- This topic has 310 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 6 months ago by bearishgurl.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 6, 2011 at 3:04 PM #694253May 6, 2011 at 4:35 PM #693081edna_modeParticipant
I was one of those lucky students in the 90s who relied on grants/fellowships/subsidized loans of both the federal and private kinds to attend my undergrad school. I’m perpetually grateful those fellowships were available for me, because my personal circumstances didn’t allow for paying for it ahead of time.
I even got a PhD afterwards in a Hard Science, thinking that no matter what, a science/engineering skill set was a) difficult enough to obtain that there would be a perennial shortage of skilled workers compared to the societal need; and b) be valued enough that compensation would remain relatively high.
Well, pharma, biotech, dot coms…all collapsing. The market for PhDs is one of the worst I have ever seen. I have some enormous number of friends who have remained stubbornly unemployed despite doing everything right. I have heard of people leaving the PhDs OFF their resumes in order to compete for entry level positions. And heaven help you if you can’t find a permanent position after your first post-doc. Or if you got a PhD in something where you can’t really get funding for the degree (most biology/chemistry/physics/math programs do provide subsistence wages, and you get the degree with no loans afterwards — one reason why I went for it). I’m frustrated because there is no limit of Big Problems for these bright, highly educated people to work on. The problem seems more to be finding competent management/organizations/funding structures to actually tackle these problems systematically with a results outlook that is somewhere between next quarter and next generation. Certainly this kind of leadership is lacking from government and most business, so who’s going to really innovate (that is, someone who isn’t Steve Jobs bring technologies to wide-scale adoption)?
There’s a bubble not just at the bachelor’s level, and not just in law school. I’m beginning to think that the MD’s had the right idea — limit the number of med schools and admissions to basically guarantee that people who complete their education will be able to pay back the loans and have a job at the end of the ordeal.
May 6, 2011 at 4:35 PM #693159edna_modeParticipantI was one of those lucky students in the 90s who relied on grants/fellowships/subsidized loans of both the federal and private kinds to attend my undergrad school. I’m perpetually grateful those fellowships were available for me, because my personal circumstances didn’t allow for paying for it ahead of time.
I even got a PhD afterwards in a Hard Science, thinking that no matter what, a science/engineering skill set was a) difficult enough to obtain that there would be a perennial shortage of skilled workers compared to the societal need; and b) be valued enough that compensation would remain relatively high.
Well, pharma, biotech, dot coms…all collapsing. The market for PhDs is one of the worst I have ever seen. I have some enormous number of friends who have remained stubbornly unemployed despite doing everything right. I have heard of people leaving the PhDs OFF their resumes in order to compete for entry level positions. And heaven help you if you can’t find a permanent position after your first post-doc. Or if you got a PhD in something where you can’t really get funding for the degree (most biology/chemistry/physics/math programs do provide subsistence wages, and you get the degree with no loans afterwards — one reason why I went for it). I’m frustrated because there is no limit of Big Problems for these bright, highly educated people to work on. The problem seems more to be finding competent management/organizations/funding structures to actually tackle these problems systematically with a results outlook that is somewhere between next quarter and next generation. Certainly this kind of leadership is lacking from government and most business, so who’s going to really innovate (that is, someone who isn’t Steve Jobs bring technologies to wide-scale adoption)?
There’s a bubble not just at the bachelor’s level, and not just in law school. I’m beginning to think that the MD’s had the right idea — limit the number of med schools and admissions to basically guarantee that people who complete their education will be able to pay back the loans and have a job at the end of the ordeal.
May 6, 2011 at 4:35 PM #693765edna_modeParticipantI was one of those lucky students in the 90s who relied on grants/fellowships/subsidized loans of both the federal and private kinds to attend my undergrad school. I’m perpetually grateful those fellowships were available for me, because my personal circumstances didn’t allow for paying for it ahead of time.
