What do you consider a lot? Student debt?

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Your point is taken, but from everything I've read, it seems to be more than a generalization:

https://www.cpapracticeadvisor.com/...lays-homeownership-for-millennials-by-7-years

Eh it was a survey. "believe this debt is to blame for what they typically expect to be a seven-year delay from buying."

Key word is "believe" and "expect".

The sample size is very small honestly. Out of 92,419 surveys sent out only 2,203 responded back.

Like I said it's not the student loan isn't a hinderance but so many other things impact your decisions. That survey doesn't take into consideration housing market one may be in, personal decisions such as putting travel and material things over savings as well as type of living one wants, personal decisions such as delaying marriage or not getting married at all but cohabitating, even a desire to own a home isn't the same as it used to be. People don't necessarily see the value of it like they used to be (part of the societal shift) and the survey doesn't go over details like what size down payment were the respondants saving for (meaning percentage), etc.

I'm sure there are a wide variety of materials out there speaking towards student loan debt and shortfalls because of that but it's much more complex than student loan debt is responsible for xyz because other things interact with that.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Eh it was a survey. "believe this debt is to blame for what they typically expect to be a seven-year delay from buying."

Key word is "believe" and "expect".

The sample size is very small honestly. Out of 92,419 surveys sent out only 2,203 responded back.

Like I said it's not the student loan isn't a hinderance but so many other things impact your decisions. That survey doesn't take into consideration housing market one may be in, personal decisions such as putting travel and material things over savings as well as type of living one wants, personal decisions such as delaying marriage or not getting married at all but cohabitating, even a desire to own a home isn't the same as it used to be. People don't necessarily see the value of it like they used to be (part of the societal shift) and the survey doesn't go over details like what size down payment were the respondants saving for (meaning percentage), etc.

You can pick apart that one article but there are thousands...

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

You can pick apart that one article but there are thousands...

See my addition to my comment:

"I'm sure there are a wide variety of materials out there speaking towards student loan debt and shortfalls because of that but it's much more complex than student loan debt is responsible for xyz because other things interact with that."

*And why shouldn't I be able to pick the article you posted apart? I'm assuming you meant for me to read it.

 

[barkley]

Despite their qualifications, grads often have to settle for lower-paying, lower-skill jobs just so they can start paying their loan bills right away

and that's what independent, self reliant adults do when they have borrowed money and obligated themselves to repay it-they take a job, any job to meet that obligation. it's not necessarily a forever thing-you get a job, you get a better job, you get a career...and all along the way you keep plugging away at those payments, ideally paying more as your income increases. just as having a home foreclosure on one's credit record no longer carries near the impact/stigma it did in years past b/c lenders recognize what the recession and housing crash did to many then homeowners, potential employers don't always look down their noses at the graduate who worked in retail or some other unrelated to their major job for a year or more right out of college vs. going without employment for that entire time so they didn't have to 'settle'. I've heard more than one hiring professional say that they are more impressed with that employed grad vs. their long term unemployed peer b/c at least the 'worker' has continued to actively purse gaining new skills and developing a work ethic all while the other has not.

ProgressNow found that students with outstanding loan payments were 36 percent less likely to purchase a house, and other research indicates that “Those with student loan debt also are less likely to have taken out car loans. They have worse credit scores.

it only makes sense that if you have large student loans and then go to apply for yet more loans for cars or homes that unless you have a sufficient salary to reasonably meet all your needs you won't qualify due to that good old debt to income ratio formula. most people know ahead of the game if they can qualify or not so it should come as no surprise to anyone that fewer holders of the large loans will have the means to purchase homes or cars. as for the worst credit scores-that falls flatly on the student:

according to FICO, 7% of consumers with more than $50,000 in student loan debt had excellent scores of over 800 points. While balances on credit cards impact your credit score, this isn't the case for installment loans. Instead, it's the payments that matter. if a student is making their student loan payments, timely, they can even in the absence of any other credit (other than utilities or if their rental housing reports) have an excellent credit rating. dd has no credit cards/never has, never has taken out any loans other than student. her fico is just below the excellent ranking and as she's made some lump sum payments (while the loans were in their initial post graduation deferral stage) it's only bumped the rating up and up.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

according to FICO, 7% of consumers with more than $50,000 in student loan debt had excellent scores of over 800 points. While balances on credit cards impact your credit score, this isn't the case for installment loans. Instead, it's the payments that matter. if a student is making their student loan payments, timely, they can even in the absence of any other credit (other than utilities or if their rental housing reports) have an excellent credit rating. dd has no credit cards/never has, never has taken out any loans other than student. her fico is just below the excellent ranking and as she's made some lump sum payments (while the loans were in their initial post graduation deferral stage) it's only bumped the rating up and up.

Yeah that I could totally see. I just know that the length of time you have credit history moreso when you're younger and in the context the PP was talkng about can negatively impact your ability to get loans (car, personal, home) regardless of your overall score depending on the lender and what you're trying to do with the credit you're borrowing.

