<p>Seven</a> Reasons Not to Send Your Kids to College - DailyFinance
Thoughts?</p>
<p>Pick whichever point you think is legitimate and I’ll tell you why it’s wrong, silly, or irrelevant.</p>
<p>
lol
someone needs to step outside their own little world</p>
<p>Hello, bubbleman… </p>
<p>The guy who wrote this needs to consider the differences between a formal education and valuable experiences. </p>
<p>College can give you both.</p>
<p>I second what qwertykey said, and I’ll actually bite at one of them.</p>
<ul>
<li>the 60% take more than 4 years bit - </li>
</ul>
<p>(Most) schools that cost $200,000 have 4 year graduation rates much, much higher than this, so the author doesn’t know jack about what he’s talking about.
The author is claiming that only 40% of students graduate in 4 years. From what I understand, these aren’t the kids going to selective, expensive universities.<br>
Of course, there are the students at $200,000 schools that don’t graduate in 4 years, but most of them do (I believe my school has an 85% 4 year grad rate, and that doesn’t take into account all the people doing 5 year bs/ms’s).</p>
<p>Heh. The worst on this list has a 60% 4-year graduation rate:
[The</a> LOWEST Graduation Rates Among 4-Year Colleges (PHOTOS)](<a href=“The LOWEST Graduation Rates Among 4-Year Colleges (PHOTOS) | HuffPost College”>The LOWEST Graduation Rates Among 4-Year Colleges (PHOTOS) | HuffPost College)</p>
<p>[How</a> Bad Are Our Graduation Rates? — The American, A Magazine of Ideas](<a href=“http://www.american.com/archive/2010/april/how-bad-are-our-graduation-rates]How”>http://www.american.com/archive/2010/april/how-bad-are-our-graduation-rates)
On that link, you can see that the only group below 50% are people going to community college, or for-profit schools. Note: for profit schools are places like DeVry or Univ. Phoenix, not the $200,000 schools the author is referring to. The private not-for profit has a 64%</p>
<p>In other words, the author has no clue what they’re talking about, and is spewing random numbers out of his mouth without understanding where those numbers come from.
Credibility shot.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here’s another little gem.
The author clearly has no clue whatsoever the amount of volunteer work students do.
I myself have worked 60 hour weeks all summer long on an unpaid internship, which is by definition volunteer work.</p>
<p>Edit: It should be noted that college is not for everyone. But this article is just absurd, in suggesting that even those who would “most benefit from college” shouldn’t go.</p>
<p>I’d like to note that, after reading his Wikipedia article, his credibility drops 130%.</p>
<p>There was also a remark in the comments section that points out he’s using the current tuition costs of the most expensive private universities today but then using the earnings from people who graduated in the 1960’s.</p>
<p>Worst part is that he has two daughters.</p>
<p>This guy… jeez. I saw this article yesterday and woke up thinking about how idiotic it was.</p>
<p>But just a word of advice to everyone on this forum: If you don’t want to go into so much debt getting a degree in engineering, it’s totally acceptable to sit around at home and just READ to get the same amount of knowledge, according to this guy!!! Companies WILL hire you at the same rate because reading = formal education. And if you don’t think you have a good enough chance with just that, get your parents to give you $200k [in cash] so you can begin and ruin a business. That’s like being cum laude, dang it.</p>
<p>The $200K number is silly. My education is not going to cost more than $40K. As that is the premise of his argument i.e. cost efficiency, then that is bunk. </p>
<p>Also, in the fourth point, he failed to adjust for inflation. If the average salary increases with inflation, the $200K will have to yield 3% above inflation to get the $851K in inflation-adjusted dollars. It is also assumed that the current financial problems will not result in hyperinflation, turning the initial $200K into toilet paper.</p>
<p>I don’t agree with the 7 reasons provided in this article, however there are several alternatives to college that provide a good life.</p>
<p>1) Learn a trade such as being an electrician, carpenter, plumber, or machinist (if their is any industry in your area for tool & die). </p>
<p>These are skills the will always be needed, and you can always make money from. If you lose your job, you can easily do work on your own to pay the bills and the pay is very equal and in many cases greater than what a college grad (particularly a Liberal Arts graduate) makes.</p>
<p>For example, a qualified electrician can easily make 50K in the first few years of employment, and that’s working for somebody else. Compare that to some college graduates who go into social work or other fields with very low pay, and subtract the high cost of a college tuition, the person with a trade is far ahead of the game. </p>
<p>Many of these people also go on to start their own business which if done properly can make a person rich. I have two close friends, one is an electrician and the other is a plumber. Both work independently. I don’t know how much the electrician makes per year, but I know he just bought a $400,000 (which is expensive in W. PA) home and has had some major contracts. The plumber, who is single, lives in a two-bedroom apartment that is sparsely furnished, but he pulls in close to 100K, and has been for nearly 4 years. He has no student loans, or any other college related expensives.</p>
<p>2) The military. I say this time after time, and I’m sure I’m starting to sound like a broken record. However, this is such a wonderful option that it is worth repeating. The military can give a person/family a very good life. It allows one to learn a skill, become self-sufficient, get work experience, serve their country, and if the person wants - FREE COLLEGE TUITION!</p>
<p>It also has intangible benefits that will payoff greatly later in life. Mainly leadership experience, decision making and life lessons that cannot be taught in school. As I’m typing this, there are 19 year old Platoon Leaders leading other groups of young men into some very hostile areas, making life and death decisions, and learning more about life than anyone could from inside a classroom.</p>
<p>Go back and look at the “Greatest Generation”, and think about the experience they went through and how benefitial it was. Back when I was in school, anytime I would get down on myself or start complaining about how tough school was or how “stressed” I was from classes, I would think about how when my grandfather was my age (at the time, 19-20), he was fighting on the beaches at Normandy, and how my Great-Uncle was making emergency landings into the French countryside.</p>
<p>Those experiences all teach a person much more about life, and the intangible qualities needed to exceed in life than any university curriculum, especially when you consider the joke a college degree is becoming.</p>
<p>We as a society have countless of “educated” people entering the workforce and public sector, yet few of them actually have any real life experiences, ones that teach maturity, leadership and decision making. While they are “college educated”, they are also “life stupid”, and that doesn’t say much for our society.</p>
<p>There is no replacement for education, but we should not be so “snobby” to think that the only valuable education comes from a university.</p>
<p>A college education may provide work related skills to do a job, but it does not provide character, and without character, people don’t get far in life, some may make it for awhile, but eventually it catches up to them and they are destroyed by it.</p>
<p>Ever since that Bernie Madoff stuff, everything is suddenly a “Ponzi scheme”.</p>
<p>The author also confuses average with meaning “this will happen to your children”. I have no reason to believe I will have the same debt burden as the average college student, for example. His point 5 is a fair point so far as entrepreneurial jobs are concerned, but most “establishment” jobs (working at an existing company) require college degrees these days. On the whole, I think most intelligent people would benefit from going to college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If 100% is the 4 year rate, wouldn’t you be adding 25% (as in, 1/4th of 100)?</p>
<p>I wouldn’t join the military simply because you think it build character.</p>
<p>Basically you are getting your balls blown off to secure the political interests of some rich old farts.</p>
<p>And I’m sure if your grandpa actually stormed the beaches of Normandy, he probably wishes he wasn’t there. War doesn’t always ‘harden’ you or make you learn the value of life. It can break you permanently (PTSD).</p>
<p>The military does a good job in its advertisements to make it look like its selective to get in (its not), its a rigorous trial by fire (99% pass boot-camp), it’ll pay for college (unlikely), and that its some manly character-builder. Eh.</p>
<p>They’re not really reasons; they’re all flawed and can easily be refuted, as we’ve seen some posters here do. </p>
<p>FAIL.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t join the military simply because you think it build character.</p>
<p>Basically you are getting your balls blown off to secure the political interests of some rich old farts.</p>
<p>And I’m sure if your grandpa actually stormed the beaches of Normandy, he probably wishes he wasn’t there. War doesn’t always ‘harden’ you or make you learn the value of life. It can break you permanently (PTSD).</p>
<h2>The military does a good job in its advertisements to make it look like its selective to get in (its not), its a rigorous trial by fire (99% pass boot-camp), it’ll pay for college (unlikely), and that its some manly character-builder. Eh. ~ Peter_parker</h2>
<p>Let’s set a few things straight.</p>
<p>1) My grandfather (along with many other “grandfathers”), was at Normandy. And you are VERY wrong to assume that he wished that he wasn’t there. Other than his family, his service was the most important thing he had ever done in his life, something he was very proud of, and something he didn’t regret. </p>
<p>I’m sure it bothered him greatly (as he said it did), but given the choice he would have made the same decisions, as it was an important part of his life, and when it comes down to it, it was something that needed to be done - and men step up and do the job (what do you do?).</p>
<p>2) Regardless of what you think, military experience does build character. The whole experience is designed to do just that. Break you down, and build you up into a leader. It’s very effective, and the maturity and confidence you gain can’t be replaced.</p>
