Grads moonlight for $$: Second jobs the norm for debt-ridden ex-students

[ckramer]

After a long day sorting through membership accounts in painfully high pumps, recent grad Danielle Dombkowski hustles downtown to a Hub landmark for a second daily dose of foot-pounding duty.

Since leaving Boston University for a corporate career last spring, she’s been moonlighting as a waitress at the Cheers restaurant.

Dombkowski is like scores of recent graduates in the Boston area who, saddled with college loans and high rents, are relying on a second job to pay the bills.

“If you’d asked me at the start of college whether I could see myself working two jobs when I graduated, I would have told you you were crazy,” said Dombkowski, 22, head of membership and subscription services at the American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics.

For Dombkowski, thousands of dollars in college loans makes holding two gigs a must. The average student leaves college $27,000 in debt - 3.5 times what it was a decade ago, according to Department of Education statistics.


link

[oldtime dfl_er]

1. Not just in the Boston area, either

It's nationwide. And grant aid is constantly being cut by this admin, which favors student loans where banks make a killing.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/1188276

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

3. You think they don't get that?

An awful lot of college age kids and graduates are presently being shown just what that bare-knuckle conservatism and corporatism will get you.

Chimpy and his maladmins are some of the best Democratic recruiters going.

[Selatius]

5. Hey, their message is simple:

If you want to go to college, you gotta pay. If you went to college to go to law school or go to med school, that's your fault for deciding to go to school for eight years. If it weren't for labor unions, child labor laws, and labor standards, maybe this generation of people will have learned a thing or two about responsibility so that they wouldn't bitch about the cost of going to college and about the banks putting their foot up American students' asses. :sarcasm:

[Selatius]

2. Poor to no competition with respect to tuition prices

One way to bring down the costs of going to school is to shift money from the Federal Family Education Loan program to the William D. Ford Direct Loan program. The direct loan program is where the government directly loans money to students and cuts out private lenders. Both essentially offer the same product, but the FFEL program costs much more because they pay private lenders the interest and insure them against student defaults, and private lenders are for-profit institutions. Over three quarters of federal taxpayer dollars devoted to student loan programs are diverted into the FFEL program. The remainder goes into William D. Ford.

In theory, students will pay lower interest rates on student loans, and it would free up billions of dollars to divert into the Pell Grant program.

[Trillo]

7. I thought that college loans defaults were phased out

during the last set of bankruptcy law revisions.

And a point of note, if they are 'cutting out' the private lenders, they why would they pay them any interest? (I think I just don't understand your intended meaning)

[Selatius]

9. The way I understand it, you have to pay back your loans regardless

If you default or are delinquent on payments, then they will use whatever legal measures to make you pay. If you can't pay now, you will be made to pay later. That can be avoided though if you ask for a reprieve in case of financial hardship, and they usually grant them, so everyone involved can avoid litigation costs, and in extremely rare cases, they will release you from paying back the loans entirely if you can prove that such a measure is warranted, but that's extremely, extremely rare. You're supposed to ask for a reprieve anyway if you can't pay it back at that time.

To answer your second point, under FFEL you essentially take out loans from private institutions and agree to repay your debt and interest to them. If you have subsidized Stafford loans, for instance, the federal government pays the interest charges while you are in school, and the government also covers the private lender's costs of insurance in case you are delinquent in payments when you leave school. That's how private banks make money off of students. Because they're for-profit, naturally you pay a higher interest rate when you leave college than if you got loan money under the William D. Ford program. It's a very lucrative business for private banking institutions.

[jmowreader]

13. You think that will ever happen? We're talking Bush, for God's sake

The reason Corporate America likes Bush is Bush gives them everything they want.

And what they want is an end to things like the William D. Ford Direct Loan Program. They want it all privatized. And they especially want the Pell Grant program to end--every dollar you can't get from a grant is a dollar you have to borrow.

This will mean the number of college-bound high school graduates will drop, since not everyone wants to take on that kind of a debt load, but that's okay too--the "right" people will still get into college, the "right" minorities will get in (on athletic scholarships), and everyone else will have to settle for a job pulling orders at the Wal-Mart Distribution Center.

[Selatius]

35. No, to be honest, I doubt it will happen

Not even under Clinton was the majority of student loan dollars diverted into the William D. Ford program. It went into FFEL instead, but then again, Clinton was too busy fighting the Republican Congress over just balancing the damn budget, and he didn't have enough time to do anything but keep the national debt from growing. Of course, it's exploded in size now under Bush.

Maybe later when this nation has awoken from its slumber and risen up in working class outrage, but I don't know when that will be.

[Trillo]

4. It used to be that a community college education was free in California.

I think books possibly needed to be purchased, but there was no tuition.

That was phased out during the Reagan years, and I understand the costs to students there (2-year public colleges) have continued to rise since then.

America is a great place for the rich. For the rest of us, what has it now become?

[Xithras]

105. California CC's are still free for the poor.

And still incredibly cheap for everyone else. You can complete a degree in one for only a few thousand if you're middle class, and fee wavers eliminate even that hurdle for the truly poor.

[Jayhawk Lib]

6. My son did the same thing...

But I see no problem with it. He is benefiting from the degree (mechanical engineer) and the bill for college needs to be paid. When he signed the loan papers he did it knowing that it would have to be paid with interest after he graduated. His wife (physical therapist) has a student loan to be paid also and they are working on it also.

They both came from families with modest means and did not receive much help from them. They have a bright future ahead of them because they worked hard and paid the price. They went to state schools instead of pricey ivy league schools and they both received good educations.

[IndyOp]

11. It is great your son did it, but what about students who will

graduate with degrees that will not get them jobs that pay as well as his? I *want* people who might become dedicated teachers and social workers and librarians and so forth to attend good schools and to graduate without being saddled with debt that will force them to avoid social service jobs because those jobs won't pay enough to allow them to pay back their loans.

And what about students whose families' cannot give them *any* help? Today these kids are without much hope of attending college - especially as tuition continues to skyrocket as federal and state funds to schools are cut.

The issue is also this: When my father returned from WWII, the government paid for all returning GI's to go to college and this did wonders for the nation - including the economy. Paying for kids to attend college - who will do the work required to earn good grades - is an investment in our future.

