College Loan Slavery

Parents Forum
81

<p>
[quote]
But to just condemn the entire system because it does not work for you, seems a bit self centered.

[/quote]

Similarly, to be satisfied with the system because it works for you seems a bit self centered. There are plenty for whom the system does not work.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Sometime we have our Europian collegues working in US office for several months. None of the Euoropians have any desire to go back home, although they must at the end of their stay

[/quote]

Your European colleagues are a self-selected group of those who would consider relocating to the U.S. in the first place. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Should not we listen more to this people who have actual experience in both systems vs somebody who have theories about another side that they never had a chance to experience?

[/quote]

A previous poster lived and worked in the U.S. and Canada, and preferred Canada. I know plenty of Europeans who have experienced both systems and prefer their own. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Be that as it may, these professionals being temporary residents, they don't have to worry about any of the economic issues of the American system that are being discussed here, such as paying for college, access to affordable medical care or retirement and social security. They also enjoy paying less taxes during their stay in the US, without that having any negative effect on their access to the above services once they get back home. Of course they like it here!

[/quote]

Very true. Many have no idea about the details of the American system and are pretty shocked when they find out.</p>

<p>
[quote]
For people with poor financial management skills, poor health, or bad luck in love/choice of life partner, paying off loans can be hellish.

[/quote]

This is the attitude that I find most objectionable: every man for himself. If you are failing financially it is only your own fault. And you better not have bad health or bad luck.</p>

<p>What I admire about the Canadian and European systems is that education and health care are available without going into any debt, without fears of future illnesses that could put you into debt. And there is no possibility of losing your health insurance. It's a fundamental philosophical difference between them and the U.S. -- the belief that a well-educated and healthy population is a common good and should be commonly funded.</p>

<p>No one is asking for any "free" hand-outs; citizens of these countries pay high taxes in exchange for these benefits.</p>

82

<p>" For people with poor financial management skills, poor health, or bad luck in love/choice of life partner, paying off loans can be hellish."</p>

<p>"This is the attitude that I find most objectionable: every man for himself. If you are failing financially it is only your own fault. And you better not have bad health or bad luck..."</p>

<p>Anneroku, Nicely phrased response. </p>

<p>And there is another danger to such attitudes in regards to whether an individual or groups education succeed or fails and whether they can bear the costs. As educational costs continue to escalate and more find that having after obtained that education that "paying off loans can be hellish."...It will negate one of the primary functions of higher education which is a social control for the release of economic or class tensions. </p>

<p>Higher education in this country is promoted as a means of social advancement or as a social leveler. As such it serves a very pragmatic purpose as a form of propaganda because we live in a society which has in recent years seen greatly increased income disparities and developed a marked disparity in regards to the control of overall resources. If we as a society, or major portions of it, lose the ability to believe education can be a genuine leveler or means of raising status then the level of discontent will increase markedly in economically marginalized populations. </p>

<p>Not exactly the most idealized view of the function of higher education, but nonetheless one which is a functionally pragmatic one.</p>

83

<p>
[quote]
People who went to school in the 1970's often have no concept of how much has changed.

[/quote]

Think about what you wrote - you're essentially saying that people who went to college in the 70s, many of whom are now paying for college for their kids, have no concept of how college costs have changed. They understand perfectly well and more than most people how college costs have changed - as well as how the entitlement mentality has changed.</p>

84

<p>USCD UCLA Dad Quite correct, that was poorly phrased and all due apologies for those reading this discourse who clearly do know the issues. It should have said "those who went to college in the 70's and who have no children currently in college may have no concept of how much as changed". </p>

<p>Oh well bound to make a mistake sometimes....</p>

<p>Peculiar thing is I have colleagues who did go to college in the 70's and who work in academe who do not seem to know, or perhaps are too scared to acknowledge the problems. </p>

<p>As far as entitlement mentality the dilemma there is the entitlements are not limited to students or members of the lower orders. The recent bailouts (which include the educational financiers in re: the liquidity money) have probably been one of the greatest transfer of resources in US history. And then there is the matter of the 1.7 billion over billings which seems to be legally quite ambiguous. And despite the "Chronicles" admirable efforts to find out exactly how much and where it went, not much information is getting out of the USDOE.</p>