Pages

How do you think the student debt saga will end?

Looking at how outrageous the entire system has become and wondering how you guys think this will turn into. Any takers?

Hedge Fund Interview Course

  • 814 questions across 165 hedge funds. Crowdsourced from over 500,000 members.
  • 11 Detailed Sample Pitches and 10+ hours of video.
  • Trusted by over 1,000 aspiring hedge fund professionals just like you.

Comments (276)

Feb 23, 2018

Students will be allowed to discharge debt, thereby robbing taxpayers and continuing to fuel increases college costs and the subsidizing of uneconomical degrees.

We should stop providing college loans. Colleges are by and large a cesspool of Marxist ideology and the rising costs are directly related to unrestrained lending.

Feb 23, 2018
TNA:

Students will be allowed to discharge debt, thereby robbing taxpayers and continuing to fuel increases college costs and the subsidizing of uneconomical degrees.

We should stop providing college loans. Colleges are by and large a cesspool of Marxist ideology and the rising costs are directly related to unrestrained lending.

Agree that ultimately the government is going to have to step in and forgive their debt, courtesy of my 51% bonus tax.

As for the second point, what about a program where the government will ONLY give loans to students who are choosing the least costly college trajectory, ie, two years of community college and then two years in-state.

A lot of my cousins live in New England and they all took out outlandish sized college loans to go to private schools in other states and major in Public Policy or Communications. Then they have the nerve to complain about their loans as though they didn't willingly sign up to borrow money. I don't get wtf they think is supposed to happen after they borrow ~100K.

    • 3
Best Response
Feb 23, 2018

I agree, but anything the govt does will be criticized.

Student loans came about as people cried that college was only for the rich. So the govt helps. Now people complain about why did the govt let them do this.

Just walk away. Allow private lenders to lend, allow people to claim bankruptcy, and eventually the market will create loans to certain degrees and require certain grades.

Let's be real. College is a drunken orgy nowadays. Every study shows how a degree can be had cheaper, hope large portions of loans are used for travel and other bullshit. Just walk away. Colleges will fire unprofitable professors, tuition will go down, etc.

And is college actually educating people? Colleges are limiting free speech, indoctrinating kids to leftist ideology, providing degrees with zero economic benefit and pissing away money on things not core to education.

Gut the monster.

Feb 23, 2018
LReed:

As for the second point, what about a program where the government will ONLY give loans to students who are choosing the least costly college trajectory, ie, two years of community college and then two years in-state.

I've never heard of this idea, but it's one of the better ideas I've ever heard. That makes a lot of sense.

Feb 27, 2018
TNA:

Colleges are by and large a cesspool of Marxist ideology and the rising costs are directly related to unrestrained lending.

You hit the nail on the head. American taxpayers are subsidizing increasingly radicalized Neo-Marxism where free speech and debate are not only discouraged, but often prohibited. "Microaggression", "hate speech", and "white privilege" are cast upon anyone who dares question Frankfurt School principles. Administrative salaries are out of control while tuition/textbook costs have inflated more than any other consumer cost over the past 10 years. White men and Asians are openly discriminated against in the admissions process, which is far removed from an objective meritocracy. Stoicism, masculinity, Austrian Economics, and the Socratic method have disappeared.

https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CPIChart2018.png

Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

Feb 23, 2018

I think there should be a mandatory 2 year work period for high school graduates, before they are allowed to enter college. I worked for a handful of years and knew the hard value of a dollar earned, so I was scared shitless when taking out my student loans and I knew that I couldn't study some bullshit non STEM subject.

    • 3
Feb 23, 2018

States offer plenty of scholarships. Working some $7.25 job 40 hours a week to pay for college is counter-intuitive and that money is fractional relative to college tuition. Putting all that time into getting a great SAT, high GPA, and AP courses will pay for most schools (assuming in-state resident).

Feb 23, 2018

Not if you go to community college and transfer or take an extra year or take more classes per semester.

Plenty of ways to not have crippling debt. Sadly people are morons. So the government needs to remove the ability.

No where in the Constitution does it say student loans are a right. Kids will figure it out.

Feb 23, 2018

I go to my state school and this isn't true at all. There is literally no merit-aid given only need based.

    • 2
Feb 23, 2018

My engineering-focused undergrad school had a lot of people doing co-op 5-year programs. It had a lot of benefits including students making money, having more time to study, learning practical things on their job in between study semesters, and graduating with a job offer and real-world experience.

Would be great if this caught on across all majors and schools. Students and companies need to come closer together, earlier, in order to serve both of their needs.

Feb 23, 2018

Like nearly every gov. venture (except the Louisiana purchase): a losing one.