College in the UK is still largely subsidized as is advanced education in Germany and Japan.

Our lives are intertwined. Our future depends on our making wise investments for the good of all our people.

:hi:

[Selatius]

12. Well, we have a different philosophy apparently in the US

If you can't pay, "tough shit." We're unlike the French, Germans, Japanese, or the English for that matter on the point. Besides, private banking institutions make money off of student loans, and we wouldn't want to put them out of business now, would we? :sarcasm:

[Jayhawk Lib]

15. They can pay....

There is nothing in life that is free. Let the ones who are going to benefit the most pay.

Is it easy? NO....absolutely not. It takes hard work and dedication. Many have done it and will continue to do it.

[Selatius]

31. I politely disagree

The biggest is the racial implications with the current financing system. All the studies I've seen say the same thing: The poorer you are, the less likely you are to go to college. People foolishly avoid college because of sticker shock, and for many people in poor urban areas, there is little prospect at all, especially for poor hispanics and blacks and poor whites.

If I had my way, I'd subsidize the education of every college student, but I wouldn't do so unless I increased the quality of K-12 public education as well as raising education standards nationwide with respect to colleges.

I'd raise them to be comparable to our European and Japanese neighbors. In fact, I want to supercede them. If you can pass the entrance exam at that level, I think you should be entitled to a subsidized college education. This is how the Europeans do it, and they have consistently whupped our asses when it comes to quality of education. It's a smart investment in America's future workforce. If you can't make the grade to enter universities, then you should be provided opportunities with vocational schools, and there I also believe students should be entitled to full funding.

Relatively speaking, subsidizing college education of every student is a drop in the bucket, especially when compared to the 400+ billion dollar defense budget.

I believe everybody who qualifies shouldn't have to face several years if not several decades in debt just because they wanted to better themselves. I've met professors in their 40s who are still paying off their tuition debt. The door has to be opened for everyone. Nobody ever said life was easy or that things come without a price, but on the same token, I don't believe life has to be made more difficult than is necessary.

[IndyOp]

46. I did understand your post - and I have a few more thoughts...

You think it is right if the people who benefit the most should work harder - and that sounds selfless. To those whom much has been given, much shall be expected. I agree with that.

Your thinking leaves out two of my three guiding principles: Opportunity; Personal Responsibility; Community. By stressing only personal responsibility your post illustrates to me an unhealthy sense of independence. What I want in our nation is a healthy sense of interdependence. Your post stresses personal responsibility at the cost of opportunity (what about the educational opportunities for people who are less well off than you?) and at the cost of community (what about my responsibility - my opportunity - to help others?).

At the institution at which I teach international students pay $46K per semester just in tuition. Out-of-state students pay $20K per semester just in tuition. In-state students pay $6K per semester. The difference between in-state student tuition and out-of-state and international student tuition is made up by taxpayers. Thus, your son, daughter-in-law, and you did not "pay your own way" -- you paid part of your way. The plumbers and electricians and janitors and fast-food workers and everyone else who paid their taxes while you all were in college helped you through school. They helped me through school, too. I am grateful.

Also, you were able to make it through school because you were lucky: In terms of the schools you attended before college, in terms of your health and other factors that could have caused you to have to drop out (or to not even try in the first place). Your son, for example, was much more likely to complete college because his parent had completed college -- if you had had to drop out, then his 'luck' would have been less.

I want more people to have the option to complete college even if their health or luck isn't as good, and even if they want to be teachers or social workers. You mentioned 'trade school' -- but you did not deal with how we get college educations for all of the people who will be doing the tough work in our schools, social safety network, and even health field (including techs). Those jobs don't pay well AND we desperately need good people in these fields to be a healthy society.

Education is the least expensive, best investment we can make in people. Period.

[Jayhawk Lib]

62. The opportunity is there for everyone.

Personal responsibility is the most important. If you take personal responsibility you will have the opportunity.

If you are in poor health I am sorry but you would probably not be able to handle the stress of getting more education.

Being independent is not UNHEALTHY. That should be the goal for everyone. I raised my kids to be clear thinking and independent. I succeeded and that is the way it should be. One of our problems today is we have way too many (in your own words) interdependent people.

I have no problem with international and out of state students paying more for their education.

I hear people telling me that our education system is bad and other countries is good. If that is the case, why would we have any international students at all here.

I could go on but I will state one more thought...We are not all equal. There are some of us that are more gifted than others. There are some that have more ambition and drive than others. The most important factor is ambition and drive. I once heard someone state that the harder they worked the luckier they become.

[Selatius]

76. Many international students are subsidized by their respective gov'ts

in many cases. The tab is usually picked up by the host nation. Iraq did this extensively in the the 1970s and 1980s with their scientists. They sent them to US schools to learn things like chemical engineering and nuclear physics, which would then be applied to designing and manufacturing chemical weapons and research into nuclear power. Many countries don't just send them to US schools. They also send them to European schools, and many more send them to both; they'll go wherever they can be taken. The point is even though American schools do not stack up to our European or Japanese neighbors, it's still far and away better than schools in the third world, and for many, sending a student to a school system ranked 14th in the world is just as good as one ranked 1st in the world.

For many progressives, the question is, "Why can't we be in the top 5 or even at the very top"? The richest nation on the planet won't even put forth the effort to be the best?

Independence is good, but historically, mutual cooperation is a very strong vehicle for survival as well if not stronger. You can get a group of people, and you can teach them to be independent and be able to work alone, and they'll get by, but studies show that if you can get them to cooperate, to pool resources and protect and defend one another, you get an effect known as synergy where the output is greater than the sum of its inputs. It is more efficient, and leaves more time to do other things like developing technology, science, and mathematics instead of spending your days trying to survive instead of thrive.

The chances of survival increase if you have others to back you up. That's not the case if you are alone and get into trouble. It is the reason why if one studies ancient peoples of the stone age, it is rarely the case that individuals foraged and fought for survival alone. Rather, they grouped themselves together and defended one another. If one failed to find food for the day alone, one won't eat for the night, and that's a consequence for going it alone, but in groups, even if you fail, you still get food because others would back you up if they succeeded by sharing what they gained by working. That's the power of mutual cooperation, of interdependence which is not to be confused with looking for handouts or freebies. If it was a handout or a freeby, you'd be the freeloader, and nobody would be expected to share the fruits of his labor with you if you never bothered to help him when he needed it because you didn't work.

Yes it is important to have the skills necessary to survive in this brutal world, but it is also important to know how to cooperate with others for mutual survival as well. (Doing it alone vs. doing it as a group together) Often, real world situations require that you mix the two philosophies together to find a path both couldn't have arrived to alone.

[Kailassa]

83. Great post, I hope lots of people read it.

Humans have evolved as a society. Some independance is good, but "me first and the rest of you can go to hell" is not. As we see with global warming, the future of our own children depends greatly on what society in general does, and likewise for the pasts that we come from. None of us can be truly independant.

I wouldn't mind betting that the per-capita income of a country is directly proportional to the amount it has spent on education for those presently working. Anyone who works is benefiting the country as a whole, anyone studying is going without an income for years while they benefit the country by becoming able to perform skilled jobs.

If you study, you are likely to get a higher pay, but at the moment this is more than counteracted for most by the cost of tuition, the cost of supporting themselves throught their studies, and the lost wages through studying instead of working.

As the wealthy are more likely to send their children to university, and the qualifications gained will often allow those children to be wealthy, the logical way to fund universities is by increasing taxes on the wealthy. No would-be graduate should have to sell their future to the bank to get qualifications. People might say it's fair because the same costs apply to all classes, but they don't. Education is far cheaper if you have parents who can pay up-front than it is if you have to pay the mountain of interest that accumuates on these loans.

[IndyOp]

85. You seem to think the world is fair.

I think you are wrong.

Some of the best people I know did not get the opportunities that you and I got and it is a shame, because they would have been able to contribute more. Some of the laziest, least deserving assholes get way too many opportunities and think they deserve everything they have.

John Calvin believed that you can tell who the good people who are - the ones who will go to Heaven - because God is already blessing them with wealth and health here on earth. So, if follws that people who don't have good things are bad people - lazy, stupid, immoral.

You seem to think the world is fair. People who have been given opportunities think they are available for everyone - just like Ebeneezer Scrooge thought that all the Cratchets needed to do was to have a bit more discipline. The Cratchets didn't need nice things anyway, they were used to being poor.

You seem to think the world is fair. I think you are wrong.

God Bless. :hi:

[Jayhawk Lib]

98. Life is not fair.

It never has been. It will never be fair. In this country the poor have more opportunity than any where else in the world. Look at all of the people trying to get here. A person has to take what is dealt to them and make the best of it. We have the richest poor in the world.

No other place in the world can you start out dirt poor and become President of the United States and go on to be worth millions. There are other examples of people with a very modest upbringing to go on and be very successful people. They did not do it sitting on there duffs and snot and whine about how unfair things are. They did it by working hard and smart and taking advantage of the few opportunities they had.

Taking from the rich and giving to the poor is not the answer. Where I live the government acquired several square blocks and built nice homes for low income people. This was about 10 years ago. You ought to see that neighborhood now.

In short....The opportunity is there. More opportunity than anywhere in the world.

[shrike]

100. What country do you live in??

I think you live in a dream world, personally. Or maybe you're living in the past.

The days when "Someone can start out dirt poor here and wind up as president" are long past. Read a book called "The Working Poor" to find our why.

[Jayhawk Lib]

106. Did you ever hear of Bill Clinton???? nt

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shrike]

108. Read "Working Poor"

He explains it much better than I ever could.
In fact, he deals with your exact point -- and demolishes it.

[Jayhawk Lib]

14. You missed my point...

My son is working a 2nd job to pay off student loans. He and his wife received very little help.

If people go to school to get a job that does not pay very well they will have to work a 2nd job to pay for it. That is their decision to go into that field.

If a person does not want to go to college they can go to a trade school. There will always be a need for plumbers, electricians, carpenters, welders, and a whole host of other trades.

The ones getting the higher education are the ones who will benefit the most so why should they not pay for it?

When I first got married and getting started in life, I worked 2 jobs. There is nothing wrong with having a 2nd job if that is what it takes.

[Chomskyite]

16. The absurdity of your position, and the poverty . . .

"If people go to school to get a job that does not pay very well they will have to work a 2nd job to pay for it. That is their decision to go into that field."

So we're now asking 18-year-olds to be economic forecasters along the lines of Warren Buffett? We ask them to make a decision now for a major that will be viable and lucrative (which is what today's student loan repayments take) in four years? Remember how good tech majors looked in 97? How good Arabic language programs probably look today?

Were you an expert macroeconomist when you were a teenager? Should we tolerate a system that requires our children to be?

Good lord.

[bleedingheart]

24. this has always been the case

I don't know about the rest of you but I know folks who got degrees in Mathematics in the 70's who ended up driving for the public transit authority because it was steady work and paid better...and even then they struggled to pay off loans.

However today I find that a lot of kids are straddled with credit card debt due to their own stupidity. My nephews are in college and it is typical to find that some of their friends are charging their spring break...a very foolish decision. My nephews are sitting at home with mom and dad because they know that their parents won't bail their asses out if they get in debt for that kind of nonsense.

[Selatius]

32. The credit card industries deserve a fair share of the blame for this too.

Here at the school post office, every other post office box has credit card offers stuffed in it, and it is absolutely vicious on apart of these credit card companies to be aiming at students who, up until now haven't even taken one course in finance or economics. It takes two to tango, and a naive college student wouldn't be looking at "0% APR" as "free money" if it weren't for that damnable MBNA and the Citibank boys shoving their boxes full of that junk. The banking establishments can no longer charge over 20 percent interest because of the S&L scandals of the 1980s, but credit card companies can???

[bleedingheart]

37. you are never too young to know that there is nothing free

I too remember the push for credit cards in college and I know many friends who were in their thirties saddled with debts they had raked up in college and continued to pile more stuff on...

[readmoreoften]

86. College is free in many European counties. See, something is free.

They're not talking about credit card debt for fancy hair care products. They're talking about student loan debt.

[LizMoonstar]

17. and what happens when you can't even get a first job?

I'm 2 years out of college with a business degree, a language degree, a writing/editing/journalism and humanities background, experience in science and math, and years of customer service experience, and I can't even get a job at McDonald's. I've had a low-paying internship, two temp jobs of varying durations, and a contract job i got fired from after 5 months because i got on the boss's nerves. what am i supposed to do, pray tell?

[Art_from_Ark]

23. Speaking as one who has traveled that road,

my advice would be to go back to school and enter a Master's program, hopefully one that would waive your tuition and give you a stipend. Or, with your foreign language background, maybe you could consider a study abroad program, especially in a country where your skills would be in greater demand. I followed that path, and wound up in Japan working for people who appreciate my skills.

[Critters2]

72. A Master's doesn't help

My brother finished an MA last May and is still looking for work in his field. In the meantime, he's selling vacuum cleaners at Sears and applying for PhD programs. Wasn't originally planning on doing a doctorate, but a body's gotta eat!

[readmoreoften]

88. If he's in the humanities or social sciences, a bit of advice...

Tell him to think twice about applying for an Ph.D. Only 20% of Ph.Ds in these fields ever get tenured positions. Most jobs that aren't tenure track pay less than minimum wage. $3000 a course in NYC, when the average teaching load of tenured university professors is six courses a year. Out of NYC, schools usually pay much less. Around $2000 is the average, from what I've found.

So if your brother's not willing to completely devote his life to his field, and if he can't get accepted by one of the top 10 schools in his field, I would STRONGLY suggest that he learns a skill if he wants to eat.

Learning grant writing, publishing software, web design, gaining managerial skills, all that will raise your salary much more quickly than a Ph.D.

[Art_from_Ark]

94. I know how that is

I did all sorts of crappy odd jobs after getting my Master's. But I eventually found my niche... I just had to go to Japan to find it. Maybe your brother, if he's unattached, can try getting into a PhD program in another country, like Canada, and see what happens from there. Last time I checked, at least some provincial Canadian universities will waive tuition and offer a stipend to PhD students who get teaching assistantships.

[taught_me_patience]

27. If you don't mind me asking

where do you live? Its hard to belive that someone of your talent cannot find a job for 2 years after graduating college. It might be time to move out here to Los Angeles... there are plenty of quality high-paying jobs here.

taught.

[LizMoonstar]

29. I'm on the Illinois/Iowa border

in a decently-sized metro area. I've been looking to leave, either for work, or for grad school, but haven't gotten any offers yet, and with my fiance graduating this may and starting work, i'm not moving 'blind' without an offer.

however, we're considering chicago (his hometown), minneapolis (near my parents), and DC area, as well as possibly going out to some of the big university towns nearby depending on circumstances.

so basically right now, i'm stuck here making ends meet for a few more months at least. no one seems to want to hire an overqualified ADDer...

[Selatius]

33. GET OUT OF THERE. Go to New York, Las Vegas, or Las Vegas

You're more likely to find work in, no offense, "real" metropolitan areas.

I live down here on the Mississippi Coast, and I'm about to finish college. New Orleans is destroyed. Biloxi is destroyed. There are jobs still around, but they're low-paying service sector jobs and plenty of construction jobs. Everything else was annihilated. I'll most likely have to move up the eastern seaboard or out west to Los Angeles or San Francisco to start a living so I can pay off my student loans.

[readmoreoften]

89. The competition in NY is fierce.

A friend of mine with an MA and years of office experience couldn't get a job. At one point, he wrote an angry letter to a job that never even wrote him back to tell him he was rejected. The HR person emailed back to apologize and explained that over 3000 people had sent in applications for that particular administrative assistant position.

He left NY.

Most people pay about $1000 a month to rent a room in NYC as well. You won't be able to entertain in your home, and you won't want to sit in your tiny room all the time, so expect to pay exorbitant prices just to get out of the house.

This is NO PLACE to save money.

[taught_me_patience]

71. You're probably going to have to move

before you can find a job (especially as a new college grad). When I was planning to move to LA, from Hawaii, I sent out over 50 resumes and didn't receive one response. The only way that I found a job was because my cousin knew the people hiring, and told them I lived in LA. I took an entry level job, even though I had 2 years of consulting experience on my resume. Honestly, its going to be tough for you to find a job without living in the area. There is a hugh pool of college grads in the big cities... no need for companies to hire out-of-state.

taught.

[Jayhawk Lib]

79. check this out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2164464

[LizMoonstar]

80. right, except that we're not. but i do appreciate the attempt to help.

i do have an interview this week, so we'll see.

[peabody]

22. I don't mean to pile on but

what happens when your son's engineering job gets offshored and there's a glut of mechanical engineers? His job then suddenly become one of those "that does not pay very well." Aside from that possibility, not everyone can, or should, be a doctor, lawyer, or engineer. We need teachers, historians, and librarians too. By your reasoning, no one should go into those fields because who the hell wants to work two jobs to make ends meet?

[DBoon]

26. Our jobs are being outsourced to countries that subsidize college

Coincidence? I think not.

If we want to be a leading technological nation, then we have to pay to subsidize higher education.

If we want to be a nation of low-wage service workers, then we should just keep doing what we are doing now.

[Bushknew]

110. A master's in computer science, cost me less than $100

http://are.berkeley.edu/~atanu/Writing/who_paid.html

India suffers from very low literacy even compared to other developing countries. Yet one gets to hear about the tremendous impact that Indian engineers and scientists have had around the world. This gives one the impression that the Indian schooling system works. I believe that that impression is wrong and that in fact the Indian school system is inefficient and is biased against the poor.

I was in fact paid during my bachelor's degree in engineering. At IIT Kanpur they gave a stipend for doing a master's degree which was sufficient to pay for all normal expenses. I estimate that my entire education in India, including a master's in computer science, cost me less than $100 in today's terms.

Nagpur is a medium sized city by Indian standards. It has a bunch of good high schools. You have to have a middle-class or better background to get into those because the competitive pressures keep the poor out. But if you get in, and don't goof off too much, you can do well in the competition for a good college. And then you get heavily subsidized in college. Armed with all the advantages, you fill out a bunch of applications, write the GRE and the Toefl and off you go to the US, never to return.

Really, you will not be missed. There are a few hundred million like you in India. Don't flatter yourself by thinking that you constitute a 'brain' drain to India. India has brains coming out the wazoo. What is indeed a drain is a resource drain. It is totally indistinguishable from a gift of $100,000 from India to the US when an engineer trained in India migrates to the US. Just like capital flight from poor nations to rich nations, it is human capital flight from the poor nation to the rich. It constitutes a subsidy that is hard to estimate but my rough calculations put it around $2 billion a year. (References available upon request.)

[Selatius]

34. "Tough shit." The Republican answer to your question is this:

Go back to college and take on several thousand more dollars worth of debt. Hahaha, screwed again! You're now enslaved in chains of debt. :sarcasm:

[taught_me_patience]

28. I agree with you completely...

There is nothing wrong with working hard when you are young. Hell, its even expected in the business world. When I was just out of college, I worked for 80-100 hours/wk for 24,000/yr. Now, only 3 years later, I'm making almost triple that amount. College grads expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter (heck I was one of them!)

taught.

[pschoeb]

75. Are you still working the same hours? if you are, your a slave

NO offense but if you still put in up to 100 hrs a week, at three time 24,000 your still making less than $13.00 an hour. If you count the fact that you were making $4.28 an hour for 3 years(24,000 at 100 hrs), if you work another three years at the higher rate you have now averaged about $8.00/hr, which is a wage you can get with no college at all. I work at a Grocery store throwing stock, and got paid $9.00 an hour, I get paid time and a half if I work over 40 hours, and there is a decent amount of overtime work available. My $9.00 wage was my starting wage, I make roughly $13.00 now, I get raises every year. Why the hell would I want to spend tens of thousands of dollars in college tuition, so that I could be treated like shit.

Also one incurs extra costs by working 80-100 hours a week. Usually your eating out, or convenience food, these cost considerably more, and often have negative health effects as does the long hours. So in fact your actual real "earnings" might be considerably lower than someone who works a regular 40 hrs a week. When your exhausted and tired one often makes poor decisions that end up costing you considerable amounts of money as well. Of course you still have to subtract my guesstimate of a minimum of $20,000(very conservative) for the cost of a four year degree.

By the way you do know that your employer was breaking the law, and it is schmucks who allow this to happen, that make everyones life miserable, their like a wife who won't prosecute her husband for beating her up, and perversely thinks it builds character. Unless your salary is over $25,500 AND your employed in certain types of positions, this federal regulation applies, there are also state regs that might make stiffer requirements.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/fs17g_salary.htm

Finally working 80-100 hrs is bad for everyone, you actually get less work done than if you worked less hours, you make bad decisions, which can negatively effect others. Anyone, who is reasonably intelligent and educated(which I guess leaves out people who go to college for business degrees, it seems) knows that working people excessive hours, is highly inefficient and actually ends up costing you more money. Any employer who thinks working their salaried employees this many hours is a good thing, is probably not an employer one wants to be promoted up into.

[taught_me_patience]

77. No... there is no way I could keep that up

you are right, 100hrs/wk is excessive and unhealthy. I was depressed and nearly suicidal. So why did I do it? Because that is what needs to be done in business. I was working in a great position at the best company in my area and was more concerned about experience than pay. Business is like a fraternity. One must go through a "hazing" period to prove that you are worthy to be a part of it. What were the results? I went from 24k to 26k to 40k to 51k to 69k in a span of 5 years. Not only that, my workload has decreased to 40hr/wk and the work is much easier and interesting.


taught.

[redwitch]

42. Imagine a world without art or music or poets

I don't mind helping my son through music school. He knows he has loans that will come due. I just don't think it should be quite this hard. And I don't think people should work 80 to 100 hours per week. Life is short. People should be able to spend time with their families.

[Megahurtz]

82. That's ridiculous!

People shouldn't have to work two jobs!

[Jayhawk Lib]

87. If that is what it takes , so be it...

I have never known a successful person that did it just on 40 hours a week. The main reason people remain middle class or poor is attitudes just like that.

If you want to succeed, get a degree and put in extra hours. If you just want to exist from payday to payday forget college and get yourself a 40 hour a week job and spend the rest of your time playing.

I do not know about you but my taxes went to support k-12 public schools and some to subsidize state universities. If a person wants a higher education he will either work his way through and take longer or take out a student loan and pay it off when he graduates.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

102. If there was proper public education at all levels, they wouldn't

(at least not fo that reason)

But nooooo, public education is a commie thing. Can't have it.

[peabody]

91. I just don't understand

why you would support a system that works people to death. Don't you think by your son working two jobs that his children would lose the companionship and influence of their father? Why would you support a system that is so detrimental to families? To me, the system is broken once a rich society like ours forces young people to juggle multiple jobs to pay off high loans just to get a good education. Just because you, or some other people, have done it doesn't make it a good thing. We need to look for different solutions so that people who want a higher education can get one, and then go on to raising families, or whatever else they want to do. A higher educated population is good for everyone, and that can only happen when education becomes more accessible.

[Roland99]

59. But your son and daughter-in-law have an advantage many others don't....

Dual income.

Your daughter-in-law's income is a bonus to them. It's awesome they're getting a great start off to life but think of the people trying to make it on their own.

Someone coming out of college will likely have the following bills:

Rent
Groceries
Car payment
Car insurance
Utilities
Phone
Health insurance/co-pays
Car maintenance (and taxes)

Add on top of that another payment of about $400-500 mo. to pay off a student loan ($475/mo. assuming $24,000 for 5 years at 7% interest).


That can be the source of a lot of financial hardship in the first few years of post-collegiate life.

[Jayhawk Lib]

63. She has a college loan

to pay off also. My son also works a second job on top of that. Sure they are strapped with bills and daughter in law is pregnant but they are making it and others can to. The best thing they have going for them is they are hard working and determined to succeed.

[Roland99]

66. But all of that pressure so early in life leads to so many problems.

[Jayhawk Lib]

74. Never once did I say it was easy.

As a matter if fact on one of my posts I stated that it was not easy. The ones who succeed in life are not the ones who take the easy way. Success has dues to pay and that is working long and hard.

[Roland99]

78. But why support a system that sets up many to fail?

Or at least cause them to struggle unnecessarily.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

101. Your positions on this matter seem to be the very definition of...

...ooops -- can't say it -- don't wanna break board rules.

