Occupy Wall Street PROTESTERS Not Letting Up - Nationwide

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartana

The skills a person gains getting an education are never wasted even if you can't use them to earn money (much like your brothers) but I think young people need to come to terns with the fact that their idealized life isn't going to mesh with reality. And that maybe they will have to live a simpler more frugal life then their parents (those Beemer driving Yuppies of Yore :-)!) ever did.

---

I hate to break something like an education down to simple dollars and sense, but when we are talking about student loans & the cost of education that is where we have to end up. I am in complete agreement that a collegiate environment provides all kinds of growth beyond just study in a chosen field and that it would be great if every person in this country could gain the social and intellectual benefits found there. But its a utopian dream. If you narrow the field to just those candidates who really want to be there we have a much better chance of success.

On a completely tangent note, I personally think 4 years (with most kids stretching it to 5 or even 6 now) is too long for most courses of study. We could dramatically cut costs by chopping a year of "general requirements" out of a degree program without significantly impacting the future of our nation. Or go the other way and give them all the general education and just a year of specific field study knowing most specialized learning is done on the job anyway. Either way, three years should be long enough to gain some independence and survival skills.

Last note, regarding a return to a more frugal lifestyle... Why in God's name don't we have a LOT more classes in high schools teaching kids the kind of frugal common sense that is so easily bantered about on these boards? The kids of most members in here probably have a pretty good understanding of how to satisfy their needs and most of their wants in a reasonable manner. Many of my own kids are pretty good, their friends are not. Without getting heavy into parental responsibility, why don't we take a little more time to show kids how to grocery shop, analyze credit card terms, calculate the real cost of owning a vehicle, invest and save (and for that matter earn!), etc. I don't know about school districts anywhere else, but that kind of "life education" is lacking here. It just seems like, if we HAVE to make a choice based on economics, that would be more valuable to learn for most kids than gaining knowledge of 15th century Italian artists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregg

I hate to break something like an education down to simple dollars and sense, but when we are talking about student loans & the cost of education that is where we have to end up. I am in complete agreement that a collegiate environment provides all kinds of growth beyond just study in a chosen field and that it would be great if every person in this country could gain the social and intellectual benefits found there. But its a utopian dream. If you narrow the field to just those candidates who really want to be there we have a much better chance of success.

On a completely tangent note, I personally think 4 years (with most kids stretching it to 5 or even 6 now) is too long for most courses of study. We could dramatically cut costs by chopping a year of "general requirements" out of a degree program without significantly impacting the future of our nation. Or go the other way and give them all the general education and just a year of specific field study knowing most specialized learning is done on the job anyway. Either way, three years should be long enough to gain some independence and survival skills.

Last note, regarding a return to a more frugal lifestyle... Why in God's name don't we have a LOT more classes in high schools teaching kids the kind of frugal common sense that is so easily bantered about on these boards? The kids of most members in here probably have a pretty good understanding of how to satisfy their needs and most of their wants in a reasonable manner. Many of my own kids are pretty good, their friends are not. Without getting heavy into parental responsibility, why don't we take a little more time to show kids how to grocery shop, analyze credit card terms, calculate the real cost of owning a vehicle, invest and save (and for that matter earn!), etc. I don't know about school districts anywhere else, but that kind of "life education" is lacking here. It just seems like, if we HAVE to make a choice based on economics, that would be more valuable to learn for most kids than gaining knowledge of 15th century Italian artists.

---

That lack of knowledge makes for great consumers (great for the marketers/lenders). Intentional?

http://news.yahoo.com/nyc-arrest-rec...045625415.html

anyone see this article? "Even in the nation’s currently depressed housing market, at least 95 of the protesters’ residences are worth approximately $500,000 or more." They got the info from arrest records.


I just read all the entries about student loans and bankruptcy's. I agree that if they could be discharged through bankruptcy everyone would just take as much as they could and then declare bankruptcy when they graduated. Because after all, student loans are a choice. You sign a contract with the loan company, they give you money expecting it to be paid back. Same with houses, cars, credit cards.

Unfortunately the high schools, which could be vary valuable in teaching kids economic responsibility, are mired down in Federal and state mandates, many of them unfunded. And I don't know about your school district, but I so some part time work in mine and many times I wonder if the schools exist to teach the children or to give the teachers, bus drivers and support staff good pensions and health benefits while protecting the bad ones with tenure. A sad state of affairs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zoebird

I agree that there is a way to get an education and not get into debt. I wish that I'd taken that path (and not gone to law school at all).

How does a person "give back" an education? I can understand the house, consumer goods, car, etc -- but what? they're going to take the education out of my brain? my experience? Or is it that they just take the degree away (e.g., I can no longer claim that I have the degree?).