I even got a PhD afterwards in a Hard Science, thinking that no matter what, a science/engineering skill set was a) difficult enough to obtain that there would be a perennial shortage of skilled workers compared to the societal need; and b) be valued enough that compensation would remain relatively high.
Well, pharma, biotech, dot coms…all collapsing. The market for PhDs is one of the worst I have ever seen. I have some enormous number of friends who have remained stubbornly unemployed despite doing everything right. I have heard of people leaving the PhDs OFF their resumes in order to compete for entry level positions. And heaven help you if you can’t find a permanent position after your first post-doc. Or if you got a PhD in something where you can’t really get funding for the degree (most biology/chemistry/physics/math programs do provide subsistence wages, and you get the degree with no loans afterwards — one reason why I went for it). I’m frustrated because there is no limit of Big Problems for these bright, highly educated people to work on. The problem seems more to be finding competent management/organizations/funding structures to actually tackle these problems systematically with a results outlook that is somewhere between next quarter and next generation. Certainly this kind of leadership is lacking from government and most business, so who’s going to really innovate (that is, someone who isn’t Steve Jobs bring technologies to wide-scale adoption)?
There’s a bubble not just at the bachelor’s level, and not just in law school. I’m beginning to think that the MD’s had the right idea — limit the number of med schools and admissions to basically guarantee that people who complete their education will be able to pay back the loans and have a job at the end of the ordeal.
May 6, 2011 at 4:35 PM #693911edna_modeParticipantI was one of those lucky students in the 90s who relied on grants/fellowships/subsidized loans of both the federal and private kinds to attend my undergrad school. I’m perpetually grateful those fellowships were available for me, because my personal circumstances didn’t allow for paying for it ahead of time.
I even got a PhD afterwards in a Hard Science, thinking that no matter what, a science/engineering skill set was a) difficult enough to obtain that there would be a perennial shortage of skilled workers compared to the societal need; and b) be valued enough that compensation would remain relatively high.
Well, pharma, biotech, dot coms…all collapsing. The market for PhDs is one of the worst I have ever seen. I have some enormous number of friends who have remained stubbornly unemployed despite doing everything right. I have heard of people leaving the PhDs OFF their resumes in order to compete for entry level positions. And heaven help you if you can’t find a permanent position after your first post-doc. Or if you got a PhD in something where you can’t really get funding for the degree (most biology/chemistry/physics/math programs do provide subsistence wages, and you get the degree with no loans afterwards — one reason why I went for it). I’m frustrated because there is no limit of Big Problems for these bright, highly educated people to work on. The problem seems more to be finding competent management/organizations/funding structures to actually tackle these problems systematically with a results outlook that is somewhere between next quarter and next generation. Certainly this kind of leadership is lacking from government and most business, so who’s going to really innovate (that is, someone who isn’t Steve Jobs bring technologies to wide-scale adoption)?
There’s a bubble not just at the bachelor’s level, and not just in law school. I’m beginning to think that the MD’s had the right idea — limit the number of med schools and admissions to basically guarantee that people who complete their education will be able to pay back the loans and have a job at the end of the ordeal.
May 6, 2011 at 4:35 PM #694263edna_modeParticipantI was one of those lucky students in the 90s who relied on grants/fellowships/subsidized loans of both the federal and private kinds to attend my undergrad school. I’m perpetually grateful those fellowships were available for me, because my personal circumstances didn’t allow for paying for it ahead of time.
I even got a PhD afterwards in a Hard Science, thinking that no matter what, a science/engineering skill set was a) difficult enough to obtain that there would be a perennial shortage of skilled workers compared to the societal need; and b) be valued enough that compensation would remain relatively high.
