How Americans afford college?

[bearlolzx]

people complain about student loans when they partied all 4 years and now their communications degree is asking 500$ a month at their door : )

[HumbleDuck]

If the score was normalized, the highest score would be 1.00 and the lowest 0, when the actual numbers are .949 to .352. And again 51 out of 188 countries scored .8 or above, which is 27%.

So, paying to train your competition can never be harmful?

Top quartile != top ℅25 it's more like the 75th percentile, and the range of a normalized function should cover 0-1, not it's actual outcome, that depends on the domain you choose.

No, it's not harmful. If someone else does what you do better than you do, you should let them have the job. ( Specially if they have much less experienced than you)

[cuafpr]

Loans / scholarships / work while in school. Anyone can do it IF they want to and work hard enough, its really not that hard in the US, less you want to go a school that you think you are good enough for but school doesn't agree, then you get people taking out stupid amounts in loans. Fact is everyone that squeaks through HS doesn't need college and likely shouldn't go.

[prwraith]

Basically you take a college loan out. Go to college. Get the degree. Move to another country (preferably one in Africa) and say fuck you to college loans.

Otherwise you will die a slow death paying them off.

[HumbleDuck]

The benefits of free college are felt by those that are already well off. It's the trickle down of education policy.

Hmm, care to elaborate?

[Shahad]

Hmm, care to elaborate?

Probably something about the poor being in unfavorable circumstances which leads to being admitted to college (or graduating high school) in the first place less likely, regardless of its cost.

[Taso]

We have state colleges which offer lower tuition so people can still get the best education.

[HumbleDuck]

Probably something about the poor being in unfavorable circumstances which leads to being admitted to college (or graduating high school) in the first place less likely, regardless of its cost.

So practically giving up on an issue instead of looking for solutions.

[Kaleredar]

The benefits of free college are felt by those that are already well off. It's the trickle down of education policy.

Seeing as free college is opposed by people who are already well off (and therefore a certain political party and therefore the not well-off individuals who follow what they say to a T,) that argument doesn't really hold water.

[Mittens]

Hmm, care to elaborate?

People that are well(not the poor) of are more likely to attend college.
- - - Updated - - -

Probably something about the poor being in unfavorable circumstances which leads to being admitted to college (or graduating high school) in the first place less likely, regardless of its cost.

This guy has it right.

- - - Updated - - -

Seeing as free college is opposed by people who are already well off (and therefore a certain political party and therefore the not well-off individuals who follow what they say to a T,) that argument doesn't really hold water.

It's a feel good policy, so it probably has a lot of support.

[HumbleDuck]

People that are well(not the poor) of are more likely to attend college.

So instead of solving the issue we should abandon poor people.
By the same logic, why waste oxygen when we are all destined to die?

[Mittens]

So instead of solving the issue we should abandon poor people.
By the same logic, why waste oxygen when we are all destined to die?

Obviously no. The focus should be on addressing the problem of poor backgrounds (which is the reason why they are not attending college), as for debt, I quite like the system the UK and Australia have.

[Kaleredar]

Obviously no. The focus should be on addressing the problem of poor backgrounds (which is the reason why they are not attending college), as for debt, I quite like the system the UK and Australia have.

The problem is is that they aren't doing that either.

For a political party to say "We shouldn't be focusing on X, we should be focusing on Z!" and then doing absolutely nothing to solve either is... well, THAT'S pandering.

[HumbleDuck]

Obviously no. The focus should be on addressing the problem of poor backgrounds (which is the reason why they are not attending college), as for debt, I quite like the system the UK and Australia have.

One of the main causes of poverty is lack of proper education. Sure safety nets should be in place, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

[rayden54]

Just don't do what I did. I'll never pay off my loans. I didn't even get the degree I wanted. Ran completely out of money first.

[Mittens]

The problem is is that they aren't doing that either.

For a political party to say "We shouldn't be focusing on X, we should be focusing on Z!" and then doing absolutely nothing to solve either is... well, THAT'S pandering.

I'm an individual I have my own opinions which might be different to what's written on the GOP platform.

- - - Updated - - -

One of the main causes of poverty is lack of proper education. Sure safety nets should be in place, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

Proper early education.

[Kaibhan]

Typically, loans you wind up paying off until the day you die. Or, at the rate my parents are going, I'll have to pick it up for them.

Why would you do something so stupid as to pick up their debt.

[HumbleDuck]

Proper early education.

And undergrad education and post grad education, all will help with poverty.
Again, none of these are mutually exclusive.

[Kellhound]

Top quartile != top ℅25 it's more like the 75th percentile, and the range of a normalized function should cover 0-1, not it's actual outcome, that depends on the domain you choose.

No, it's not harmful. If someone else does what you do better than you do, you should let them have the job. ( Specially if they have much less experienced than you)

Its not based on a quartile. "Developed nation" is based on a hard cut-off value (.800) that is independent of the number of countries involved, as they are measured against a series of fixed values. If only the top ten countries were included in the entire count, their scores would not change.

Paying to train someone to be better than you is insane and very self destructive.

- - - Updated - - -

One of the main causes of poverty is lack of proper education. Sure safety nets should be in place, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone had at least a Bachelor's degree, poverty would still exist, and likely in a similar ratio as seen today. It would just set the new minimum bar to hold any job.

[Mittens]

It's free for the user. Anyone with a clue of what the topic being discussed is about knows this.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, getting straight A's in elementary school will surely provide you with a bright future and prevent you from being poor.

Or did you mean middle school? Or high school? Even if high school, those straight A's don't do you a lot of good if you don't have the time to attend college, even if given a full ride, because you're too busy working 3 part time jobs trying to provide for your family.

Proper secondary education also isn't being focused on at all by the same group of people who are typically against free higher education.

Most of the differences occur in pre-k education. I'm not sure why one would bother in the latter, especially if the objective is to aid kids with poor backgrounds.