<p>Some of the debt incurred will last a lifetime. Instead of blowing 150k+ on college, that money could be used to invest or buy a property. Four years of one’s life will also be freed up to generate more income. In a long run, this would provide a better return on the investment. Some of the world’s richest never attended college.</p>
<p>This is very misleading. How about those jobs that require a college education? How does not going to college help you get a job as an engineer, doctor, teacher etc if thats what you want to do?</p>
<p>college ( IMO) isn’t * just *about increasing your employability/income ( although stats show it does both for the majority), it is also about increasing your connection and understanding of the world, thereby broadening your perspective and enjoyment of life.</p>
<p>I would agree that spending $200K for a private college is not necessarily preferable to $110K for a public school-</p>
<p>Just noticed this OP was in reference to a John Stossel piece?
:rolleyes:</p>
<p>How about those jobs that require a college education?</p>
<p>Like packing orders at Amazon?
The days are long gone that you can easily provide for your family with the sort of jobs you can get with only a high school diploma.</p>
<p>While it is certainly possible to become educated on your own, by reading, traveling and putting yourself in new situations, think of how much * more* you could get out of those experiences if you had formal education beforehand.</p>
<p>There are also colleges which will help you get college credit from your life experiences and study for those who are motivated to do so.</p>
<p>totally agree with emeraldkity…it’s not always about the employability/income…heck, if it was, it would be incredibly competitive to be admitted to plumbing trade school…</p>
<p>and isn’t John Stossel now on Fox? how old is this story?</p>
<p>Plus finding a job that pays anything much without a degree is pretty hard. My son dropped out of school for a while and was earning a little over minimum wage for 2 years and with no benefits. He went back to finish off and is starting a new job in a few days that starts at triple what he has ever earned before plus has benefits - medical, dental, pension, 401k matching etc - that he never had before. Yes he gave up 2 years of earnings and has a little debt (under $10k), but he will be far better off in the long run. He will probably recoup the lost earnings and the debt in less than 2 years.</p>
<p>Look at the case of the first woman. She was stupid enough to attend a no name college (Rivier College???) for a worthless degree in human development. As a result she spent three years searching for a job, and then has the audacity to ***** and moan she got nowhere in life. She should have been smart enough to realize that college isn’t for everyone. She had the opportunity to get her education for a much lesser cost at a more reputable state school. </p>
<p>The root of the problem exists within society. From a young age all students are led to believe they are college material. The world needs ditch diggers too.</p>
<p>I propose that college-bound seniors should be exposed to the realities of college debt. A liberal arts degree from a noname school will get you nowhere in life. Especially for low income and middle class families that can’t afford to send Jimmy to a private school for four years to hit the bong instead of books. More students should be encouraged to pursue a degree in real subjects (math, hard sciences, engineering, pre-med) instead of fluffy degrees in women studies, art, or theater. If you get a BA in one of those subjects, your employment prospects and chances for upward mobility look bleak. Forever will you be stuck as a barrista at Starbucks making 9$ an hour. Too many students are misled by the promise that college opens doors. A bachelors degree is the high school diploma of the past.</p>
<p>From a young age all students are led to believe they are college material. The world needs ditch diggers too.</p>
<p>This isn’t an accurate statement.
Many students who are bright are steered into dumbed down classes- in an effort to " narrow the achievement gap"
Why can’t they give support to students who need it to excel, instead of tamping down the aspirations of the driven?</p>
<p>We* have* ditch diggers, they are called * convicts* and if we continue to restrict appropriate educational opportunities by socioeconomics, we will continue to have more convicts than we know what to do with.</p>
<p>Husband’s nephew did not do college, did EMS, firefighter’s training, now works for manufacturing plant where his dad has worked for 30 years. Nephew is head of his division, but with no college education, he will go no further, and it is too bad. They like him (and his dad) a lot, but they only put college graduates in charge of plants. Now nephew has 1.5 babies, nurse wife, pretty hard to backtrack for the degree. He could have gone far.</p>
<p>A noname school? lol What does that have to do with anything? Once you get the job, nobody will care where you went to school. It is all about performing well on the job.</p>
<p>A “real subject”? What does that even mean?</p>
<p>I would never major in any of those “real subjects” because I have no interest in those areas.</p>
<p>The main thing that students should focus on is finding their passion and what majors they really enjoy and not just majoring in something that is a “real subject” and will make them more money down the line.</p>
<p>insom I am actually 16. I just put in a random date because I didn’t want my actual birth date on a website.</p>
<p>And when I mean a “real” subject, I am referring to a marketable degree. One that will actually net you a decent salary. By all means, if you can afford go to college with 150k+ price tag and four years of your life spent to pursue your interests, more power to you. Not everyone is wealthy enough to freely spend money like that. Students should make smarter choices regarding majors. Chances are the womens studies, ethnic studies, or other fluffy degree will end up working a dead end job with no room for upward mobility. It is in the student’s best interest to pursue a degree in a valuable field. Otherwise enjoy a hellish life paying off student loans for the next 20 years!</p>
<p>First of all, the people spending $150k on a college degree are in the minority. I spent less than $30k on my degree.</p>
<p>I did not go to college to pick a degree that will make me a lot of money. I picked a degree in an area that I like.</p>
<p>There is no such thing as a “fluffy” degree.</p>
<p>A valuable field to you is not a valuable field to somebody else. Somebody with a liberal arts degree making $30,000 a year might be happier than somebody who is an engineer making $100,000 a year.</p>
<p>Just a quick note insomniatic, I think that argument skirts a few important points. If they’re happier with the liberal arts degree and $30k a year, more power to them, but from a financial viewpoint they are way worse off, between college costs and forgone income. Especially since there’s ways for them to achieve such an income even without the college degree. Which defeats the purpose of college from a financial viewpoint, short of the possibility of upward mobility.</p>
<p>From a financial standpoint, it is not smart to spend $150k on 4 years of college on any type of degree when you can attend a state school for much, much less.</p>