One Response to “Universities Feast on Federal Student Aid”

1. Star Fire says:

   December 14, 2011 at 3:27 pm

   You appear to sneer derisively at “government” and “college” and you present some valid criticisms/observations. I agree that far too many students are being pressured to take the four-year degree route when they might be happier taking the affordable trade school/community college route or by simply completing training provided on-the-job by employers or taking certification exams or launching businesses. All such routes should be regarded as honorable.

   However, one statement that you should consider revising is that in some of your videos you suggest that one of the few “worthwhile” or “justifiable” college degrees would be the J.D. (LAW). That is also, arguably, a lie. In fact, a law degree may be one of the worst investments any prospective student could make at this time in our nation’s history. Many employers consider the J.D. to be nothing more than a second bachelor’s. Do a GOOGLE search and read the horror stories and the articles that have been done by the New York Times. There are literally thousands of unemployed young law graduates and lawyers who are working in relatively low-paying jobs that don’t require a law degree because they’ve found no other way to earn a living. Read their blogs and you’ll see how they are also buried in debt and then please correct your past statements recommending law degrees!

   Even your claim about medical degrees needs reconsideration and qualification. I would say that anybody who contemplates being a general practice physician should think twice and instead consider becoming a master’s level physician assistant or nurse practitioner. If a prospective student must be a doctor and spend all of that extra money for an M.D., then he/she should seriously consider specialization. The reason: General practice physicians also find it difficult to pay off their massive student loan debt, especially if they accept a job or hope to establish a practice in a rural area (unless they’re lucky enough to benefit from some type of tuition reimbursement program).

   Any society that pressures its young people to rely on student loans and DEBT for post high school training is simply a fraudulent, corrupt society. It’s not a right-wing, left-wing, libertarian debate. It’s simply a measure of how corrupt one’s country happens to be. In other words, the higher the tuition, THE GREATER THE INSTITUTIONAL CORRUPTION.

   The same could be said about health care. The greater the disparity, THE GREATER THE CORRUPTION.

   The strings of the “government” agencies you decry are being pulled by very powerful private sector players who benefit from existing policy. Consequently, corruption needs to be cleaned up first.

   Then it doesn’t matter if you organize as a “limited government” country or as a “social democratic” country. Because equality of opportunity will present itself in the absence of corruption.

   America can’t get EITHER socialism or private enterprise to work. Corruption explains why. Clean up the corruption. Then you’ll solve the affordability problem. Fail to clean up corruption and predictably and inevitably you face gradual decline and an economy that won’t remain viable.

   There are certain countries in the world where higher education is free — even for foreign United States citizens. Yet taxes remain bearable. Those societies have decided to pay the taxes because they believe that provides equality of opportunity is a better society. (And possibly a less corrupt society?)

   Even in America, there are certain college institutions that appear to be taking strides away from the corrupt DEBT-FOR-ED model. For example, Berea College in Kentucky, a private college, awards a full-tuition, four-year scholarship to every admitted student. And while families are expected to pay what they can for living expenses and fees, Berea pledges “to cover the rest through financial aid and scholarships—not loans.” NOT LOANS! That’s remarkable.

   Of course, that college may require students to work for a few hours every week, but that’s a good thing because the students will gain valuable work experience.

   A similar model operates at Point Lookout, Missouri — home of the College of the Ozarks. I’m sure these colleges have their own problems and critics. But their model appears more sustainable to me than what I’ve seen elsewhere.

   So — even in a country that shows every outward sign of massive internal corruption — there are some refreshing, debt-free education models and alternatives.

   Of course, any private institution could reform and adopt a similar NO DEBT “work-for-an-education” model. But how can the desire for such reform occur when corruption is so deeply-entrenched in the fabric of so many private institutions and think tanks?

   I often talk to people who are fond of the statement that “Life isn’t fair.” They must be fond of that statement because they smile when they say it. So, they then tell me that corruption is here to stay and the wealthy and elite of society will always limit access to education and health care for people who work for wages and nothing can be done. And they accept it. And they smile. That’s a corrupt personality.

   The fact that there are countries with fine NO TUITION public universities and the fact that there are small private universities with NO DEBT, “work-for-an-education” models, tells me it’s not a “public” or “private sector” debate. Either way can work. It just takes the will to be a less corrupt country (or institution).

   Follow the money.