Should Liberal Arts Majors have Limits on How Much Student Loans they Can take Out?

[TalonStrike]

It makes since to offer student loans to people majoring in STEM subjects, who will be able to actually get good paying jobs and pay down all of their loan debt. For instance, I majored in a STEM subject, and I am of track to pay off all of my debt within 3 years of graduation despite the large amount of debt that I have. However, what about the people who major in liberal arts subjects, get low paying jobs or no jobs at all, and have no clear path to pay off their student loan debt? Should they be able to take out the same amount of student loans as a STEM student? I think not. I find it somewhat ridiculous how people can just have their student debt "forgiven" after a certain period of time. If you incurred debt from borrowing money from hard-working taxpayers, then you should be obligated to pay it all off. Those "forgiven" people would end up costing the taxpayers a lot of money in the end. That's not how it's supposed to work. The STEM people on the other hand would be more likely to pay off all of their debt including interest, benefiting the taxpayers in the end.

 

[LumbergTech]

I can see where you are coming from, but at the same time I think that there are a number of degrees that don't pay very well that at least some of us in society believe are very important. Not everything can be measured in monetary value. I agree that someone shouldn't be able to take out some absurd amount of loans for something that isn't providing value to society, but I don't agree with the blanket disregard that seems to be tossed out at anyone who isn't/didnt pursue one of a few very specific degrees.

 

[randomrogue]

This poll will never be fair with the demographics of this forum.

I had to look up STEM. Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics. I think it's rather elitist to think that those are premier majors. Some people actually want to study and work with something more liberal arts oriented or even something in the STEM category that simply doesn't pay well. Try getting a job as an Archaeologist that pays well.

As long as they pay off the debt I don't really care. Clearly if you have a maximum earnings potential of $40,000 a year you shouldn't be able to borrow more than a couple hundred bucks a month in student loan payments but that's enough money to get a degree at a state school.

Can you even get an ivy league fluff degree?

Haven't finished reading this but it might be relevant: http://247wallst.com/2012/10/12/the-highest-and-lowest-paying-college-majors/

 

[randomrogue]

Also, when did they allow student loans to be forgiven? As far as I know only Teachers have that option and I'm pretty sure it's after they've worked for a while. Makes sense to cut our educators a break considering we pay them a nickel a day to babysit our minions.

 

[Farang]

As a liberal arts major, I used to place a lot of value in STEM graduates my first few years out of college. However as my career as progressed that is no longer the case. STEM majors are simply a higher commodity coming out of school, over the long term they aren't necessarily any better.

I do think it might make sense to rebalance the availability of STEM and liberal arts education. For example here in Seattle they are cutting the computer science dept at UW. CUTTING! Tech is our biggest industry. Take away some resources from liberal arts and expand C.S. That helps twofold--more people who want to take C.S. can take it, and liberal arts becomes more competitive so people aren't just doing it as a default major. People who are passionate about a certain liberal arts subject can succeed, the problem is when people are doing it aimlessly as the easy major

 

[TalonStrike]

This poll will never be fair with the demographics of this forum.

I had to look up STEM. Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics. I think it's rather elitist to think that those are premier majors. Some people actually want to study and work with something more liberal arts oriented or even something in the STEM category that simply doesn't pay well. Try getting a job as an Archaeologist that pays well.

As long as they pay off the debt I don't really care. Clearly if you have a maximum earnings potential of $40,000 a year you shouldn't be able to borrow more than a couple hundred bucks a month in student loan payments but that's enough money to get a degree at a state school.

Can you even get an ivy league fluff degree?

Haven't finished reading this but it might be relevant: http://247wallst.com/2012/10/12/the-highest-and-lowest-paying-college-majors/

interesting article

 

[Absolution75]

Can anyone confirm this? But I heard that to be able to qualify for federal loan assistance, you need to be able to show that a certain percentage of your graduates receive jobs within a certain timeframe of their graduation. If you fail, you lose the ability to receive federal loan assistance for your students.

I heard it from someone in grad school one time - may or may not be true. If it is true, I don't see why we should cap loans for liberal arts majors. Perhaps 10 years from now, we become like China/Japan where engineers are so prevalent that it may be easier to fine a job with a liberal arts degree.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

If you're going to leach money from us, the least we should be able to do is have some input on what you are able to take. Sorry, I'm all for the whole "freedom of choice" - but just like welfare, when it's not your money - it should no longer be your choice.

