NSR: CHICAGO Political Thread ***HIGHLY TOXIC - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK***

Discussion in 'Chicago Fire' started by skinut, Nov 12, 2016.

  1. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    I disagree with what you added:
    4) Limit the max indebtedness amount to a percentage of a degree's median incomes at a school.

    One, not every individual graduates to college with the myopic vision of using that degree to obtain a position in the precise same industry in which they obtained their degree.

    Two, almost ZERO law school graduates studied "pre-law" as an undergrad. Historically, the most common undergrad degrees for law schools are English, History, Political Science and Philosophy (and I KNOW what you think of philosophy majors ;)). All of those have very limited "degree's median income" after undergrad.

    In fact, almost no law school admissions people I know (and I know a lot of them from my previous position) would recommend pre-law to budding law school students.

    Also, it would destroy most social services, as the median income for a social workers, addiction counselors, primary school teachers, etc. are so low that nobody would be able to obtain loans to graduate from college and, especially, graduate school.

    That would have a serious negative outcome.
     
    Fuegofan repped this.
  2. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Yes, this was previously discussed in another thread.

    By they way, Illinois did not have anti-usury laws until 2021.
    This was an attempt to "fight against" the payday loan industry that proliferated in Illinois over the past three decades.

    And the current law caps interest rates at 36%.
    See, Predatory Loan Prevention Act, 815 ILCS 123

    Oh, and it bans 'secured' loans for dogs and cats.
    (815 ILCS 123/15-5-16)
    Sec. 15-5-16. Prohibition on secured loans for canines and felines. No person or entity shall make a secured loan for the purchase of a canine or feline. Any secured loan made for the purchase of a canine or feline is null and void. This Section shall apply prospectively and shall not apply retroactively. This Section shall not impair or affect the obligation of any lawful secured loan entered into before the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 103rd General Assembly. (Source: P.A. 103-339, eff. 1-1-24.)
     
    Khan repped this.
  3. Khan

    Khan Member+

    Mar 16, 2000
    On the road
    #6003 Khan, Mar 30, 2024
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2024
    Tom, whether we like it or not, taking out a loan is a purely financial decision. And to base the ability to borrow on ANYTHING other than the ability to repay causes, well the clusterfvkc we have today.

    Student loans are the ONLY debt that can be taken out, without any sort of means to FIRST predict the ability to repay. You cannot deny this reality. And further, that this is a core piece of why these loans are so onerous to borrowers.

    And secondarily, [in part] why young people often delay forming households, which reduces our nation's birthrate, and negatively impacts the entry level real estate market, and so on.


    Unfortunately, the line has to be drawn somewhere.

    If [for example] the median BA Philosophy degree pays $30K after matriculating from UIC, then the max allowed indebtedness could be set as a % of that income.

    However, if that BA Philosophy later goes to Kent, and the median income after matriculating from there rises to $100K, then the max allowed indebtedness could then be adjusted upwards.

    You are arguing against a "fixed" max indebtedness, but I am thinking of an adjustable one, based upon the completion of a program. What's more, the further a student gets into her program, the more she can borrow. [So a freshman can only borrow a portion of the max indebtedness, just as a 1st year Law student can only borrow a portion of the max indebtedness.]


    Completely disagree. Without attacking you, you're flat out wrong on this. Keeping things "the way they've always been" merely lines the pockets of institutions, while impoverishing students and future practitioners:


    It is fvkcing moronic that Social Workers need a fvkcing master's degree to practice. Absolutely stoopid, dumb, moronic, and serves to help NO ONE who practice, NO ONE who needs a social worker, and ACTIVELY harms society. FFS, most of them never have to do a thesis defense; the "MS" is just an artifice that serves no one.

    What you are talking about here is the phenomenon of "degree inflation."

    What would happen to THAT profession is that schools would be FORCED to recognize that their program requirements to practice are INSANE, and that Social Workers can practice with "just" a BS. MSW degrees are cashgrabs that only serve to enrich these institutions.


    And there are other degrees that are similar. For example, Physical Therapists were BS trained professionals for decades. Now? Its an entry level doctorate, that has not appreciably improved the profession. [And again, often without the requirement for a dissertation to graduate.]

    Pharmacists are the same. Previously, a BS was enough to work at Walgreens, now ya gotta get into $150K+ debt to work there, for a doctorate that hasn't made pharmacists better at their jobs.

    Cutting back on degree inflation, by limiting indebtedness will be a BENEFIT to society and to the students, full stop.
     
  4. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    #6004 xtomx, Mar 30, 2024
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2024
    @Khan, I am happy to discuss this you, but I need to let you know that you have my entire position backwards.

    I know you missed the original discussion. It is here:
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/dave-baldwin-career-deathwatch-thread.2124024/
    Starting at Post #148 with the announcement that the Fire have an official "Official Student Loan Partner" which is a private, for-profit and rather predatory student loan originator.

    You basically described me, except I switched from philosophy to English literature while an undergrad, and then went to Chicago-Kent.
    The median is an incredibly false basis for determining salaries or debt.
    Nobody I went to law school with was making $100k out of law school. I certainly wasn't.
    Hell, the majority of lawyers never make six figures.
    Also, the big lie about law school is that there is no "guarantee" (or, even expectation) of a job (let alone a high paying job) out of law school, unlike, say medicine or nursing.


    I am not advocating for the status quo. I have no idea where you got the impression I was advocating to "keep things 'the way they've always been."

    Of course, I agree that "keeping things "the way they've always been" merely lines the pockets of institutions, while impoverishing students and future practitioners."
    It does "line the pockets of" institutions to an extent, but absolutely lines the pockets of loan servicers.
    They are the group we should be fighting against, not the really the schools (except for proprietary, for-profit schools, f*ck them).
    I already made my point about private colleges and universities known.

    That has been my point, as discussed in the previous thread on the topic.
    I am advocating for an overall of the system, albeit in incremental steps.

    The first step is taking the profit ("lining the pockets") out of student debt.
    The second step would be working towards reducing/eliminating student debt in the first place.

    Once again, my current profession is a full time professor at a public college.
    Prior to that, I was legal aid lawyer for 13 years.
    Prior to that, I was in private practice.

    I am not an armchair, keyboard warrior on this issue.
    I have lived this for almost 25 years.
    I live in this world every day now.

    That is simply not true. At NO POINT was "a BS enough to become a pharmacist" at least not in the United States. It has been a minimum of a master's degree since at least the 1970's.
    In fact, American universities do not even offer bachelor's in pharmacy and haven't in years.

    I should mention that I was a pharmacy technician in the 1980's.
    It was my first "profession" and I almost went towards pharmacy school, but, at 19 or so, wasn't ready to head towards a master's/Doctor in Pharmacy.

    Currently, a Doctor in Pharmacy is the ONLY degree that allows one to sit for the NAPLEX (North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination). EVERY state has required this since 1986.

    I take it you have not worked with very many social workers.
    I have. As an Elder Law Legal Aid Attorney I worked with social workers every day.

    I am talking about OPPOSITE of degree inflation.
    I am talking about the reality of how complex social work actually is. Again, the problem is not the education, but the devaluation of the profession.

    The amount of education, training, and experience needed to be an effective social worker, especially considering the myriad of options for social work (juvenile, gerontology, criminal/post incarceration, mental health, etc.) options, a Master's is a minimum.

    One of my main points in the original thread is that we devalue so many occupations that necessarily require degrees and, frequently, advanced degrees
    and
    we have "defunded" higher education, going back to the Reagan administration and pushed the cost obligations onto the backs of students
    and
    then saddle those who are willing to take on those occupations with ridiculous debt that their salaries will never realistically meet (because we devalue those occupations)
    and
    then we make damned near impossible to get out from under that debt (no bankruptcy, 10+ year loan forgiveness with front loaded interest and ridiculous demands to compliance, etc.).
     
    Fuegofan repped this.
  5. Khan

    Khan Member+

    Mar 16, 2000
    On the road
    #6005 Khan, Mar 30, 2024
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2024
    Tom, you're focusing on the wrong aspect of my post. You're focusing on the hypothetical of what a JD might earn out of law school.

    You SHOULD focus on the idea of using some material basis to determine creditworthiness and an ability to repay. So whether an atty makes a median of $100k or $80k isn't the cogent part, so much as using some basis of future income to determine an ability to repay.

    In this case, a median income for a degree at an institution could easily be found, and then a max indebtedness could then be pegged to that median. We have the data available, and we can keep folks from getting in over their heads.

    Thank you. The institutions have their part in this, by means of what they charge having no basis on future value to the student.

    Look, these institutions, both non-profit and for profit have had virtually unlimited access to unregulated free money, without having a concomitant proof of value to the student. They're a stakeholder in this, and they're not innocent.

    So, IOW, you have a vested interest in the status quo, yes? You WANT things to be the same, because that feeds you and your family, if you're gonna be intellectually honest.

    And I should mention that my scary, brown illegal immigrant father did, in fact have a BS Pharmacy, and was a Registered Pharmacist in Illinois for 42 years. He worked in retail pharmacy, and in a hospital as well.

    Yes, a BS Pharmacy was enough to practice in Illinois. A Doctorate in Pharmacy has done exactly Jack and shyte for the profession.

    Incorrect. I've worked with social workers in a previous career, and many of them are clients today.

