Article: Four Ways Banks Have Ruined Higher Education

<p>Four</a> ways banks have ruined higher education - Salon.com</p>

<p>So how exactly were those 4 things mentioned the banks’ fault?</p>

<p>Seems to be a little of a mis-titled article…</p>

<p>sorry but, banks ain’t got nothing to do with it! look at the schools .</p>

<p>I don’t have a problem with students being offered some luxury housing options, as long as the college also makes sure that there also is sufficient affordable housing. </p>

<p>Some public colleges are demolishing all of their cheaper dorms and replacing them with expensive privately-financed apartments. In some cases, the state did not give the college sufficient borrowing authority to build their own housing.</p>

<p>The typical student is not used to sharing a room - many have their own bathrooms at home. </p>

<p>It is interesting to see the total room and board bill for colleges ranging between $9K and $14K a year. The $14K is mainly found in high cost cities, such as DC.</p>

<p>sadly, too many folks look to “blogs” as statements of fact. And moreover the owners of the blogs print this stuff, unedited, even if it is totally illogical and makes no sense.</p>

<p>What do “banks” have to do with Voter ID laws (his “4th” point)? What do “banks” have to do with the student journalists at UGa?</p>

<p>This blog, like many, is almost moronic.</p>

<p>I don’t know whose fault it is but I think it’s ridiculous that 18-21 yr. old kids need to live in luxury.</p>

<p>I’m still trying to get past the author’s assertion that “multi-tiered” housing (different housing options at different prices) is “unfair.” How is it unfair that students who can afford pricier housing get to live in pricier housing??? Last time I looked, that’s how it worked for any student who opted to live off-campus . . .</p>

<p>What a piece of rubbish.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Exactly. It might even be that the higher-priced housing students, who are paying a premium, are subsidizing the lower housing students.</p>

<p>Just one example why the author has a blog, and not a real journalism job.</p>

<p>“Ruined” might be the wrong word to use in a title, but the piece does point out some valid concerns regarding changes in money dynamics of higher education. </p>

<p>With housing, public colleges are faced with increasing enrollments but decreasing funding from the state. The harsh reality is that a private company can build dorms at about 2/3 the cost compared to the state and avoid all of the related politicking. I know this because I know one of the guys who started a company that has built dorms, mostly in the SE. I also know the main costing guy for one of the big commercial construction companies and we had a nice conversation about it.</p>

<p>Issue #2, colleges seeking increased revenue from streams that are not classified as tuition, has helped administrators reign in tuition increases while rapidly increasing the overall cost if attendance. This is especially helpful in a state like WA with prepaid tuition plans. I know of a college that marks up its food plan by 60%.</p>

<p>The third thing, and probably the most insidious, is colleges encouraging or requiring students to participate in usury-rate financial schemes to the detriment of the students and families. We like to hold onto the idea that the college, with its captive enrollment, will operate as surrogate parents in the best interest of the students. We feel that a non-profit or public U will have more of a moral prerogative than a University of Phoenix. Unfortunately, as we have seen with FA office scandals and the debit card example in the story, that is not always the case. That may be the justification for the words “banks” and “ruined.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Welcome to the new world of media! </p>

<p>Blogs are easily identified as the garbage they are. Outfits like the HuffPo are now elevated to a rank in the mainstream media, despite showing little improvement of their days when they did not have a single reporter on staff. They are still pure and unadulterated horse manure. </p>

<p>Big names of the past are now filled with “contributions” and it has become impossible to separate biased and moronic opinion pieces from research driven journalism. Most sources are merely circular and aggregated without any effort in checking for accuracy. </p>

<p>We now have 24 hours a day newsfeeds. And we are still none the wiser because the news has reached the level of having a coffee with your football buddies. Lots of opinions and little to no facts.</p>