would reduce profits by shrinking the market.

We agree degrees are devalued. There is one way to increase their value, give out less of them.

When it comes to giving out less of them, then you can either choose to charge more for them (pricing the bottom end out of the market) or you can increase academic standards so fewer people are capable of obtaining them (ending up with only the best of the best academically). Is it better to have graduates being the richest students or the brightest ones?

Macbeth wrote:

We have watered down the requirements for every other degree what makes you think engineering is immune from it?

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

We have watered down the requirements for every other degree what makes you think engineering is immune from it?

Because the thought of buildings and bridges collapsing rightfully terrifies people. That, and the FE and PE exams are the real limiting factor.

That really isn't the universities problem. And we have plenty of people who manage to get through their bar exams or the GMAT eventually. It's not like there is a shortage of lawyers or MBA holders since it became the ticket to wealth and privilege.

i don't think it's sustainable nor do I think the wages enjoyed by engineering grads is sustainable. Once we manage to get more engineers into the system the wages will begin to decrease.

That was my point. I'm pessimistic about the whole thing.