Pay Your Debts Snowflakes- Student Loans Just Got A Lot More Expensive

[EverCurious]

Personal attacks aside, this has zero to do with the blind rush to get a $30k bill for a degree you're never going to use...

It has everything to do with it. And when you say a "degree you never use", what the fuck are you even talking about? One of the major reasons one goes to college is to develop critical thinking skills (which you obviously lack). It's those critical thinking skills that lead a graduate to develop good workplace skills because they have spent 4 years being taught to think critically as a part of higher education. If you don't see the value in critical thinking, then you're probably a stupid person yourself who lacks the ability to exercise critical thinking and thus sucks up all the stupid bullshit (like how people don't need college degrees) Conservatives vomit out there like how cutting taxes somehow means more revenue, the Earth is 6,000 years old, Climate Change is not real, and deregulation is good for the economy. College graduates make nearly double what those with only a HS degree make. So all you're doing when you discourage people from going to college is lowering the average wages, making people less inclined to question dubious ideology, which results in a lowering of the living standard, which results in an increase in welfare spending because people without college degrees qualify for many welfare benefits as their average wage of $23K/yr is barely above the poverty line. Someone without a college degree is most likely going to have to rely on federal assistance programs like SNAP, Medicaid, and others. Most Walmart workers have no college degree, and we the taxpayers subsidize about $5B a year in welfare benefits for those workers. BTW - Walmart's profits last year were $14B. So we are subsidizing more than 1/3 of Walmart profits because they pay their non-college educated workforce such low wages.

Personal attacks aside. Partisan attacks aside.

WRONG! Getting a degree does not /guarantee/ higher pay.

IF the college graduate isn't willing to pursue the actual career, which includes moving away from friends and family, then they will /never/ see that "increased pay" for their degree.

IF the college graduate is going after those 27% of jobs that require a college degree, lets say "Anthropology." If they are not willing to move to a museum that has an anthropology position open, they're not going to see any benefit. If they're not willing to move to a school that has a anthropology teaching position open, they're not going to see any benefit. If they're not willing to /commit/ to pursuing the position their degree is in, then they will /never/ see an increased wage because of that degree. This is /not/ a hard concept to grasp, you are just unhinged about partisan politics...

As to the workplace skills bit, all these colleges giving out safe spaces and catering to PC. The skills they are learning in colleges are actually a /disservice/ to concept of workplace skills... I'm just going to refer you to this list here - http://www.jwu.edu/uploadedFiles/Documents/Alumni/JWUTopWorkSkills.pdf If you cannot see how college grads are either failing to learn these /basic/ workplace skills at college, or worse actually learning the /wrong/ thing to do from college, then I really can't help you because you're too dense.

One can see just from /your/ responses to my comments that you are failing on like 90% of these /actual/ workplace skills you think college is teaching/has taught you. It doesn't matter how much you whine about my hard nose statements son, I am a recently business person. A professional who got paid to give advice on everything from hiring/firing to the guts of how a business is run, my entire job was taking over management of businesses when they had an unexpected executive position open up. I am who these kids are wanting to hire them. I am the person who would be looking at their resume and evaluating their attitude and fit for whatever position. I'm the interviewer. I am the person who evaluates their performance and decides if they get canned in a down size or not. Whine, cry, bully all you want, but I am the harsh reality these kids will face when getting a job. I'm the person who that decides if they get hired or fired, I'm the person that decides what they are paid, and I'm the person that decides if they get a raise. You can try to hide under your security blanket of "lefty values" but I'm the bitch that steals your blanket and burns it to say "welcome to the real world."

Lets get "personal" son and maybe you'll figure it out before you fuck your life over (regardless of your precious 4 year degree.) You come off as a hostile, angry, punk kid, immature and abrasive. You think you're smarter than anyone who doesn't agree with you. You think you can force people to believe what you do by berating them and calling them stupid. You think insults are valid points of debate and meaningful to prove your point or get your point across. You think partisan politics are appropriate to fling at a non-partisan person simply because they disagree with you on a single point; showing you have zero skill for negotiation, zero compassion for alternate opinions and would/will make it harder on co-workers to deal with your personality flaws. You attempt to force or bully me into thinking and believing as you do, which is 100% impossible in any real world situation - that only works on college kids and people who have not formed a solid foundation of beliefs, the majority of people outside college, those in the workforce have already developed those things. You think that it's appropriate to guess at, and insult, "my" religion without a second thought for how unrelated and inappropriate that is. Instead of trying to change my mind through effective negotiation, you IMEDIATELY choose to /personally/ attack /me/ as if that would help your case.

Son, just based on your diatribe in what three posts(?) I can tell you that you would be fired from any job that paid even second rung. But you go on thinking you're all that and a bag of chips.

"Arrogance is a creature. It does not have senses. It has only a sharp tongue and the pointing finger.”

 

[EverCurious]

Again, personal attacks aside, this has /nothing/ to do with kids blindly rushing out for a $30k bill on a degree that they aren't going to use.

No one is "blindly rushing out" to get a college degree. If you want to make a decent living in this country, you have to have a degree. Furthermore, you keep saying people have a degree they aren't going to use. What the fuck does that even mean? Of course, it means nothing...it's just something that sounds clever to you in that empty little head of yours. Fact is, students take away more from college than just a piece of paper. They take away critical thinking skills, they take away exposure to new ideas they have been shielded from, they take away much more than just a piece of paper. I don't think you went to college yourself. It's funny to me that you pretend you did so you can be self-righteous in your assessment of education, ignoring the fact that students are burdened with debt because of your stupid trickle-down policies that reduced revenues, forcing states to increase tuition on students. 15 years ago, it was possible to go to a state school for next to nothing (if you were a resident). Nowadays, it costs students $30K to go to a state school that their parents most likely went to for 1/100th the cost. This isn't because of anything other than tax cuts...the governing ideology of the anti-intellectual morons that make up the entire Conservative movement today.

