Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
smac97

Covid = End of College 'As We Know It' = End of Byu?

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

The reason a university education has become so expensive is because of government involvement in tuition. 

The need for big university buildings has almost vanished. 

But the same can be said for church buildings. 

Absolutely. The government's money is the single largest disruption into any market. If the government drops it participation in tuition assistance/loans by 50% the market will make a corresponding adjustment. 

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I don't know if I agree with  your point.  I don't see how it's any tighter.  It seems less tight today then it used to be. 

It is easier to get into college and get loans for it. It is harder to pay said loans off. Real income has been falling for years even when you factor in inflated living costs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Islander said:

Absolutely. The government's money is the single largest disruption into any market. If the government drops it participation in tuition assistance/loans by 50% the market will make a corresponding adjustment. 

Doubt it. Private loans would just cover it with marginally less protection for the debtor compared to a government loan. Until bankruptcy systems make it a more palpable risk to the lender the supply will not go away. It is anti-capitalist to, in essence, privilege certain loans as non-dischargeable. The risk to the lender has to be there for the system to work.

Or we could, you know, ban usury all together as Judaism always has amongst its adherents, Christianity used to, and Islam still does but that is probably not going to happen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Islander said:

Absolutely. The government's money is the single largest disruption into any market. If the government drops it participation in tuition assistance/loans by 50% the market will make a corresponding adjustment. 

You are so correct.  The ordinary citizen does not want to acknowledge it.  

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

It is easier to get into college and get loans for it. It is harder to pay said loans off. Real income has been falling for years even when you factor in inflated living costs.

what do you mean?  Real income is about as high as it's been:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

The dips, due to near crashes, are the interruptions in steady growth.  I'm guessing we'll see a dip again, if it's not happening already, due to our current pandemic and other associated events.  

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I see there's no accounting for inflation.  10,000 grand in 1980 is about $33,350 today.  That means the increase is (40,000-33,350)/33,350, or about 20%.  But complicating it...the average for instate is $8,893/yr.  So $35,572.  But that's average.  But the little piece says "you could get a four-year bachelor’s degree at a public school for less than $10,000" suggesting that would be on the very low end.  Imagine you could get a 4 year degree for less than $30,000, which then would put the cost of college at a lower rate than 1980.  Certainly complicated seeing as the range of cost for college is very, very large.

I'm not sure there's much to the hysteria here.  

 

 

I'm always amused by your kind of reasoning.  Prices skyrocket over time and someone comes along to say: Things aren't really getting much more expensive!  That's just inflation!

What Inflation really is is a decline in the value of money, because the reason that something that costs 10,000 in 1980 is about 33,500 today is because money isn't worth as much now as it was then.

Money loses value over time, and the more time goes by, the less that money is worth.  Which is why it takes more money to buy what could have been bought with less money before.

I'm looking forward to the day when money will have no value at all, or at least be so worthless that we figure out how to live and produce things and trade what is produced, just as we do now, but without using any money.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Islander said:

Absolutely. The government's money is the single largest disruption into any market. If the government drops it participation in tuition assistance/loans by 50% the market will make a corresponding adjustment. 

That reasoning carries all the way through.  Man-made government is the producer of money, and if men totally got rid of all money that men produce, the market would make a corresponding adjustment.  God does not produce money.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I'm always amused by your kind of reasoning.  Prices skyrocket over time and someone comes along to say: Things aren't really getting much more expensive!  That's just inflation!

What Inflation really is is a decline in the value of money, because the reason that something that costs 10,000 in 1980 is about 33,500 today is because money isn't worth as much now as it was then.

Money loses value over time, and the more time goes by, the less that money is worth.  Which is why it takes more money to buy what could have been bought with less money before.

I'm looking forward to the day when money will have no value at all, or at least be so worthless that we figure out how to live and produce things and trade what is produced, just as we do now, but without using any money.

um...thanks, Ahab.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Ahab said:

That reasoning carries all the way through.  Man-made government is the producer of money, and if men totally got rid of all money that men produce, the market would make a corresponding adjustment.  God does not produce money.

It does not carry all the way through.  In this case, government basically subsidizes college tuition by providing loans and grants directly.   Now, I understand the rationale for that; it is important to advance the lives of our young children.  

But the reality is that with more "free" or heavily subsidized money in the system, universities will simply charge more (market pressure is what it is) and students will sign up for the loans and grants.  Who suffers?  The kids with their high loan balances.

Without government guarantees, commercial lenders would screen and filter the loans before granting them. Marginal institutions -- mostly for-profit -- would drop out and go out of business.  True, fewer kids would go to college, but that was the way it was before WWII.    Marginal currently-public universities would drop out.   There would be less need for the unproductive professions (sorry) of doctorates in academic teaching positions.  There would be lots fewer classes on movie appreciation (I enjoyed mine), acrobatic skiing (I enjoyed it). surfing and the like.

The medical profession is quite similar although the government sets medical prices through their Medicare billing rate schedule.  The problem with the government setting medical prices is that it often leads to shortages.  But government funding of medicine, and granting monopolies to hospitals and medical schools to operate, leads to drastically increased prices.  The money is not going to the doctors who perform the services, but to the people who receive the money from insurance companies. 

Public primary and secondary schools don't have exactly the same problems as the whole system is free, so that doesn't impact what parents pay to have their kids educated. 

  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

It does not carry all the way through.  In this case, government basically subsidizes college tuition by providing loans and grants directly.   Now, I understand the rationale for that; it is important to advance the lives of our young children.  

But the reality is that with more "free" or heavily subsidized money in the system, universities will simply charge more (market pressure is what it is) and students will sign up for the loans and grants.  Who suffers?  The kids with their high loan balances.

Without government guarantees, commercial lenders would screen and filter the loans before granting them. Marginal institutions -- mostly for-profit -- would drop out and go out of business.  True, fewer kids would go to college, but that was the way it was before WWII.    Marginal currently-public universities would drop out.   There would be less need for the unproductive professions (sorry) of doctorates in academic teaching positions.  There would be lots fewer classes on movie appreciation (I enjoyed mine), acrobatic skiing (I enjoyed it). surfing and the like.

The medical profession is quite similar although the government sets medical prices through their Medicare billing rate schedule.  The problem with the government setting medical prices is that it often leads to shortages.  But government funding of medicine, and granting monopolies to hospitals and medical schools to operate, leads to drastically increased prices.  The money is not going to the doctors who perform the services, but to the people who receive the money from insurance companies. 

Public primary and secondary schools don't have exactly the same problems as the whole system is free, so that doesn't impact what parents pay to have their kids educated. 

  

My point was simple, and to state it even more simply:  If the government drops it participation in tuition assistance/loans by 50% If the government drops its participation in ALL monetary exchanges, by 100%, the market will make a corresponding adjustment.  The market would adapt to those changes.

We have money because men in government created money.  God did not create money.  The "market" refers to any place where there is an exchange of goods and services, and the markets can function just fine without any money.

Not everybody likes that idea though, especially not people with a lot of money, because for them their money gives them some advantages over people without any money or just with less money.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Sorry. Wrong thread.

Edited by Bernard Gui

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Doubt it. Private loans would just cover it with marginally less protection for the debtor compared to a government loan. Until bankruptcy systems make it a more palpable risk to the lender the supply will not go away. It is anti-capitalist to, in essence, privilege certain loans as non-dischargeable. The risk to the lender has to be there for the system to work.

Or we could, you know, ban usury all together as Judaism always has amongst its adherents, Christianity used to, and Islam still does but that is probably not going to happen.

I think you're validating my point. Private loans would be dischargeable in BK thus restraining private lending. There would be, likely, lower limits to loans leading to lower tuition costs. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Ahab said:

That reasoning carries all the way through.  Man-made government is the producer of money, and if men totally got rid of all money that men produce, the market would make a corresponding adjustment.  God does not produce money.

