This thread illustrates, among other things, that the dichotomy between low-list-price "public" (= government operated and taxpayer-subsidized) colleges and "private" (= privately operated and also taxpayer-subsidized) colleges is a false dichotomy. The unfortunate man who killed himself attended a public college with a low list price, but still managed to rack up huge debts (how?). For some applicants, and for ANY genuinely poor applicant, it's probably safer to gain admission to a college with a higher list price but phenomenal financial aid, and end up coming out of college with less debt.
It's always sad when someone feels such desperation that suicide appears to be the only way out. There are hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of Americans who suffer from debilitating bouts of depression. But research shows that most of the best treatments for keeping depression from turning into suicide are cognitive, involving the patient taking responsibility for his own thoughts and deeds. When I read in the original article
Quote:
|
he was wary of taking a job outside of his field because he feared his wages would be garnisheed
|
I see someone who was not fixing his problem, but making it worse.
I really appreciate goaliedad's comments in this thread about the policy issues behind student load regulations. The push to make student loans available even to students who haven't achieved well in free K-12 schooling, and to make sure lots of lenders participate in that market, means that some loans that would never be made in the first place in a more balanced market will be made. Each borrower has to look at the situation realistically before signing the loan agreements, which always include a promise to repay the loan.