SandyBeaches2016 OP t1_j4q6bvs wrote
From the report: "the average college student in 2023 has to work about 4x as many hours on minimum wage as a student 30 years ago to access the same education."
y0da1927 t1_j4qfl1t wrote
The extra amenities don't pay for themselves.
The college my dad went to was basically an oversized high school. Then my sister went to look at it a few years ago and now it's really nice. New dorms, new gym, new library and labs. New cafeteria.
Like 7x the price.
urgjotonlkec t1_j4qgd4n wrote
My university looks like a country club now. When I went there the dorms all looked like projects.
y0da1927 t1_j4qhp1p wrote
I didn't graduate that long ago and the school I went to is much nicer now then when I graduated.
Brand new athletic facility. A number of the old buildings were gutted and remodeled.
That's student dollars they are spending.
MountNevermind t1_j4qx1mz wrote
When you're gouging people, you can afford nice things.
That's a consequence of the problem, not the cause.
Or an example of competition in no way benefitting the consumer.
y0da1927 t1_j4r0zov wrote
>Or an example of competition in no way benefitting the consumer.
They get nice shit when they study. That's definitely a benefit.
Seems like kids want nice shit more than they want cheap school. Otherwise most of these private schools wouldn't exist, everyone would go to Suny Binghamton for 4k/yr not Syracuse for $40k.
The consumer does not seem to be too concerned with cost during the selection process.
Robot_Basilisk t1_j4sennw wrote
Except there is no alternative. There are no cheap, no-frills schools that let the consumer choose an education without all the amenities.
There are, however, tons of Midwestern state schools that have absolutely garbage amenities but still cost $24k per year to attend.
You'd think you're going to the no-frills, affordable universities because the dorms are from the 70s and full of mold, the single cafeteria seats about 100-200 at a time, most of the desks are from the 1960s, and the carpet hasn't been replaced anywhere since the 1980s, but then the bill comes due and it's still 70+% what the best state schools charge.
Because they know students have no other options. And there is zero incentive for anyone to come along and "compete" by opening a cheaper school, an endeavor that would cost millions of dollars just to get off the ground. Who would spend millions just to charge less?
What is the capitalist answer to this?
y0da1927 t1_j4sm5ss wrote
Community college. Online school, or go to another country. A better accreditation system would help as currently the colleges themselves get to gate keep who can offer classes and how.
But there are affordable schools out there. Cuny Brooklyn is like 5k tuition for example.
Robot_Basilisk t1_j4umn65 wrote
You can't get a premed degree, an engineering degree, or an MBA from a community college.
Online colleges are sketchy, still expensive, lacking in even more amenities, and suffer from low credibility..
Traveling abroad costs money, and the way most developed nations subsidize universities to keep costs down without flooding them with students is by increasing the required to get in and stay in school, so you're asking Americans to spend thousands of dollars to move abroad and apply to foreign universities and pass much more rigorous entrance and pacekeeping exams after going through the declining American school system. That's also hardly viable for most people.
Instead, we can just use the same solution most other nations have worked all of the kinks and bugs out of: Subsidize higher education with tax dollars, regulate the prices universities may charge, and increase academic rigor at universities to ensure that nobody without the will and the aptitude to succeed enrolls.
That last part serves the dual purpose of revitalizing community colleges and trade schools as more students accept that 4-year universities aren't aligned with their goals instead of going just because it's the thing to do.
2-year degrees and trade schools are often treated like consolation prizes in America. As if only those whose lives haven't panned out would ever end up there because everyone with their shit together gets a bachelor's degree.
We can change that by emphasizing with entry testing that 4-year degrees are highly specialized and intended for those interested in more academic or design-based work; and that those without those goals can and should instead pursue 2-year programs. By making 4-year degrees more selective we can also discourage employers from scorning a 2-year degree that meets every requirement for the job role.
Again: These problems have proven solutions that have been employed for decades all over the developed world. America need not reinvent the wheel.
y0da1927 t1_j4v3lqc wrote
Those who go to school earn a sufficiently high wage premium that they do not require subsidization. End of story.
If they want a budget option they are available.
I see no reason to give future high earners tens of thousands of public dollars and have the public assume all the risk if they fail. Figure it out for yourself or don't go.
The problems have not been solved in other countries. They are just hiding in bloated government spending that benefits only high earners and shifts all the risk to the public. Hard pass.
Robot_Basilisk t1_j4wyui2 wrote
>Those who go to school earn a sufficiently high wage premium that they do not require subsidization. End of story.
You destroyed your credibility in record time.
Stop vomiting up tired old talking points that don't address anything I said. You are unfathomably wrong on this, to the point that it's staggering.
Every single data point says the US is the one with a bloated, broken system that puts all the risk on the public and we're about to face a crisis over it.
No other developed country is struggling this badly or facing this much risk from higher education. For reasons I spoonfed to you but you chose to ignore.