No tax cuts = no student debt

So again, it's hard to see how you aren't the cause of the problem you are complaining about. The problem isn't that there's no value in a college degree, the problem is that you are stupid and you think everyone else should be as stupid as you...that way we don't question the stupid things you say. it's obvious why you want to discourage people from attending college; educated people are less inclined to buy your bullshit.

WRONG! The idea that's been hammered into the head is that you need a college degree - you are walking proof of that. You are /blindly/ arguing for it and not even listening to /logical/ statements that if you're not going to pursue a career in your degree you are wasting your money.

I've spent a lot of time listening to my minions over the past 27 years. The young ones tell me it was "what you did" they tell me that they'd never once considered a 2 year and a good number of them say that they wish they'd known about trade schools because they're not working in the field they'd picked for college (for whatever reason.) I base my opinion on on my experience and my knowledge of people. What are you basing /your/ opinion on?

Again, having a degree is not a /guarantee/ that you will get paid more.

I'm not complaining about shit son. I merely said that if kids are not going to pursue their career than getting a degree and a bunch of debt might not be a good idea.

 

[The Derp]

WRONG! Getting a degree does not /guarantee/ higher pay.

Nothing is guaranteed of course, however it is indisputable that it is easier to find a job, and the job will pay more, if you have a degree vs. if you do not:

So explain to me how not getting a 4-year degree puts you in the same position in the workforce as not having a 4 year degree (or puts you at a disadvantage)?

 

[The Derp]

WRONG! The idea that's been hammered into the head is that you need a college degree

If you want an easier time finding a job, and if you want to make enough money you don't have to rely on federal assistance programs, yes, you need a college degree.

I've spent a lot of time listening to my minions over the past 27 years. The young ones tell me it was "what you did" they tell me that they'd never once considered a 2 year and a good number of them say that they wish they'd known about trade schools because they're not working in the field they'd picked for college (for whatever reason.) I base my opinion on on my experience and my knowledge of people. What are you basing /your/ opinion on?

Maybe you should actually listen to people instead of pretend listen to them, or listen just to have your poor ideas validated. You're the ones who promised us that tax cuts would pay for themselves, so there would be no need to cut spending because look at all the tax cut-caused growth! When that turned out to be a crock of shit, states found their budgets had massive deficits because of the drop in revenues. To close those deficits, as is required by states that have BBA's, spending had to be cut. And what is always first on the chopping block? Education. So to close deficits caused by tax cuts, states cut funding for higher education which forced schools to raise tuition, which forced students to borrow more. Students wouldn't have had to borrow if taxes had not been cut.

So what I want from you, is an admission that it is because of tax cuts that the cost of higher education got so high...then you use those high costs as a means to dissuade people from getting a college degree because the stupider someone is, the more inclined they are to believe your bullshit. And I'm not speaking generally. I'm speaking specifically to you and your comrades.

IYou don't seem to be basing your opinion on facts, which is the problem. You rely on your gut feeling and other emotions to carry your argument because you are too prideful to admit you're full of shit.

No, no, no...the problem is you are confused as to what a fact is. Your feelings and emotions are not facts. Your anecdotes and bullshit hearsay are not facts. You aren't even basing your opinion on facts because the facts show the more educated you are, the easier it is for you to find a job and the higher that job pays. Do I need to post the chart again from the BLS?

So when you look at that chart, what is it you see? Do you actually see weekly earnings holding flat the higher the education level? What about the unemployment rate? Did you see that it's higher than the national average for people with just a HS diploma? I want to know what your eyes see when you see the above chart.

IAgain, having a degree is not a /guarantee/ that you will get paid more.
I'm not complaining about shit son. I merely said that if kids are not going to pursue their career than getting a degree and a bunch of debt might not be a good idea.

Nothing is guaranteed, of course, but the facts clearly show that those with a college degree have a much easier time finding a job than those without college degrees. AND those with college degrees get paid far more than those without. Nearly double for those with just a HS diploma or some college. Again, those are facts which I know you are allergic to, so I don't expect a thoughtful response.

 

[The Derp]

I've spent a lot of time listening to my minions over the past 27 years. The young ones tell me it was "what you did" they tell me that they'd never once considered a 2 year and a good number of them say that they wish they'd known about trade schools because they're not working in the field they'd picked for college (for whatever reason.) I base my opinion on on my experience and my knowledge of people. What are you basing /your/ opinion on?

So I want everyone on this board to notice what this shit-sipping sack of crap is doing here. They know there is no actual evidence to support the laughable argument they're making, so instead of relying on verifiable facts, what we get instead are a series of anecdotal, take-my-word-for-it bullshit hearsay that acts as a substitute for actual fact. This is very deliberate, because it's the only way they can shirk responsibility for foisting a bullshit argument on us. Basically, there are no facts that support their position, so instead they just invent facts that lend an argument credibility it doesn't otherwise have. They already have a predetermined conclusion, and it's about wiggling the facts around to fit it afterwards...not unlike what they did with "Growth in the Time of Debt", the paper from Rogoff and Reinhart that Conservatives used to justify Sequestration. Of course, the paper ended up being a load of horseshit, rife with "spreadsheet errors" (yeah, right!), data omissions, and miscalculations. Such sloppiness could have been cleaned up had the paper been peer-reviewed. But it wasn't. Why? For the same reasons I gave before; they had a conclusion they already wanted and needed to retroactively fit the data to support it. It's basically the anti-Scientific Method. Their fraud was discovered by a UMASS grad student. To this date has anyone been held accountable for this thing that severely hampered economic recovery? NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOPE! In fact, those Conservatives still parrot the crap from that paper that's been debunked.