With the way the system is today, I can get a major in "Playing Videogames" on the government dollars

 

[unokitty]

Everyone should be able to study whatever they want and can afford.

However, if you want use taxpayer money then:

“Someone who has a liberal arts degree isn’t going to make the same amount as someone with a degree in nursing or science, engineering or mathematics,” Kantrowitz said. “As a general rule, every student should borrow no more than what they expect their starting annual salary to be.”
--SunTimes

Everyone knows that the current status quo is not going to hold... The only question is how bad does it have to get before our distinguished politicians stop loaning government money to children that don't have much of a chance of ever paying it back...

Uno

 

[Darwin333]

Everyone should be able to study whatever they want and can afford.

However, if you want use taxpayer money then:

“Someone who has a liberal arts degree isn’t going to make the same amount as someone with a degree in nursing or science, engineering or mathematics,” Kantrowitz said. “As a general rule, every student should borrow no more than what they expect their starting annual salary to be.”
--SunTimes

Everyone knows that the current status quo is not going to hold... The only question is how bad does it have to get before our distinguished politicians stop loaning government money to children that don't have much of a chance of ever paying it back...

Uno

AND it is one of the very very few debts that can not be discharged in bankruptcy. So they are just flat out taking advantage of the dumb kids and straddling them with debt they can't afford for a very long time. I know stupid is supposed to hurt but we are talking about fresh out of high school kids and frankly our high schools aren't doing a very good job at teaching the implications of taking on debt such as this.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

OP, I think you have correctly identified easy access to loans as one of the causes of the education bubble, but you have come up with the wrong solution. Asking the government to efficiently allocate education dollars won't work any better than any other form of central economic planning.

IMO to really solve the education bubble we need to attack the problem from the both the creditor and debtor (student) sides of the equation.

Creditor side:
1. Get the government out of the student loans business.
2. Make student loans easier to discharge in bankruptcy (but still more difficult than other forms of debt)

Debtor side:
3. Require more data collection and disclosure on student salaries and loan defaults on by school and major
4. Improve personal finance education at the high school level

 

[cwjerome]

As a strong supporter and promoter of a good liberal arts education, I'm OK with a generalized "means" test whereby different degrees get slightly more or less loan money based on average income projections and statistics. I think maybe it will even help liberal arts programs and those who get those degrees while encouraging some on the fence to pursue STEM-like degrees for the extra loan money.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

It makes since to offer student loans to people majoring in STEM subjects, who will be able to actually get good paying jobs and pay down all of their loan debt.

We don't have any shortage of people in STEM fields. It's a myth. In fact, there are even underemployed PhD scientists. See:

http://www.psmag.com/science/the-real-science-gap-16191/

What we should do is force higher education to adopt a "human capital contract" type of model. Students would not pay any tuition or expenses up front but would be contracted to pay a certain percentage of their earnings for, say, 40 years.

If the higher education is valuable and worthwhile and if there is a market demand for graduates with that kind of education then the school can earn a profit. If not then the school might lose money. It would be a way of restoring market-based forces to higher education.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

AND it is one of the very very few debts that can not be discharged in bankruptcy.

Yup. If you "play by the rules" and do what your parents and your teachers indoctrinated you to do as well as following public service announcements and what our politicians say--you cannot discharge your student loans in bankruptcy.

BUT--if you use credit cards to gamble at casinos, spend it on blow, or purchase luxury cars that you cannot afford--ta da! You can discharge the debt in bankruptcy!

 

[Fenixgoon]

We don't have any shortage of people in STEM fields. It's a myth. In fact, there are even underemployed PhD scientists. See:

http://www.psmag.com/science/the-real-science-gap-16191/

What we should do is force higher education to adopt a "human capital contract" type of model. Students would not pay any tuition or expenses up front but would be contracted to pay a certain percentage of their earnings for, say, 40 years.

If the higher education is valuable and worthwhile and if there is a market demand for graduates with that kind of education then the school can earn a profit. If not then the school might lose money. It would be a way of restoring market-based forces to higher education.

given the amount of money DoD is throwing at STEM, i must respectfully disagree.

go to any big-name employer and i guarantee they will have engineering openings.

other factors affecting this "shortage" might be whether people relocate and whether the positions pay the desired salary.

i was talking to a friend of mine from work who applied for a job and the employer said the starting salary was about $40k. my friend laughed, shook their hand, and walked away (i'm guessing he makes about $60k right now)

 

[Farang]

We don't have any shortage of people in STEM fields. It's a myth. In fact, there are even underemployed PhD scientists. See:

http://www.psmag.com/science/the-real-science-gap-16191/

What we should do is force higher education to adopt a "human capital contract" type of model. Students would not pay any tuition or expenses up front but would be contracted to pay a certain percentage of their earnings for, say, 40 years.