Well, pharma, biotech, dot coms…all collapsing. The market for PhDs is one of the worst I have ever seen. I have some enormous number of friends who have remained stubbornly unemployed despite doing everything right. I have heard of people leaving the PhDs OFF their resumes in order to compete for entry level positions. And heaven help you if you can’t find a permanent position after your first post-doc. Or if you got a PhD in something where you can’t really get funding for the degree (most biology/chemistry/physics/math programs do provide subsistence wages, and you get the degree with no loans afterwards — one reason why I went for it). I’m frustrated because there is no limit of Big Problems for these bright, highly educated people to work on. The problem seems more to be finding competent management/organizations/funding structures to actually tackle these problems systematically with a results outlook that is somewhere between next quarter and next generation. Certainly this kind of leadership is lacking from government and most business, so who’s going to really innovate (that is, someone who isn’t Steve Jobs bring technologies to wide-scale adoption)?
There’s a bubble not just at the bachelor’s level, and not just in law school. I’m beginning to think that the MD’s had the right idea — limit the number of med schools and admissions to basically guarantee that people who complete their education will be able to pay back the loans and have a job at the end of the ordeal.
May 6, 2011 at 4:36 PM #693086anParticipant[quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.May 6, 2011 at 4:36 PM #693164anParticipant[quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.May 6, 2011 at 4:36 PM #693770anParticipant[quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.May 6, 2011 at 4:36 PM #693916anParticipant[quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.May 6, 2011 at 4:36 PM #694268anParticipant[quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.May 6, 2011 at 4:47 PM #693097ScarlettParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.[/quote]I am not saying that. One can postpone going to college ( or at least the last 2 years) and save money working while living at home. Or attend a college in town or state. Encourage real penny-pinching and responsibility for students. Work jobs while attending college. Family can help with living expenses.
Hell you can make the living expenses a loan that’s with much higher rate than student loans. There are ways. So one is more careful when borrowing for living expenses, that’s all I am saying.
But it is true that only well off families can afford to pay nowadays for Ivy League schools, otherwise it will be dumb to get a quarter mil loan just for tuition.
May 6, 2011 at 4:47 PM #693174ScarlettParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.[/quote]I am not saying that. One can postpone going to college ( or at least the last 2 years) and save money working while living at home. Or attend a college in town or state. Encourage real penny-pinching and responsibility for students. Work jobs while attending college. Family can help with living expenses.
Hell you can make the living expenses a loan that’s with much higher rate than student loans. There are ways. So one is more careful when borrowing for living expenses, that’s all I am saying.
But it is true that only well off families can afford to pay nowadays for Ivy League schools, otherwise it will be dumb to get a quarter mil loan just for tuition.
May 6, 2011 at 4:47 PM #693780ScarlettParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.[/quote]I am not saying that. One can postpone going to college ( or at least the last 2 years) and save money working while living at home. Or attend a college in town or state. Encourage real penny-pinching and responsibility for students. Work jobs while attending college. Family can help with living expenses.
Hell you can make the living expenses a loan that’s with much higher rate than student loans. There are ways. So one is more careful when borrowing for living expenses, that’s all I am saying.
But it is true that only well off families can afford to pay nowadays for Ivy League schools, otherwise it will be dumb to get a quarter mil loan just for tuition.
May 6, 2011 at 4:47 PM #693926ScarlettParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Scarlett]Then how about limiting the loan amount strictly to tuition+books – something that’s clearly quantifiable and justfied by receipts etc.? Let the students figure out how to pay for the living expenses. Maybe that would force reconsidering saving for living expenses, and also housing and location of the college.[/quote]
So, what you’re saying then is only well off family should have the oportunity to go to good schools.[/quote]I am not saying that. One can postpone going to college ( or at least the last 2 years) and save money working while living at home. Or attend a college in town or state. Encourage real penny-pinching and responsibility for students. Work jobs while attending college. Family can help with living expenses.
Hell you can make the living expenses a loan that’s with much higher rate than student loans. There are ways. So one is more careful when borrowing for living expenses, that’s all I am saying.
But it is true that only well off families can afford to pay nowadays for Ivy League schools, otherwise it will be dumb to get a quarter mil loan just for tuition.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.