An interesting and potentially useful perspective here. Except for one thing. It's hard to claim that these students were mislead because a lot of them indeed got high-paying jobs in the DEI scam. Now some of those woke privilege jobs have evaporated you can hardly turn round and blame the colleges.
You said it yourself, it was a DEI SCAM. The things taught in it, like discrimination based on skin color are even against the law. Just because the creators of the degree thought it might work out in the short term, doesn't mean that it would work in the long run because eventually it could be (rightfully) brought to court. The adults are supposed to know better.
(I do agree the students should have known better as well, but they were brainwashed to a certain extent, IMHO)
This is an interesting concept, but if you’re going to include DEI degrees then you’re going to have to include all the other scam degrees which honestly are about 80% of them. Business development degree, biology, anthropology, and most art degree are also useless in the real world. That said if you’re going to do this, you should make the colleges pay for it and not the taxpayer. Most of us were smart enough not to get crap degrees.
I would suggest that it should be used for all scam degrees where the colleges lied about the effectiveness or usefulness of them. The Borrowers Defense to Repayment (being used correctly in this manner) would put pressure on the colleges to not provide crap degrees (or not suggest those crap degrees are going to make you a certain amount of money). The whole point of the BDR is so that the government (taxpayers) can recoup its/their money and hold the colleges accountable. They've not been held accountable for too long and they're running amok.
Agreed. A lot of these degrees are really only for rich kids who can afford to lose 100 grand or so and not be affected. That poor and middle class kids were encouraged to take out massive loans for them is criminal.
I’d be cool with absolutely everybody getting their student loans forgiven, on a couple of conditions:
1) Student loans go away. There will never be another student loan, public, private, government-backed, and I might even be in favor of parents being banned from loaning money to their kids to go to college. It’d force college costs back down where normal people could afford it. My mother paid her way through grad school waiting tables, while supporting two kids. That needs to be possible again.
2) Any institution responsible for issuing the loans should be forced to eat the cost. No bailouts. Student loans were always an evil scam driving up the price of college, while simultaneously making it so that huge swathes of jobs that never required a college degree were inaccessible to non-degree-holders. That was never OK, and those responsible deserve to have that rubber band snap back on them.
3) Everybody working for the govt. end of the student loan racket should be laid off immediately, their offices closed, the buildings and office furniture auctioned off, and the proceeds applied to the national debt.
Thanks for reading and your comment. That would sure be interesting. I know that the government so easily giving out large student loans raised the cost of college degrees and it's a huge shame (and sham).
I am not sure which came first, the chicken or the egg here. Was it that the businesses thought a DEI degree was worth something or was it the schools giving out DEI degrees? I'd love an answer if anyone knows. I was only made aware of this situation after it was in full force by both parties.
HR Departments (and hiring managers) lacking a good ability to judge competence of potential employees, and desiring an "easy button" to decide between candidates, a "degree" became a symbol of a talented individual.
Using degrees to judge people (when you know virtually nothing else about them) was sort of okay as it implied the person had some level of familiarity with the subject. So for engineers, physicists, chemists, etc this is perhaps better than nothing, but overall what a degree really symbolized was either A) the individual was good enough at taking tests to get a scholarship; B) Had enough wealth (and connections) to afford college; C) were four years older and thus more experienced with life.
So if a degree in chemistry qualified you for a starting job as a chemist, what does a degree in DEI qualify you for?
No matter what field, I'll take four years of hands on experience at a job, over some piece of paper.
An interesting and potentially useful perspective here. Except for one thing. It's hard to claim that these students were mislead because a lot of them indeed got high-paying jobs in the DEI scam. Now some of those woke privilege jobs have evaporated you can hardly turn round and blame the colleges.
You said it yourself, it was a DEI SCAM. The things taught in it, like discrimination based on skin color are even against the law. Just because the creators of the degree thought it might work out in the short term, doesn't mean that it would work in the long run because eventually it could be (rightfully) brought to court. The adults are supposed to know better.
(I do agree the students should have known better as well, but they were brainwashed to a certain extent, IMHO)
This is an interesting concept, but if you’re going to include DEI degrees then you’re going to have to include all the other scam degrees which honestly are about 80% of them. Business development degree, biology, anthropology, and most art degree are also useless in the real world. That said if you’re going to do this, you should make the colleges pay for it and not the taxpayer. Most of us were smart enough not to get crap degrees.
I would suggest that it should be used for all scam degrees where the colleges lied about the effectiveness or usefulness of them. The Borrowers Defense to Repayment (being used correctly in this manner) would put pressure on the colleges to not provide crap degrees (or not suggest those crap degrees are going to make you a certain amount of money). The whole point of the BDR is so that the government (taxpayers) can recoup its/their money and hold the colleges accountable. They've not been held accountable for too long and they're running amok.
Agreed. A lot of these degrees are really only for rich kids who can afford to lose 100 grand or so and not be affected. That poor and middle class kids were encouraged to take out massive loans for them is criminal.
I’d be cool with absolutely everybody getting their student loans forgiven, on a couple of conditions:
1) Student loans go away. There will never be another student loan, public, private, government-backed, and I might even be in favor of parents being banned from loaning money to their kids to go to college. It’d force college costs back down where normal people could afford it. My mother paid her way through grad school waiting tables, while supporting two kids. That needs to be possible again.
2) Any institution responsible for issuing the loans should be forced to eat the cost. No bailouts. Student loans were always an evil scam driving up the price of college, while simultaneously making it so that huge swathes of jobs that never required a college degree were inaccessible to non-degree-holders. That was never OK, and those responsible deserve to have that rubber band snap back on them.
3) Everybody working for the govt. end of the student loan racket should be laid off immediately, their offices closed, the buildings and office furniture auctioned off, and the proceeds applied to the national debt.
Thanks for reading and your comment. That would sure be interesting. I know that the government so easily giving out large student loans raised the cost of college degrees and it's a huge shame (and sham).
The real crime is that of the hiring managers and HR Departments that considered these degrees to have any value in the first place.
I am not sure which came first, the chicken or the egg here. Was it that the businesses thought a DEI degree was worth something or was it the schools giving out DEI degrees? I'd love an answer if anyone knows. I was only made aware of this situation after it was in full force by both parties.
I say it was the chicken.
HR Departments (and hiring managers) lacking a good ability to judge competence of potential employees, and desiring an "easy button" to decide between candidates, a "degree" became a symbol of a talented individual.
Using degrees to judge people (when you know virtually nothing else about them) was sort of okay as it implied the person had some level of familiarity with the subject. So for engineers, physicists, chemists, etc this is perhaps better than nothing, but overall what a degree really symbolized was either A) the individual was good enough at taking tests to get a scholarship; B) Had enough wealth (and connections) to afford college; C) were four years older and thus more experienced with life.
So if a degree in chemistry qualified you for a starting job as a chemist, what does a degree in DEI qualify you for?
No matter what field, I'll take four years of hands on experience at a job, over some piece of paper.