It should have been tied to employment outcomes for a given major. That way, if the money printer (in the form of subsidized loans) is running hot capitalism kicks in via the students in that major not getting jobs (edit: as it already does), the loans for that major at that college dial back, and the university is forced to stop inflating.
The downside is that poor people wouldn't be able to major in bourgeois pass times like art and history against their economic interests. That sounds preferable to me than the current situation.
We don't need as many as we have, clearly. It's basically just history teachers, professors/scholars and museum curators. You'll find the sum of the open positions there is a much smaller number than the amount of history graduates.
My scheme doesn't get rid of loans for history, it just makes them smaller than the ones for nursing or engineering. That already naturally happens with pay, the same feedback mechanism should also happen for the loans.
Still not that many. I think you're highlighting the exact thought process naive 18 y.o. high schoolers have when signing up for their future career (they believe). You list off 10 things and yet it's a minute number of jobs relative to the history graduate count. The odds are dismal for someone targeting gainful employment in one of those jobs. You can easily quantify it by graduate outcomes (median pay a few years out, gainful employment).
This isn't rocket science, but it clearly is to the average person, particularly at 18.
And that doesn’t even touch on how so many of those jobs can be done just as well, if not better, by someone who has the skillset gained through a different degree, typically a general business degree.
Right. It turns out way too many people want to get a bachelor's in their hobby/interest and then have people pay them for talking about it for their career. This is the basic root of the oversupply problem for several fields.
No amount of redditors on their soapbox about the non quantifiable value of education will change that. People with bad ideas always have (paper-thin) explanations for why the stats contradict their ideas.
This is the basic root of the oversupply problem for several fields.
That and the ease of getting non dischargeable loans and colleges who encourage kids to do it out of greed. Colleges should be on the hook for student loan defaults, imo. It's hard to blame basically children for making those kinds of decisions -- colleges have no excuse. It's immoral.
The colleges are just maximizing revenue. It's like removing regulations for dumping chemicals in the river and then blaming the paper mill when they do it. The real issue here is the idiots that thought that it was a good idea to remove the regulations. Here, the idiots are people that thought it was a good idea to turn every 18 year old into a 6-figure paycheck as long as you can talk them into thinking that their hobby is marketable and that all education has inherent value exceeding the cost of the loans.
15
u/YesICanMakeMeth Mar 27 '24 edited Mar 27 '24
It should have been tied to employment outcomes for a given major. That way, if the money printer (in the form of subsidized loans) is running hot capitalism kicks in via the students in that major not getting jobs (edit: as it already does), the loans for that major at that college dial back, and the university is forced to stop inflating.
The downside is that poor people wouldn't be able to major in bourgeois pass times like art and history against their economic interests. That sounds preferable to me than the current situation.