Grow up. Pull your head out of the sand. Go study the topic before pushing your pre-canned Boomer rhetoric on others. End of story.
y0da1927 t1_j4x1h4a wrote
Dude two seconds on Google got me all this research that clearly states college degrees more than pay for themselves. All you could find was one shitty wiki article??
If you're struggling that's a reflection of you. Don't project your incompetence on society.
https://educationdata.org/college-degree-roi
https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2022/data-on-display/education-pays.htm
Familiar-Kangaroo375 t1_j4r3xfp wrote
Where the fuck is 4k a year?
InsuranceToTheRescue t1_j4s2wux wrote
Binghamton, NY apparently.
MountNevermind t1_j4rfsb2 wrote
Mmmmkay. You have a nice day.
cybicle t1_j4ssbc9 wrote
Okay, boomer.
Old-Calligrapher-783 t1_j4sykc0 wrote
Why would you create a meaningless map based on min wage instead of doing this based on the mean wage of students? My niece just got her first job at 17. In the middle of nowhere WI and is getting 15 an hour.
40for60 t1_j4rvfm6 wrote
other costs where higher in the past though, housing , food, communication, transportation everything else was more expensive. Not saying things are not out of whack today but comparing only tuition is a misnomer. Norman Borlaug has said one of his motivators was nearly starving to death while going to college.
cybicle t1_j4srtgr wrote
I think you're wrong.
Last time I checked, the cost of living has gone up quite a bit, compared to minimum wage.
40for60 t1_j4tw8hc wrote
cite your data
biguncutmonster t1_j4v8t7e wrote
You’re making a claim, cite yours too
40for60 t1_j4vt9lg wrote
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=76967
Even though these domestic flights appear not to have changed that much, international airfares have become much more affordable. According to Nomad Wallet, in 1970, a return flight between New York and London was retailed for $550. With inflation, that's around $5,350 in today's money. With low-cost airlines abound, tickets between New York and London can range from $300 to $1,000 in economy.
https://clickamericana.com/topics/science-technology/international-phone-calls-1965
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/09/20190930-sivak.html
cybicle t1_j4wzo8f wrote
Yeah, because domestic flights and international phone calls are major expenses for most US citizens.
By the way, your first link point to a chart which shows that "Total food budget share increased from 9.4 percent of disposable income to 10.3 percent in 2021"
40for60 t1_j4x30wv wrote
and yet food is still 50% cheaper, what is your point?
cybicle t1_j4x9uli wrote
You can whattabout all day long. The big picture is that, overall, wages vs purchasing power hasn't increased.
40for60 t1_j4xcw2c wrote
did i ever claim it did? you're so angry that you make shit up in your head. How are you any different then the MAGA morons about masks?
cybicle t1_j4xk0pz wrote
> other costs where higher in the past though, housing , food, communication, transportation everything else was more expensive.
You implied things were less affordable in the past, but when compared to typical wages in the past, that isn't true.
40for60 t1_j4xlrv9 wrote
prove it,
cybicle t1_j4wzleq wrote
40for60 t1_j4x2ycj wrote
this year, you're using one odd ball year 6 months, why?
cybicle t1_j4x90eh wrote
Sorry, I hastily pasted the wrong link. This one goes into some more depth:
https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/
Combine the above info, which shows that "housing , food, communication, transportation everything else" actually wasn't more less expensive with the following info (which is seven years old, but the trend hasn't changed), and you'll see that college tuition increases are far from offset by a lower cost of living:
https://archive.attn.com/stories/19/paying-college-1978-vs-paying-college-2014
Edit: a word
40for60 t1_j4xdzo8 wrote
it is a fact prices are less and we can look things like gasoline, although adjusted for inflation gas prices have stayed about the same cars are getting 50% more miles per gallon so fuel as a % of income is less. Almost all consumer goods are cheaper today then they were in the past (maybe) all, can you find something that is more expensive today? Also tuition has been rising at 6% per year on average since the 1960's, this isn't anything new, sorry you aren't that special.
cybicle t1_j4xjigs wrote
Spending power is the combination of consumer prices and consumer income; it reflects what people can afford instead of simply looking at how much they earn or how much things cost.
College is much less affordable now than it has been in the past.
40for60 t1_j4xl3za wrote
This is what you said "I think you're wrong.
Last time I checked, the cost of living has gone up quite a bit, compared to minimum wage."
This is factual inaccurate and has nothing to do with the cost of education.
"College is much less affordable now than it has been in the past."
this is also factual inaccurate and the % of people going to college proves this. In the US the number of kids who go to college has doubled since the 70's. You could say, the dumb fucks that go to a out of state school and get a degree in something that doesn't pay well and load themselves up with a ton of debt don't get their monies worth but school is certainly affordable if you do it wisely and the numbers prove it. Tuition is up but the cost of living is down and there are more opportunities then ever to get an education subsidized but I really think we need to go back to the "good old days" strip the schools bare, get rid of Pell grants and all lending and make people pay cash up front. Jam the "good old days" down the throats of everyone that thinks it was so awesome.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments