joey cancels another $4.28B in student loan debt

I won't try to follow your logic, but my point is that college education is a "cherry on top" commodity.

 

No. Insurance is a regulated product that is able to charge for every little thing. They should not be covering a routine exam. They should not be covering routing lab work. Those are not insurance issues. But insurance wants to be the middle man because they have the actuaries to make money. Every thing the government can require is more dollars for them. Allow catastrophic policies (insurance companies do not want this). Which also points out I am not for getting rid of insurance like you said. I am for making it more affordable and turning it into actual insurance instead of the middleman it is today. Education is a completely different situation where we are offering loans for degrees that are not worth the cost but because we cannot be honest and say an engineering degree is more valuable...the engineer graduates with debt they can service while the artist graduates with debt they cannot service.

This is a terrible middleman analogy you have tried to concoct.

 

I mean that is basically the problem, education shouldn’t be a ‘commodity’ just because people can profit from it because there is demand for it.

 

Main point is like with medicine, I don’t negotiate the price with the provider. Insurance doesn’t work like a bank but they are basically the only option you have to pay for a cost you have no power to negotiate.

 

I don't follow. (?)

 

I'm not talking about the paycheck hit, but the years of investment professors are required in order to be eligible for the gig. I've got no idea about the impact on enrollment if college was free. I'm not even totally against making it free; just explaining one of the reasons it's not.

 

The OP regularly violates a board rule about commenting on newly started threads.

 

Do you want fewer people to pursue advanced degrees? I don’t get it. Wouldn’t it be better for if smart people didn’t have to make a significant monetary investment up front to become scientists or doctors?

 

I'm not following your point, tbh. Is it just more of a sacrifice if you have to pay for schooling? Is that the argument?

 

That's great news thanks for the update

 

Let's say you want your kid to take piano lessons. Instructor A has a bachelor's degree in music and teaches elementary school + piano lessons on the side. Instructor B has bachelor's, master's and doctoral degrees in piano performance and teaches at the local university. Which instructor is going to cost you more?

And yes, the other part of my point was that profs sacrifice (not only income, but time spent studying and not saving for retirement). College is necessarily a more expensive commodity than K12. I acknowledge that it's only one narrow perspective. There are many other resources necessary at the university that lead to bigger costs.

 

Exactly, if they are going to pay off student loan interest, they might as well pay off mortgage interest, car loan interest, credit card interest....I'm pretty sure most people have already paid off the principle owed on these loans all they owe is the interest.

 

That is what Biden said about his previous attempts of student loan forgiveness. There are legal ways for him to forgive some loans but I believe they are very limited. Others have faced serious legal challenges. This could be legit but I assume if it is, it would have happened before now.

 

Why is a PHD in piano performance teaching children to play the piano? Shouldn’t the PHD ensure that their income opportunities are much higher than someone with a bachelor’s degree in the same field? If not, what is the value in getting a master’s and PHD?

 

PLSF was created under George W Bush. Trump killed it. Biden only restored what had been a perk of public service before his term and fixed a bunch of administrative fixes that made the program, as written, basically useless.

Similar programs to reward public service exist elsewhere as well.

 

We'll see if he wins or SCOTUS wins on this...

 

Just because college is free doesn't mean people would get into whatever college they want. There would still be a hierarchy of institutions and admittance that reflect that. Prestigious universities are still going to have the most qualified professors (generally speaking)

 

They earn a Doctor of Musical Arts (DMA). PhD is a scholarly degree. Every piano prof I’ve worked with teaches private lessons on the side. It’s an easy side hustle and pays pretty well. My wife is a prof and teaches a select few business/engineering profs kids on the side.

 

Then why wait until now to announce these ones? It just does not seem to make a lot of sense.

 

So it seems there is not an ROI on investing the money in a PhD in the field. Or is it a requirement if you want to become a professor?