Feb 23, 2018

This is the stuff that should happen, but likely won't because it makes too much sense:

1)

Should not require a college degree to sit for these exams:

  • CPA and related accounting exams
  • Bar exam
  • Actuarial services and related exams
  • Any securities licensing

In other words, no professional license not dealing with physical structures (such as engineering and architecture) or human health (such as doctor or nurse) should require a college degree to sit for the certification exams. If you can pass the exams then you have the requisite knowledge.

2)

A non-profit organization should create a general business certification exam that covers the basics of accounting, finance, mathematics, and English writing proficiency--the basic business skills that white-collar employers will want in their paper-pushing employees. Then this non-profit should get major corporations to agree to accept certification in lieu of college degrees (for most of their jobs). This would require a significant cultural shift, but it's possible.

Should accept the above comprehensive business competency certification test in lieu of a college degree (for most administrative jobs):

  • Federal employment
  • State employment

3)

In order to receive federal student loans, you must complete 2 years at a community college and transfer to a 4-year in-state program. In other words, for taxpayers to assist you in financing your education, you should take the most economically efficient path.

4)

Re-allow private lending for student loans, specifically allowing for students to discharge private loans in bankruptcy. This will create a business opportunity for lenders, but will narrow lending to legitimate programs and career paths due to the risk of bankruptcy.

5)

Universities should start offering highly targeted 2-year programs for in-demand skills, such as computer programming. Private, for-profit organizations have been trying to do this, but they don't have legitimacy with employers. I believe I saw UNC-Asheville (?) is now offering a similar program, which is great. Having a non-profit university certification adds credibility.

Feb 23, 2018

Agree, they should also have to price degrees by the average yearly salary of someone in that field. This would ensure private and public sector working together and normalize the supply of needed skillsets and prevent a surplus of gender studies degrees.

Studying Finance? Last year's average salary for a finance grad (2-5yrs out of school) $55k, your total tuition for 4yrs is $55k

Studying Art? Last year's average salary (2-5yrs out of school) $40k, your total tuition for 4yrs is $40k

Feb 24, 2018

This is stupid. You're basically asking non-retards to subsidize the retarded women's studies and art history majors. It's not the like students who lack foresight don't have access to nearly all of the fixed costs associated with a university (counselors, sports, libraries, advisors, career fairs, most classes, etc.).

Your incentive scheme is backwards as well. Schools should charge MORE for an art history degree if you were gonna do this, as this would ensure fewer students graduating in this field, and the ones who do graduate likely have better external supports anyways due to the ability to bear the higher cost.

    • 2
Feb 23, 2018
TippyTop11:

Agree, they should also have to price degrees by the average yearly salary of someone in that field. This would ensure private and public sector working together and normalize the supply of needed skillsets and prevent a surplus of gender studies degrees.

Studying Finance? Last year's average salary for a finance grad (2-5yrs out of school) $55k, your total tuition for 4yrs is $55k

Studying Art? Last year's average salary (2-5yrs out of school) $40k, your total tuition for 4yrs is $40k

I would say that I like where you're going with the pricing model, but I would flip it around.

If you're doing a, say, political science major, you're charged $60,000 and if you're doing an engineering major you're charged $35,000. This would really force students to decide if the degree is worth it at all. Unfortunately, this means the liberal arts would be reserved for the wealthy, but as I've pointed out in other threads, the liberal arts are easily accessible in libraries, on the Kindle, on YouTube, etc. Anyone of any age can study in the liberal arts.

Feb 24, 2018

this is a great post, +1

Feb 24, 2018

badly.

it's the only form of debt where the underwriter has absolutely no regard for the borrower's ability to pay back the loan.

imagine if I walked into my Mercedes dealer and said "hey guys, I'm enrolled in a performance driving course. give me a financing deal on that new AMG GT S cabriolet. oh, and don't look at my finances. just trust that I'll get enough sponsorships afterwards to repay the loan."

unsustainable. extremely myopic. borderline enslaving.

if you can't afford tuition, you shouldn't go to college. (unless it's a highly techincal degree)

    • 1
Feb 24, 2018
MonacoMonkey:

badly.

it's the only form of debt where the underwriter has absolutely no regard for the borrower's ability to pay back the loan.

imagine if I walked into my Mercedes dealer and said "hey guys, I'm enrolled in a performance driving course. give me a financing deal on that new AMG GT S cabriolet. oh, and don't look at my finances. just trust that I'll get enough sponsorships afterwards to repay the loan."

unsustainable. extremely myopic. borderline enslaving.

if you can't afford tuition, you shouldn't go to college. (unless it's a highly techincal degree)

I disagree with your last line. Loans would be fine if the government and certain private undergrad lenders were able to discriminate based on a wholistic set of criteria (hs GPA/SAT, undergrad selectivity, major, undergrad GPA, internships, current credit history, etc.). The issue is that this could never happen in today's politically and racially charged environment, as such a program would be declared racist and discriminatory due to a disproportionate number of minorities (excluding asians obv) and women being unable to get loans.

