Self-indulgent me generation, using sophistry to justify defaulting on a loan. Because, mostly, he didn't want to work for a living. First-world crybaby.
I took out student loans right out of high school because I was raised by a mother who lived on welfare most of my life. I saw a college degree as the ONLY way for me to end the cycle of poverty that I grew up in. But what I didn’t count on was paying an absurd amount for out of state tuition and despite being in forbearance, the loans accumulated interest. So my $30,000 in student loans has blossomed into approximately $60,000 (even with a bankruptcy), with little to no hope that I’ll be able to ever pay it back. I will die with student loan debt and it’s ridiculous.
People who don’t understand the cycle of poverty in this country, like to throw around terms like “entitlements” or “self indulgence” or “lazy” and it’s bullshit. Quit applying your situation to every other situation in existence. If anyone in this thread is self indulgent, it’s you.
Colleges set you up for failure. They are money making machines who whose main purpose is garnering new students at whatever cost. Most are not interested in your success (in school). Most aren’t even interested in the quality of your education. Our country needs to wake the fuck up and realize that a quality education, free of encumbrances, is the only way that we’ll ever make this world work.
Knowledge is power and the fat cats in power are so afraid of empowering everyone with knowledge, that they have made the entire system into a house of smoke and mirrors. There is a plethora of resources available to everyone. Life isn’t a zero sum game. There is plenty to go around and we should all share in the benefits.
And what the fuck kind of concept is "out of state" tuition anyways? Seriously?
Huh? You and your family didn't pay the taxes that allow for the in-state rates. Why should you be able to move there and take advantage?
Also, if you were in CA why not just go to one of the fifty UCs or CSUs?
- At best, it's for the state to make money in the long term by reducing the brain-drain of great students moving to other states.
- At worst, it's for the university to make more money short-term via price discrimination, by operating under the assumption that people who travel further often tend to have more money to spend than those who stay in state.
Yes, because my primary motivation for moving to Nebraska (from California) was to "take advantage". You got me.
I attended three colleges in California. I'm not sure what the point of your last sentence was/is.
I lived in an area where even the cost of rent, exceeded what one could make at the low income, part-time jobs available in that area.
How do they determine if you are from "out of state"?
Surely you can find a way around it - i.e. just lie and say your family just moved to said state right after you graduated HS, etc.
And there are people who are neither, such as myself.
I don't think that the discussion about how crappy our system is and how to fix it should be owned by any one of these groups. Maybe the article's author is the not the poster child for financial responsibility, but that doesn't make his arguments about the broken state of our system any less valid.
So how do you change things? You can change the rules of the game, but the rulemakers are tight with the gamemakers. You can refuse to play, but playing the game is seen as the only way out for many. Or you can refuse to pay and break the game permanently. I don't advocate any particular approach, but I understand those who do.