Joe (not his real name) the Plumber (not his real job) started this type of shit in 2008 when he lied to Barack Obama about his job and Obama's proposals' effect on it. Joe was not a plumber (he was unemployed) and his name wasn't even Joe (It's Sam Wurzelbacher), but he needed desperately for people to think that so his argument against Obama's "socialism" would make sense. Of course, we now know it doesn't and didn't, but whatever. What Sam did was really set the stage for internet trolls on the right to do the same thing. So what you had was a bunch of folks going on the internet and lying about their credentials in order to make an ideological argument that couldn't stand to scrutiny. So you saw a flood of people pretending to be "veterans" or "small business owners" or even victims of Obamacare...all of whom couldn't support their argument with facts, so they used lies and emotion. Putin took notice of this and a lack of accountability by anyone on the internet to call these frauds out, and adopted it as a Russian Active Measure, then had his troll army turn the fakeness up to 11 in order to bombard the internet with suspicious, unverifiable claims that shape opinion.

What you're doing, EverCurious, is exactly that. You wouldn't believe me if I said I was Tom Brady, so why should I believe any of the shit you say about yourself? You should be able to make an argument on just the facts. You cannot submit unverifiable anecdotes in a real debate, so why the fuck should anyone accept them here?

So when did you stop beating your wife, anyway?

 

[EverCurious]

Last one I'll be answering for today, my son graduates tonight so I have to go socialite and take pictures.

Yes employers check credit scores, because people who are in financial difficulties are often put there by bad habits.

No they're not. Again, you are making judgements of people because you lack critical thinking skills. So prior to Obamacare, 60% of all personal bankruptcies were because of health care costs. So tell me something, what "bad habit" causes breast cancer or other genetic diseases? Seriously, the nerve of someone so fucking dumb they feel they can judge others for personal circumstances of which you have no fucking idea. Why do you do that? Simple. You lack critical thinking skills, thus making the case for me that college is necessary.

B) if your debt is caused by medical emergency, divorce, or student loans most companies won't hold it against you

BULLSHIT. This is you talking out of your ass. I am finding most of what you say is coming from your ass. This is because you lack the critical thinking skills one would learn in college. So thanks for proving my point that college degrees are necessary because of people like you, who only spread bullshit. And this has everything to do with college. More of that critical thinking that I was referring to earlier that you lack. It's because there are so many stupid people that dumb ideas like no college proliferate. I don't know a single, serious person who thinks that you can get farther in life without a college degree than with one. It's magical thinking that comes from a lack of critical thinking.

You opinion on the matter of /why/ businesses get a credit report on employees/potential employees doesn't change reality son, no matter how emphatically or angrily you say it. I know exactly why they get these reports and the kinds of things they might be willing to over look because I've done it, for around 20 years. You're the one talking out your ass here...

If I am reviewing a potential employee's credit report and I see they have a student loan, frankly I think nothing of that. It's only if they've got a huge pile of debt that I start worrying about negligent hiring - that means hiring someone who could be a liability to the company. It's generally stuff like bills that have gone into collections, this says to me that the person didn't negotiate a payment plan., they're irresponsible. A long term habit of paying credit cards late says to me that they are not reliable. I can generally make a judgement call based off a credit report, like if everything is clean for 5 years then all of a sudden there's a glut of bad stuff; I can generally make an assumption that there was an emergency situation - a divorce, a business failure, a medical emergency, or the like. Perhaps it was a job loss also, however, if they don't have evidence (in their employment history) that they got a "replacement" job for the other two years of the report (reports generally cover the past 7 years) then I might have concern that they didn't pick up the ball after having shit hit the fan - this could be an issue if the position I'm hiring for is high stress or requires someone who needs to be able to handle situations (say management or public relations positions for example)

If they've got bills to a hospital, I can generally get a "feel" for it being an emergency situation (aka was a sudden expense) and frankly I don't worry about that either. I'm one of the folks that gives potential employees to explain themselves if I see a potential problem because I know way too many good people who had a bad run. I've actually even leaned toward hiring some folks with a credit issue based entirely upon their explanation and actions; I recall one potential hire who told me before I pulled his credit report that he had gotten washed in a divorce. When I saw the slew of debt and late payments I understood what was going on - he had actually gotten a second job to cover the debt and alimony payments. In the end his bad debt actually /helped/ him get the job over another potential hire because it showed me that he was dedicated to resolving the situation no matter how emotional it was for him, it said to me that he had a strong ethics, and gave me the impression that he could be relied on.


Reference:

---

"Why do employers check credit history? Employers use credit reports to judge how responsible and financially stable you are."

"What items in your credit report could be a problem when it comes to getting hired? There are several red flags that employers are going to pay attention to if they run a credit report and use it as part of the decision-making process. Ken Lin, CEO of Credit Karma, shared information with The Balance on the items in a credit report may appear as red flags to employers. These red flags include:

• Liens - Any type of lien against you could be a sign of irresponsibility. It suggests to employers that you weren't responsible enough to pay off your debt or negotiate a settlement.
• 100 Percent Credit Utilization - This shows employers that you're in over your head and can't stick to a budget.
• Bankruptcy/Foreclosure - Again this shows a lack of responsibility with things you're committed to. To an employer this could suggest that you'll bail on large projects and aren't resourceful enough.
• Recent Late Fees - Recent 30-, 60-, or 90-day late fees show finances are causing you significant stress. This activity may appear as more of a red flag for financial positions because it suggests you have trouble budgeting.
• Significant Activity - A recent opening of several new accounts or closing of several accounts could appear as a red flag. Significant new activity may trigger employees to think you are desperate and need extra credit because you are in over your head. Closing several accounts could appear as a sign that you aren't good with money and don't know how to avoid charging up a large sum of debt.

"Don’t be scared off by a potential issue on your credit report. What seems serious to you might not phase an employer. Or, you might be able to provide a reasonable explanation for a negative item, and convince the hiring manager. Finally, if you think the employer is using credit reporting as a cover for more discriminatory practices, don’t hesitate to contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They can determine if the employer is using credit reporting as a viable part of its screening process related to business necessity" - Why Do Employers Check Credit History?

---

"One late payment to Columbia House Music back in 1988 doesn't concern me; however, I did have a candidate with multiple foreclosures and a string of late payments," says Osborn. "Over a period of time, it represented a series of poor decisions and lack of judgment. That did concern me, and ultimately we did not extend an offer."

Large, outstanding balances can be adverse too. "I am interested in the applicant's ability to pay their debt based on the salary that I am going to offer," says Desbarres. If their monthly payments are too big, "that's a sign of financial duress and a risk factor for committing financial exploitation."

[...]

Prior to your credit report being checked (and you'll know, as you have to give permission), disclose problems quickly. Eighty-seven percent of organizations report that they allow job candidates, in certain circumstances, the chance to explain results, according to the Human Resource Management study.

"It's much better that I hear any potential derogatory information from the applicant. I'm going to find out about it anyway, and if I feel that you are trying to hide it from me, then I am going to wonder what else you are hiding," says Desbarres.

Solid explanations help, assures Desbarres. "Sometimes unfortunate things happen to good people. If you can give me a plausible explanation about why this derogatory information should not be a cause for concern, I'm more than happy to hear it. Remember, I've already made the decision that I want to hire you!"

"Finally, if you have fabulous credit and are counting on it giving you an edge, forget about it. A mere 9 percent of recruiters said that a positive credit background check is an influential factor in hiring decisions. It's nice, but the candidate with the firmer handshake and superior credentials will probably join the payroll." - 6 myths about credit report checks by employers

---

"What red flags do employers look for in your credit report?

1. For positions handling money, credit checks show whether you have a pattern of handling money responsibly. If an employer sees a pattern of late payments, large debts, or other financial issues, they may see it as an issue for specific types of positions.

2. Looking at your credit report can show employers whether you have a pattern of poor decision-making in your personal life that might affect your position at their organization.

3. Your credit report gives employers a sense of your responsibility level in your personal life. If you haven’t done anything to improve your credit or continue to be irresponsible with money, it’s a bad sign for employers looking to hire you.

4. Some employers believe people with large debts or credit problems could be more likely to steal or commit fraud, which organizations can’t afford, especially in today’s down economy.

5. Employers may fear lawsuits if an employee has access to customers’ money or possessions, since the lawsuit will usually fall on the company and not the individual." - http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs.../when-employers-look-into-your-credit-history

---

""What employers are really looking for — again, if they look — are patterns of money mismanagement that could put the employee in a position where they may not be the appropriate person to manage the money on behalf of the company or might make them a little bit more susceptible to compromise their ability to handle sensitive financial information," Bille said.

What's an employer credit check?

When a hiring manager wants to review an applicant's credit history, he or she requests that person's credit report. Credit scores are not part of employer checks — the number isn't that useful, Bille said — and on that report, the manager will look for things like debts in collection or judgments. - When can employers check your credit?

 

[The Derp]

You opinion on the matter of /why/ businesses get a credit report on employees/potential employees doesn't change reality son, no matter how emphatically or angrily you say it. I know exactly why they get these reports and the kinds of things they might be willing to over look because I've done it, for around 20 years. You're the one talking out your ass here...

Actually, you are because we are talking within the realm of a false premise; that those with college degrees have a hard time finding a job. So you set the entire premise of this debate falsely, claiming that those with college degrees cannot find work. After doing the tiniest bit of research, what we've found is that the unemployment rate for people over the age of 25 with a 4 year degree is only 2.7%:

So while I appreciate all the work you did, we have to actually go back to your central premise about job difficulties upon graduation and "not using your degree". Clearly, the facts above undermine that false premise since those with college degrees do manage to find jobs, and find them rather quickly. And not only do they have a much easier time getting hired than people without college degrees, they are also getting paid significantly more, as the BLS data above shows. BTW - that chart comes directly from the BLS website here. So, we went down a rabbit hole that turned out to be a sewer line...bad on us. What we should have been talking about was the usefulness of a four-year degree, and the stats above bear out exactly how useful a bachelor's is when it comes to finding a job that pays well. So before we even get to the debt load and hiring practices, we have to return to the central premise of your argument and break that down since the facts seem to tell a different story than what you are saying.

 

[jasonnfree]

Gee whiz, just keep raising taxes and pretty soon our problems will be solved. Taxes keep getting raised in california and people and businesses keep leaving. What dummies they are, right?

NO! People and businesses are not leaving California. That is a fucking lie perpetrated by people who cannot create jobs on their own, all they can do is try to poach them from other states.

Since 2012, CA has lead the nation in job growth, total jobs created, and business growth:

So either the US Census Bureau is wrong, or you are.

Which is it?