    • 4
Feb 28, 2018

I agree with you on changing the rates and also that it wouldn't go over well politically. Too bad people don't have common sense anymore.

That said, I think a fix is changing student loan rates- you have a debt with minimal risk but still priced at 4-7%? Seems high, I think they should reduce student loans to the Feds fund rate. This would be more appropriate for the risk level and would help reduce the burden on those who made stupid decision.

Don't get me wrong, if you decide to take out $100k to go party for 4 years then you should have to pay it all back but I think punishing them with an interest rate that I can get on a personal loan is a bit much.

Feb 24, 2018

this isn't a disagreement. it's following up on my thoughts.

"it would be find if the govn't could discriminate". BUT THEY CANNOT.
and therein lies the monstrosity of a problem. I completely agree with your hypothesis.

Apr 5, 2018

If they privatized student loans then they are able to.

No pain no game.

Feb 28, 2018

Too true, unfortunately.

Don't even get me started on costly crap private schools... I understand it MIGHT be worthwhile taking out a 100K+ loan to go to an Ivy, but not for a school like Baylor, USC, etc. Just go to a decent public school and call it a day, pay in-state tuition. Don't complain about your enslavement to debt owed to a subpar school to me.

Apr 2, 2018

All the liberal arts majors will be publicly burned at the stake in front of the masses. They will pay with the only thing they have left after such subpar decision making; their lives. Their assets (if they have any aside from immaterial items like paint brushes and ripped hoodies) will be auctioned off like that of an incarcerated dope dealer and sold for pennies on the dollar. Millions will die, yes, but the US will recover, and never again will so many mindless lemmings overextend their leverage (only financial institutions should be allowed to do so). The reduction in population will allow the US to prosper while the rest of the world suffers from overcrowding-related repercussions. Trump will stay on for another 2-6 terms, gracefully defending our borders while Melinda moves in with Tom Cruise. You heard it here first

    • 2
Apr 4, 2018

It'll end in tears, then suicides, riots in the streets, calls to put bankers into gulags.

1) Interest rates are rising, which will make debt for many unsustainable.
2) There's evidence that many haven't finished paying (nor are anywhere close) their debt by 35, a decade after finishing university.
3) Low interest rates have destoyed savings. If you dare, go look how many Americans have no savings whatsoever, and how many millennials haven't saved anything yet.
4) If I recall correctly, there are actually subprime student loans securities out there. You know how it goes.
5) Humanities faculties have been utterly destroyed. The only good thing that will come out of this catastrophe will be de fact that humanities will have to be de-funded so that the SJW cancer is eradicated. Curricula in education, gender studies, ethnic studies, human resources will have to be purged in their entirety. If this doesn't happen soon enough, even STEM will be contaminated. (I legit dated briefly a chick studying biology at UCLA, she was forced to take African studies and write an essay on Black Lives Matters)
6) The corporate world, which ironically is the one pushing the most for the point 5, isn't enough to collect the crap it produces and pay for it. Starbucks will push for diversity and then still pay you a minimum salary for bartending with your phd in social justice.
7) Half of millennials now believe socialism is a fairer system, so when the happening happens, run before comrade genderfluid knocks at your door. Liberal media will fully endorse this until their doors are finally knocked as well. If you are white, male and heterosexual, get out of the country as soon as the bubble bursts and move to the Visegrad bloc.

    • 1
Apr 4, 2018

The Student Security Act is a phenomenal idea that unfortunately doesn't seem to be getting any traction. It wouldn't solve the problem entirely, but it would take a huge bite out of it while also taking a big step towards keeping Social Security solvent.

Basically, it would give borrowers of federal loans the option to defer collecting Social Security by up to 73 months beyond their current date of eligibility. In exchange for each month you defer, you would get a $550 credit off of your student loan balance ($40,150 total if you take the full credit). It would be strictly voluntarily, and you could defer for less than 73 months (in 1-month increments) if you don't want or need the entire amount of the credit.

There's literally no common sense reason for anyone to oppose this, but it does not seem to be going anywhere.

Feb 23, 2018

It's an interesting idea, but I can think of a number of objections. For example, you're costing the taxpayer a known quantity in the short-run in exchange for saving the taxpayer an unknown quantity--on paper--50 years from now on a program that may or may not exist in a half century. Another objection is that you're asking a 20-something to make a retirement decision 50 years in advance. As much as I've bashed young people lately, I do think it's an unfair burden to place on someone to make such a decision 5 decades in advance. 95% of people will exchange money today for the potential of money 50 years from now.

