i had an american history professor who looked like abe lincoln.

Posted by tangplay on 2/10/2019 9:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/10/2019 9:46:00 PM (view original):
Firstly, with all due respect CCCP, the uncalled for insult adds nothing to the conversation and does nothing to enlighten people on truths. It creates an environment where they will disagree with simply because they don't like you without considering the rational of your post.

Secondly, your post has a lot of truth. Enron did not kill people. It was a terrible, corrupt company but it did far less harm than a tyrannical government. Once again, it's about risk management and protecting our intrinsic freedoms. Tang, used the term "micro freedom" in an earlier post. Freedoms are freedoms. There are no micro or macro freedoms. The word :freedom" doesn't need a modifier in the same way the words "justice" and "good" don't need modifiers (i.e. social justice).

To your second point, this is one reason that I think a college education is overvalued in the marketplace. I spent all of my adult life on college campuses. The point of college is to gain knowledge. This is the only point of college. There are many less expensive options to achieve these means. But way too many kids see college as a time to "have fun" before they must transition to the real world. This is why student loan debt will lead to the next recession and most of that debt was wasted by kids who got their degree in partying and drinking beer, but never received a degree in an actual useful major.

Well, not saying I agree with this, but here's a snippet of an article.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-problems-with-libertarianism_us_57c093efe4b0b01630de953f

The whole purpose of civilization should be to ensure that everyone is fed, clothed, housed and NOT to create the conditions so that the few can secure a substantially greater portion of resources while others are left with virtually none. In a libertarian society, who protects the unprotected, who defends the rights of the defenseless? Even libertarians acknowledge that a free market will drive a larger wealth disparity... Wealth inequality paired with deregulation creates an opportunity for haves to rule the have-nots. This is one of the many reasons for regulation ? to ensure that the rich few do not impose their will unjustly or destructively on the poor multitudes.

Another libertarian belief is the idea that the government should not be allowed to impose its will on the citizenry. However, in a truly free market that promotes freedom of contract and de-regulation ? employers have a right to force rules that would never be permitted in our current Democratic systems. Libertarianism is a rich man’s ideal. It ostensibly gives ultimate freedoms and choice to everyone at the cost of helping the helpless...

The core principles of libertarianism ? deregulation and a free market economy... will lead to an even bigger wealth gap [that] sounds like [a] dystopian future pic where classism runs rampant and the massive lower income classes rise against their small but incredibly wealthy oppressors.

You may see the poor or underclass as weak ? the “losers” in the giant meritocratic experiment that is the libertarian ideal, but weak as they are, there are going to be a hell of a lot more of them than there are of you. So in the hopes of avoiding the fate of the monarchy during the French Revolution, maybe it’s best to retain welfare and at least a modest social safety net...

In the end, libertarianism is similar to communism. On the face they’re both noble, but impossibly ambitious theories ? one has individual freedom as its core principle and the other, equality. However, in practice, both concepts lead to outcomes that aren’t as pure.

Debate away.

To the college point, fwiw I learned a lot in college about independence, maturity, and journalism, plus I got to put it to use.

Your learned to be a terrible writer and debater? You should demand your money back.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/10/2019 10:44:00 PM (view original):
If it permanently destroys your financial future by saddling you with $200,000+ of unrepayable debt, then the benefit is outweighed by the cost.

This.

permanent is a funny word

kinda like fungible

debtors prison

reneger

unrepayable

words like that

Declare Bankuptcy a few times, take out loans until American banks refuse ye, then get some dough from Russian Gangstas

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/10/2019 10:44:00 PM (view original):
If it permanently destroys your financial future by saddling you with $200,000+ of unrepayable debt, then the benefit is outweighed by the cost.

Most people are able to graduate college owing far less than that. Yeah if you go to Oberlin and don’t ever work and have to live off of loans, you’re in deep.

But if you go to a state school and work at least part time, you’re probably looking at a 60 or 70k debt. It’s a lot, but that’s manageable over 10 years.

I don't feel bad for anyone who has a large student loan, just as I don't feel bad for anyone who loses money in the stock market. Both types of people are gambling that their investment of time and money will result in them ultimately making money. Sometimes both types lose. The average student debt is less than $40,000, which is about the same amount many of these grads spend on new cars they feel "entitled" to. They need to STFU, work hard, and pay their debts, the way Americans have for over 250 years.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2019 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/10/2019 10:44:00 PM (view original):
If it permanently destroys your financial future by saddling you with $200,000+ of unrepayable debt, then the benefit is outweighed by the cost.

Most people are able to graduate college owing far less than that. Yeah if you go to Oberlin and don’t ever work and have to live off of loans, you’re in deep.

