College Tuition
May 16, 2007 - 8:45pm
Comments
July 13, 2007 - 5:41am
#122 (permalink)
Fidel, after that long-winded tirade against everything from "daddy's credit card" to George Bush, do you think that $5,000 in annual undergraduate tuition is outrageous?
Of course you do.
But what is truly outrageous is what passes for "outrageous" these days. What is "outrageous" is that 2.7 billion people live on $2 a day or less. A young person having to work hard to pay a paltry $5,000 in annual tuition is not.
Local Star Tribune columnist Nick Coleman wrote a column today about the high cost of college tuition and he asked: "Anyone making $100,000 is among the top 10 percent of wage earners. And if the top 10 percent can't afford to get their kids a sheepskin, who can?"
Near the end of his column, he said that in-state tuition at the University of Minnesota is $9,400 per year (plus another $9,800 for books, fees, on campus living expenses, and other expenses)
Hells bells. That's a steal.
If a student works a mere 25 hours per week at $8 dollars an hour (and you've got to be nearly brain dead to not be able to find a job that pays more than that--I tutored for $10 an hour as an undergrad 25 years ago), after the microscopic taxes on that income, the student would pay for half of a full year's cost. Then, knock off $2,000 for easily obtainable grants (particularly if you're low income) and you have total debt of $27,400 for a four-year degree.
The monthly payment on that debt over ten years is a little over 300 bucks.
Again, that's a steal. And it makes the Coleman quote above absolutely laughable.
I hadn't looked a college costs in a long time. But, I hear people complaining about schools with tuition of $30,000, $40,000, or more a year (like Carleton College here in Minnesota at $34,000 per year). Yeah, if you want to attend a school like that, you're going to have to pay out some serious coin. But, a place like the University of Minnesota is a great public school (I've got two degrees from the UofM).
So, what's the big deal about college costs? Are the costs wildly different than that in Canada for a comparable public institution?
ETA: Or, go to school for six year, take a lighter credit load, and work an extra ten hours per week and the monthly debt payment after school are only about 190 bucks.
[ 16 May 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]
I'd argue that grants and student assistance are way too difficult for a student to obtain. Sure, if you're low income OSAP will step in and pay your way, only for a few years until they charge you interest and you start making payments. But, the problem with this, is that the amount of money a student recieves is relative to the amount of money that their parents make (at least this was the case four years ago when I entered university.) This means, if a student's parents make decent money, they're not rich by any means, but they make okay money, OSAP generally will not be able to grant the student a loan. BUT this doesn't take into consideration that a family making moderate money doesn't always have enough to share with their children on post secondary education, therefore their out of luck as far as financial support from parents, or government funded loans.
What this leaves is grant programs. Once again, most are reserved for low-income students, thankfully, or else lord knows I wouldn't have gotten through school! But, many other students are left out in the cold. Other grants are reserved for students with high academic standing. Once again, this makes perfect sense, but the problem with this is, many students who have to pay their own way through school have to work off campus. I worked forty hours a week during exams at some points to be able to afford my school and living expenses. Because of this, many students in this position are exhausted, and while maintaining good grades, they might not make the cut for grant programs, at least that's what I found.
Existing funding structures cause a difficult dynamic on campus. College and university campuses offer some really worth-while jobs for students: student government, student newspapers, radio stations, but most of them are volunteer based, or give students a bare minimum pay, meaning they spend many more hours at work than they actually get paid for, or they make considerably less money than they should. The payoff-experience! Campuses are an AMAZING place to build experience, especially for aspiring journlists, politicians, activists etc. etc. etc. BUT, the problem with this, once again, because of the inaccessability of grants, scholarships and loans is that only those who can afford to work these jobs, because of lessened finanical strain, end up in these positions, such as editors of the school newspaper or high powered student political positions. I know this isn't the case for every student, who has ever held one of these positions, but it does put campuses at risk of being run by financially elite students.
Oh yeah? Well, I had four jobs at 35 hours a week each, and three small children when I was in school full time! If I can do it, everyone can! I win! I win!
D. Fox gets screwed in Canada
And, they need boots on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq. Subsidized PSE is an enticement for army recruiters preying on kids from poor families who have no university or college in their town and can't afford several thousand dollars to live away from home. Student loans aren't enough to cover the costs for too many students, and in too many cases, Canadians have simply been denied student loans based on bad credit checks. And bad credit is typically a problem for low income Canadian families.
Someone has to donate their lives to low wage philanthropy and imperialism abroad, and it sure as hell won't be snot-nosed brats from upper middle and upper classy Canadian or American families. And someone has to pay back $20 billion dollars of student loan indebtedness. Quarter to a third of a century worth of indebtedness was once called indentured servitude.
===
Students and Loans: 'Til death do us part(USA)
quote:"Richard and Sheila Friese, with no income, can't pay off their loans so they and son Ryan, 16, may be evicted."
They can't get a car loan, a home mortgage or any other type of loan. They've lost jobs and even spouses over it.
They are so humiliated they don't want any of their friends or family to know.
And for most, there is no way out.
They are former students trapped under the weight of student loans. The same vehicle that allowed them to get a college education has left many graduates buried in debt with no reasonable way to climb out.
Some students who never graduate are stuck paying off loans without the earning power of a degree -- an estimated additional $1 million in lifetime earnings.
And some students who finish can't afford the monthly payments. Others lose jobs and can't catch back up. Then they get turned down by employers who increasingly check credit records before hiring. ...
And for additional cost of living comparison, can you tell us how many million Americans can't afford to be sick down there, students and otherwise, Sven ?.
[ 17 May 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
quote: Even after financial aid is included, it takes 31 percent of an average family's income to send a kid to a public college. And if you are dumb enough to let a kid go to "a fantastic college" of the private sort, the average family will need 72 percent of its income to support its Ivy League habit.
Am I the only one who thinks it is somewhat old fashion for the parents to take on the financial burden of sending their kids to college? Easy for me to say, sure, as someone who doesn't have children who I want to see excel, and get into the fantastic college and become the one to cure cancer, but as far as I see it, if kid's start working at sixteen, save half their paycheques, work 25 hours a week while in post-secondary, they will still have loans to pay at the end, but their education is then something they've earned academically and financially.
Many of my peers who have flunked out of school, had to retake classes time after time, slept through class, handed in essays late, are the ones who had a free-ride through school, thus it wasn't their money invested in it, and they somewhat took the education system for granted. VAST STEREOTYPE, I know! But I do think there is value in working your ass off through university, just to get that degree to hang on your wall. But if tuition was slightly lower, grants were more accessible and scholarships were handed out more often, some of the burden would be lessened for hard working students out there.
I'll still be paying off my student loans by the time my son reaches college age. I certainly won't be able to send him to college.
But that's okay, because financing a college degree is easy! He can work 24 hours a day! Walk uphill both ways to school! Sven has already told us how easy it is.
Perhaps it's time for Sven to realize that he doesn't belong here?
He might be a progressive by American standards (of even this I'm unsure), but he certainly has issues with our views.
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
I'll still be paying off my student loans by the time my son reaches college age. I certainly won't be able to send him to college.
But that's okay, because financing a college degree is easy! He can work 24 hours a day! Walk uphill both ways to school! Sven has already told us how easy it is.
Well, looking at the example that I gave you (the U fo M, a large public university), what am I missing?
If people want to work to get a degree, and are willing to work for it, it looks accessible.
quote:Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
Perhaps it's time for Sven to realize that he doesn't belong here?
He might be a progressive by American standards (of even this I'm unsure), but he certainly has issues with our views.
What are "our" views? Those of the royal "we"?
In this specific instance, I'm looking at college education costs and it doesn't seem like they are the gigantic mountain that so many make them out to be. I was surprised when I actually looked at the numbers for the University of Minnesota.
[ 17 May 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]
By the way, LTJ, my sig other and I have given several $5,000 scholarships that go to individuals who are single parents, doing well academically but need the money. I am more than happy to help someone who simply doesn't have the time to do everything needed to get through college. But, average Joe and Jane student can work to get an education and it won't cost them an arm and a leg. And it won't kill them.
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
Well, looking at the example that I gave you (the U fo M, a large public university), what am I missing?
If people want to work to get a degree, and are willing to work for it, it looks accessible.
I know! It's like I was saying to the kids the other day, I sez, "Kids," sez I, "I don't care if you are being brought up in a homeless shelter. EVERYONE can afford thousands of dollars in tuition! Everyone can work 5 part-time jobs throughout university and still get good grades!" But kids these days, they just don't believe it. They're just lazy, that's their problem!
And you know, it's not like I don't give. Oh yes, I certainly do. Why, just the other day, I gave a few thousand dollars to some nice, upstanding young woman who sang so pretty for her supper. Yes, I did, and it just made me feel all good inside. Yes, if one person gets a few thousand from me, that means EVERYONE can get ahead!
[ 17 May 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]
Fidel, from the article you posted: "Many of the students awash in debt say that they were blinded by the promise a college degree holds and unprepared to take on high levels of debt at such a young age."
Blinded by the promise or deluded? If you're going to get a degree in A versus a degree in B, it doesn't mean that you're going to get the same pay and opportunity to earn money if degree A is a poli-sci degree and degree B is a civil engineering degree.
People choose the degree they are going to get and then need to think, practically, what is the income I can get from that degree? If a student elects to get a poli-sci degree, a student needs to understand that it may be more difficult to get a well-paying job after graduation than if the student got an accounting degree, for example.