If the higher education is valuable and worthwhile and if there is a market demand for graduates with that kind of education then the school can earn a profit. If not then the school might lose money. It would be a way of restoring market-based forces to higher education.

There is a shortage. Not in certain fields, but in the obvious ones. I'm familiar with computer science and it's nuts right now, absolutely crazy.

 

[ColdFusion718]

I can see where you are coming from, but at the same time I think that there are a number of degrees that don't pay very well that at least some of us in society believe are very important. Not everything can be measured in monetary value. I agree that someone shouldn't be able to take out some absurd amount of loans for something that isn't providing value to society, but I don't agree with the blanket disregard that seems to be tossed out at anyone who isn't/didnt pursue one of a few very specific degrees.

Too many goddamned people coming from the lower class and middle class are studying these useless soft majors. It's hurting the country as a whole.

Look at countries like China. What are most of the students there studying? A majority of them are in some sort of science, engineering, or medical field. They get it. They understand that to push their country forward, they have to advance as a country in these fields. The kids of this generation don't get it. They think it's OK to go rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans to study shit like Art History. A lot of these kids come from middle class or working class families. Give me a break!

If you want to study useless stuff like Sociology, Communications, or Philosophy do that during your free time instead of running up $40k a year in debt.

I've always liked history but did I major in it? No way because I know it pays squat! I studied engineering instead because I'm reasonably good with math. Now as a grown man, I can do all of the history reading I want instead of paying some school $$$ to tell me which history books to read.

Liberal arts are for kids from wealthy families with trust funds. Notice I said wealthy, not rich. When you're rich, you can live comfortably. But when you're wealthy, you can help your friends/family become rich, even if they are complete idiots.

Take a look at the rising costs of higher education. Do you honestly think that's an accident? The government has cut investments in education year over year. Why are they doing that? Well, if you're wealthy, you can get people elected and when you can get people elected, you can get laws written that help you and your friends.

If a class can influence laws that make higher, quality education farther and farther out of reach, the poor won't be able to gain access. Less educated people are easier to subdue.

OP, you're an idiot for even typing out "STEM."

 

[Farang]

Too many goddamned people coming from the lower class and middle class are studying these useless soft majors. It's hurting the country as a whole.

Look at countries like China and India. What are most of the students there studying? A majority of them are in some sort of science, engineering, or medical field.

If you want to study useless stuff like Sociology, Communications, or Philosophy do that during your free time instead of running up $40k a year in debt.

This is really close minded. Look, I get that you get a lot of recruiters contacting you and you got a high salary out of college. Your degree paid off in a very obvious way. Like job training.

I majored in political science. Most of my schoolwork consisted of writing essay 5-20 pages in length and revising them repeatedly, usually on topics related to politics and history. This wasn't mental masturbation, there is actual work involved and yes I am pretty sure I can do it a hell of a lot better than most engineers. Just like they can engineer stuff a lot better than I can. It's good to have mutual respect that way.

Now I am a freelance writer. Directly related to my degree. I've also been successful in business, in a baffling sort of way (in fact because many engineers can't step back and see the larger picture and I'm able to profit from that). Did I look in some career guide and see what a starting salary was going to be for poli sci majors? Does that determine its value to me? No. If I wanted to engineer stuff I would've studied engineering, turns out I'm much better at something else so I got a very valuable education in that.

 

[ColdFusion718]

This is really close minded. Look, I get that you get a lot of recruiters contacting you and you got a high salary out of college. Your degree paid off in a very obvious way. Like job training.

I majored in political science. Most of my schoolwork consisted of writing essay 5-20 pages in length and revising them repeatedly, usually on topics related to politics and history. This wasn't mental masturbation, there is actual work involved and yes I am pretty sure I can do it a hell of a lot better than most engineers. Just like they can engineer stuff a lot better than I can. It's good to have mutual respect that way.

Now I am a freelance writer. Directly related to my degree. I've also been successful in business, in a baffling sort of way (in fact because many engineers can't step back and see the larger picture and I'm able to profit from that). Did I look in some career guide and see what a starting salary was going to be for poli sci majors? Does that determine its value to me? No. If I wanted to engineer stuff I would've studied engineering, turns out I'm much better at something else so I got a very valuable education in that.

Good for you. You've made it. I'm talking about the country as a whole. You are an aberration and you know it. If you look at other folks with backgrounds similar to yours can you honestly say that a larger percentage of them are gainfully employed on equal footing compared to you? No you can't because that would be complete BS.

I'll reiterate--the country is hurting as a whole on the education front. Do you think we can sustain our technological superiority as a country if we continue to get generation after generation of students who pursue an education in fluff?

The tide is already turning. Instead of our own students studying science, engineering, medicine, etc, we are importing students from other countries like China and India to fill these seats in our universities.

Not only that, we are also importing a lot of the workforce in these fields to meet the job demand.

If anything, we need fewer political science graduates. Look our Congress members, for instance. How many of them have a background in law and political science? Nearly all of them!

Look at China's government. They are made up of mostly economists, scientists, and engineers.

P.S. The bolded text you've written isn't a sentence. I thought you said you were a writer? I think you could have used a few more of those "5 to 20-page papers."

 

[momeNt]

Student loans just need to be privatized. Feds will never be able to properly price different majors the way the market will be able to.

 

[Farang]

Good for you. You've made it. I'm talking about the country as a whole. You are an aberration and you know it. If you look at other folks with backgrounds similar to yours can you honestly say that a larger percentage of them are gainfully employed on equal footing compared to you? No you can't because that would be complete BS.

I'll reiterate--the country is hurting as a whole on the education front. Do you think we can sustain our technological superiority as a country if we continue to get generation after generation of students who pursue an education in fluff?

The tide is already turning. Instead of our own students studying science, engineering, medicine, etc, we are importing students from other countries like China and India to fill these seats in our universities.

Not only that, we are also importing a lot of the workforce in these fields to meet the job demand.

If anything, we need fewer political science graduates. Look our Congress members, for instance. How many of them have a background in law and political science? Nearly all of them!

Look at China's government. They are made up of mostly economists, scientists, and engineers.

P.S. The bolded text you've written isn't a sentence. I thought you said you were a writer? I think you could have used a few more of those "5 to 20-page papers."

Yea buddy I'm not getting paid for this so sorry if it isn't my best work. I'm not exactly writing for the Wall Street Journal.

I could just as easily denigrate engineers.. like the dude who went to college 4 years to perfect Yahoo mail's drop down menus. Congrats dude you're basically a paid robot. I can't really engage in discussion with someone who calls my education "fluff" and thinks because they can read a book on Abe Lincoln they can get the same education that is at a university (I read a Ruby on Rails book can I be an engineer now?)

I'm not an aberration. You don't need to be working in politics to be using a poli sci degree. Plenty of sales/business people have liberal arts backgrounds and are good at what they do precisely because of what they learned with their education.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

There should be a minimum credit rating (of your parents if under 24, just as your estimated family contribution is calculated) for student loans and it should be easier to take out loans if you are in a field that produces graduates that get a job. This should be based on the university's placement record in the field: So for undergrads an english degree from Stanford would be easier to get money for than a chemistry degree from a barley-accredited university.

 

[BoomerD]

If the STEM degrees are worth so much more in the job market...should universities charge more for those than they do for liberal arts degrees?

 

[jihe]

Who will have an easier time finding a job? Liberal arts major or martial arts major?

 

[marvdmartian]

I can see where you are coming from, but at the same time I think that there are a number of degrees that don't pay very well that at least some of us in society believe are very important. Not everything can be measured in monetary value. I agree that someone shouldn't be able to take out some absurd amount of loans for something that isn't providing value to society, but I don't agree with the blanket disregard that seems to be tossed out at anyone who isn't/didnt pursue one of a few very specific degrees.

At the same time, don't you also see a trend toward more of those "very important" liberal arts degrees, and less toward degrees in engineering, medicine, etc? How many English major degrees do we need in this country? How about art, or psychology?

I wonder, sometimes, if we're not seeing this trend because kids have gotten lazier, and are more attracted to degree programs that aren't as difficult (like engineering, medicine, etc), or take less effort? This whole thing could be an end result of society poo-pooing kids in recent years, and not forcing them to face a little bit of reality. Why take a difficult major to get that degree they say I need, if I can take something that's easier to pass?? :hmm: