the rich get richer

• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573129 wrote:I can find an institution that does exactly what I explained, Yes.

  one institution
  well that sure will take care of the 30 or 40 million people who may need that service.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573130 wrote:What will you do with the identification of such an institution?

  register immediately
• gut

  isadore;1573138 wrote:lol
  "why should I give you an entitlement I didn't receive?" that is right screw'em
  although maybe it would be better to live in a society that was really the land of opportunity, but you got yours so screw'em

  No, it's called fairness. I didn't get an entitlement for college, why should I pay for yours? "Screwing you" implies I'm getting something you didn't, which is not the case and merely a me-me-me entitlement mentality on your part.
  
  And I'm guessing after you pay for your college you won't be to keen on increased subsidies for college, either.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573140 wrote:see people in the low economic quintiles need those jobs to put clothes on their backs. Not to pay $300 for a text book

  
  People in that situation won't have to pay the $300 for textbooks. Lol When's the last time you went through the financial package of an udergrad student becasue if $300 is what's providing you life sustenance there are ways for you to not have to pay for books.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573132 wrote:It isn't easy...but it was worth it.

  and it is not 20 years ago and many of these folks do not have a support system.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573143 wrote:register immediately

  
  Oh really. How will you prove that you have done so? I we can work this out I will find an institution that does exactly what I explained.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573134 wrote:The resources and support exist. They only need go us them.

  not for many
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573146 wrote:and it is not 20 years ago and many of these folks do not have a support system.

  All they need to do is walk in the door of the University.
• isadore

  gut;1573135 wrote:Not that hard was it? And I wasn't wrong, was I? I have no idea what the rest of your post is attempting to say, the vast majority of students are not graduating with overly burdensome debt levels.
  
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2013/09/24/five-myths-about-college-debt/
  The college premium is larger in the United States than in virtually any other economically developed country. Across the 34 countries that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, employers on average are willing to pay 1.8 times as much for a college graduate as they are for an unskilled worker. But in the United States, employers pay 2.6 times as much for a college graduate. This, in spite of the fact that the supply of college graduates in the United States is among the highest in the OECD.
  

  • 34.4 percent graduated with no debt.
  • 12.0 percent graduated with $1-$9,999 in debt.
  • 18.2 percent graduated with $10,000-$19,999 in debt.
  • 15.5 percent graduated with $20,000-$29,999 in debt.
  • 8.9 percent graduated with $30,000-$39,999 in debt.
  • 5.3 percent graduated with $40,000-$49,999 in debt.
  • 5.3 percent graduated with $50,000-$99,999 in debt.
  • 0.5 percent graduated with over $100,000 in debt.

  As you can see, the median debt (i.e., 50th percentile) level for all graduating seniors is slightly above $10,000 for those receiving a bachelor’s degree. This is probably less than an average new car loan.
  
  
  
  Game. Set. Match. I'm done with this, this argument is resoundingly over.

  you lied, you told me before that the stat did not include those who had no debt. And now we see 34.4% had all there costs covered and I am sure the large majority of those came from the upper quintiles of income.
  And those in need will skew toward the upper end of the debt chart.
  And of course many more who will never enter because of the cost.
  Of course you would claim not to understand the statements from the article about how rising cost and following incomes were making more difficult for those in need to get an education.
  Bug again screw 'em
• isadore

  gut;1573139 wrote:Well, if cutting the loans/interest subsidies lowers costs, then what happens? You get the same education for a lower debt burden. Is your mind blownt?

  gosh if you have money you can
  but we are talking about people who don't
  
  but hey you got bucks so screw'em
• isadore

  gut;1573144 wrote:No, it's called fairness. I didn't get an entitlement for college, why should I pay for yours? "Screwing you" implies I'm getting something you didn't, which is not the case and merely a me-me-me entitlement mentality on your part.
  
  And I'm guessing after you pay for your college you won't be to keen on increased subsidies for college, either.

  gosh a ruddies I didn't get polio vaccine when I was growing up, why should I pay so you can get some. screw you.
  I would not be personally aided by free post secondary education and all my college debts are long paid. I support it because it would be good for our nation.
  Now you on the other hand are definitely a me-me=meer I got mine, so screw you.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573145 wrote:People in that situation won't have to pay the $300 for textbooks. Lol When's the last time you went through the financial package of an udergrad student becasue if $300 is what's providing you life sustenance there are ways for you to not have to pay for books.

  Students have been forced out of school because of expenses like that. Free post secondary education would allow all those interested to attend.
• gut

  isadore;1573153 wrote:you lied, you told me before that the stat did not include those who had no debt.

  What stat? You cannot read. This is a different chart. You really need to learn some basic math and finance skills.
  

  isadore;1573153 wrote: And now we see 34.4% had all there costs covered and I am sure the large majority of those came from the upper quintiles of income.
  And those in need will skew toward the upper end of the debt chart.
  And of course many more who will never enter because of the cost.
  Of course you would claim not to understand the statements from the article about how rising cost and following incomes were making more difficult for those in need to get an education.
  Bug again screw 'em

  You're making a lot of assumptions there. Many people do not come from wealthy families but instead choose programs they can afford. Many poor people actually receive significant free aid. The people who actually get kind of screwed are those from families disqualified from aid because of assets but nevertheless aren't paying for their student - they have the means, but choose not to.
  
  Only 5.8% of students took on significant debt over $50k. We can reasonably assume in almost all cases that was a matter of choice, as clearly the majority of students find more affordable programs. A good chunk of those probably also take 5-6 years to complete the program.
  
  The ROI to a US college student is higher than anywhere else in the world, even those countries that fully pay for university. You don't have a leg to stand on in this debate.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573159 wrote:Students have been forced out of school because of expenses like that. Free post secondary education would allow all those interested to attend.

  They wouldn't have to pay for such expenses if they were in the financial scenario you provided.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573147 wrote:Oh really. How will you prove that you have done so? I we can work this out I will find an institution that does exactly what I explained.

  I would think you would want to make list of these institutions available. I guess not, screw those people who do not know.
• Con_Alma

  gut;1573160 wrote:....
  
  Many people do not come from wealthy families but instead choose programs they can afford. Many poor people actually receive significant free aid. The people who actually get kind of screwed are those from families disqualified from aid because of assets but nevertheless aren't paying for their student.
  
  Only 5.8% of students took on significant debt over $50k. We can reasonably assume in almost all cases that was a matter of choice, as clearly the majority of students find more affordable programs. A good chunk of those probably also take 5-6 years to complete the program.
  
  The ROI to a US college student is higher than anywhere else in the world, even those countries that fully pay for university. You don't have a leg to stand on in this debate.

  This is dead on.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573163 wrote:I would think you would want to make list of these institutions available. I guess not, screw those people who do not know.

  I'd be happy to provide you with a program if you will share with me how you will follow through with your declaration to register.
• isadore

  gut;1573160 wrote:What stat? You cannot read. This is a different chart. You really need to learn some basic math and finance skills.
  
  
  
  You're making a lot of assumptions there. Many people do not come from wealthy families but instead choose programs they can afford. Many poor people actually receive significant free aid. The people who actually get kind of screwed are those from families disqualified from aid because of assets but nevertheless aren't paying for their student - they have the means, but choose not to.
  
  Only 5.8% of students took on significant debt over $50k. We can reasonably assume in almost all cases that was a matter of choice, as clearly the majority of students find more affordable programs. A good chunk of those probably also take 5-6 years to complete the program.
  
  The ROI to a US college student is higher than anywhere else in the world, even those countries that fully pay for university. You don't have a leg to stand on in this debate.

  No sir it is the same chart and 35% have no debt.
  Now talk about making assumption. You twist and you twist to avoid the obvious. Those with no debt are far more likely to be those with the most family resource. And those with the most debt are from families with the least resources. That is the most logical and likely explanation. That gives me two legs to stand on Then of course we have all those who because of their financial situation will not be able to enter. But hey we know your opinion, I got through, screw’em.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573162 wrote:They wouldn't have to pay for such expenses if they were in the financial scenario you provided.

  according to you, my observations are different.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573164 wrote:This is dead on.

  no
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573172 wrote:according to you, my observations are different.

  
  Of course that's according to me. I certainly wouldn't cite information according to you or someone else. My statement being according to me is implied in the fact that I made the statement.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573166 wrote:I'd be happy to provide you with a program if you will share with me how you will follow through with your declaration to register.

  gosh I guess you got to know the secret code.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1573175 wrote:Of course that's according to me. I certainly wouldn't cite information according to you or someone else. My statement being according to me is implied in the fact that I made the statement.

  well look in the mirror and make sure its you
  and then decide why you want to deprive American young people of an education.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573171 wrote:... Those with no debt are far more likely to be those with the most family resource. And those with the most debt are from families with the least resources. That is the most logical and likely explanation.....

  Assumptions, assumptions. tsk, tsk.
  
  Here's an actual account. I used no family resources and graduated with no debt.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1573178 wrote:well look in the mirror and make sure its you
  and then decide why you want to deprive American young people of an education.

  I can't deprive them. There are resources in place to enable them to gain the education they seek.