I agree! Everyone can be an accountant or a doctor! Everyone! I think it's just these dumb kids these days, wanting to do something with their lives other than being a banker or a doctor or an engineer. Everyone's good at science and math! Everyone's got a head for business!
I think it's about time these poor kids got it through their heads that the humanities and social sciences are only for the rich to dabble in. If you want to get a college education and you're poor, then you should damn well commit to being a banker! That's the only way to get ahead in this world.
Com'on, Michelle, like jrose (our resident college student on this thread) said, if you're low income (your homeless shelter example), it's relatively easy to get grants. Add that to working and you have a college degree paid for and no crushing debt burden.
As to five part time jobs? To work 25 hours a week?
Sven, working 25 hours a week is only feasible if you're in an easy program. If you're taking a full course load and they're not bird courses you probably won't have that much time. If somebody's in a really hard program like music performance, don't expect them to even work 10 hours a week.
There's also a lot of variation in living among people. Some people have to commute 10 to 15 hours a week which really puts an upper bound on their productivity. Other people are living alone for the first time and are not efficient with laundry, cooking and cleaning in the first and/or second year. One person I know has it pretty easy, her parents bought her a $150, 000 condo right next to McGill so she doesn't commute. Plus, since the value of real estate goes up, they'll probably have made munny off her "rent" while she studied. Big advantage being able to afford a mortage rather than simply "losing" 40, 000 to four years of rent.
As for student loans, there are simply a lot of scholarships in the USA, it's my observation they have it better than here. It's really accelerated in the past five years. For example, the Ivy Leagues are now free unless your parents make a very high income. For the middle of the road schools, there are some scholarships. I know four years ago I had a lot of waived tuition offers from American schools just for scoring high on the SAT, some of them were very well known apparently. My friend who did even higher than me, he got a 1580/1600, got even more offers. We both chose McGill though as we were not really ready to leave
Ultimately it depends what province you live in. I feel fortunate to live in Quebec, where they have a flawed though still good. I'm from an extremely low income background but I mabaged to get through 2 years of CEGEP and 4 years of University with only 18k in loans. They'll be interest free until six months after I leave graduate school (another six years). After which the interest rate will be very low and even then the interest will be 40% tax deductible. Students in other provinces though have a legitimite reason to protest if they pay high tuition and don't receive support. They're going to inherit the national debt that allowed baby boomers to live the high life, so they can at least get an affordable education.
I've always had the opinion that financial support should be more available to graduate students and that's how the situation is. Of my friends going to Masters and PhD programs, they all have their tuition waived with a usually generous stipend to live on. People with FQRNTs and NSERCs probably have the best situation. I suppose in a society of infinite money this would be true for undergraduates as well.
[ 17 May 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
I agree! Everyone can be an accountant or a doctor!
Actually, for a lot of people, I would recommend trade school. There are a lot of great opportunities there.
I'm a university student too. I was a full-time university student for the first two and a half years I was babbling.
But the young kids these days, they'll never believe it. They'll never believe that you can get your whole education and all your living expenses paid for by a bunch of scholarships and a part-time job at Denny's. They'll never believe that they can get good marks in school when they've stayed up half the night waiting tables. No, they sure won't. I knew at least one person out of the 500 in my program who did that! If she can do it, everyone can! But the kids these days, they won't believe it.
No sirree. They sure won't. That's the problem with young kids nowadays. Too lazy to work 18 hour days of studying and part-time jobs to get themselves through university! They refuse to believe that there are millions of dollars worth of scholarships out there just waiting for you to write and say "Please may I?" They have this stupid idea that you have to get top marks in order to get scholarships, and they refuse to believe they can get top marks after they've just pulled an 8 hour shift at their job the day before their exam.
quote:Originally posted by 500_Apples:
Sven, working 25 hours a week is only feasible if you're in an easy program.
Bullshit. My sig other is a perfect example. She worked full time as a paralegal at a law firm (which meant she was working a minimum of 40 hours per week) and she went to law school at night just under a full time rate (she graduated in three years and one semester, not three years like a true full-time student).
But, then, you might consider law school "an easy program".
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
So, what's the big deal about college costs? Are the costs wildly different than that in Canada for a comparable public institution?
Some facts about tuition and access to post-secondary education.
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
Bullshit. My sig other is a perfect example. She worked full time as a paralegal at a law firm (which meant she was working a [b]minimum
of 40 hours per week) and she went to law school at night just under a full time rate (she graduated in three years and one semester, not three years like a true full-time student).But, then, you might consider law school "an easy program".[/b]
I disagree completely.
So let's say she did 40 hours a week as a paralegal.
Let's add 15 hours a week due to commuting.
Let's add 15 hours a week due to class time.
Let's add 30 hours a week outside of class time to review the material learnt in class (that's the standard, 2 hours outside of class for every hour in class).
That's 100 hours a week.
That leaves 68 hours for sleeping, cooking, cleaning, taking showers, going to the bathroom, eating, socializing, and relaxing.
Could it be there's another factor involved that amde things easier?
In a progreesive society, there should be no tuition fees for pse.
quote: Sven, working 25 hours a week is only feasible if you're in an easy program. If you're taking a full course load and they're not bird courses you probably won't have that much time. If somebody's in a really hard program like music performance, don't expect them to even work 10 hours a week.
It's tough, really really tough. Do-able in some cases I think, but tough. I hate to keep using myself as an example, but I would have considered my program a difficult one. Certainly not easy in any respect. It was very specialized, and meant lugging around camera equiptment for hours on a bus, early morning interviews, unpredictable hours, and it had very high standards to remain in the program. This of course added extra pressure. When I said it was relatively easy to get grants and scholarships when you're low income, I meant very low income. If your parents are making 50,000 a year, good luck getting a loan! I just happened to enter university right after my dad had lost his job, so OSAP was very good to me.
But, you do what you have to do, and I ended up working four or five days a week, with a full course load. You learn to live on four hours of sleep a night for four years! [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
But, I worked all these hours, and finished my schooling on time, but despite this, I still walked away with $25,000 in debt. Much of this is because I decided to leave my smaller city, for a larger city to get an education. Had I stayed at home, it would be far less. For me, this would have been an option, but not everybody has this same situation. Not everybody lives in urban centres close to a good university, so this is another factor that makes accessibility different.
To me, I think if you work that many hours, plus full-time in the summer, you should be able to afford to go to school. Post-Secondary education should NOT be a luxury. Once again, I'm lucky, because I had the option to move home, which I've done, so I can focus on knocking down my loans. Not everybody has this fortunate situation.
When I was trying to choose to go to school, and I was from a family who had just suffered a lay-off, I had friend's parents telling me that given my situation, I should just resort to the fact that I should go to a local college and get a diploma in journalism. This would have meant not moving to Ottawa, and getting the degree that I had my heart set on. But financially it would have kept me out of debt. As far as I see it, this makes education a luxury, which it shouldn't be.
At more than $25,000, and $400 per month, if my simple math serves me right, I can expect to pay off my loan in about 65 months. This is hoping that I don't have any financial difficulty headed my way, or any other reason I might have to temporarily default my payments. So, this means, by the time I'm 30 I should ALMOST have my loans paid off. Makes it very difficult for someone starting out to even think about buying a car or a house any time soon.
quote:Originally posted by jrose:
It's tough, really really tough. Do-able in some cases I think, but tough. I hate to keep using myself as an example, but I would have considered my program a difficult one. Certainly not easy in any respect. It was very specialized, and meant lugging around camera equiptment for hours on a bus, early morning interviews, unpredictable hours, and it had very high standards to remain in the program. This of course added extra pressure. When I said it was relatively easy to get grants and scholarships when you're low income, I meant very low income. If your parents are making 50,000 a year, good luck getting a loan! I just happened to enter university right after my dad had lost his job, so OSAP was very good to me.
But, you do what you have to do, and I ended up working four or five days a week, with a full course load. You learn to live on four hours of sleep a night for four years! [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
Well, good work Jrose, really impressive, how did you manage?
I don't think it's universally doable though. 4 hours of sleep a night can be very bad for you, and a lot of people wouldn't manage. I know some who can be very productive going 48 hours without sleep. Others need at least 7 hours a night. Some need 9 hours. The other flexi factors is that you were actually able to find a good job. If you had gone to school in a period of higher unemployment, you might not have been able to find one given your hourly restrictions due to your courses (unless you're willing to skip class).
I really wouldn't recommend a full course load and full work load to the average university student.
quote:Originally posted by Caissa:
In a progreesive society, there should be no tuition fees for pse.
But tuition fees aren't the killer. It's living expenses for 8 months a year that are the obstacle. I wouldn't support free tuition fees, anyway. Generally, it's the elite that go to university. If we have the tax dollars to pay for their education, we should use them instead on housing the homeless.
quote: I really wouldn't recommend a full course load and full work load to the average university student.
True enough. And I think if I didn't have to, my marks would have been better, if I had more hours to sleep and more time to spend on homework. Don't get me wrong, I managed good marks, but if I had the extra time, I would have had the higher marks which would have made me eligible for more grants and scholarships, so it's not an ideal situation for anyone.
quote:Originally posted by 500_Apples:
I disagree completely.
So let's say she did 40 hours a week as a paralegal.
Let's add 15 hours a week due to commuting.
Let's add 15 hours a week due to class time.
Let's add 30 hours a week outside of class time to review the material learnt in class (that's the standard, 2 hours outside of class for every hour in class).
That's 100 hours a week.
That leaves 68 hours for sleeping, cooking, cleaning, taking showers, going to the bathroom, eating, socializing, and relaxing.
You’re pretty close. Although, the class time is maybe a little high and the study time may be a little low.
quote:Originally posted by 500_Apples:
Could it be there's another factor involved that amde things easier?
Actually, no. She had an aging father 2.5 hours north of here and she went up to help him every other weekend. So, it was more difficult than I had described.
What “other factor” were you thinking of that might have made this easier for her?
It was not easy. But, it is also extremely unusual in terms of the amount of work that she had to do in order to accomplish that, relative to 99% of students.
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
Walk uphill both ways to school!
You’ve got the wrong generation, Michelle. That was the generation that really worked hard was the WWII/Depression-era generation. Our generation has it easy.
quote:Originally posted by Phrillie:
If we have the tax dollars to pay for their education, we should use them instead on housing the homeless.
I totally agree with this. Put money where there is a real need. I want society to help the indigent.
But, if you can work, you can go to school. The only way I am able to earn the money that I earn is through years of hard work. I don't mind paying taxes for those who need it. But, I do mind paying taxes for those not willing to work as hard as I do.
quote:But, if you can work, you can go to school.
That isn't true! My boyfriend is one semester away from his degree from the Ontario College of Art and Design. He's had to take a leave because he cannot afford to go back. He's not eligible for OSAP, because his parents make too much, though they don't give him a cent, plus with OCAD being the only school in near distance to choose from, he had no choice but to live in the city, unless he wants to commute two hours per day. So, without loans, inability to afford to live alone in downtown T.O, he has made the choice to put it on hold, to move back in with his parents to continue to save up. Plus, in a program such as his, where supply costs are huge, who knows how long this will take. OSAP calculates based on a parent's income, which often does not reflect a student's need, depending on their relationship with their family, or what they are willing to donate to their education. I THINK this might have changed recently, to a certain point, but I'm not as educated on OSAP as I was a few years ago. If anybody knows the current system I'd be curious to know.
But he is WILLING to work, that isn't the issue. It's just a case of his realization that he needs to work full time for awhile before even being able to think of re-entering the school system. It's a shame really. He's a smart, and talented guy!
With the abolition of tuition fees and a needs based grant system, the elite wouldn't be the only ones going to pse.
Anecdotally, Ms. C. and I both come from working class families and achieved at advanced degrees at university.
quote:Originally posted by Caissa:
With the abolition of tuition fees and a needs based grant system, the elite wouldn't be the only ones going to pse.
I think that whether or not tuition should be funded on a needs-based grant system is the fundamental question.
Government should be there for people who need the help. But, if a person can work and take on a manageable amount of debt, and maybe extend the time it takes to get a degree, then why should that person expect another person is working hard to fund that education because the student doesn’t want to work as hard as she or he could to get the degree?
Most people who make significant incomes (and who pay the bulk of taxes) have to work incredibly hard and long hours. A person expecting support from the government should be willing to work just as hard. If not, then one must, necessarily, be arguing for penalizing hard work.
As far as only “the elite” going to college, if you look at the students at our large local public university (University of Minnesota), the vast majority are from middle class families (not “elite”). The “elite” go to Carlton or Notre Dame or wherever and pay ridiculous tuition bills for an education that is not worth the high incremental cost.
Let's talk Canada.
I'm advocating the abolition of tuition fees for publicly funded instituitions and a needs based grant system for other expenses.
The US is a whole other kettle of fish.
The countries have fundamentally different zeitgeist.
quote:Originally posted by Caissa:
Let's talk Canada.
UofM was just an example.
What are tuition rates at comparable large public universities in Canada?
quote:Originally posted by Caissa:
With the abolition of tuition fees and a needs based grant system, the elite wouldn't be the only ones going to pse.
Grants that would cover 8 months' worth of living expenses plus transportation and textbooks? What do you think that would cost? Do you think that's realistic while people live on the street?
quote:Anecdotally, Ms. C. and I both come from working class families and achieved at advanced degrees at university.
Like, I said, generally it's the top tiers that get the opportunity. Lots of exceptions to that, of course.
Lastly, Sven, the "middle class" are part of the elite, at least it seems that way to working class people.
quote:What are tuition rates at comparable large public universities in Canada? ~ yawn ~
We could do your research for you, Sven. Or we could ignore you, as you seem incapable of understanding that this forum serves a different country than your own, with differing issues.
[ 17 May 2007: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]
quote:quote:
Grants that would cover 8 months' worth of living expenses plus transportation and textbooks? What do you think that would cost? Do you think that's realistic while people live on the street?
While more funding is definitely crucial to pse, it would be a monumental task for any government to eliminate fees. I honestly think that paying some sort of expense helps students not to take their pse for granted. It isn't necessarily a right of passage, or does not offer a sense of entitlement, that I think would exist if it was not fee-based.
quote:Originally posted by Phrillie:
Lastly, Sven, the "middle class" are part of the elite, at least it seems that way to working class people.
Are teachers "working class people"? I think so. My pa was a school teacher and we were middle class. I think there's more overlap than not between "working class" and "middle class". 'Course, that depends on how one defines those "classes". But, I've tried to get definitions like that here before (what is "rich"?) and it's like pulling teeth!
Why do we charge tuition fees for pse and not elementary and secondary education? I think all should be paid for out of the public purse.
quote:Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
We [b]could do your research for you, Sven. Or we could ignore you.[/b]
Again, the royal "we"? Why don't you just follow the last sentence in your quote above and call it a day?
~ yawn ~
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
Are teachers "working class people"?
Nope, not when senior salaries hover around $70K.
quote:Originally posted by Phrillie:
Nope, not when senior salaries hover around $70K.
What about a plumber who makes $60,000?
What about a new teacher who makes $25,000?
quote:Originally posted by Caissa:
Why do we charge tuition fees for pse and not elementary and secondary education? I think all should be paid for out of the public purse.
Why stop at a Bachelor's degree? Why not pay for unlimited university studies, then? Doctorate, post-doctorate, as many as you want.
Because it's not a basic human right like housing and health care. We can't afford perks until we've got the basics covered.
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
What about a plumber who makes $60,000?
What about a new teacher who makes $25,000?
You make a good point, Sven. I think of "working class" has being doomed to earn a moderate salary for eternity -- secretaries spring to mind, service industry, etc. $60K is an awfully good salary. Perhaps "working class" as a description doesn't work. The hypothetical new teacher might be a newcomer to the middle class but he/she will get there eventually.
Why is pse more of a perk than what education is currently paid for?
quote: Why stop at a Bachelor's degree? Why not pay for unlimited university studies, then? Doctorate, post-doctorate, as many as you want.
That's a really great point, because really, think of how productive the world would be, if we all had our studies paid for, infinitely. I'd be in school forever! Sure, a million really great studies would be done at universities, and we'd all be enlightened and be able to communicate in brilliant discourse, but geez, there are a lot of people that would stay in school as long as the government would support them, that's for sure!
What exactly is the point of this thread?
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
UofM was just an example.
What are tuition rates at comparable large public universities in Canada?
Alright Sven. Let me tell you what I'm facing as a full-time student in Alberta.
From the time I go back to the U of A in September to when I leave in April, I will have to spend about $12,500 on tuition, books*, housing, food and other expenses.
I'm probably going to earn about 40% of that amount over the summer at my job, and fortunately I'll be living with my parents during that time.
I get a $1000 bursary every year.
I'm left with about a $5500 annual debt from now until I'm finished my degree, if I don't take a job over the school year. And I can't do that, I need to get a 3.0 GPA just to get into the graduate program I need to get the Meterology degree I want.
I'll have my degree with about... $23,000 of student loans. Provided I finish my degree by 2010. Not a guarantee.
Piece of cake, according to Sven. After all, he thinks nearly $20,000 a year for an in-state student at a public university is a "steal."
The only stealing that's going on is as a result of the racket that's called higher education these days. There's absolutely no reason for tuition to be as expensive as it is. What they really could use is a federal anti-trust lawsuit.
[ 17 May 2007: Message edited by: josh ]
Quality of education is directly linked to tuition fees, obviously, which is further outlined inEducated Solutions.
One article goes into depth about this.
quote: Quality is increasingly a topic of discussion.
Tuition has increased and private funding has increased as governmental funding has been unable to meet the growing
needs of universities with rising student populations. Additionally, there is a change in the perceptions of the role for higher education,
moving from a social institution to something closer to an industry or corporation.
Pressure to demonstrate accountability
has increased, and external bodies, like Maclean’s magazine, have begun to publish their own measures of quality.
‘Quality assurance’, ‘quality assessment’ and ‘accountability’ are all gaining more and more attention in articles, conferences and discussions on higher education policy. Yet, as I listen to these discussions, it seems at times that ‘education’ is being forgotten.
Instead, other characteristics of institutions
are being measured, including the amount of research funding, numbers of articles published, size of student population
and even the quality of sports facilities. While these things are important, it is critical
that the discussion of education is not buried in the process.
I'm not suggesting this publication because I'm involved in it, but because it outlines a lot of important issues facing students, policy makers and the government, including accessibility and tuition. There are so many issues facing post secondary education, and we've barely scratched the surface.
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
People choose the degree they are going to get and then need to think, practically, what is the income I can get from that degree? If a student elects to get a poli-sci degree, a student needs to understand that it may be more difficult to get a well-paying job after graduation than if the student got an accounting degree, for example.
That sounds really complicated, Sven, a juggernaut of decisions for young people to have to make so early in life. I think the whole issue is confusing on purpose to tell you the truth. Kids in some rich countries just go to school and don't have to worry about having enough money for text books, rent or dealing with debt service payments on loans and credit cards at the same they are trying to earn decent grades. It's difficult to concentrate on the task at hand after pulling a McNight shift, imo. All of this is no sweat for whiz kids like you though. I'm impressed.
They once said they same thing in Victorian era England, Sven. Orphans around England were encouraged to get an education, but then they said that education should be of sufficiency of excellency that the poor little buggers should devote their lives to making rich people richer ie. industrialists and capitalists alike. The kiddies were made to memorize facts and figures and times tables and could recall tidbits about the empire on demand. There was no education for the sake of having both sides of the coin and learning how to learn.
Appreciation for art and architecture and doctoring and lawyering - those were privileges and positions of employment for upstanding Londoners!. And they said the same thing about orphans reaching for the brass ring then, that they could always work their way up the ladder of success. It wasn't mentioned often that orphan's had few options for employment but to sell sandwiches or themselves in the streets, or swim for lumps of coal dropped from barges in the Thames. They learned not to want for no educashun.
What about poor little Jessica Lynch, Sven?. She just wanted to become an elementary school teacher. Was it really worth having her legs shot up for imperialism ?. There was a young American man on CBC News a few months ago who told about being in Iraq and the arguments he had with his family about signing up. He said his family had a difficult time persuading him against it because he had no health insurance and few job prospects otherwise. Sure, there are lots and lots of McJobs for young people to choose from but not many success stories. I understand that these basic necessities and more are provided instantly by signing on a dotted line in your country. Is that true do you think ?. Do imperialists really believe in socialism when it's convenient for their raw ambitions abroad ?.
Doctors and Dishwashers Dean Baker
quote:While doctors, lawyers, and accountants don't pull down the same money as corporate CEOs or the Bill Gates types, their success is hugely important in sustaining the conservative nanny state. If the only people doing well in the current economy were a tiny strata of super-rich corporate heads and high-tech entrepreneurs, there would be little political support for sustaining the system. Since the list of winners also includes the most educated segment of society, it creates a much more sustainable system. In addition to being a much broader segment of the population (5-10 percent as opposed to 0.5 percent), this group of highly educated workers includes the people who write news stories and editorial columns, teach college classes, and shape much of what passes for political debate in the country. The fact that these people benefit from the conservative nanny state vastly strengthens its hold.
[ 17 May 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
quote:Originally posted by josh:
What exactly is the point of this thread?
josh, the point of this thread is for everyone with university degrees to brag about the hardships they had to endure to get them, and then support the idea of making university more and more expensive so that all those rotten kids nowadays who have it so easy can learn what it REALLY feels like to have to work for something.
But the kids these days, they just won't believe you even if you tell them how fortunate they are to have a mortgage and no house when they're done university. No sirree. I tell you, things were different in MY day. We ate dust for supper every night, worked three jobs, and took five courses per semester. And we LIKED it!
I am totally in favour of free college tuition. But who pays? If it is private companies then never. I will never support the Coca Cola UofT or the GM u of Windsor, or the Sleeman's Uof Guelph.
If it is government then what programs will be cut to pay for it.
All three provincial parties have agreed to not go crazy with expenditures for the next election.
So if we are against private universities which I am then where does the money come from
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
But the kids these days, they just won't believe you even if you tell them how fortunate they are to have a mortgage and no house when they're done university. No sirree. I tell you, things were different in MY day. We ate dust for supper every night, worked three jobs, and took five courses per semester. And we LIKED it!
Come on now ,I think you're exaggerating just a little ?. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
I miss my overpriced school. What a great four years!
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
josh, the point of this thread is for everyone with university degrees to brag about the hardships they had to endure to get them
I never viewed working for college as a “hardship”. Certainly not bragging about what I had to do. Nothing really to brag about. Like I said, the generation that really had it tough is rapidly leaving our presence: the WWII/Depression-era people.
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
and then support the idea of making university more and more expensive so that all those rotten kids nowadays who have it so easy can learn what it REALLY feels like to have to work for something.
How on earth do you infer that, Michelle??? What I’m saying is not intended as an object lesson to learn the virtues of hard work—although it would, indeed, do that. The question is, why should someone like me who pays very large tax bills (and who works very hard and very long hours to earn the money to pay those taxes) be expect to pay for something for someone who isn’t willing to work just as hard as I do for something they want? It’s an equity issue. And, it’s far different that helping someone pay for college based on need.
But hawks down there are always crying poor mouth, Sven. Republicans are always on the defensive about socialism for the rich in America. And our poodles in Ottawa just wanna lick their boots with holding back on the phony EI surplus and defunding social programs in general.
quote:Originally posted by Caissa:
Why is pse more of a perk than what education is currently paid for?
Because K-12 is fundamental education. It's very hard to find employment without it.
quote:Originally posted by Phrillie:
Because K-12 is fundamental education. It's very hard to find employment without it.
What they are creating is a large, unskilled labour force that will end up chasing too few jobs in future which do not require PSE or higher education in general. I imagine this is part of the conservative nanny state plan for Canada which Dean Baker described is happening in the U.S.
For many years in Canada, and since Ottawa signed on the UN Declaration of Human Rights, PSE was somewhat affordable for all Canadians, and now it's not. Students are $20 Billion dollars in student debt alone today. Last year, the U.S. reported over 200, 000 American students couldn't afford to attend college or university. There are similarities in Canada today.
Canada has well-educated people coming from developing countries with one and two undergraduate degrees and who don't understand what Canadian student debt means. A grade twelve highschool diploma in Canada isn't worth twhat it was 25 years ago.
quote:Originally posted by Fidel:
What they are creating is a large, unskilled labour force that will end up chasing too few jobs in future which do not require PSE or higher education in general. I imagine this is part of the conservative nanny state plan for Canada which Dean Baker described is happening in the U.S.
You must be thinking of Germany and France, which each have a perpetual state of unemployement of about 10%. The USA's rate is about 4.4% (Canada's rate is only slightly higher). So, if you're looking for countries with workers that will end up "chasing too few jobs in future", the future is now: in Germany and France.
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
You must be thinking of Germany and France, which each have a perpetual state of unemployement of about 10%.
It's all in the way we count the unemployed, Sven.
Some countries do a better job of counting than others. They can live on a waiter's or waitress' wages in France or Germany. That's not true for North Americans today.
And next to the U.S. in a comparison of richest conutries, Canada has the largest low skill, lowly paid workforce. Germany probably has the most highly skilled workforce in the world today. Even though that country has to import almost all its raw materials, Germany typically exports around $900 billion dollars worth of finished goods and services. Germany and France are rich countries, Sven. And they aren't selling off natural resources to pad GDP figures like the abusive Canada-U.S. economic relationship.
But the U.S. doesn't include the homeless, the down and out and those whose unemployment benefits have run out and are still jobless in unemployment statistics.
Orwellian jobless statistics in the U.S. also don't include incarcerated Americans or those on parole. And, voting in democratic elections is considered a basic human right in over 80 nations. The USA is an exception and denies that right to its poorest citizens warehoused in what is the largest state-run and privatized for-profit gulag system in the world today. I think California is said to have built one new university and 21 new supermax super-duper prisons in the last fifteen years. Just goes to show there's more taxpayer's money to be had in warehousing poor people than educating them.
quote:The 1.5 million American men in jail and the 8.1 million on parole make up nearly 10 per cent of that country's male workforce. By not including them in its labour force survey, the U.S. is able to reduce its official unemployment rate by more than more than five percent.
And your country's gulag population is now more than 2.2 million Americans incarcerated in state-run and for-profit gulags, so what's the real unemployment rate in the States, Sven ?. Your prison industrial complex has more people in its private and public gulags than China does, a country with four times the population.
In Canada we have a $51 BILLION dollar EI "surplus". Only 37 percent of unemployed Canadians actually qualify for unemployment benefits today compared with over 80 percent 25 or 30 years ago, a time when Canadians chose full-time work over what were much more accessable and more generous UI and social welfare benefits available then.
A left turn on the road to Rome -- Jim Stanford
As it turns out, there are valid alternatives to American-style flexible labour markets.
[ 18 May 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Post secondary education? Whatever happened to trade work? What do we need more of? University grads or welders? I could easily get any number of trade apprenticeships, once I explained the to tradespeople that they are paid for me to work for them. Carpentry, stone masonry, welders, tool and die, etc.
A college recruiter from the States I ran into told me he was graduating electrians who would make much more than the doctors, immediately and the job-earning prospectus.
There's a subtle class distinction going on in this thread.
Training that leads to certification for welders, fitters, mechanics, air condioning etc are all categorized as post-secondary education.
What's at issue here is that the top jobs and most rewarding career employment has become a privilege of those who can afford to pay in Canada. We are short of family doctors at the same time Alberta claims they are short of electricians and welders. I think it's bullshit coming out of Wild Rose County as per usual, but so do a lot of people.
Fidel: "What's at issue here is that the top jobs and most rewarding career employment has become a privilege of those who can afford to pay in Canada."
Agree and disagree. What the fuck is a rewarding career? We can't all be activists, writers, perpetual students, and other assorted bullshit artists, including gov employees.
Have you ever worked with a good stone mason? A true chef? A real farmer?? Most blissed out people I know, and often they don't need to go to school.
Upwards mobility with a degree is true in the corporate world. But who wants to work in that sphere when there's value in professions more rewarding?
[ 18 May 2007: Message edited by: Farmpunk ]
That's fine, we do need welders and fitters and ironworkers and plumbers in Canada. No one's contesting this isn't the case. But asshole employers across Canada tend not to want to pay for training someone through five years of an apprenticeship either if they can help it. Alberta is NOT short of electricians. They just don't want to have to pay existing unionized electricians their journeyman wage rates.
What's also at issue here is Canada dropping from 13th to 16th on the list of most economically competitive nations. And we're not going to be as competitive as the social democracies or even Singapore if our colonial administrators in the two dirty old line parties continue to withold EI allowances for living and training benefits from unemployed and under-employed Canadian workers.
BTW, do you have a family doctor, FP ?. Because if you do, then stop complaining eh.
[ 18 May 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Fair points. But, coming from an employer's standpoint and listening to the many small business in this area, I've found that good employees, ie those willing to work, are hard to come by. If an able young person approaches tradework properly, there are openings.
I think that perhaps some Locals are unwilling to accept new people, young people who may have more skillset potential.
The problem is likely educational. The trades are Very poorly taught at lower levels. It's grade school classism. How many kids have the opprotunity to learn labour skills?
And, no, I don't have a family doctor. My old one, who used to work here on the farm for my grandfather, retired. But I don't go to the sawbones without a serious reason, and I hadn't seen him in years.
quote:Originally posted by Farmpunk:
The problem is likely educational. The trades are Very poorly taught at lower levels. It's grade school classism. How many kids have the opprotunity to learn labour skills?
I think that community college instructors who teach trade skills are actually certified journeymen themselves and typically have years of valuable on the job experience to share with apprenticing students. Like any sector of the economy, the job offers are either there or they aren't.
It's estimated that by 2015, about half our labour force will be aged 45 to 64 years-old.
Our economy has become less diversified in recent years not "knowledge-based" high tech as other rich G8 economies are pursuing. Canada is relying too much on the resource sector with exports of raw materials, fossil fuels and GHG-intensive energy increasing by 40% to 50% of total Canadian exports in recent years.
quote:And, no, I don't have a family doctor. My old one, who used to work here on the farm for my grandfather, retired. But I don't go to the sawbones without a serious reason, and I hadn't seen him in years.
It's a sad situation with more than five million Canadians who don't participate in their own preventative medicine because there is a shortage of doctors in Canada, about 500 a year. Preventative medicine was supposed to be a cornerstone of medicare in Canada. Our two old line parties are fucking up on purpose in order to prepare us, to soften us up for the eventual introduction of American-style health care. It's happening now with defunding post-secondary so as to produce shortages of medical people, and we are short of infrastructure for foreign-trained doctors to do their practicums in clinical settings before they are able to practive medicine in this frozen Puerto Rico. And this is happening against the will of Canadians by and large.
quote:Originally posted by Farmpunk:
There's a subtle class distinction going on in this thread.
Like a sledgehammer.
Well if we support Canadian workers rights and free choice to pursue trades apprenticeships, then why would we not see it the same way for ALL areas of employment?.
Why should rich people's kids become family doctors and lawyers and news reporters and not everybody elses ?. If students from well off families were stepping into medical schools in the numbers needed, then we probably wouldn't be concerned about our two autocratic old line parties dismantling health care like they've been doing. It takes a few years of on the job training to produce a bricklayer, but that person is not going to decide that you've got a health issue, perhaps the beginnings of a cancerous growth somewhere.
Just an on-the-ground note for you folks -
Simon Fraser University has taken the (apparently unusual, AFAIK) step of deciding to deny bursaries to anyone who does not have a student loan.
Spot the perverse debt-incurring incentive there, folks.
In addition, spot all the ways students can get screwed, too.
So much for "easily available grants" and "plain old hard work gettin' you through school". [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
Immediate reaction: which of the following is most in need of a bursary?
- Someone who needs to borrow money to go to university.
- Someone who doesn't need to borrow money to go to university.
quote:Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
Immediate reaction: which of the following is most in need of a bursary?
- Someone who needs to borrow money to go to university.
- Someone who doesn't need to borrow money to go to university.
I just got screwed by this dumb logic.
Quebec has a social program, that if you graduated on time, and got bursaries every year, they ay off 15% of your student loans.
For me, that would have been around 2700$.
I finished my program on time.
I got bursaries every year... except the last.
I made just a bit too much money. Had I made say 1000$ less, I would get that 2800$ loan pardon. Additionally, it's stupid, because I made that high salary on a job in BC, which has a higher cost of living and I had moving costs and rent costs so it's not as though I made that much money.
Fair enough. I agree that it makes no sense to penalise student who work.
quote:Originally posted by DrConway:
Just an on-the-ground note for you folks -
Simon Fraser University has taken the (apparently unusual, AFAIK) step of deciding to deny bursaries to anyone who does not have a student loan.
Spot the perverse debt-incurring incentive there, folks.
In addition, spot all the ways students can get screwed, too.
So much for "easily available grants" and "plain old hard work gettin' you through school". [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
DrConway - since when?
quote:Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
Immediate reaction: which of the following is most in need of a bursary?
- Someone who needs to borrow money to go to university.
- Someone who doesn't need to borrow money to go to university.
What if the person who doesn't need to borrow money is someone who slaved away all summer to save up $10000 to last him or her through the 8 months of the fall/spring semester?
Should that person be penalized because he or she managed to save up just as much as someone on a student loan would get?
A bursary has always been defined as being for someone in financial need, regardless of the source of income, at least until this rather bizarre policy came into play.
Canada has one of the most complicated and inflexible student loan systems in the world. Canadian students pay some of the highest interest rates on loans in the developed world. And good students like Vincent have found that there just is no economic reward in Canada for going into student loan debt. Higher education in Canada used to be affordable for everybody at one time. Not anymore.
There's no excuse for defunding PSE, health care and infrastructure spending in Canada. We have unparalleled natural wealth being siphoned off to the States every day, and we don't have much to show for it. The two old line parties running the show in this country have been on the take for years.
quote:Originally posted by DrConway:
Just an on-the-ground note for you folks -
Simon Fraser University has taken the (apparently unusual, AFAIK) step of deciding to deny bursaries to anyone who does not have a student loan.
Ottawa U has had this for years too. It discourages part-time and/or summer employment IMO.
I think I've said this before in another thread, but I am opposed to free PSE for everyone who wants it. I think there should be a minimum GPA requirement (or perhaps if you fall within the top 25% of the class etc. to account for the fact that some programs are easier than others) and students should earn free PSE. Don't countries like France and Germany have streaming programs as early as grades 8 or 9? I don't like that for Canada and I don't think we can afford to have it both ways. I prefer a system where everyone has the opportunity to pursue PSE and we reward the hard working ones who excel in their particular area.
I agree with Jrose above. There are lots of students who go through school and major in drinking with a minor in partying and sleeping in. Why should they get a free ride? What benefit is their "education" to society or even themselves?
quote: Many of my peers who have flunked out of school, had to retake classes time after time, slept through class, handed in essays late, are the ones who had a free-ride through school, thus it wasn't their money invested in it, and they somewhat took the education system for granted. VAST STEREOTYPE, I know! But I do think there is value in working your ass off through university, just to get that degree to hang on your wall. But if tuition was slightly lower, grants were more accessible and scholarships were handed out more often, some of the burden would be lessened for hard working students out there.
quote:Originally posted by Summer:
agree with Jrose above. There are lots of students who go through school and major in drinking with a minor in partying and sleeping in. Why should they get a free ride? What benefit is their "education" to society or even themselves?
I'd like to see free education for all Canadians simply because we can afford to do that and more on top of giving away the oil and natural gas, oceans of timber and massive amounts of hydro-electric power to the Yanks for a song.
Besides, there are countries where PSE is free or incredibly cheap and accessible and which don't have all this unparalleled natural wealth being taken off their hands by corporate friends of government, and those countries actually rate in the top ten most economically competitive while Canada drops further down the list.
So I, for one, don't buy into the moralistic, Puritan rhetoric about never giving a sucker an even break. We should all be driving Cadillacs and have big-giant savings accounts with the amount of natural resources that have been carted away, trucked south and siphoned off over the years and with Canada's youth having to accept a quarter century worth of student loan debt and thousands of capable students being denied student loans every year. Canadians need a god damn revolution in this frozen Puerto Rico, and to tell the feds and their corporate and banking friends that their free ride in Canada is over.
[ 28 June 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Just curious what Babblers thoughts are on something like they do in Finland, where post secondary education is free, but all men are required to do 6 months of military service, or 13 months of non-military service, then be part of the reserves. Apparently for women its not mandatory (yet).
Linus Torvalds says the free schooling helped him to develop Linux way back when he was a student. Though I don't think he had anything good to say about the mandatory service part.
Of course you still have to pay you own expenses, and are limited in hours available to work and what not.
I'd be happy to do 6 months of military service to erase my ever growing student debt. That is assuming I wasn't one of the maximum 2000 of ~900,000 that can be shipped abroad at a time.
[ 29 June 2007: Message edited by: gonzo ]
How much student loan debt did you accrue that you would be willing to give up six years of your life for? Personally, it would have to be three or four hundred thousand, at leat, for me to give up six years. It's six years in the prime of your life.
Might not be so bad considering that Finland doesn't go around starting or getting involved with stupid wars. I think it's pretty sexist, though, that men are required and women are not.
500_Apples, sorry, maybe I wasn't clear... Its 6 Months, not years.
Damn, that would have to be one hefty bill to get me to have a buzz cut and call people sir or ma'am or whatever for 6 years!
[ 29 June 2007: Message edited by: gonzo ]
Well,
Poor reading skills!
I think it's appalling the way our feds allow Canadian student loan debtor's credit ratings to suffer when defaulting on what have to be the strictest and most complicated loan repayment schemes in the developed world, right here in Canada.
It's appalling when we realize that even resident Dubya and the paleocons have passed legislation in this decade allowing indebted U.S. students to work it off with volunteer work in the peace corp, "Americorp", public service, and with more opportunities than are generally available to young people in this frozen Puerto Rico aside from joining the fascist occupation in Afghanistan in order to access a taxpayer-funded education. The feds should be ashamed of their bad selves.
Our Liberal stoogeocrats in Ottawa have governed further to the right than U.S. paleocons, fcs.
[ 01 July 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
quote:Originally posted by Fidel:
It's appalling when we realize that even resident Dubya and the paleocons have passed legislation in this decade allowing indebted U.S. students to work it off with volunteer work in the peace corp, "Americorp", public service, and with more opportunities than are generally available to young people in this frozen Puerto Rico aside from joining the fascist occupation in Afghanistan in order to access a taxpayer-funded education. The feds should be ashamed of their bad selves.
Oh my god, are you serious? Americans are allowed to work off their student debt by doing volunteer work!?
I could cry.
Michelle,
There are lots of positions with the Canadian government that would give you a tuition credit. Additionally, a high salary is completely equivalent.
I doubt the peace corps take anybody.
The BC government is also paying off the student loans of at least some of their employees. The problem is, there's no positions in the government for researchers of fundamental nuclear structure.
quote:Originally posted by DrConway:
The BC government is also paying off the student loans of at least some of their employees. The problem is, there's no positions in the government for researchers of fundamental nuclear structure.
Is that a serious counterargument, or comedy?
quote:Originally posted by 500_Apples:
I doubt the peace corps take anybody.
I could be wrong. It's something I read at 60 miles an hour and didn't fully understand it all. But it sounds like "AmeriCorps" accepts volunteers of all ages.
AmeriCorps volunteers tutor, teach, lead
quote:AmeriCorps is a federally funded program that gives people of all ages job experience and training through public service in education, public safety, health and the environment. In return, AmeriCorps members receive an $11,100 living allowance and $4,725 in scholarships or funds to help pay student loans.
Does Canada have anything like this ?. We can be sure the Republicans down there have gutted the funding for these kinds of programs, but what a damned good idea. And they think Canada is socialist.
[ 01 July 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
quote:Originally posted by 500_Apples:
Is that a serious counterargument, or comedy?
Well, if I become a professor somewhere, to get the kind of salaries commonly associated with being one, I have to... wait for it...
get tenure
which is way harder to do now than it was even 20 years ago, and so I would have to start out making about $25k a year as a constantly-on-the-go sessional instructor or assistant professor at first. Try paying your student loans on that!
Now, were I a research chemist for the BC government as a government employee, I'd get my debts liquidated in 3 years, and then after that I'd be golden.
quote:Originally posted by DrConway:
So I would have to start out making about $25k a year as a constantly-on-the-go sessional instructor or assistant professor at first. Try paying your student loans on that!
Um, I know of no assistant prof who makes anywhere near that little. Sessionals - maybe, though that's not intended to be full-time work (not that I'm defending the low rates paid to most sessionals, but still).
[ 02 July 2007: Message edited by: Left Turn ]
quote:Originally posted by DrConway:
Just an on-the-ground note for you folks -
Simon Fraser University has taken the (apparently unusual, AFAIK) step of deciding to deny bursaries to anyone who does not have a student loan.
Spot the perverse debt-incurring incentive there, folks.
In addition, spot all the ways students can get screwed, too.
Or at Langara College, where the student work (SWAP) is only available to students with student loans.
In my case I didn't need the SWAP work to pay my tuition for the Library Technician program, but I could have used the experience of SWAP work in the Langara Library. Unfortunately, I was denied the chance to obtain that experience because I wasn't on student loans. Thanks Langara. NOT.
[ 02 July 2007: Message edited by: Left Turn ]
quote:Originally posted by DrConway:
Well, if I become a professor somewhere, to get the kind of salaries commonly associated with being one, I have to... wait for it...
get tenure
which is way harder to do now than it was even 20 years ago, and so I would have to start out making about $25k a year as a constantly-on-the-go sessional instructor or assistant professor at first. Try paying your student loans on that!
Now, were I a research chemist for the BC government as a government employee, I'd get my debts liquidated in 3 years, and then after that I'd be golden.
Don't study something extremely theoretical unless you know what you want to do. I took one of the most theoretical undergraduate programs available at my university, and I'd be no good to work as a technician for hydro quebec. I will however be a good graduate student, where I'll be paid 22, 000 stipend in addition to the tuition waiver. (Over five years, that's certainly enough to pay off undergrad student loans if that were what I was planning to do). Post Docs typically get paid minimum 40, 000; and assistant professors in the sciences start at 60, 000.
Nuclear physics should be in high demand from places like the US military and the chinese government, universities are not your only option.
It is not a provincial government's responsibility to find a need to hire every single possible type of expertise. You knew what you were doing at the start.
I think the problem is that Canada is saturated with highly educated people. Over 84 percent of new people to Canada have a university degree. And there are a lot more people in Asia accessing university educations than here. Recent federal governments have done a lousy job of matching highly educated immigrants with job opportunities in Canada. The points system for immigration has no bearing on the economic situation whatsoever. CBC News a month or so ago featured a story about army recruitment for Afghanistan. One of their new recruits is a man who's come from China with a graduate degree in physics.
quote:Originally posted by DrConway:
Well, if I become a professor somewhere, to get the kind of salaries commonly associated with being one, I have to... wait for it...
get tenure
Sorry, skipped over this part. FYI tenure does not generally affect salary; ie you don't automatically get more money once you get tenure. Salaries are generally set according to experience, years in position and so forth. I suppose in a technical sense one could say that because failure to get tenure will result in dismissal, you are thus shut out of the very highest pay scales, but it is possible to get access to some of those pay scales without tenure (e.g., in many places one can be promoted to assoc. professor without tenure) at least for a period of time.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch for ridiculously high post-seondary costs for Canadians seeking their first diplomas and degrees in this Northern Puerto Rico ...
[ 02 July 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] Alright I deserved that.
I wonder if you can apply the same analysis to all PSE given the very different outcomes. E.g., law school tuition has risen dramatically in the last few years, but so has the economic benefits attached to that degree for the average student. Is free PSE a good idea for people who, on graduating, will immediately join the echelons of the highest paid members of society?
Now, before anyone starts yelling, I KNOW that not every law student makes the big bucks. At the same time, I think that enough of them do (and this true of many professional programs) to make it a legitimate consideration.
[ 02 July 2007: Message edited by: pookie ]
quote:Originally posted by pookie:
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] Alright I deserved that.
I wonder if you can apply the same analysis to all PSE given the very different outcomes. E.g., law school tuition has risen dramatically in the last few years, but so has the economic benefits attached to that degree for the average student. Is free PSE a good idea for people who, on graduating, will immediately join the echelons of the highest paid members of society?
Now, before anyone starts yelling, I KNOW that not every law student makes the big bucks. At the same time, I think that enough of them do (and this true of many professional programs) to make it a legitimate consideration.
[ 02 July 2007: Message edited by: pookie ]
It seems to me, and I may be wrong, that your position is that the student's financial burden to attent post-secondary education should be proportional to hi salary upon graduation.
I disagree with that position. But if it were to be applied, the fairest way would be through retroactive tuition following graduation, say 15% of after-tax salary for the first five years.
Now, I think this is immoral. Yes, someone who studies dentistry or accounting will make more money than someone studying certain other fields. But there's a good chance they're working harder, or that they're taking it for a reason. I don't think we should be implementing economic disincentives that discourage people from making wise economic decisions.
No, someone pursuing a double major in philosophy and history might not make as much starting salary as someone pursuing a medical degree. But they're doing that as a choice based on the other benefits; they might find their major more interesting, or more fun, or less challenging.
quote:Originally posted by 500_Apples:
It seems to me, and I may be wrong, that your position is that the student's financial burden to attent post-secondary education should be proportional to hi salary upon graduation.
Not precisely. What I am saying is that where students in very high-yield ($) programs argue for tuition support, the reason why they should be treated exactly the same as other students who are not in such programs is something that they should think about and be prepared to explain.
quote:I disagree with that position. But if it were to be applied, the fairest way would be through retroactive tuition following graduation, say 15% of after-tax salary for the first five years.
In a way, some tuition forgiveness programs operate somewhat along the same lines, by forgiving student debt where the graduate enters into a more "social justice" or "community service" type position.
quote: Now, I think this is immoral.
Immoral is a strong term, don't you think?
quote:Yes, someone who studies dentistry or accounting will make more money than someone studying certain other fields. But there's a good chance they're working harder, or that they're taking it for a reason. I don't think we should be implementing economic disincentives that discourage people from making wise economic decisions.
I think many would disagree with the basis you cite for the higher pay. In any event, it is debatable the extent to which high tuition for these programs acts as a disincentive given that these programs routinely receive far more applications than positions.
quote: No, someone pursuing a double major in philosophy and history might not make as much starting salary as someone pursuing a medical degree. But they're doing that as a choice based on the other benefits; they might find their major more interesting, or more fun, or less challenging.
Yes, and they're also likely to be making less money. The personal benefits are great, but I don't see why that has a bearing on whether all PSE tuition should receive the same kind of subsidy.
[ 02 July 2007: Message edited by: pookie ]
For both Canada and provincial student loans, the interest is a floating rate of prime plus 2.5 per cent, for a rate currently at 8.5 percent. Or students can choose a fixed rate of prime plus five per cent, or over 11 percent interest. These are the highest interest rates on student loans among richest nations.
And all of the richest nations would envy the unparalleled amount of natural resources, fossil fuels and massive amounts of hydro-electric power this country allows to be taken off our hands, carted away, trucked off, siphoned off and stolen from this frozen Puerto Rico at a frenzied pace 24-7-365. We know who is being subsidized.
[ 03 July 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
For the record: I do like what I'm doing. I just wish the government wouldn't play favorites especially when it's known that BC Liberals like screwing government employees when they feel like it.
quote:Originally posted by West Coast Greeny:
I'll have my degree with about... $23,000 of student loans.
If you get a job paying $35,000 per year (not uncommon with a university degree), then you should be able to pay this off in, say, four years.
According to your profile, you were born in 1987. So you should be free of your student debt (if you finish your education by 2010) by the time you're 27 years old.
After that, you will continue to enjoy the substantial earning potential that a university degree affords you.
quote:Originally posted by Martha (but not Stewart):
If you get a job paying $35,000 per year (not uncommon with a university degree), then you should be able to pay this off in, say, four years.
If the person puts off marriage, a family, a mortgage and lives like a Korean immigrant for several years, then I could see paying off maybe the average student loan debt in five or six years time. Sure.
Students in some other rich nations just go to school though. We're short of doctors in this frozen Puerto Rico, and the ideology isn't helping to create more.
Make that "lives like someone living in a cabin in northern BC".
Scenario: Student X finishes her/his education at the age of 23 with $23K in student loans. Student X gets a job paying $35K (as a beginning salary). If Student X pays $7K per year, then Student X can both (1) pay of her/his student loan by the time s/he is 27 and (2) live a reasonable life at $28K per year.
Fidel: "If the person puts off marriage, a family, a mortgage and lives like a Korean immigrant for several years, then I could see paying off maybe the average student loan debt in five or six years time. Sure."
I disagree that Student X has to put off marriage. Marriage costs nothing, unless you are suckered in by the marriage industry. If Student X marries someone in a similar position, then Stdent X and spouse can live on a combined income, after paying loans, of $56K per year. And that's to start: presumably wages will increase.
I disagree that Student X has to put off having children, only because I know couples in this situation who indeed have children. They do OK, though it's hard. But we're only talking a four-year period of such hardship, after which they can look forward to the enormous financial and social benefits of a university education.
There's nothing wrong with "living like a Korean immigrant", whatever exactly that means. I live on very little, much much less than $28K per year. I would not be happy to live on this little in perpetuity, but it's really not so bad in the short term. Also, I anticipate a substantial increase in my living standards when I graduate, even though I'll be paying down student loans. (Currently, I certainly do not live on $28K per year.) I anticipate a further substantial increase in my living standards when I finish paying off those debts. Moreover, I currently enjoy the intellectual benefits and lifestyle of a university student; and I will continuue to enjoy the intellectual benefits of having had that education as well as the social and financial benefits, for the rest of my life. It would be a gross display of brattishness for me to fail to see how damn lucky I am, and for me to fail to see that a $23K debt would be a small price to pay for the tremendous benefits I currently enjoy and anticipate enjoying in the future.
quote:Originally posted by Martha (but not Stewart):
Scenario: Student X finishes her/his education at the age of 23 with $23K in student loans. Student X gets a job paying $35K (as a beginning salary).
What's the average repayment schedule for student loans in Canada, realistically?. In China, I think they were complaining a year or two ago that it was taking an average of two years to pay back student loans. Meanwhile, many Canadians have carried their student loans for well over ten years and suffered bad credit ratings as a result of defaulting on payments.
The median earned-income in 2004 across Canada was just $25, 400. CLC economist Andrew Jackson says we've hemhoraged a quarter million good paying full-time manufacturing jobs since 2004, and the bulk of job growth has come from lower paying service industry jobs.
One Canadian from Newfoundland's story I linked to somewhere above ran up $65 thousand in student loans and scored some pretty good marks along the way. He's working at a clothing store in Edmonton to support his family, and his student loans are now at $80 thousand with added interest. His loans went into default, and he now has a credit rating of R9. Young Canadians are not encouraged to seek higher education by stories like these. Once upon a time just 15 or 20 years ago, the PSE situation in this Northern Puerto Rico wasn't quite like the way it is today.
Democracy and a well-informed, highly educated public go hand in hand.
Fidel: "What's the average repayment schedule for student loans in Canada, realistically?"
Good question. Dunno.
Fidel: "The median earned-income in 2004 across Canada was just $25,400."
For people with university degrees? (Recall that this particular subthread was in response to the comments made by West Coast Greeny, who is concerned that he'll have $23K in debt after getting his Master's degree in meteorology. Do those folks only earn $25K?)
Fidel: "Young Canadians are not encouraged to seek higher education by stories like these."
Well, it's not stopping me. Maybe I'm overly optimistic about my future prospects, but I really don't spend too much time worrying about a life of poverty. Besides, I'm not doing this degree for purely financial reasons: I consider myself extraordinarily fortunate to be able to spend my late teens and early twenties enjoying a luxury I consider much more luxurious than a yacht or BMW.
After 13 years of Liberal Party autocracy in Ottawa, the student loans system is broken. Even the ReformaTories have admitted as much.
quote:Originally posted by Martha (but not Stewart):
Fidel: "The median earned-income in 2004 across Canada was just $25,400."
For people with university degrees? (Recall that this particular subthread was in response to the comments made by West Coast Greeny, who is concerned that he'll have $23K in debt after getting his Master's degree in meteorology. Do those folks only earn $25K?)
$25.4k is for all adult single income earners - i.e. the entire working population in Canada.
Sobering fact, that - 50% of ALL income earners make LESS than $25,400 a year.
quote:Originally posted by Martha (but not Stewart):
Fidel: "What's the average repayment schedule for student loans in Canada, realistically?"
Good question. Dunno.
In Ontario, they will give you 9.5-15 years.
In Ontario, if you make less than a certain amount of money, they "forgive" all but $7,000/yr of your student debt, 6 months after graduating.
So assuming you didn't work a minute of your 4-year degree and if you only took out OSAP, you will have a debt of $28,000. I am not sure what the interest rate is - but it's low. Over 15 years, you can pay about $200/month and pay it back.
I think most students should be able to graduate with less debt, by saving money for college during high school and by working summers. Many schools are also very reasonable with scholarships - so long as you are not a C student, there is money to be had.
Add this to the fact that you can pay off the loan much quicker (and more cheaply) if you are more agressive with payments, and you find my position on the matter: college debt of this kind is no big deal.
Charlotte
quote:Originally posted by CharlotteAshley:
In Ontario, they will give you 9.5-15 years.
In Ontario, if you make less than a certain amount of money, they "forgive" all but $7,000/yr of your student debt, 6 months after graduating.
Partial loan forgiveness requires that the student be making regular payments up to and including the time they apply for "debt reduction." So the former students in the worst financial shape receive no "debt reduction."
Former students in Ontario struggling financially with student loans and other debt currently have no choice but to wait ten years before student loan debts are wiped clean with declaring personal bankruptcy.
And there are so many trip ups and niggling rules that most struggling former students are bound to break at least one of them in acknowledging the debt by any number of possible ways, like simply filling out interest relief applications or attempting to pay down the loan while living below the poverty line.
Even taking a college class starts the clock running again on statutes barred status of the loan, and the ten year clock starts over at time point zero. Apply for interest relief?: the clock starts over. If they feel flush enough to pay one cent on the student loan, then it's considered acknowledgement of the debt no matter what the financial status of the loan debtor may be.
Our Liberal governments of the recent past sold old student loan debts for so many cents on the dollar to private enterprise for collection, who then turn around and attempt to collect the original principal amounts on student loan debts with interest. And the legal elbow room Liberal governments provided those collection agencies to harass and cajole struggling Canadian former students would be the envy of loansharks everywhere.
That's oppressive when you consider that former students struggling with loan debts and bad credit are treated on the same level as deadbeat dads and OJ Simpson. In several other rich countries and not so rich countries, there are no tuition fees or several thousand dollar book costs with GST, and student loans in those countries go to cover cost of living for lower income and out of town students who have no choice but to move away for college and university. It's the ideology in this Northern Puerto Rico, and it stinks. It was time to ditch the two old line parties in Ottawa decades ago.
Report: Overhaul student loan system
[ 06 July 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
quote:Originally posted by Fidel:
Partial loan forgiveness requires that the student be making regular payments up to and including the time they apply for "debt reduction." So the former students in the worst financial shape receive no "debt reduction."
No they don't. Friends of mine ignored their loans all the way through university, and six months after graduating got a letter out of the blue saying they owed them way less than they thought. [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img] This was the experience of every person I know.
Charlotte
[ 08 July 2007: Message edited by: CharlotteAshley ]
quote:Originally posted by Fidel:
Former students in Ontario struggling financially with student loans and other debt currently have no choice but to wait ten years before student loan debts are wiped clean with declaring personal bankruptcy.
That's the other thing... as far as I can tell, you are not allowed to declare bankruptcy on these loans at all anymore. That ended just before I got into university, maybe ten years ago.
But given the timeline above, I'm not especially clear on why the majority of students would have trouble paying back $200/mo. Which, BTW, you don't need to start paying until you have been out of school for 6 months so you have plenty of time to find *some* way of making money.
Don't get me wrong, I think the government should be subsidizing post-secondary education *much* more than it is (and I think universities should be allowed the charge whatever they feel like), but I also don't see the current system as being completely prohibitive.
I entered university at 18, having left home a year earlier and severed ties with my parents completely. I had a small scholarship and then worked every minute of my university career. I got out of school with less than $2,000 in loans. And my parents had virtually nothing to do with it.
Charlotte
quote:Originally posted by CharlotteAshley:
No they don't. Friends of mine ignored their loans all the way through university, and six months after graduating got a letter out of the blue saying they owed them way less than they thought. [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img] This was the experience of every person I know
There is no forgiveness for federal student loans, only debt reduction. And the person's loans can not be in default in order to qualify for debt reduction. Check it out. It's no wonder students are complaining.
CanLearn FAQ
The rotten bastards didn't forgive poorLewis' student loan, and this Canadian student had three limbs missing after his second day on the job with some scabby outfit clearing brush for Brascan's power lines. The debt collection agency jackals hounded poor Lewis for his student loans until the day Mike Harris' electrical power DREGulation scheme killed him.
After more than 100 years in power and sharing power, Canada's two kleptocratic old line parties need cleaning out of Ottawa and Queen's Parks in order to prevent further rot and decay.
quote:Originally posted by CharlotteAshley:
But given the timeline above, I'm not especially clear on why the majority of students would have trouble paying back $200/mo. Which, BTW, you don't need to start paying until you have been out of school for 6 months so you have plenty of time to find *some* way of making money.
I'm sure there are more than 800 student loan debtors who who diagree. \
There have been actual Nazis and other war criminals who've lived out the rest of their lives in this country and were never harassed and harangued by the feds and debt collectors like ordinary Canadians trying to access higher education in this Northern Puerto Rico with unparalleled natural wealth being siphoned off by marauding multinationals.
The two old line parties are violating Canadian's basic rights as outlined in the UN declaration Ottawa signed on to several decades ago. It says access to higher education should be based on merit not ability to pay. And there are thousands of Canadians who qualify for PSE and have been denied student loans.
"No replastering. The structure is rotten" - Paris 1968
Is it right for Canadians in the armed forces to access taxpayer funded college and university educations while the rest of the slobs have to go into long-term debt for the right to access PSE ?.
quote:Originally posted by Fidel:
[QB]
There is no forgiveness for federal student loans, only debt reduction. And the person's loans can not be in default in order to qualify for debt reduction. Check it out. It's no wonder students are complaining. [QB]
Ah, the program I was referring to above is the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant:
"The Ontario Student Opportunity Grant is available to help students reduce their annual Canada-Ontario Integrated Student Loan debt by limiting a student's repayable debt to $7,000 for a two-term academic year and $10,500 for a three-term academic year. It is available at the end of each of your academic years."
Info available at https://osap.gov.on.ca/.
Charlotte
quote:Originally posted by Fidel:
Is it right for Canadians in the armed forces to access taxpayer funded college and university educations while the rest of the slobs have to go into long-term debt for the right to access PSE ?.
Yes, it's a recruitment bonus, what's wrong with that?
They get salaries too... and when they go to Afghanistan, I don't think they have to pay for rent to sleep in the barracks...
quote:Originally posted by CharlotteAshley:
Ah, the program I was referring to above is the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant:
Yes, and Canadian students are still in hawk for more than $10 BILLION dollars worth of student loan debt!. Here's an anectdote of my own: I don't know any student loan debtors who have had their federal student loan debts, the largest proportion of their personal debts, either erased or reduced by any such overly-generous federal government any time recently.
$10B represents more than half of the national debt accumulated by Ottawa between the years 1938 and 1974 as a result of spending their way through world war and laissez-faire induced economic depression. And since bailing out the private banks in 1991 and Liberal cutbacks to the provinces, and slashing and burning federal programs, the Liberals still only managed to pay down a fraction of national debt racked up since Mulroney's time in the sun. The provinces went on to pile up another $400 billion dollars worth of debt since the rest of the money supply was privatized. Next to the very politically conservative U.S. and perhaps Brazil pre-Lula, Canada's two old line parties have racked-up some of the largest national debts in the world while slashing social program spending.
quote:Originally posted by 500_Apples:
Yes, it's a recruitment bonus, what's wrong with that?
They get salaries too... and when they go to Afghanistan, I don't think they have to pay for rent to sleep in the barracks...
I knew you were a socialist at heart, 500. I think you're one step away from believing access to PSE should be a basic right for ALL Canadians as per the UN declaration of human rights Ottawa signed on to many years ago.
Like yourself, I, too, believe that taxpayer funding of post-secondary is a necessity for any advanced democracy. Taxpayer-funded college and university education should not be used as an enticement to dedicate one's life to U.S. imperialism. It's a terrible form of government coercion, and it should be stopped today. The feds should be told to remove that particular enticement from the top left-hand side of their recruiting web page and posters plastered across Canada in every shopping mall.
The feds should either fully-fund PSE in Canada, or stop using taxpayer's money to prop up U.S. imperialism abroad with aggressive U.S.-style recruting bonuses for Canadians shut out of the free market prosperity alleged to be taking place in this country. That way, there is no mistaking which Canadians are joining the CF to become what amount to paid mercenaries in someone else's country on the other side of the planet, and which of them were there for the taxpayer-funded socialism for a select few.
[ 10 July 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]
I went to a baseball game tonight with two law students at the University of Minnesota, one of whom was from Toronto.
Somehow, we got on the subject of college tuition. He said that his undergraduate tuition and fees, four years ago, were $5,000 per year. That is cheap!!
When I got home tonight, I did a little research here. The tuition rates in Canadian colleges are way lower than American universities. And, there's no comparison when looking at Canadian tuition rates and elite American private colleges and universities (with many having annual tuition rates of $30,000 to $40,000 per year).
Hells bells. Even if Canadian students take out loans for 100% of their tuition and fees, it's still a steal. And for those willing to work even a mimimal work schedule to pay a portion of their tuition while in school, the post-graduation debt load is microscopic.
ETA: At a graduate level: Tuition for the Toronto student at the University of Minnesota Law School is US$31,000 per year. Had he gone to the University of Toronto, his law degree tuition would only have been about C$16,000.
I had a German law student working for me this summer (he has his law degree from a German university and received his LLM degree from the University of Minnesota Law School this spring). He said that German Universities are starting to impose a fee on students (something nominal like 500 euros per year) when previously it was free. And the studenst are complaining about that!!!
[ 12 July 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
When I got home tonight, I did a little research here. The tuition rates in Canadian colleges are way lower than American universities. And, there's no comparison when looking at Canadian tuition rates and elite American private colleges and universities (with many having annual tuition rates of $30,000 to $40,000 per year).
But meatheads like dubya get into Yale and Harvard through legacy agreements and cash on the barrelhead. Sometimes it's not what you know but who you know, ya know?. France has a similar elite college for plutocrats in training. It's an unreal situation to be in for the majority of people's kids.
[qote]Hells bells. Even if Canadian students take out loans for 100% of their tuition and fees, it's still a steal. And for those willing to work even a mimimal work schedule to pay a portion of their tuition while in school, the post-graduation debt load is microscopic.
They'd rather be more than $12 billion dollars in the hole collectively early on in life. What else can we expect from lazy beer-swilling Canadians?. Hey, our appointed bank governor just raised the rate another half a percentage point, so watch our student debt load pile up even higher in the next few years while our do-nothing overpaid senators mull over Alexa McDonough's student bankruptcy proposal of last year while relaxing on a beach somewhere in Calfornia or Florida.
quote:ETA: At a graduate level: Tuition for the Toronto student at the University of Minnesota Law School is US$31,000 per year. Had he gone to the University of Toronto, his law degree tuition would only have been about C$16,000.
If he's not Canadian, then tack on another $10 G's to daddy's credit cards. Our universities love to gouge hell out of foreign students just like U.S. colleges.
And 500 Euros is nothing for German students, although I don't like the idea of free market education anymore than I like U.S.-style free market health care. It tends to become too expensive and inaccessable for tens of millions.
For one thing, U.S. and German economies are a lot larger than Canada's. Sure, we have a big GDP now. But a lot of it is our valuable raw materials and energy being carted off south and not because all of us have good paying union jobs like in Germany. Your appointed bank governors have been using slightly looser money policies than our money managers up here. And with the recent interest rate hike at the central bank, a few more Canadian students will have to either work more McNight shifts and save for a few years for the right to access high-priced higher education, or willingly and voluntarily accept a quarter century worth of student loan debt. Or as we become more like the U.S., Canada's own would-be Jessica Lynch's can always volunteer to fight the enemies of freedom in the enemies' own country somewhere several time zones away.
Interest rates in student loans aren't as high the U.S. as here. And it looks like there are struggling American students and politicians demanding reforms