- This topic has 533 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by
scaredyclassic.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 14, 2015 at 6:34 PM #783706March 14, 2015 at 7:03 PM #783707
joec
Participant[quote=flu][quote=AN]joec, Paul Jacob went to UCB, Paul Allan went to Washington State University, Jerry Yang went to Standford, Larry Page went to UMich and Standford, Sergey Brin went to University of Maryland, College Park (public) and Standford, Tim Cook went to Auburn University (public) and Duke University for MBA, Steve Jobs went to Reed College and dropped out, Marissa Mayer went to Standford, etc. I can go on and on, but there are plenty who did not go to Ivy and made it big. I would rather my kid be Steve Jobs and drop out of Reed College than Zuch’s wife.[/quote]
Practically speaking, Stanford is equivalent to the Ivy’s if not better. Just like MIT. Between it and Berkeley, I’d say it’s a toss up.[/quote]
Yes, if you look at my message, I said Stanford is sorta my west coast Ivy League…I think in the Ivy League, there are some considered not the “best” either like Brown I think.
That said, I’d love if my kids can go to Stanford and I am a fan. I can’t be an Ivy snob since I didn’t go, but I sorta look more highly on people who did go to the Stanfords or Harvards of the world. The reason is because I feel they are more selective than UC to begin with (maybe I got in so I think UCs suck and I have low self esteem?)
Here is list of CEOs degrees from 2012…Note that no UC is there in general.
http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/top-business-schools/articles/2012/05/14/where-the-fortune-500-ceos-went-to-schoolMy point again is if your goal is to take the top job, having the degree will help. The data doesn’t support going to UC will help much since they are not even in the top 10. I also mentioned, yes, there are some great UC people (I think Broadcom CEOs were from UCLA)…
But, again, I think if given the choice, most people would go to Stanford over UCB if cost wasn’t an issue.
I also knew people who didn’t get into Stanford, but got into the other UCs so I am thinking Stanford is “better”…(remember, I didn’t even apply).
March 14, 2015 at 7:53 PM #783708spdrun
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]
That would be great but public law schools in ca. Are same price as private now. 50k a yr. For uc.[/quote]Tuition or room/board/tuition?
March 14, 2015 at 8:13 PM #783709scaredyclassic
Participantmore than 50,000 us dollars tutionper year for UC law schools. Total debt load quarter million with interest after garduation.
No bankruptcy!!!
Many financially wrecked lives!!!!
See http://www.jdunderground.Com
Solution according to the young way underemployedNew attorneys…
“Stop caring”.
Let your debt sit there. Try to live off debit cards no bank accounts.
Fuck the man
March 14, 2015 at 8:33 PM #783710ParticipantOr just go to a law school in a state with lower demands. Tuition at Rutgers Law is $25,000/yr, and at public law schools in NY, it’s about $15,000.
March 14, 2015 at 10:14 PM #783712flyer
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic][quote=flyer]As your kids and their friends start graduating from college, start noting how many get not “a job,” but “the job” they want, and are able to buy homes (if they so choose.)
You might find the results shocking.[/quote]
no. I assume disaster. I am shocked when things even come close to working out[/quote]
I realize you understand this, scaredy, but many who are sending their kids to college, believing it is a automatic ticket to success, don’t realize the stats clearly indicate an over-saturation of college grads in the US, and, with globalization, it’s predicted things may only get more challenging for US grads in the future.
That is why I mentioned I believe connections will ultimately control the destiny of future generations, and should be as highly pursued as any degree.
March 14, 2015 at 10:26 PM #783713an
Participant[quote=flu][quote=AN]joec, Paul Jacob went to UCB, Paul Allan went to Washington State University, Jerry Yang went to Standford, Larry Page went to UMich and Standford, Sergey Brin went to University of Maryland, College Park (public) and Standford, Tim Cook went to Auburn University (public) and Duke University for MBA, Steve Jobs went to Reed College and dropped out, Marissa Mayer went to Standford, etc. I can go on and on, but there are plenty who did not go to Ivy and made it big. I would rather my kid be Steve Jobs and drop out of Reed College than Zuch’s wife.[/quote]
Practically speaking, Stanford is equivalent to the Ivy’s if not better. Just like MIT. Between it and Berkeley, I’d say it’s a toss up.[/quote]Yes, Standford is like Ivy of the West. But the people I listed, only Jerry Yang and Marissa Mayer went there for undergrad. Larry Page and Sergey Brin went to public school for undergrad and went to Standford for grad school.
