Back in the 60's/70's, SC subsidized public colleges to the tune of 
something like 80 cents or more per dollar of expenses.  I believe that 
number is in the low teens now.  The burden of the difference has been 
shifted to the student.

The federal government offers to pick up some of the slack with grants, 
subsidized loans and unsubsidized loans with pretty low interest rates. 
  More and more, people are needing a degree for a chance at a better 
job, so going to college is a thing that has just become expected.

A lot of kids have no idea what they are even doing in college, so they 
wind up with degrees in political science, generic B.A. degrees, or 
business, for lack of any better ideas.  These are 'worthless' in their 
general form, but make up a good portion of degrees obtained.  This 
flood of degrees lessens the value of having a degree and lowers the 
chances of obtaining a better job.  Lower paying jobs mean less money to 
pay back the loans used to get a degree to get a higher paying job.

Still, the degree is needed/desired, so people take the loans without 
giving a thought to the future (college kids are ignorant like that). 
So, now the kids have free money and the schools raise tuition because 
more people can afford the higher price.  It reminds me of the 
healthcare situation.  Hospitals will charge $40 for some aspirin 
because the insurance companies will pay for it, eventually.  People 
have to have the insurance because they can't afford $40 for aspirin.

Is the education provided by colleges worth what most charge?  No.  Not 
unless it is in some specialized area and the school gives the student 
access to resources that they would not otherwise have.

So, colleges overcharge for a product that can only decrease in value. 
Students pay the high prices because the government gives them 
cheap/free money to do it.  The return is often disproportionate
to the investment and around it goes.

I blame the schools, mostly.  I mean, I can't blame them for doing what 
comes naturally, asking for as much money as they can get away with, but 
I can blame them for not making at least a small effort not to.  The 
problem isn't access to the money, it is schools charging way more for a 
required commodity than it is worth in most cases.

On 6/13/2012 3:16 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_articles/Education_Inflation.asp
> Yet, the main reason tuition continues to rise is a dramatic change
> that took place regarding the Federal Stafford Loan more than a decade
> ago. When Uncle Sam opened the floodgates to government-backed student
> loans without parent income restrictions in 1992, colleges welcomed
> the news with open arms. The sudden injection of millions of
> additional aid dollars only furthered tuition increases. Add to that
> the government’s continued promotion of the Stafford Loan as a
> low-cost program, and you have the formula for hyperinflationary
> costs.
>
> Here are the enrollment stats:
>
> http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0278.pdf

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:351948
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to