Thanks for the heads up. I'll tell my next door neighbor he made a mistake selling his house since his company is moving to Texas and he's going with them.

 

[The Derp]

Thanks for the heads up. I'll tell my next door neighbor he made a mistake selling his house since his company is moving to Texas and he's going with them.

You mean the make-believe neighbor you just invented for the purpose of lending your weak argument credibility it does not have on the facts? Well since we're playing this game, I'll just say that a dozen of people I know who currently live in Texas are relocating their businesses to California. Yeah, they said they couldn't find skilled people in Texas because Texans are not very well educated, are unhealthy, and largely are barefoot and pregnant, but always find the time to have sex with the nearest barnyard animal. So it's weird how my personal experience seems to contradict yours, isn't it?

Be sure to say he's also a "small business owner" and "veteran" who is "married to a black woman" and who was a "victim of Obamacare". We've heard it all before, thousands of times from people much more clever and believable than you.

Just curious - is the reason you have to make up a person because there aren't any facts to support you? Did you bother to look at the charts? So who is lying, the Census or you? I think it's you. After all, the Census has actual numbers whereas we have to take your word for it, right? Why should we take your word for it?

 

[The Derp]

I base my opinion on on my experience and my knowledge of people. What are you basing /your/ opinion on?

I base my opinion on facts, not anecdotes that can be easily manipulated, exaggerated, or skewed through bias. The facts show that the unemployment rate for people with a 4-year degree is nearly half that for people with just a HS diploma. The facts also show that those with 4-year degrees earn almost twice as much as those without any degree and almost 50% more than people with Associate's degrees. The facts seem to indicate that it doesn't really matter what field your bachelor's degree is in, so long as you have one you are very nearly guaranteed employment at a decent wage. But that's just looking at the facts. They don't account for wild exaggerations and "personal experiences" informed by bias that could really just be a fabrication designed to lend credibility to an argument that has none. I wish there was a "jerking off" emoji that I could use every time someone tried to submit a "personal experience" that is unverifiable into a debate.

That's always what it's like with those on the right, though. When the facts don't support your case, just make shit up. Like Joe (not his real name) the plumber (not his real job). He tried to exaggerate and invent personal circumstances in order to trap Obama in a debate. That's basically what you people are reduced to now; exaggerating your own credentials (or just making them up) in order to make your argument credible because it's just not.

You gotta be a pretty shitty and insecure person to do that kind of thing, or a Russian troll since they employ the same Active Measures. So are you a shitty person or a Russian troll?

 

[dfens]

All debts are created by the Jewish bankers to enslave the regular people and keep them fighting each other.

Fact.

 

[JoeB131]

STEM degrees are useless, actually. But whatever. It's hilarious to me that Conservatives think there should be more STEM degrees, yet when those who get STEM degrees warn of Climate Change, suddenly they're not to be trusted. So how's that work? You want people to get STEM degrees, yet you refuse to listen to them once they do. So you're really just jerking off on this board when you posture that you want more scientists and engineers. Why? You don't listen to what they say now, so why would you listen to them in the future? Why do you think they're necessary if you routinely and regularly refuse to accept what they say? Can you answer that question? Doubt it.

I think it's laughable that you think I'm "Conservative". You should probably talk to the other posters here.

As for global warming, most liberals don't want to drive hybrids or live like hippies, either.

My point is, we should not fund those degrees in Art History or some other such shit that have no value in the working world other than being a "glorified HS Diploma"

If you think that, then you're an idiot. Plain and simple. HR employers cannot discriminate based on race or gender. If you think they do, then you clearly have never worked in the private sector ever. I think you're just a posturing shithead, but that's my opinion. I've seen very little from you to tell me otherwise.

You missed my point, guy. They aren't discriminating against "race" or "gender". They are discriminating on the basis of QUALIFICATIONS.

Guy with an engineering is going to get a job because he has useful skills.

Gal with a degree in Women's Studies has no useful skills, and frankly is just going to be more trouble than she's worth after some bull dyke professors spent 4 years telling her about the evils of patriarchy.

 

[EverCurious]

@The_Derp You're little more than a partisan hack who thinks he knows everything. There are only 27% of jobs in the US that need a degree, that's a bottom line fact that's been stead for quite a while (since the 70s if I'm not mistaken.) I'm not going to hand out $30k to every college student when only 27% of jobs in the US require it. It's /not/ necessary. If you want to waste money on a degree to work at Starbucks, feel free, but do it on your own dime.

This is going to be my last post to you son, I'm going through a painful divorce so I don't really feel like dealing with your constant partisan/personal attacks and insults of me when all I was doing was tring to help kids make an informed decision. Congratulations, you are now the second person on USMB to make my ignore list.

---

Think About Earning Potential

Some degrees are more valuable than others. Visit the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Operational Outlook Handbook online, which details how much you can expect to earn in specific careers as well as how many jobs are projected to be available in that field. Choosing a major where you’ll earn enough to pay back loans is critical, but it’s also important to choose a field with plenty of job growth and upward mobility. While considering your interests is important when selecting a career, it shouldn’t be the most important factor if you’re planning to go into debt to earn a college education. Talk to people in the field you’re considering to find out what jobs exist in your region. While college debt is, in general, worthwhile, doing your research and planning ahead can help ensure that it will be worthwhile for your specific situation - Is it Worth Going into Debt to Earn a College Degree? – Great Value Colleges

---

While college-educated people do stand a better chance of landing a job than those who don’t go to secondary school, the time it takes to pay back the money laid out for a degree is growing, causing many to question the efficacy of attending college.
Money isn’t the only issue, though. The specter of successful college-dropouts like Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs weighs on young people making the decision on whether or not to go to college. Likewise, some experts argue that attending college has become less about learning actual skills and more about simply paying to have a degree. Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses, published earlier this year by the University of Chicago Press, found that 36-percent of college students “did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning” during their college educations.
Is a college degree still worth it? Here’s the Debate Club’s take: - https://www.usnews.com/debate-club/is-a-college-degree-still-worth-it

---

It does not help that nearly a third of those who take out such loans eventually drop out of college; they must still repay their debts. A third transfer to different schools. Many four-year degrees drag on longer, and so cost more. Overall, the six-year graduation rate for four-year institutions is only 59%.