---

Why don't you work as an attorney if you went to law school? That would seem to solve a lot of your problems. There are many attorney jobs that do a lot of good for people, working with abused children or adults, helping with loans like you are getting help, protecting those that need protection, helping people set up businesses are many of the things that are very useful to society.

I suppose tat depends upon how you are defining the problem.

My problem, really, isn't the loans themselves. I've been paying them back since 2002. I have 30 years to do it, technically, but of course, now it's in collections so who knows? I'm also working diligently to pay it off -- and it looks like we'll have $11k to add to that pile (in the CD that I roll over) in the next 6 months. So, it's 1/8 of the way to being paid off at that point. It will get done, I know it. :D

The real problem -- for me -- is emotional:

1. that i took on the debt in the first place;
2. that i went against my better judgement and what i knew i wanted for myself at 19, at 22 (first year of law school) and kept going to school and taking out loans when i knew i didn't want to do that work;
3. getting over my resentment (toward myself, i think) that i was so under the sway of my family and my desire to please them that i'd done something terribly foolish;
4. regretting that i didn't take the 5 yr stint in montana to pay this off, but also somewhat thankful that i didn't.

how would working as an attorney solve these problems?

For me, debt forgiveness is confused with personal forgiveness. :D (i literally figured this out last week. I've been working very hard on this personal issue).

I still believe that debt forgiveness would be a great part of the plan moving forward, but i do not think that i would qualify for any form of it, nor seek it -- even if it were available to me. Because it doesn't equal personal forgiveness.

That being said, I love the work that I do and I do it well. This is my business. I've used my law degree more in the last three years than i ever have before (and i did work as an attorney for 1.5 years after graduating).

Starting this business has been everything for me. Fulfillment of my dream, work as one of my passions, and it's honestly making it possible for us to live the life that we want to!

When we lived in PA, DH was working an office job that he found very tedious and difficult, and that was not keeping up with COL. He was great at his work, and loved his coworkers and his employers loved him as a worker and as a person, but they simply were not giving raises after the recession hit, and we felt blessed that he had a job at all, considering the cuts that were made. Many of our friends lost their jobs. It was hard on all of us.

I was working as a yoga teacher then -- mostly an independent contractor. I ran a successful, profitable business, but the margin was small. I can only teach so many classes (exhaustion!), and with the glut of new teachers on the market, studios and gyms started to pay less. I had a small group of dedicated private clients, too, so I was blessed that i could balance out my income there. But even after expenses, my business was not profiting much. My income paid my student loan payments, put into our emergency fund -- which usually went to home or car repairs. When we vacationed, I would always work -- which offset the costs of our holidays plus allowed me to take it as an expense as well. I usually made a profit on all of our holidays -- including coming to NZ, our european trips, and all of our us trips. So, while i am widely travelled, it is because of my work that we were able to do it. :)

i put that out there because people often say "the money you spent on your travels could have paid your student loans!" but our travels were working holidays for me. I would combine the loss of income for not staying home plus the costs of travel/housing/etc, and then negotiate the contracts to make sure that i was either breaking even or earning money. I usually earned, and that money would go to the student loans and emergency fund. Truly, the second income was being used secondarily.

But i knew that without starting a studio, I would never, ever get ahead. And, I felt that where we were -- it just wasn't possible to start a studio without a lot more capital than we had. This -- and because we wanted to be here -- is why we moved to NZ.

Here, I do work that I love. In 1 yr and 8 mo since i've started this business, we made a small profit in year one, and are really doing well here in year two. The expenses of the business are covered, and we are able to cover our living expenses (total, $8k), the remainder is being reinvested into the business, paying us back for our initial investment, and going into the account where we are saving to pay off the student loan.

This is what will solve the financial problem of the loan. Starting this business, while risky, is paying off. And i'm doing work that I love and I do well. It's fabulous!

Anyway, catharsis. It took me a while to really realize where I was feeling into this space.

Not that I don't support the movement, but I'm feeling less. . . voracious . . . about it now. because I'm realizing that i need personal forgiveness, not debt forgiveness. :)

College has become such a business. I think we're encouraged to think its so important so we buy what they have to offer......which doesn't always seem very useful.
I can't believe at this point that having a college education is considered that important anymore. I rarely hear of many kids going into the field they studied for. And there's so many totally irrelevant, stupid courses that are required. My son transferred after his freshman year and hardly any of his courses transferred....and they were requirements.
I think we've gotten off track, thinking that everyone needs to go to college and every 18 year old should know what they want to do forever. I'm not sure what the alternative could be........but so much time and money is wasted on "higher education".
My son needed to take one more "requirement" to graduate. So he chose one that sounded easy, since he spends so much time on working jobs in his major. He chose a course that discusses how androgynous performers affect culture. WHAT????
What a waste of time/money/resources. And even though he is close to a genius in his major..........he had to repeat a required math course like 4 times. And also take foreign language. These courses absolutely in no way "furthered" his education or prepared him for anything in the future.

I'm with you and Gregg on this one Cathy.

I think that first, university should not be available to all. that is to say, there should be tough entrance examinations, and if you don't pass, you don't go. I met illiterate -- as in literally cannot read -- people who had scholarships to the university plus stipends and such (guess who?). Universities should not offer remedial courses.

This means more trades and vocations for people who do not get into university.

From there, I agree with Gregg and Cathy that the "general education" requirements could be put into one year, and the remaining major credits into two. from there, anyone needing to go further or wanting to, can get further education.

To me, things like law school could be managed as it is in the system here (or UK system), where it's essentially an undergraduate major. you do your 4 yr university, and three years of it is law school. vet school is similar, as is engineering, etc. This makes sense to me -- rather than needing a secondary education. A lot of medical/health professions here are similar, but not doctors (nurses, osteopaths, physios, dentists, etc).

Anyway, just some thoughts out there.

Also, I'd like to talk about the "OE" or "gap year."

I think that using that is a GREAT idea. First, the "OE" is actually something different here -- something you do during your working years, usually as part of your work. :) Most people here go to the UK or Middle east, which I think is interesting. Some take a year-long sabbatical and do volunteer work overseas for a year or so, or go WOOFA-ing. So, they save up for it themselves. Most people do it between ages 25 and 35, usually before having children (or if they had children very young, it might be between 35 and 40 after the children are 18 yrs old).

but the gap year, that's something. a lot of kids work during this year and/or volunteer. I think this is a great thing, to be honest, because the young person gets a sense of "life without school" and can go out into the world (while still living at home), and see what the working world is. S/he can go and try a lot of jobs, volunteer, meet people, and see what s/he would like.

In my first year of university, I discovered that medical school (my original idea) was not a good one, and then wanted to quit and learn to teach yoga and give massage and learn how to start and run my own studio. I wanted to quit uni, go to community college and get a business degree. I wanted to spend the summer getting my yoga/bodywork certification to work my way through community college. I figured it out after just one year.

I know a lot of people who are like me, and a lot of the kids who enjoy a gap year here do much the same. One of my friend's spent her gap year painting houses, an din the process learned how to do specialized finishes. she was then hired to help out on a film set. She decided she wanted to learn to be a set painter, and her boss suggested that she take a specific course at the local technical/arts college. It was literally a two semester certificate. She was able to pay cash (from her job earnings from that job), and works as a set painter today. That's about 15 years later.

So it really served her to get out there and work, and see what she wanted to do, so that she could then get the training that she needed.

I disagree. I think universities should be available for all at least so long as they are PUBLICALLY financed. I believe if the public is PAYING for it even in part, the public should have some right to use it. The public paying for something that almost none of them actually have a right to use is just bizarre.

Now it is not the case the few do not get their cut. Research is currently funded by universities in part. And of course not every college admits everyone and that is fine, CA specifically has a multi-tier system. Community colleges are pretty much available to all (do you even need a GED? I don't know) and you don't even have to be pursuing a degree. Cal-State schools let in a large part of those who apply, though a more formal application process is needed. UC schools are more elite especially the elite ones. Not every education opportunity is avialable to everyone but at least the public does have some opportunities open to them and their children (even if they have a B rather than a straigth A average!) and some stake in funding the system.

Hey but don't charge any taxes for it and I'm perfectly fine with a private university only taking geniuses.

In DK, where the public does pay -- and for vocations, etc -- there are entrance qualifications. It isn't open to anyone. You still have to qualify to go. You have to do well in school, do well in specific exams, and then take entrance exams to the schools that you want to go to. It's competitive.

If you don't qualify, you sit for the exams again the next year, or you can go into another area of inquiry. It's not a 'given' that you will qualify to go. And, if you don't qualify, usually you can easily get in a vocational or technical school, or other schooling, in the off-cycle. I'm not sure if DK universities have a mid-term entrance process.

It's not about 'only taking geniuses' but really only taking students who actually qualify. I cannot tell you the level of frustration I experienced at university when I was sitting in classroom with people who were not functionally literate. I'm sorry, but you should at least be functionally literate to qualify for university.

I also think that sports-and-universities might need to be segregated. the benefits of sports at universities is great (brings in a lot of income and supports a lot of scholarship, among other, programs), but the problem is that you end up with people who aren't able to manage the academic requirements but who are excellent at the given sport. Of course, MANY if not MOST of the student-athletes (male and female) are qualified, so it's not an iditement of everyone in every program.