I personally am more impressed by the 40 under 40 list than the fortune 500 list. I bet most if not all on the fortune 500 list did not study STEM. Ultimately, my point is that just as you guys would want to spend $400k for an Ivy education, just in case your kid get lucky and make association with the right people. I would want to spend $50k and save $350k, just in case my kid is the next Jan Koum or Nick Woodman, so I can put that $350k in their start up. If they end up being just your average joe, at least that $350k saved can go into investment properties that I can pass on to them to help lighten their financial burden for the rest of their lives.March 14, 2015 at 10:49 PM #783720ParticipantVery interesting article about similar topic: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/opinion/sunday/frank-bruni-how-to-survive-the-college-admissions-madness.html?_r=0
“… I looked up the undergraduate alma maters of the chief executives of the top 10 corporations in the Fortune 500. These were the schools: the University of Arkansas; the University of Texas; the University of California, Davis; the University of Nebraska; Auburn; Texas A & M; the General Motors Institute (now called Kettering University); the University of Kansas; the University of Missouri, St. Louis; and Dartmouth College.”
“I also spoke with Sam Altman, the president of Y Combinator, one of the best-known providers of first-step seed money for tech start-ups. I asked him if any one school stood out in terms of students and graduates whose ideas took off. “Yes,” he responded, and I was sure of the name I’d hear next: Stanford. It’s his alma mater, though he left before he graduated, and it’s famous as a feeder of Silicon Valley success.
But this is what he said: “The University of Waterloo.” It’s a public school in the Canadian province of Ontario, and as of last summer, it was the source of eight proud ventures that Y Combinator had helped along. “To my chagrin,” Altman told me, “Stanford has not had a really great track record.””
March 14, 2015 at 11:11 PM #783721ParticipantWith all the talk about the worthiness of the cost of an Ivy education. No one have really mentioned what kind of person would make that cost worthwhile. Not everyone will be CEO of fortune 500 companies. The probability of your kid being a regular sales guy, an engineer, an IT admin, a RN, etc. is much higher. Would a $400k cost for an Elite U degree be worthwhile if your kids’ only desire is to help the poor and the sick (physically help them, not with just money)? Would you ignore your kids’ desire and push them to get into Elite U with a hope they’ll be a CEO of a fortune 500 company? Even if they’re capable of doing it, would you ignore their true desires for financial prosperity?
March 14, 2015 at 11:13 PM #783722ParticipantTrue dat.
Most of us iscogs.
March 14, 2015 at 11:28 PM #783723ParticipantI wish they teach personal finance in HS (make it mandatory) and teach them about ROI. Maybe then, there won’t be so many people graduating with $200k+ in loan with a starting salary of <$40k. I think that kind of debt load really affect them for many years to come.
March 15, 2015 at 1:32 AM #783725ParticipantAgree with teaching kids about ROI. Our kids were clued in at a very early age, and we got them involved in their own investments as soon as we could–just as my Dad did with us. Also agree avoiding debt concerning education is definitely the way to go if at all possible.
In the final analysis, if your kids can live the lives they want to live, imo, that’s what really matters.
March 15, 2015 at 2:26 AM #783726CA renter
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=spdrun] all without debt.[/quote]
What is it with people on here being so against any debt?
Debt is leverage and the way (along with selling stock) to get wildly rich beyond your initial seed capital.
Generally, the richer the society, the higher the debt levels.
For example, rich people get multimillion dollar loans to buy houses, boats, planes, etc…When assets/collateral lose too much value, the end result is bankruptcy. Too bad student debts can’t be discharged in bankruptcy. I think they’ll have to reform that if young families are so burdened by student debts that the overall economy suffers.[/quote]
For every one person who gets rich by using leverage (outside of housing), there are thousands (millions?) who go broke because of debt.
If you don’t have intelligence and a lot of luck on your side, it’s best to avoid debt whenever possible.
March 15, 2015 at 2:38 AM #783727Participant[quote=flyer]The variables other than education are the real deal breakers. Can’t tell you how many people I’ve known and my kids have known who got where they are via connections vs. education. In my kid’s case, even with great degrees, connections trumped education every time.[/quote]
Could not agree more.
I grew up with a lot of kids whose parents worked in the entertainment industry. Not one of these kids went to college, but almost all of them have good-paying jobs in the entertainment industry. Lots of people with Fine Arts or Cinema and TV degrees really want these jobs, but can’t get them. It is all about having the right connections.
If you look at the stories of the wealthiest Americans, you’ll find that most of them had some sort of connection that lead them to their successes.
That brings us back to the Ivy Leagues where the education is often no better than what’s found in state colleges. The difference is that the students in the Ivy League schools were specifically chosen because of their unusually high IQ and personal initiative. Those traits alone are two of the best indicators for future success. It’s not the schools that make the students successful, but the students who make the schools successful and give these schools their reputations. Of course, highly intelligent people who tend to come from more successful (read: more intelligent) families can make some powerful connections this way, and that’s why families have traditionally chosen to send their kids to these elite schools whenever they had the opportunity to do so.
March 15, 2015 at 2:40 AM #783728Participant[quote=spdrun]… and restoring previous levels of PUBLIC funding for PUBLIC universities. Take the money from Homeland Security and War on Drugs bullshit programs if need be.
I’d rather see outright funding to the universities than students being forced to take on loans. Yeah, yeah, spending on social programs is so old-fashioned in 2015…
[/quote]Exactly right, spdrun.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.