But if you go to a state school and work at least part time, you’re probably looking at a 60 or 70k debt. It’s a lot, but that’s manageable over 10 years.

I would wager that you could get out for much cheaper than that. You can go to a junior college for two years and work your way through this without any debt. You then can go to a state school where it will cost you about $20k/year. If you work part time while doing that, you are looking at 10-15 in debt per year for 2 years.

The probably is that this is not the reality of what happens in most cases. Every person in this forum has spent time in the real world and understands the value of the dollar. 18 year old kids have no clue and make stupid, irrational choices. Most kids will take out max loans and rationalize it as they need "spending money".

If my oldest gets into Duke, I am in serious trouble. $250k after taxes. YIKES!

Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2019 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/10/2019 10:44:00 PM (view original):
If it permanently destroys your financial future by saddling you with $200,000+ of unrepayable debt, then the benefit is outweighed by the cost.

Most people are able to graduate college owing far less than that. Yeah if you go to Oberlin and don’t ever work and have to live off of loans, you’re in deep.

But if you go to a state school and work at least part time, you’re probably looking at a 60 or 70k debt. It’s a lot, but that’s manageable over 10 years.

The dollar figure was arbitrary. The rest of your comment has merit.

I simply contend that college is not for everyone. For too long, our culture has persuaded people that college is necessary while, at the same time, fleecing students and parents with skyrocketing tuition/books/fees (even for state schools.) There's more than a little racket mob action going on here. P.T. Barnum would be laughing.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/11/2019 10:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2019 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/10/2019 10:44:00 PM (view original):
If it permanently destroys your financial future by saddling you with $200,000+ of unrepayable debt, then the benefit is outweighed by the cost.

Most people are able to graduate college owing far less than that. Yeah if you go to Oberlin and don’t ever work and have to live off of loans, you’re in deep.

But if you go to a state school and work at least part time, you’re probably looking at a 60 or 70k debt. It’s a lot, but that’s manageable over 10 years.

The dollar figure was arbitrary. The rest of your comment has merit.

I simply contend that college is not for everyone. For too long, our culture has persuaded people that college is necessary while, at the same time, fleecing students and parents with skyrocketing tuition/books/fees (even for state schools.) There's more than a little racket mob action going on here. P.T. Barnum would be laughing.

I wouldn’t consider state schools a racket. At least not in CA. The Cal State system charges about $7k a year in tuition. The more elite University of CA system charges about $12k a year. You’re in for a few hundred dollars more in books. And there’s also living expenses, but those are there regardless.

I’m a big fan of keeping your options open. Maybe you want to be an electrician. That’s great. You’ll need training and tons of on the job experience. But you might also need a degree. If you get hired on as a facilities guy for a tech company and want to move into the engineering department down the road, a degree will be necessary regardless of your training and experience.

Also college gives you important life skills–critical thinking and the ability to commicate well in writing, specifically. Yeah, some people are naturally better at those things than other but they are both learned skills that take time and training to develop.

Posted by all3 on 2/11/2019 10:13:00 AM (view original):
I don't feel bad for anyone who has a large student loan, just as I don't feel bad for anyone who loses money in the stock market. Both types of people are gambling that their investment of time and money will result in them ultimately making money. Sometimes both types lose. The average student debt is less than $40,000, which is about the same amount many of these grads spend on new cars they feel "entitled" to. They need to STFU, work hard, and pay their debts, the way Americans have for over 250 years.

This is twice lately!!

Freaking right on all3! You said it nearly perfectly.

I had 3 children attend universities, 2 graduated with masters and better.
I can tell you this.

Hard to complain about higher education and also complain about how little the younger generation UNDERSTANDS about global history.
That historical understanding requires decent, basic critical thinking and analytical abilities. BOTH are things a student should receive from "secondary education" if the student actually wanted a decent education.

On a side note. The University of Arizona provides a high quality, fair and balanced (ALL political ideologies are present) education at an affordable cost to In-state students. I'm not positive about 1 child, but my two daughters got (more than) a four year degree and left college with NO debt!

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/10/2019 10:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/10/2019 10:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 2/10/2019 10:06:00 PM (view original):
I did do an apprenticeship.

That's great. To be clear, i'm not knocking you or anyone else for going to college. Remember, I believe in personal choice. I just don't believe that formal education is the most effective route for most fields of study. (especially with the cost of college today.)

I'm glad to hear it. I spent 10 years in college. I'd hate to think it was a complete waste of time and money.

was that you in Animal House saying "7 years of college down the drain"? LOL

Mr. Blutarsky! 0.0!