    Each and every last one of them have told me that a MS in social work is idiotic, and most should be able to practice with merely a BS. These are folks who have worked in health care, in schools, and in non-profits. None of them have told me that they think a MSW is necessary to do what they do.

    That there is inflation in qualifications makes it impossibly difficult to attract new social workers, because it consigns them to a lifetime of financial struggle.

    Agreed that many occupations have been devalued. But, I don't agree that all occupations we've mentioned should require an advanced degree.

    Agreed that I'd like my attorney to have a JD, or my physician to have an MD. I don’t, however, think that my pharmacist needs a PharmD, unless they're working in a specialty compounding pharmacy. No social worker tells me that a masters is required, although for counseling work, you could make a cogent argument. And no Physical Therapist needs a doctorate.

    Degree inflation only enriches lenders, AND INSTITUTIONS, while impoverishing the student. Taken together, this is a negative for society.

    So, who wins?

    Wealthy institutions, or the student?

    Again, not every profession needs an advanced degree. And the institution charging tuition and fees not tied to the value of the degree sets kids up for failure.

    Agreed, but of the two of us, only one has worked with loan origination. Part of a solution to a financial problem is to treat it as such. And unless we're gonna make college free, treat student loans as we would any other loan:

    1. Loans being tied to an ability to repay, and
    2. Institutions having some measure of responsibility for the programs that have enriched them.
     
  6. bunge

    bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Oct 24, 2000
    Public education clearly needs to be more subsidized. If we want health care professionals to be available to save us in times of need then we should guarantee that a career is viable.
     
    harrylee773 and xtomx repped this.
  7. harrylee773

    harrylee773 Member+

    Jul 28, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    College should be free. Period. No, Harvard, Yale, and whatever other doucehbag assembly line school that exists at this point solely so that legacy failsons can continue to have somewhere to do kegstands until getting a job as VP of Marketing at daddy’s company should not be free, they can keep fleecing donors for exorbitant tuitions, but state universities should be free to the public.

    Regardless of what “profession” a student is ostensibly studying to get into- the idea that an education only holds societal value if the person receiving it immediately uses it to earn money after graduating is depressing - it benefits us all to have people with degrees that don’t lead to six figure salaries, and education should be available to those who see it as a passion as well as those that see it as a means to an end.

    Taking out a loan is not “purely financial decision” in a society that says you have to be educated to qualify for jobs when those that need the jobs most can’t afford to pay for the education requires to get decent jobs. It’s not a decision at all - it’s a requirement to have a future in many cases. We’ve basically told people that it’s either flipping burgers or an education for generations while tuition has skyrocketed and the minimum wage has sat dormant. We need to eliminate the need for a lending agency to profit from education and allow people to study and learn without putting themselves in insurmountable debt. And also do something to help those that are already there.
     
    bunge and xtomx repped this.
  8. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Agree 100%, @harrylee773

    Public colleges and universities should be tuition free, paid for by a 2-5% employment tax on graduates and employers that have positions that require a college education.
     
  9. bunge

    bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Oct 24, 2000
    Libertarianism needs to die immediately and rot away quickly.
     
    xtomx repped this.
  10. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Yes.
    Please and thank you!
     
  11. Khan

    Khan Member+

    Mar 16, 2000
    On the road
    #6011 Khan, Apr 1, 2024
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2024
    "Should" be free? Sure.

    But, first, thats an entirely different question from that of student loans. Second, I can't envision an American society where we would have the political will to make it happen.

    I'd rather expend liberal political will on a public health care option FIRST, and then, as ot pertains to higher education, free JUCO/trade schools. I think THESE are within our power to enact. At least, in our lifetimes.

    Alas, it is. If we're going to have a cost associated with ones training, and if we're going to have loans to finance that training, loans are what they are:

    Loans, which are purely financial decisions.

    Some of us choose to make that calculated risk to take these out to engage in training to seek a profession, and some choose not to do so, because of the costs.

    Others choose to specialize their training, in part, BECAUSE OF the costs involved. (Ask a urologist or proctologist why they specialized as they did, and pretty much all of them will have their student loans somewhere in their top 3 reasons why they did. )

    Disagreed. It's a choice. One can make a dandy future for yourself in the trades, which require no expensive schooling, for example.

    We also have a very 19th Century cost structure (everyone PAYS the same tuition), married to a late 20th Century means to pay (by means of non-underwritten loans), leading to a 21st Century nightmare. With real costs borne by society.

    And part of tuition skyrocketing is associated with choices the institutions make (they've got free reign to charge what they want, given that they have fully unfettered access to unlimited borrowing by their customers), while degree inflation has artificially increased entry requirements in many cases.

    (Thinking of social workers, pharmacists, physical therapists, hell even office managers/admins job listings ask for a BA.)

    And yes, we've lost our political will as a society to continue to support education as it should.

    Again, separate the nobility of seeking education from the means to finance it.

    A loan is exactly that:

    A loan. And as such, all phases of the loan should be underwritten (to prove ability to repay), payment terms that make sense, and a means to dispose of them, to include bankruptcy, in extreme cases.

    If college would be free, then sure, we'd have no need for lending. If higher ed was supported as it was for the boomers, then we'd have scant need for lending. Until that changes?

    Well, here we are. Fix the issues we have, not the issues we wish we had, IMO.

    Agreed. In full. We got here because we've conflated the nobility of education with the means to pay for it.

    Everyone should have access to an education, but that doesn't mean "going away" to laze about in a dorm for 4 years, while racking up debt. JUCO does just fine to get you through English 101. Some of us served this nation to pay for school, while others worked to pay for it.
     
  12. bunge

    bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Oct 24, 2000
    Loans need to go away.

    Society needs to invest in its future.

    Stop funding roads and fund education instead.
     
    Mac97 and xtomx repped this.
  13. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Stop underwriting businesses that don't need it.
    Stop funding charter schools.

    Start taxing churches.

    Fund education instead.

    Roads are helpful, but should be paid with road/vehicle/truck taxes.
     
    Mac97 repped this.
  14. Mac97

    Mac97 Member+

    Jul 15, 2014
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Especially religious buildings.
     
    bunge and xtomx repped this.
  15. bunge

    bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Oct 24, 2000
    #6015 bunge, Apr 2, 2024
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2024
    I pick on roads because idiot libertarians want them to be able to ship their things all over the country and want the government to pay for them, but they don't want a government to pay for things that don't directly help their business.

    Roads are essential. Food is not. :rolleyes:
     
    Mac97, harrylee773 and xtomx repped this.
  16. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Of course, I agree. :thumbsup:
    (hence my caveat about users paying for the roads).
     
  17. juicecrewallstar

    Chicago Fire
    United States
    Mar 1, 2019
    stop funding roads and fund trains!
     
    Fuegofan, Mac97, xtomx and 2 others repped this.
  18. schroncar

    schroncar Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Mar 2, 2007
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So what kind of food are you eating that does not utilize roads at all? They seem
    like an odd choice for your wrath.
     
  19. bunge

    bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Oct 24, 2000
    I’m not sure I have ever mentioned this here, but when I am on the highway and see the grassy median between the two sides, I always imagine tracks there and how we already have so much land to put down tracks and connect different cities.
     
    Mac97 and xtomx repped this.
  20. bunge

    bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Oct 24, 2000
    Cicadas are coming. Stock up and can them.

    On the flip side, who is going to clean your bedpan when you’re old and decaying but no one has gone into nursing for decades because they make more money and have more personal freedom on Only Fans?
     
    xtomx repped this.
  21. harrylee773

    harrylee773 Member+

    Jul 28, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, there’s no conflation here - the means to pay for an education should not be part of the equation, period. Taking a loan is not a financial decision when trade school also costs money and not everyone is cut out for it. Making a living for oneself in the trades is not something everyone is able to do and it’s a pisspoor solution to the problem of school being financially out of reach for many without a loan.

    Fixing the issues we have starts more with free college than student loan forgiveness but there’s no reason to not pursue both. Simply forgiving student loans doesn’t provide a path to education for those that want or need it now but can’t afford it, and free college doesn’t help those that have loans that they’ll never pay off even though they’ve more than paid the original amount they were lent.
     
    Fuegofan, Mac97, xtomx and 1 other person repped this.
  22. schroncar

    schroncar Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Mar 2, 2007
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    “ not cut out for it”- what a compelling reason!
    Adding your name to list of people willing to risk personal funds to make unsecured loans to questionable credits and charge zero interest.
     
  23. harrylee773

    harrylee773 Member+

    Jul 28, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So everyone should pursue a career in a trade just to see if they make it? Or do they just need to provide a reason that you think is compelling before they can do something else?
     
  24. schroncar

    schroncar Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Mar 2, 2007
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Not at all. Different strokes for different folks. It is good for people to like different ways to make a living.
    Life is more than just your job. Work is how you earn a living, not how you live. While work can provide some satisfaction, find joy elsewhere.
    “Not cut out for it” seems to be used a lot by people who just do not want to work.
     
    Khan repped this.
  25. harrylee773

    harrylee773 Member+

    Jul 28, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yeah, like maybe, I don’t know, academic pursuits that aren’t necessarily tied to your job prospects? A good way to find a passion or find out more about an existing passion is to learn about in an academic setting, unfortunately in this country that comes at a cost that requires a loan for many, and it shouldn’t.
    “People who just do not want to work” - you mean like billionaires or…. ?
     
    xtomx repped this.

Share This Page