Comment by superJoy | Hacker News Reader

Comment by superJoy | Hacker News Reader

At what point do these students realize the cost indicates they should stay from that school? Like, "Oh wait, even though X is a better school than Y, it will cost 5x more, and my starting salary will only be 5% less." Is that happening? It just seems some of these people are naive. Another example is ones that are unaware of the economy of the city they aspire to live in, and get a degree with little value in that city. And then they're unemployed...

Now that doesn't mean the college system isn't flawed or unfair. I think that it is. But some of the discussion should be on how we tell young adults to best navigate their way through the system, as it exists at present. Picking your dream school, a "good" school, whatever, should not be independent of some analysis on what the return on investment is. For students that can do that, there are still opportunities out there... I say that because I've made decisions where I got in but didn't go to my dream school. It sucks. But the extra value from the quality of the education didn't seem worth $100k in debt once I get on the job market.

How many 18 years olds are making rational decisions about return on investment in 10-15 years time?

I'm not sure how you go about adequately informing students about a major life decision they are making.

My high school counselors frequently came by classes and spoke about college---while they didn't talk about the financials in detail, they easily could have. It'd be as simple as doing a quick calculation on the board of how long it will take to pay off some amount of debt. Now whether that advice would stick in the students' heads, I don't know, but they should at least try. There's also high school economics classes that should be discussing this. I was required to take one and my teacher actually did a better job of explaining the cost of college than the counselors.

Now whether that advice would stick in the students' heads

Certainly not all, by a long shot. Here in Australia, you get a couple of grand to help you out when you have a baby, helping cover various initial costs, purchasing prams or whatever.

A friend of mine mentioned that he'd heard his 17-year-old daughter talking with her friends about having a baby because then you get that baby money. They saw it as a huge windfall and don't understand that all that money and more is needed to set yourself up for a child, nor that a child significantly changes your lifestyle and activity choices, especially for someone around 20.

It's not to say that everyone at that age has no forethought, but as a demographic, they're not good at long-term planning.

but what about their parents? shouldnt the parents be smarter than that?

At this point; I'd accept "more than not at all."

Anecdotes ahead, proceed with caution: Very average PA public school; had a "home ec" course, in which we did hilariously outdated calculations on things like interest vs compound interest. Not a single mention of what I'd call "practical economics"; e.g. actually balancing a real budget (which, FWIW, I've heard is becoming more a thing in certain districts), calculating the costs of goals, and perhaps touching on long term financial planning. When I first had to handle retirement fund options; you could have handed me a live squid for all I knew what to do with it. I got _lucky_. I had parents who filled in many of the gaps, and were willing to be a resource as I got older, as well as some more informed friends; but I worry about how people with less might have gotten by.

why is it the schools job to teach their finances? I see school as more academic, while personal matters like that should be taught at home.

Are you kidding? What home?

Oh, you mean the people who the banks gave giant loans to that it turned out nobody could afford and put everyone into foreclosure? Or their kids, who signed their life away to bankruptcy-proof loans on a degree they never finished, and can't get a job good enough to pay it back?

Have you seen what passes for a parent?

Yes, let's have those people teach their kids personal financial management.

This post is why ITT we all lose.

It's always amazed me that some people get to pick which colleges to go to. I never had that option. Until I turned 24, the maximum financial aid available to me was a measly $5,000 stafford loan. There aren't many places you can attend with only $5,000. That won't even pay for an in state public university in virtually every state. The colleges I spoke with told me that if I didn't have the money, I should wait until I turned 24 and try again. That was a long half decade wait.

You have to have a rich relative available to cosign for all those private loans--federal loans for dependents are capped at about $5,000/year, and independents get about $10,000/year. The total lifetime amount is capped at about $60,000, which is why I'm sometimes skeptical of "I have $200,000 in student loan debt! I'm so poor and oppressed!" stories. It's very likely that these people are just fine because their family will eventually bail them out no matter how many bad choices they make--they're legally obligate to. Student loan companies don't loan money to people without collateral.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com