I meant government loans.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Islander said:

I meant government loans.

I know, but the same reasoning would apply to the government dropping out of any or even all involvement in our economy..

If the government dropped its participation in tuition assistance/loans by 50%, the market will make a corresponding adjustment. 

Do the people in government want people to work?  Sure they do.  So what can they do to try to get people to work?  Offer them money.  Pay them or see that they get paid for the work that they do.

But why make money necessary at all?  Because people need money to be able to pay taxes.  Because taxes pay for the work the people in government want to do.  And for the people who will do that work for them.

Money is what makes the worldly world go around.  You can buy anything with money.  Or at least that is what some people believe.

Edited by Ahab

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Islander said:

I think you're validating my point. Private loans would be dischargeable in BK thus restraining private lending. There would be, likely, lower limits to loans leading to lower tuition costs. 

Private student loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy though. Kill the supply of public funding and the private sector will fill in with little to no change. Make it a real risk and the market will rebalance.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Ahab said:

I know, but the same reasoning would apply to the government dropping out of any or even all involvement in our economy..

If the government dropped its participation in tuition assistance/loans by 50%, the market will make a corresponding adjustment. 

Do the people in government want people to work?  Sure they do.  So what can they do to try to get people to work?  Offer them money.  Pay them or see that they get paid for the work that they do.

But why make money necessary at all?  Because people need money to be able to pay taxes.  Because taxes pay for the work the people in government want to do.  And for the people who will do that work for them.

Money is what makes the worldly world go around.  You can buy anything with money.  Or at least that is what some people believe.

No argument there. I just think that primacy of government loans has an inflationary effect that totally distorts the market. 

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Private student loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy though. Kill the supply of public funding and the private sector will fill in with little to no change. Make it a real risk and the market will rebalance.

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post

Seems to me that the Church has already positioned itself for this possibility. Pathway began back in 2009. Yet another example of the so-called prophets being entirely reactive to societal changes with no capability of anticipating future events.  😁

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry Ahab , but I don't want 500 pounds of potatoes, I want a new tire. Mediums of exchange are necessary ,I don't care if it is gold or paper or bitcoin. I would be nice if it was a stable medium.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/24/2020 at 1:29 PM, stemelbow said:

what do you mean?  Real income is about as high as it's been:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

The dips, due to near crashes, are the interruptions in steady growth.  I'm guessing we'll see a dip again, if it's not happening already, due to our current pandemic and other associated events.  

Factor in CPI.

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Factor in CPI.

The census bureau doesn't factor in CPi?  

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/23/2020 at 2:07 PM, Ahab said:

... I met my wife at a Church single adult conference, and that is also where she met me.
 

What a coincidence! ;) :D  (Sorry! :huh:  Couldn't resist! :unknw:)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/24/2020 at 8:48 PM, strappinglad said:

Sorry Ahab , but I don't want 500 pounds of potatoes, I want a new tire. Mediums of exchange are necessary ,I don't care if it is gold or paper or bitcoin. I would be nice if it was a stable medium.

All you have to do is let someone know what you want to get with some of your numbers.  You know, those numbers you have in your bank account.

None of us need any money.  I rarely see any of it.  I just need someone to continually add some numbers to my bank account(s).

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/24/2020 at 10:48 PM, strappinglad said:

Sorry Ahab , but I don't want 500 pounds of potatoes, I want a new tire. Mediums of exchange are necessary ,I don't care if it is gold or paper or bitcoin. I would be nice if it was a stable medium.

The dollar has done pretty well in stability when compared to most forms of exchange throughout history.

I would personally like to see more investigation of the economic systems that predate currency to see what we can learn from them. For centuries everyone automatically assumed that before that it was a barter economy that evolved into currency. This goes way back and the narrative was neatly established as certain. Then historians went out eager to prove the theory and study the transition and found barter economies were very rare and generally only existed in collapsed societies that previously used currency.

Share this post


Link to post

The commercialization of higher education provided a built in mechanism that will eventually kill it: greed.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...