The lousy national job market does not help, either. A report by McKinsey, a consultancy, found that 42% of recent graduates are in jobs that require less than a four-year college education. Some 41% of graduates from the nation’s top colleges could not find jobs in their chosen field; and half of all graduates said they would choose a different major or school.

Chegg, a company that provides online help to students, collaborated the study. Dan Rosensweig, its boss, says that only half of graduates feel prepared for a job in their field, and only 39% of managers feel that students are ready for the workforce. Students often cannot write clearly or organise their time sensibly. Four million jobs are unfilled because jobseekers lack the skills employers need. - http://www.economist.com/news/unite...-return-higher-education-would-be-much-better

---

Just 38 percent of students who have graduated college in the past decade strongly agree that their higher education was worth the cost, according to results of 30,000 alumni polled by Gallup-Purdue Index. - Is college worth the cost? Many recent graduates don’t think so.

---

Some of the least-earning majors are related to education, theater and art. Over a lifetime, the median expected earnings for a drama or theater arts major is lower than that of someone with a two-year associate’s degree. - Want proof college is worth it? Look at this list of the highest-paying majors

---

But dig deeper into the data and it becomes clear that the value of a degree is eroding—while the premium has remained stable, the cost to attain a degree has risen and earnings for college graduates and non-graduates alike have fallen. And while there's plenty of evidence that a higher education provides a gateway to higher-paying jobs, the return on a college degree can vary widely, depending on a range of factors.

For one, there's the matter of completing college.

Only 36.5 percent of students at public, four-year universities have obtained a degree after five years—close to the lowest level in three decades. (Tweet this.) That number does go up at private universities, where 57 percent graduate within five years, according to an analysis by ACT, which has kept a comprehensive database of completion rates since 1983. But that means that even at private universities, more than four in 10 students don't have a degree after five years.

[...]

In fact, ensuring a good return on a degree largely seems to come down to the choices students make: whether they seek out fields with high pay and projected demand, pick a low-paying major but pursue a higher education to boost their salary prospects, or choose a career path within a lower-paying field that can lead to higher-paying opportunities.

Still, while students can up their odds of success, college remains a risky, and expensive investment for families—and one whose value diminishes if costs increase faster than wages. At some point, if tuition costs continues to climb, the benefits simply may not be worth the price of admission for some.

Between 2011 and 2013, college enrollment actually started to fall. "We were thinking it could be the tipping point," said Will Kimball, a research assistant at the Economic Policy Institute. But then the trend reversed.

"The question now is how much more are potential students able to take on when they can't necessarily anticipate increasing returns on their degree?" - You wasted all that money on a college degree?

---

https://thehustle.co/is-a-college-degree-worth-it-in-2016

---

For a few decades now, economists' ideas about education have been dominated by the "human capital" theory — that more education gives people more skills, which makes them more productive, which means they earn higher wages. Ergo the way to fix stagnating incomes for the middle- and lower-class is to give everyone better educations, and especially to amp up the portion of Americans with a college degree.

But that seemingly intuitive idea has taken a data-based beating recently, as John Cassidy recently laid out in The New Yorker.

For a while, the college wage premium — what people with a college degree make over and above those without — grew as the overall portion of Americans with at least a four-year degree also grew. The standard story was that this meant the supply of college graduates wasn't keeping up with the demand for their skill sets.

But according to work by both the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) and the New York Fed, wages going to college graduates flatlined or declined from 2001 to 2013. As a result, the college wage premium stopped growing over the same period. It only increased recently again because wages declined for everyone else.

[...]

So Cassidy pointed to an alternative to the skills story: that higher education serves as a kind of rubber stamp of upper class competency to businesses. "By completing a four-year degree, students could signal to potential employers that they had a certain level of cognitive competence and could carry out assigned tasks and work in a group setting," Cassidy wrote. "But a college education didn’t necessarily imbue students with specific work skills that employers needed, or make them more productive."

[...]

What's important for the education debate is that this increase in inequality shows up mainly within education groups. "For instance there's a lot of growing wage inequality among college graduates, and among high school graduates," Mishel continued. "In fact the bottom 70 percent of college grads have had stagnant or falling wages" since 2002.

In other words, who has what degree of education may not be a terribly helpful unit of analysis. When we look at the college wage premium, what we're arguably seeing is the collapse of worker bargaining power, the weakening of the labor force, and the resulting rise in inequality. "If you smash unions and smash the minimum wage, you've smashed the wages of high school educated workers," Mishel went on. "Now was that because of technological change that the premium went up? No."

Cassidy pointed out that if the signaling story is true, then a college education only delivers a wage premium if most people don't have one. The whole point is to stand out from the crowd. But in a way, this is true of the skills theory as well: If we magically gave everyone the skills of a four-year degree, that would not mean even janitors would suddenly make upper-class wages. Employers don't pay people on the abstract principle that if you're productive you "deserve" a better salary. They pay based on whether they can find someone else to do the same job for less. - http://theweek.com/articles/575139/why-college-degree-isnt-worth-what-once

 

[The Derp]

As for global warming, most liberals don't want to drive hybrids or live like hippies, either.

I'm not so sure about that (I have a Prius myself)...and it's really coal fired power plants and massive factory farming that accounts for the overwhelming majority of emissions. Two things regular people have no control over.

My point is, we should not fund those degrees in Art History or some other such shit that have no value in the working world other than being a "glorified HS Diploma"

Do I need to post the chart from BLS, again, showing the higher your education level, the higher your wage and the lower your unemployment?

So when you look at that chart, what is it you see? I want to know what your eyes are physically seeing in the above chart. Because when I look at it, I see people with bachelors (regardless of major) making double what those with just a HS diploma make, and nearly 50% more than those with just a 2 year degree.

Gal with a degree in Women's Studies has no useful skills, and frankly is just going to be more trouble than she's worth after some bull dyke professors spent 4 years telling her about the evils of patriarchy.

Wow...homophobia is so 2004. Furthermore, anyone with a 4-year degree is going to have an easier time finding a job that pays well than someone with less education. At least, that's what the facts say in the chart above. It doesn't matter what your degree is in, if you have one in any subject you are far more likely to find a good paying job than if you don't.

And furthermore, when it comes to STEM degrees, what I don't understand is if they're so important and useful, how come Conservatives never listen to people with STEM degrees when they tell them climate change is real, tax cuts do not create growth, a fetus is just a fetus and not a person, etc.? You guys want STEM degrees, then ignore what those degree holders tell you. Can you square that circle for me?

So that brings us to the question why do people urge folks not to get a college degree? The answer is simple; the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to buy into the bullshit that Conservatives are pushing. We can see it in the narrative thread you are pushing here, despite your claims you do not share their point-of-view when you actually do. Simply having a 4-year college degree (regardless of your major) gives you a leg up in the employment market, and all but guarantees higher wages and job security.

 

[Dragonlady]

While few jobs REQUIRE a college degree, many companies won't even bother to interview you if you don't have one.

A friend was lamenting his "wasted" years earning a degree when nothing he learned in college was applicable to his actual job.

My response was "That new executive management job you have, would they have interviewed you for this job without this degree?". He replied that they would not.

Having the degree says something about a person - their commitment, work ethic, and desire to bring out their best. All qualities I would be looking for in an employee.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[The Derp]

@The_Derp You're little more than a partisan hack who thinks he knows everything. There are only 27% of jobs in the US that need a degree, that's a bottom line fact that's been stead for quite a while

Do I need to post the chart again?

So while those 27% of jobs need a degree, that doesn't mean the applicants for the other 73% of jobs don't get a leg up because of their degree. We see in the above chart that, despite your crumbling narrative about job requirements, people graduating with a 4-year degree regardless of major are pretty much guaranteed employment by the time they are 25. Why? Because that is what the facts show. 2.7% unemployment rate is full employment for 4-year college grads. So something isn't making sense in your argument. You say only 27% of jobs require a four year degree, implying that jobs for college grads are hard to come by, but then the facts from the BLS show that college grads with 4-year degree are at full employment. So I'm a bit confused about your position because it seems like it is contradicted by the facts.

This 27%...from where are you getting that? Because it reads to me like a bunch of subjective bullshit that is completely ignorant of the facts. You say people with a 4-year degree in any subject cannot find work, yet the BLS facts say otherwise...that by age 25, college grads with a 4-year degree see only a 2.7% unemployment rate. So how could that be true, and what you're saying be true? If anything, what you're saying, though you don't realize it, is that having a four year degree makes it easier to get a job, and that job pays better than if you don't.

So either the BLS is wrong, or you are. Which is it?

 

[The Derp]

While few jobs REQUIRE a college degree, many companies won't even bother to interview you if you don't have one.
A friend was lamenting his "wasted" years earning a degree when nothing he learned in college was applicable to his actual job.
My response was "That new executive management job you have, would they have interviewed you for this job without this degree?". He replied that they would not.
Having the degree says something about a person - their commitment, work ethic, and desire to bring out their best. All qualities I would be looking for in an employee.

Exactly. Thank you for posting this. The BLS figures show that if you have a college degree, you are pretty much guaranteed employment. A 2.7% unemployment rate for 4-year degree holders over age 25 indicates that getting a college degree in any subject certainly gives you a leg up on those who don't have a degree. Full employment for 4-year college grads completely undermines the premise those on the right are making on this thread.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Gee whiz, just keep raising taxes and pretty soon our problems will be solved. Taxes keep getting raised in california and people and businesses keep leaving. What dummies they are, right?

NO! People and businesses are not leaving California. That is a fucking lie perpetrated by people who cannot create jobs on their own, all they can do is try to poach them from other states.

Since 2012, CA has lead the nation in job growth, total jobs created, and business growth:

So either the US Census Bureau is wrong, or you are.

Which is it?

Thanks for the heads up. I'll tell my next door neighbor he made a mistake selling his house since his company is moving to Texas and he's going with them.

Vigilante Vigor

That's not relevant to the case. Moving out on his own is desertion.

Violating the Monroe Doctrine, Mexico collaborates on this invasion. So it is an act of war. Letting California virtually secede is treason. If all you do is blame the rock band, Jerry and the Brownies, that won't get you off the hook. This is the state that elected Reagan because it didn't let the original Berkeley insurrection take over.

 

[Winston]

Personal attacks aside, this has zero to do with the blind rush to get a $30k bill for a degree you're never going to use...

It has everything to do with it. And when you say a "degree you never use", what the fuck are you even talking about? One of the major reasons one goes to college is to develop critical thinking skills (which you obviously lack). It's those critical thinking skills that lead a graduate to develop good workplace skills because they have spent 4 years being taught to think critically as a part of higher education. If you don't see the value in critical thinking, then you're probably a stupid person yourself who lacks the ability to exercise critical thinking and thus sucks up all the stupid bullshit (like how people don't need college degrees) Conservatives vomit out there like how cutting taxes somehow means more revenue, the Earth is 6,000 years old, Climate Change is not real, and deregulation is good for the economy. College graduates make nearly double what those with only a HS degree make. So all you're doing when you discourage people from going to college is lowering the average wages, making people less inclined to question dubious ideology, which results in a lowering of the living standard, which results in an increase in welfare spending because people without college degrees qualify for many welfare benefits as their average wage of $23K/yr is barely above the poverty line. Someone without a college degree is most likely going to have to rely on federal assistance programs like SNAP, Medicaid, and others. Most Walmart workers have no college degree, and we the taxpayers subsidize about $5B a year in welfare benefits for those workers. BTW - Walmart's profits last year were $14B. So we are subsidizing more than 1/3 of Walmart profits because they pay their non-college educated workforce such low wages.

Personal attacks aside. Partisan attacks aside.

WRONG! Getting a degree does not /guarantee/ higher pay.

IF the college graduate isn't willing to pursue the actual career, which includes moving away from friends and family, then they will /never/ see that "increased pay" for their degree.

IF the college graduate is going after those 27% of jobs that require a college degree, lets say "Anthropology." If they are not willing to move to a museum that has an anthropology position open, they're not going to see any benefit. If they're not willing to move to a school that has a anthropology teaching position open, they're not going to see any benefit. If they're not willing to /commit/ to pursuing the position their degree is in, then they will /never/ see an increased wage because of that degree. This is /not/ a hard concept to grasp, you are just unhinged about partisan politics...

As to the workplace skills bit, all these colleges giving out safe spaces and catering to PC. The skills they are learning in colleges are actually a /disservice/ to concept of workplace skills... I'm just going to refer you to this list here - http://www.jwu.edu/uploadedFiles/Documents/Alumni/JWUTopWorkSkills.pdf If you cannot see how college grads are either failing to learn these /basic/ workplace skills at college, or worse actually learning the /wrong/ thing to do from college, then I really can't help you because you're too dense.

One can see just from /your/ responses to my comments that you are failing on like 90% of these /actual/ workplace skills you think college is teaching/has taught you. It doesn't matter how much you whine about my hard nose statements son, I am a recently business person. A professional who got paid to give advice on everything from hiring/firing to the guts of how a business is run, my entire job was taking over management of businesses when they had an unexpected executive position open up. I am who these kids are wanting to hire them. I am the person who would be looking at their resume and evaluating their attitude and fit for whatever position. I'm the interviewer. I am the person who evaluates their performance and decides if they get canned in a down size or not. Whine, cry, bully all you want, but I am the harsh reality these kids will face when getting a job. I'm the person who that decides if they get hired or fired, I'm the person that decides what they are paid, and I'm the person that decides if they get a raise. You can try to hide under your security blanket of "lefty values" but I'm the bitch that steals your blanket and burns it to say "welcome to the real world."

Lets get "personal" son and maybe you'll figure it out before you fuck your life over (regardless of your precious 4 year degree.) You come off as a hostile, angry, punk kid, immature and abrasive. You think you're smarter than anyone who doesn't agree with you. You think you can force people to believe what you do by berating them and calling them stupid. You think insults are valid points of debate and meaningful to prove your point or get your point across. You think partisan politics are appropriate to fling at a non-partisan person simply because they disagree with you on a single point; showing you have zero skill for negotiation, zero compassion for alternate opinions and would/will make it harder on co-workers to deal with your personality flaws. You attempt to force or bully me into thinking and believing as you do, which is 100% impossible in any real world situation - that only works on college kids and people who have not formed a solid foundation of beliefs, the majority of people outside college, those in the workforce have already developed those things. You think that it's appropriate to guess at, and insult, "my" religion without a second thought for how unrelated and inappropriate that is. Instead of trying to change my mind through effective negotiation, you IMEDIATELY choose to /personally/ attack /me/ as if that would help your case.

Son, just based on your diatribe in what three posts(?) I can tell you that you would be fired from any job that paid even second rung. But you go on thinking you're all that and a bag of chips.

"Arrogance is a creature. It does not have senses. It has only a sharp tongue and the pointing finger.”

For a hiring manager you sure don't seem to know much. Anthropology? You think only museums and universities hire Anthropology majors? The FBI hires lots of them. Marketing companies love them. Public health, industrial relations, the list is pretty comprehensive. Not to mention it is a damn good degree prior to law school. Matter of fact, someone with an Anthropology degree would probably be a better fit for YOUR job than you.

Then there is philosophy, my personal favorite. Mostly because philosophy majors have the highest increase in salary during the first ten years of employment, and they sure as hell aren't sitting around being philosophers.

The point, a college degree, ANY college degree, will improve one's lifetime earnings. One does not have to work in the field of their degree. Hell, my brother majored in English. He is an engineer.

 

[The Derp]

The point, a college degree, ANY college degree, will improve one's lifetime earnings. One does not have to work in the field of their degree. Hell, my brother majored in English. He is an engineer.

Boom! This is exactly right, and the BLS figures support it. The more educated you are, the easier it is for you to find a job and the more that job will pay.