Apr 4, 2018
Troll - Aged 18 Years:

It's an interesting idea, but I can think of a number of objections. For example, you're costing the taxpayer a known quantity in the short-run in exchange for saving the taxpayer an unknown quantity--on paper--50 years from now on a program that may or may not exist in a half century. Another objection is that you're asking a 20-something to make a retirement decision 50 years in advance. As much as I've bashed young people lately, I do think it's an unfair burden to place on someone to make such a decision 5 decades in advance. 95% of people will exchange money today for the potential of money 50 years from now.

Valid points, however I'd say that:

a) It's true that this could end up being a bad deal for the taxpayer....but even in the worst case scenario it's better than simply forgiving most or all of the debt next time the Democrats control the government, which they're likely to try but are less likely to get away with if the Student Security Act or something similar is in place

b) We're talking about grown adults (20s/30s) and pushing back SS eligibility at most to age 73. If they take the money they would have used to pay off student loans and either invest it or use it to pay off credit card debt it's a slam-dunk good financial decision. If they blow it (and many would), then maybe not...but it's still their decision to make.

Feb 23, 2018

Wow this is actually a really interesting idea. Surprised I haven't heard of it before nice

Apr 6, 2018

Wait... so they get money accelerated? Paid for by my 40%+ tax rate... good to know
So that this idiot can mill around for a couple years and then decide they need a masters in BS too???

Why don't we don't enabling the poor decision makers?

Apr 5, 2018

It utterly pisses me off when the institution approves the Grants/Loans to the kids wearing the latest style clothing, new iPhones, driving BMW's/Benz/Audi's. Yes, these are the liberal arts students ranting on FB how the world is unfair or constantly spamming photos/updates about their lives.

SDSU, if you look at their Transfer Admission Guaranteed programs, and yes, UCSD is included, has majority STEM majors that they allow these transfers in. They're trying to cut down on the students transferring into an 'arts' program.

@neink Yes, STEM is facing the dilemma as well. I know the faculty heads at both institutions in engineering. Many of the students coming in lack strong mathematical skills to the point the institutions tried to implement a remedial/refresher mathematics class as a requirement prior to continuing the upper division coursework. This failed. The only option they have now is to dumb down the coursework.

@neink I agree with #6. Recruiting/Headhunting/Temp Agencies are being flooded with resumes/CV's of people with BA/MA degrees for data entry/office assistant type role. Most of these jobs are easily trained at a Community College that offers a program for one semester and you get direct placement with local businesses/corporations. Sad, ain't it?

No pain no game.

Apr 4, 2018

The dumbing down is real. I have a friend who studied maths (Bsc) in Italy, went on to take a Master in the same discipline at Oxford and told me the entire program didn't teach him anything he didn't already know.

He still appreciated having a significantly broader network of people, but he effectively paid for that, not for the education.

Apr 5, 2018

I agree wholeheartedly that college is not for a lot of people. I might be one of them. The struggles I am facing starting undergraduate with a negative debt and trying to save up so I don't require a loan might be all for nothing. I still want that toilet paper on my wall.

College is expensive, time consuming, and not a sure guarantee something will produce after the years of effort. Many professions that require a certification, training, or trade skill are in dire need of more people to enroll in. They're told by society that these jobs are "beneath" them, and a college degree is the only means for a better quality of life.

No pain no game.

Apr 5, 2018

What America needs is a some European style sensibility in Higher Ed,

1.) Bachelor's degree should be 3 years. No BS core classes. Just focus on your major. If you want to learn about Art History and Philosophy, do it in your own time. If the rest of the world can finish college in 3 years, we can do it here too.

2.) There should be public colleges where poor kids can do and get a great education for a very lost cost. But there should be a HIGH barrier to entry for higher ed. Sorry, if you are't capable of going to college, you should not - go to a 2 year plumbing/electrician/mfg school. That's the problem with US colleges - there are too many kids who don't belong there.

These public colleges should be heavily subsidized by State/Fed govts - but they should have no excesses, i.e. no sports teams, residential dorms etc. Sort of like a CUNY.

3.) Similarly, there should be 2 year vocational colleges for kids who can't make it to higher ed to train them for these "new collar" jobs. These should be very cheap to attend.

4.) MBA should be 1 year. JD should be 2 years.

    • 2
Apr 5, 2018

Agreed, decrease the duration and increase the intensity. This would actually level the playing field between rich and poor students to some extent because people are more likely to get derailed by peripheral issues than lack of academic ability. Cutting program length decreases the likelihood of life getting in the way.

Apr 5, 2018

Total side note: I initially read your user name as "tona porn otto nap," which made no sense, and it took me a minute to re-read as "to nap or not to nap."

Good to know my mind is still solidly in the gutter.

Pages