<p>3) As far as “getting your balls blown off”, well - it can certainly happen, but if everyone was so scared of that happening and didn’t sign up, we wouldn’t have a military would we? There are risks, some much greater than others in military life, but it’s a decision one makes. Believe it or not, not all men are whimpering, feeble toads so terrified of a fight that they won’t serve their country. Everyone gets scared (I’ve seen very tough men pray and even cry), but overcoming that fear, living through it, really does build character. If you can walk out of a situation like Iraq or Afganistan, the corporate world isn’t very scary.</p>
<p>4) You know nothing about PTSD. Nothing. I don’t care if you are a psych major, or you watched some biased anti-war video, you know jack. It’s not like the movies, where men suddenly have flashbacks of combat and start freaking out uncontrollably. In fact, that untrue hollywood induced stigma is a major reason why servicemen DON’T GET HELP. Because they know they will be treated like ticking time-bombs, which couldn’t be further from the truth. </p>
<p>5) Your percentages are intentionally misleading. First, the selection process simply to join may not be rigorous as an enlisted personnel, but the standards become increasingly difficult for officers and enlisted personnel in specialized units. Take alook at Marine OCS, and tell me how “easy” it is. I would bet few people on this board would meet the criteria to be competitive, including yourself, and even fewer would make it through the program. </p>
<p>If you want to talk about “rigorous”, let’s looking at the criteria for Naval Special Warfare, Army Special Forces, Marine Special Operations, and Air Force Special Tactics. There is nothing in college, and dare I say life, more rigorous than any of those units. To say the military isn’t selective is a very false and misleading statement, because it’s units are the most selective and hand-picked groups in any organization in the entire world, military or coporate. </p>
<p>Also, what is your dig about it not paying for college? I have about 5 buddies all going to school for free (mine was paid with athletic scholarship), off of the GI Bill, which is exceptionally common. </p>
<p>You really seem to be confused, or you just are letting your personal politics get in the way of the facts.</p>
<p>Ummm…he went to Cornell for undergrad and Carnegie Mellon for his master’s. While I completely disagree with the article, if the author was a non-Ivy grad that followed a similar plan/worked from the ground up it would be slightly less inane.</p>
<p>
</p></li>
</ol>
<p>LULZ. The $800,000 difference in earning potential is almost entirely inflation adjusted (since both college grads and high school grads earn income in the same years–except for years 1-4). </p>
<p>The $851,000 is not inflation adjusted. You earned interest on the $200,000 while inflation was decreasing its value. Assuming inflation fluctuates between 2-3% overall, then the inflation adjusted value of a 3% yield is approximately:</p>
<p>200,000(1.03^49)/(1.025^49) = 254,000.</p>
<p>// Stopped reading after that.</p>
<p>“If I put that $200,000 that I would’ve spent per child to cover tuition costs, living expenses, books, etc. into bonds yielding just 3% (any muni bonds) and let it compound for 49 years (adding back in the 4 years of college), I get $851,000. So my kids can avoid college and still end up with the same amount in the worst case.”</p>
<p>And just where does he plan on getting that $200,000 to just throw down into some investment account? The vast majority of Americans don’t have more than $30-40K in cash to put in an investment account. And most students pay WAY less than $200K for college…between scholarships, need-based aid, and state schools, $50-60K is a more realistic amount people spend on college (out-of-pocket, loans, interest). And yes, if they go to grad/professional school, they do pay more but they make WAY more in the future too.</p>
<p>Also, I’m gonna say the median salary for non-college grads is $50K, and the median salary for a college grad is $70K. If the non-college grad works for 47 years (age 18-65), they will make $2,350,000. If the college grad works for 43 years (age 22-65), they will make $3,010,000. Subtract $100K for college expenses (including out-of-pocket, loans, and interest; this is also a HIGH estimate- most people won’t spend that much), and you have $2,910,000 which is still higher. And please note that I was GENEROUS with the median salary for non-college grads while I was CONSERVATIVE with the median salary for college grads. The real difference should be much higher.</p>
<p>Is that list a joke? lol. My parents don’t even have $20,000 to hand me and I wouldn’t take it if they did</p>
<p>I agree with bigeastbeast on the military comment. It takes a special kind of person willing to forfeit their future so you don’t have to!</p>
<p>^^^ That kinda sounded like a sarcastic insult, but I’m sure it wasn’t meant to be.</p>
<p>My whole point was that there are many paths in life, and some people pick ones that aren’t college, and for those people that is OK.</p>
<p>For some people, the military provides the exact lifestyle they want.</p>