[Cassandra]

8. What does this do to us as citizens...

when it takes this much just to get through the day? How can you be willing to speak truth to power when you're trying to hang on to two jobs?

[pdurod1]

10. Credit Cards are the killer...

I had 3 credit cards, down to one now. Balance unchanged. Student loans are paid off. They asked me permission to lower my interest rate --down to 4.5%. What gives with the credit card people? How many times do I have to repay-back the same money? And the corporatist' wonder why I can't pump money into the economy and buy their "made in China" crap.

edit: spelling

[Wheres The Beef]

18. Why so expensive?

I have 2 kids going to ASU. Why does tuition seem to go up every semester? Who gets all this money. They always seem to be bugging the state for more money, my kids for more money, and then they they want me to contribute in addition. Maybe its time to examine some of their foo foo departments and make some of these professors actually teach something.
It's no wonder these kids are coming out with so much debt! How about some cost control too.

[LizMoonstar]

19. and which departments count as 'foo foo'? n/t

[Wheres The Beef]

25. One example of foo

Okay, 1st the foo foo.
When my oldest graduated 6 years ago a fellow student and friend was awarded a degree in Native American Studies. It was a state mandated dept., with dept head, professors, assistants, office space, and all the stuff needed to run a big time university dept. The student was proud, the family was proud, we were all proud. 1st member of the family to earn a college degree and all that. It didn’t cost a thing for the student. All fees and tuition paid for by the government. Fine, whatever works. However I couldn’t help wonder what you do with such a degree. 6 years later you manage an Indian “tax free” smoke shop across the road from a casino in Chandler Arizona. (I’m being vague as to gender and stuff here on propose)
Years ago ASU had a few more than 100 degree programs, today its close to 400.

And of course they raise tuition because they can. No accountability, no cost control it’s like any other big government program.

[LizMoonstar]

30. under that description, my buddy's Asian Studies, and my French, are foo.

i'm not quite sure what your point is.

[Selatius]

36. If it's not business, engineering, medicine, or law, it's crap

That seems to be what the person is aiming. Actually, I tend to agree with the person to a certain extent. If you're going to college for a liberal arts degree, you're better off not going to college. If you want to become a painter, you don't need to take on 25,000 dollars worth of debt to develop your talent. Most of the famous composers of music, painters, and various artists never had formal education.

Ultimately, I think what's driving the cost of tuition is, frankly, no competition between schools as well as banking establishments looking to squeeze more profits out of student loan programs. If the federal government is doling out money to students to pay for college, you'd think the federal government would be able to collectively bargain with university board of trustees to keep tuition in check like the federal government bargaining with pharmaceutical companies to keep prices low under Medicare/Medicaid. It's either that, or you go to Europe or Canada for your drugs.

[skooooo]

45. Sorry, you're wrong.

Liberal Arts teach people how to think critically. That's exactly what we need more of now.

[Selatius]

67. What, math and science and medicine don't require critical thinking?

I agreed, to a certain extent but not entirely, that you need not go to college to rack up college debt if you're going to do something such as become a painter or a musician. Why? Because historically those fields don't offer a consistent income except if you become famous or prominent in your field. They have the most trouble paying off the tuition load seen today at US universities. Did Van Gogh or Picasso go to college to develop their talents?

Ultimately, what I'm saying is a short-term solution. In the end, I'd advocate an increase in education standards across the board coupled with subsidizing the education of every college student that can get into university. If they, for whatever reason, can't go to university, an alternative such as vocational training should also be subsidized as well.

[northzax]

70. liberal arts is so much more than painting or music

take my degrees, for instance, majors in government and East Asian political history, minors in Japanese and creative writing. What did I learn, precisely? how to learn. I learned to criticaly read and process information, and how to communicate it to others. in that time, I took science classes, I took philosophy classes, I took econ, I took math, I took art history, I took languages. And the people with engineering or math degrees did the same thing. Could I have gone to law school with that just as well as pre-law? of course. Or business school. or, with a couple of other classes, engineering or medical school. The value in an undergraduate liberal arts education is the ability to learn any of those, or all of them, as you wish. My current job has absolutely nothing to do with 12th century Mongolia, or short fiction writing, or the federalist papers, or even Japanese. but I use the critical thinking skills every day. I use the communication skills every day. I don't know much, but I do know where to find the information and how to process it when I need it. And that is worth more than a technical undergrad degree any day. I went to undergrad to learn all that, and grad school for the technical expertise. Technical skills wane and are vulnerable to societal change, the ability to think and adapt is not.

Do you know how few CEOs of fortune 500 companies have undergraduate degrees in business? not many, I wager, and none that I have ever heard about.

[skooooo]

92. Well...I think you're not being realistic..

You say, "you need not go to college to rack up college debt if you're going to do something such as become a painter or a musician."

If that's your view of the liberal arts, then I think you have a narrow view. What about English majors? Criminal Justice? Law? Lanuages? Teaching? etc. etc. Those are all within the domain of liberal arts. the Society needs people that can think and write clearly. Critical thinking means looking at context. In the sciences, it means looking at society issues, philosophy and morals. That is the domaine of the humanities.

Your second paragraph, I agree with of course. Not everyone is cut out for college, and vocational training is great. But, don't short change the humanities by thinking that all it is composed of is misfit artists and musicians.

[northzax]

21. why does tuition go up every semester?

because the Janitors get paid more every year, and the groundskeepers, and the security guards. The electric bill goes up every year to cool the dorms in the heat, the price of printer cartridges goes up, paper, pens, pencils and test tubes are all more expensive every year. Plus, think of all the people ASU has on the payroll, not just your 'foo-foo' (I think I can guess which those are) professors, but lab techs, the aformentioned custodians and caretakers, all those people cost more every year, in health care costs, insurance, and retirement, not just salary.

of course, the main reason prices go up is because they can. At my alma mater, in ten years, tution and fees (including housing and health care) have increased roughly 10 thousand dollars, 30 percent overall. (when I graduated it was about $31,000/year, next year it will hit 40k.) as long as people will pay it, and can finance it, prices will go up. it's that simple.

