Feds end student loans and institutional support for some majors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

This

That’s not what the proposal is about. It’s about terminating useless degrees at $100k a year schools that end up with salaries less than a high school graduate. Go back and read the actual proposal. My expensive “psych”undergrad degree at a $$ SLAC was worthless

People love to use these types of examples...but the SLAC grad or any grad of a top 30 school can and usually does just fine with a Psyche or any number of humanities degrees. Also, these schools are the most generous with FA, and you will see schools like Amherst show up as both top schools and "Best Value" schools, because the net cost for the average student is very low and the loan burdens even lower to nonexistent.

It's the Psyche major at Frostburg and literally thousands of random schools that has to borrow a ton and can't find a job worth their student loans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

Liberal arts folks like to say it provides a well-rounded education because that's the only thing liberal arts folks can claim. STEM folks also receive a well-rounded education thanks to those Gen Ed classes but they also learn concrete, focused skills in a field of choice.

Well those courses are in the liberal arts. Much of STEM couldn’t exist without the liberal art- hell, 1/2 of STEM ARE liberal arts. The backbone of this entire tech trend we are seeing is mathematics, specifically statistics and probability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone one on here complaining their tax dollars should not go to student debt.

By all means keep complaining when your tax dollars are going to fly Patel's GF around, Kai Trump running around the Hamptons, ICE funding, Don Jr's cocaine habit, Maralago lobster dinners, Trump's golf, Noem's hair stylist and private jets and cars etc... The waste of this administration is staggering and you are worried about student debt being wiped out???

Find your brain cells.

Two things can be true at the same time. I don’t want to pay anybody’s student loan debt, and I don’t want to pay for all the administrations stupid shit. Unfortunately, the history of the United States, we’ve always paid for our politicians vacations and fashion choices. However, historically, we have not paid for people to get art history degrees only to work in Starbucks.

Why not improve museum funding, so we have more position to higher those experts and inform our society? It’s like people have forgotten the arts exist.

Oof, I agree but we're running full speed in the opposite direction now with the defunding of IMLS and NEH.

Just want to say I went to a school with a well known art history program, and every art history major I know is now a lawyer earning AT LEAST double my salary. The studio art majors are the ones who are in all sorts of random, often low paid, but interesting creative careers in various fields.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

Liberal arts folks like to say it provides a well-rounded education because that's the only thing liberal arts folks can claim. STEM folks also receive a well-rounded education thanks to those Gen Ed classes but they also learn concrete, focused skills in a field of choice.

Well those courses are in the liberal arts. Much of STEM couldn’t exist without the liberal art- hell, 1/2 of STEM ARE liberal arts. The backbone of this entire tech trend we are seeing is mathematics, specifically statistics and probability.

I think the people who don't know what liberal arts are (it's not a synonym for "fine arts" or "stuff I don't like") also don't know what goes on in a good college math classroom. Concrete and focused skills? Maybe sometimes. But a lot of it's just about the fundamentals and beauty of math.

[Anonymous]

If you read the article, this is a irrelevant to you unless you’re borrowing money from the government

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone one on here complaining their tax dollars should not go to student debt.

By all means keep complaining when your tax dollars are going to fly Patel's GF around, Kai Trump running around the Hamptons, ICE funding, Don Jr's cocaine habit, Maralago lobster dinners, Trump's golf, Noem's hair stylist and private jets and cars etc... The waste of this administration is staggering and you are worried about student debt being wiped out???

Find your brain cells.

Two things can be true at the same time. I don’t want to pay anybody’s student loan debt, and I don’t want to pay for all the administrations stupid shit. Unfortunately, the history of the United States, we’ve always paid for our politicians vacations and fashion choices. However, historically, we have not paid for people to get art history degrees only to work in Starbucks.

Why not improve museum funding, so we have more position to higher those experts and inform our society? It’s like people have forgotten the arts exist.

Oof, I agree but we're running full speed in the opposite direction now with the defunding of IMLS and NEH.

Just want to say I went to a school with a well known art history program, and every art history major I know is now a lawyer earning AT LEAST double my salary. The studio art majors are the ones who are in all sorts of random, often low paid, but interesting creative careers in various fields.

The high-prestige but low-paying fine arts jobs are usually for trust fund kids. Often with the high-earning spouse and an eventual inheritance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

This

That’s not what the proposal is about. It’s about terminating useless degrees at $100k a year schools that end up with salaries less than a high school graduate. Go back and read the actual proposal. My expensive “psych”undergrad degree at a $$ SLAC was worthless

I honestly don't know how that is possible unless you just did not apply yourself. Yes, you have to work harder than an engineering or comp sci major finding that first job after graduating, but there are a lot of different career paths for those graduating with a psychology degree. I'm betting that fault was in you, not your chosen major.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

This

That’s not what the proposal is about. It’s about terminating useless degrees at $100k a year schools that end up with salaries less than a high school graduate. Go back and read the actual proposal. My expensive “psych”undergrad degree at a $$ SLAC was worthless

People love to use these types of examples...but the SLAC grad or any grad of a top 30 school can and usually does just fine with a Psyche or any number of humanities degrees. Also, these schools are the most generous with FA, and you will see schools like Amherst show up as both top schools and "Best Value" schools, because the net cost for the average student is very low and the loan burdens even lower to nonexistent.

It's the Psyche major at Frostburg and literally thousands of random schools that has to borrow a ton and can't find a job worth their student loans.

Why can a kid at a second tier state school not do well, or get hired with a psych undergrad degree?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you read the article, this is a irrelevant to you unless you’re borrowing money from the government

This. People are acting like student loans are dead. The private lenders are probably super excited about this development. All my debt is held by private lenders, such as it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read the article, this is a irrelevant to you unless you’re borrowing money from the government

This. People are acting like student loans are dead. The private lenders are probably super excited about this development. All my debt is held by private lenders, such as it is.

Agree

[Anonymous]

If a Democrat had made this proposal, the Democrat voters then would agree with it, but then the Republican voters would have objected.

Impossible for DCUM or any other forum to have a rational conversation about the pros and cons in the current political climate.

Sigh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

This !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Why should taxpayers pay for poor educational choices young adults are making? Why aren’t parents guiding their children to make financially responsible decisions?"

Because until now we lived in the United States of America where Americans had freedom to chose to go into debt.

If you want to live under a dictatorship then we are no longer the US.

Trump wants more Trump Universities that's his goal nothing more nothing less. It's all about the money flowing to him.

Fine. Go into debt. But don't expect the taxpayers to bail you out. And government, universities and parents should be making it clear to kids that X amount of money for Y degree will most likely leave you with crushing debt. No one was saying any of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

The well rounded education doesn’t disappear. Students still need liberal arts requirements to graduate. It just means there’ll be less people who leave undergrad without jobs. If the colleges are upset about this, they should lower their costs.

If they get rid of the liberal arts majors, then the liberal arts professors are going to leave — so who is going to teach the liberal arts course that required to graduate?

[Anonymous]

The issue with student loans is not that people can’t find jobs — it’s that the terms of the loans prohibit people who HAVE jobs from paying them off. What we really need is loan reform that enables people to reasonably pay off their loan in 25 years.