[raccoon]

56. That's for those who are lucky enough to have benefits.

"all those people cost more every year, in health care costs, insurance, and retirement, not just salary."

See my post #55.

[northzax]

69. I was going from my experience at a small liberal arts college

where every employee on campus had health insurance (the school self insured through the school clinic and outsourced the major stuff to the local hospital.)

[raccoon]

55. Very good questions,

"Why does tuition seem to go up every semester? Who gets all this money?"

I can tell you this much: the rank and file at the colleges don't get it. At the state-supported school where I work, an HR employee told me that 50 percent of the staff/faculty at the school are part-time, no benefits.

My guess is all that money goes for additional branch campuses and new buildings. It sure looks that way to me.

[Art_from_Ark]

95. At my university, a lot of the physical plant workers

were part-time (often students), with no medical coverage outside of the student health clinic. Most of the teachers of beginner-level classes were low-paid ($400/mo) TAs. Most of the part-time help in the various cafeterias, dorms, library, etc., were work-study students.

[shrike]

109. There ARE a few administrators who are extremely well-paid

Not that some of them don't earn their keep.

[lovuian]

20. It looks like the rich can go to college and the poor can but

a saddled with huge debt... and whats really happening is the economy is so bad that students aren't getting big enough salaries starting out to help pay them back and in some cases they can't get a job...

meanwhile education keeps going up up up and the easiest avenue for poor kids is

sign up for the Army...

Times are in deed scary for our young people... I see them smart bright and really feisty...

They will fight Bush's legacy he is leaving...

[Blue_Tires]

38. at least they are finding work somewhere

which already puts them in a better position than myself

[Kailassa]

39. It really puzzles me that people calling themselves Democrats

can speak out in favour of a system that so obviously favours the wealthy.

Sure, some people from impoverished backgrounds will make it through. And some people can smoke all their lives without getting lung cancer.

The whole nation benefits when each person can achieve their maximum potential. As it is, countless able people are being wasted, while those wealthy enough to have Daddy pay their tuition upfront are getting less and less competition in both their courses and job hunting, as money overtakes merit in getting a degree.

Sure, there is always the alternative of a job in the trades, but I wonder at the "classism" of anyone who thinks that being from a poor background makes you well-suited to plumbing. It's kind of like the belief that being wealthy makes you well suited to politics.

[shrike]

40. One of the joys of not having kids

Is that you can offer the sweat of your brow to siblings of more modest means, and their kids.
I expect to be doing a lot of sweating in the next few years.

[redwitch]

41. That is really great of you!

Want to adopt my son? He's going to school for music. (Front row seats at all his future gigs) Hey, he could be the next Lennon and think how foolish you would feel if you turn this down! :P

[shrike]

44. If I had the money, I'd think about it

Seriously. There's nothing that would please me more than to help deserving people. But sadly, I'm not rich, just more comfortable than most, and thus I must prioritize.
(P.S., I WILL kick myself if he turns to the the next John Lennon.)

[redwitch]

47. That may take another ten years or so

Do you think we'll still be DUing? :hi:

[shrike]

50. You never know

If we are, you'll announce it, I'm sure: that your son is now Lennon.
Lucky you. He can care for you in your old age. That's the downside of not having kids.

[redwitch]

53. You're right, I could hardly keep that to myself!

Tell you what, I'll arrange a DU concert tour with front row seats for DUers in major cities across the world- don't want to forget our friends on the other side of the pond. :-)

[MrPrax]

43. Oh Poor Babies...

Oh and they thought that they could be the greedy bosses that owned the restaurants.

The middleclasses must be shielded from 'common vocation' so that they might be able to produce the 'fruits' of civilization.

Anytime spent with the 'brutish' lower classes will only blunt the mind, invite vice and breed empathy for the wrong class

...a Member of the Bar serving food!!!----how rude!!

[redwitch]

48. I think your post is pretty rude

n/t

[Kailassa]

51. Education should be available to all, not just the rich and lucky.

MrPrax, perhaps some of us posting here are wanting to work toward an educational system in which class has nothing to do with a person's educational prospects.
A system in which having a rich Daddy no more entitles you to end up a member of the bar than it does the progeny of the single girl working behind the bar.
A system where the best person for any job has a good chance of getting that job, and contributing to society all that their talents allow.

[MrPrax]

52. Maybe...

or maybe she's working at Cheers in Boston coz she is 'hot' for the bartender who used to pitch for the Red Sox? ;-)

Education should be available to all!!

um--I am more interested in the money, security, power aspects of employment than I am worried whether a law firm gets 'the best'...

Besides law firms can increase their prestige and profits if they hire 'lightweights' with blue-blood name credibility? That's a fact...

You gonna tell them they have a social obligation to hire a nobody with great marks?

[Kailassa]

57. Law firms still have to produce results to stay ahead of the game.

Yes, society would have to change a lot now for the "blue bloods" to no longer be given a free ride. But these same law firms will still take great marks into account when hiring other employees, as they have to have people there to produce results, as well as show-ponies to make the firm look attractive.

In wanting people to have the opportunity to achieve what they can, the best person to be in each job, I'm looking at what is good for the country as a whole, and for each individual. I don't give a damn about law firms that cater to the wealthy, they are not the only opening for people who have studied law.

The fact is, education, as you said, is connected with money, security and power, and that is why the establishment are working to keep university education as the private preserve of the elite. The best way to put an end to the inbred oligarchical theocracy that has taken over America is to upset the class system through education, through the opening up of oportunities to those who, at present, wouldn't even consider such opportunities to be possible.

Small changes can cause huge changes. When a few people from a poor community get educated, they can be a beacon to others, letting them know it's possible. Then some kids will know it's worth trying harder, studying and learning, because there is a chance they can get there too. With enough of that, the whole society changes, becoming richer, happier and safer for everyone.

But, of course, truly happy people would never vote for bush, he needs to keep people frightened and greedy to win the next elections. Yes, I know he's served 2 terms, but still the only thing that will stop him changing the law on that or totally denying us an election is if his party want the excuse to be rid of him.

[MrPrax]

60. Your Faith in the Free Market

is impressive...I disagree on too many points to make a reply worthwhile...

In Solidarity...

[caligirl]

84. Thats what certain people thoght they were getting with Bush

What a failure he is. Never worked a company anyway but into the ground.

[redwitch]

54. What is the matter with you?

You sound like a Democrat. Sheesh. :eyes:

[MrPrax]

61. Crazy isn't it...

That someone claiming to be a 'democrat' might not really give a shit about some 'lawyer' that is TOO stupid to go look for a 'better' paying first job and has to do 'work' for a living...

That's a really BAD democrat position to take...to think that the snotty tone of the 'posted news story' makes it think that doing 'service' work is something terrible...

Jeez...sorry to upset your beautiful mind...

[redwitch]

64. I don't think the article or the original posters point was snotty at all

You sound like you have a bit of a boulder on your shoulder MrP.

[redwitch]

68. P.S.

recently graduated lawyers don't always rake in the big bucks. I have a friend who is 45, a jr. partner in a small but successful firm. STILL paying off student loans and struggling to make ends meet. Mortgage, 2 kids, working wife (also with student loans). They do not live "high off the hog"( What a strange expression!) they take infrequent modest vacations and live very simply. They'll be helping their kids through college starting in 3 years when 1st child graduates high school. That seems pretty tough, their own loans AND their kids.

[Kailassa]

65. I'm sorry I wasted my time trying to discuss things with you.

Obviously you're against any changes that would make it easier for low-income people to compete with the wealthy, and only want to discuss this in reference to "whining rich kids". Luckily there are some here who would like to improve the whole system.

[JPZenger]

49. Interest Rates Had to Be increased -to pay for tax cuts

The GOP Congress had no choice except to increase interest rates on college student loans. Otherwise, they could not have afforded the elimination of the inheritance taxes on the rich.

Remember, Congress was ready to permanently eliminate inheritance taxes last year. Then, the same week, Katrina hit, and they thought it wouldn't look right to do it while so many poor people were drowning and starving.

[KansDem]

58. Regardless how you stand on college loans, remember this...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a former student can seek to refinance a loan (or loans) only once. So there is a possibility of getting a lower rate which should help in repayment. However, once refinanced, if another deal comes along that promises an even a greater reduction in costs, too bad. You're lock in and there's nothing you can do about it.

You can refinance you home mortgage as often as you like, why not your student loan(s)?

[lagavulin]

73. I was an investment advisor for a large bank....

for several years, and we used to have a pretty standard "college costs calculator" that we'd run to show how people needed to invest their children's assets to provide for rising college costs 5, 10 or 15 years into the future. Now granted these calculations are rough guesstimates, and the future is never certain and constantly changing, but what was apparent to me but I couldn't say to my investors was that college didn't seem like a good investment at those numbers. Unless the child could get into a "status school" like Yale or could avoid taking on much debt to pay for college (which means NOT having any substantial savings in the child's name), I don't see how there's any payoff.

To put it simply, I think the traditional idea of college is absolutely unsustainable, and the present generation is recognizing that fact in a hard way. As the above article says, if the average student leaves school with $27,000 in debt then that child is dead in the water the minute they leave college. That debt cannot be absolved through bankruptcy (it never could even before the recent banruptcy law changes), and the burden is just too great to pay off with even the most generous entry level jobs. I think it's abusive to inflict that kind of expectation of anyone.

Also, Sallie Mae is making money hand over fist off these poor kids.

I have two young children of my own, but I'm fulling expecting the present "general university" higher-education system to have collapsed and/or been overhauled by the time they're of age. It HAS to because it's already no longer viable. I suspect this is all part of the downsizing of the American Dream we're about to experience in a hard way. In 10 years we'll perhaps see a rejuvenation of vo-tech schools, specialized training schools or some similar model....maybe we'll even see kids foregoing college for direct apprenticeships (something business leaders should absolutely be considering and encouraging!).

God I feel sorry for any child who leaves college with that kind of debt. They're too inexperienced to know how that will bury them for decades.

[Megahurtz]

81. But remember these new workers "lack competence"

so the jobs they studied for are being outsourced to "more competent" foreigners.:sarcasm:

[ckramer]

90. If you can get into a great/big company after high school, consider

skipping college altogether (or go to college part time). Work your way up the corporate ladder. Because eventually all these Harvard graduates are going to work for you if you are very good at climbing it.

This way you saved your college tuition, and one day get to enjoy bossing around these ivy leaguers.

[WindRavenX]

93. Hoo boy, I'm one of those girls (or will be next year)

I'll be graduating from Boston College in 2007 with BAs in biology and English. And I plan on going into education-- hopefully Teach for America.

But it is costing me. However, my experience at BC has made my debt, ~25-30K when I graduate, bearable.
It shouldn't be this way, though, and I know many many kids who are denied the chance to go to any college, let alone a private one.

[high density]

96. But after you get that great degree, you too can have a $27k/year job!

It's so great in the Bush economy.

I think Bush likes that students spend $50k for a diploma (or many times more) and then leave college only to be working two jobs or living with parents. It works out so great for the banks! Not so well for the students, but why care about them?

[demgrrrll]

97. I worked full time,went to grad school at night and was a cocktail

waitress whenever I had a "spare" moment. Hard as hell. I did not have huge debts but I was exhausted most of the time and I look back now and wonder how the hell I ever did it.

[devilgrrl]

99. Some of the responses to this are absolutely disgusting.

Yeah some of you worked 15 jobs to make ends meet, so that makes it okay to burden tomorrows generation by making them work even more?

Higher education should be free!!!!! End of story!

Jerks!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

103. Truly Reactionaries Or Lousy Liberals.

[Babette]

104. I agree

How are these people supposed to have normal lives? You only get one life, you don't want to spend it all running from job to job so some banker can enjoy his life. I get to work my tail off in college to do well for a promise of a decent life, only to have that promise broken. I get to spend MORE years living hand to mouth while neglecting my loved ones and my health.

And what about the children?

Teachers are already seeing the behavior/discipline/academic problems in kids who have parent working two or more jobs. How does it affect their future and ability to become productive citizens?

I'm appalled by the people who think that *everyone* can and should work 15 hour days until half their life is gone. Isn't this the kind of thing we say is so evil about Chinese sweatshops? We say that *we* are so much better as a country because we can get educations, make money and lead decent lives. That's a myth! Lets stop saying it.