Sister-in-law more than qualified on the income to debt ratio but she didn't have enough credit history and thus she was seen as too much of a risk with the car loan (I believe they wanted a minimum of 3 years history). We had our own debt to income ratios but because we had at least some modest amount of credit history (for our ages) it boosted the confidence of the lenders that we could repay our loans (eta: mostly speaking mortgage and for my husband only his car loan when he was 21 nearly 22)

Of course length of credit history only matters so much especially if you've got long history of it but have too much debt to income ratio (especially if you're using credit cards in the bad ways) or are doing other things that negatively impact your credit score.

 

[MrsPete]

I know it's not always realistic but I think taking any amount of student loan debt is too much, or a lot.

I'm with you: If you are young and healthy and without dependents, it may not be easy -- but you don't NEED to borrow. I think many do these days because the idea of "it's impossible without loans" and "everyone does it" has become pervasive.

Let's math it up:
First you need to make a good college choice. The community college near us costs about $2600/year, and most of their books are online. Let's call it $3000/year.
If you're working minimum wage (which my daughters didn't, even in high school), you'd be able to pay that cost in roughly 10 weeks of work -- let's make it 12 weeks because you're going to pay Social Security tax.
So it's possible to work hard all summer and pay your basic community college costs.
If you can then work 20 hours a week during the school year and have enough to pay for your food and a really ratty place shared with a roommate.
Personally, I always worked 2-3 jobs during college. I was perpetually exhausted, but it was okay. The best was being an RA in the dorms because it gave me a free room, half my tuition paid, and half my meal plan paid. The worst was working a 3rd shift job, then going straight to class. But I was young and determined -- and I've never regretted it at all.
If you're able to live at home with your parents, you can be comfortable.
If you can't, you can get creative: Our pastor has several times sought out young ladies of good character to serve as live-in helpers for the elderly ladies in our church who can't manage to live alone -- free room for help is a good deal. Joining the military reserves is a time-tested way to pay for college. I knew a guy in college who lived (free) in a funeral home His job: Answer the phone at night, and occasionally drive the hearse to the hospital to pick up a body /transport it back to the funeral home, where the real workers took over. Some child care jobs are live-in.
Once the person has earned an AA/AS, a bigger paycheck is expected.
So the person can transfer to a university, even if it's part-time.
Easy? Absolutely not, but possible.

Another reason NOT to borrow: My first two years out of college were harder than college. I made it through my first year of college because I had high school savings. I made it through my other years because I'd developed a rock-solid work ethic and had that free room ... but those strategies ended upon graduation. Oh, I made it -- obviously -- but my first apartment was a two-bedroom shared with five people. I only had one other person in my bedroom because I shared with the girl no one liked. But I had no work clothes, I had to buy a car, and those first two years were HARD.
If I'd been paying student loans in addition, well, I just don't know how I could've done it. I would've had to go back home to live -- and my parents made it clear that wasn't an option. I probably would've paid off student loans and fallen into credit card debt at the same time.
I am 200% certain that the right answer is avoiding debt altogether -- no matter how difficult.

I do not feel it is productive to push someone into a career (or for them to push themselves into it) that is not a good fit for them, solely becuase it is one associated with a strong paycheck.

When I was new to teaching an idea permeated schools and teen life: You are meant for one specific job -- your true passion! To do anything else would be to deny your true self, and to make that happen, you must go to your dream school -- borrow if you must, but do it! Do what you love, and you'll never work a day in your life. I never bought into that idea, and frequently people vehemently disagreed and said I was trying to hold our kids back. That overly-idealistic idea has all-but disappeared today.

Realistically, every one of us is qualified for /would enjoy a number of jobs. No one is saying, "You must go into ____ career for the money, even if it makes you miserable." Rather, the right answer is to help kids filter though multiple careers that would suit their personalities and abilities; often kids don't figure it out right away. For example, I'm in my third decade of teaching high school seniors, and I've never had a single one go away to college saying, "I'm going to be an accountant." But I've had a bunch come back saying, "I started in general business, but once I took my first accounting class, I knew I should change majors."

lso there's a difference in guidance and telling. Sitting down going over the impacts taking out X loan would do and how to budget that in with all other expenses is a lot different than saying "you're going to do this and that, etc"

I don't think I've ever heard of anyone going full-scale drill-sergeant on their kids demanding, "You will study ___ and you will like it!"

In theory, yes, kids who are "walked through the numbers" will understand, but -- no -- they don't always respond to facts. I'm thinking of a student I taught some 5-6 years ago. She was looking at art school, and her parents were AGAINST it. She looked up expected salaries for people entering the field that interested her (furniture design), and she showed me online that people with that degree tended to earn -- I'm kinda making up these numbers, but my point is valid -- $12,000 - $100,000 per year. She went on to explain to me that if that's average, a person who's a real go-getter could do better -- maybe $140,000 or so! And she'd be quite happy on $140,000. I tried to help her see that those were averages -- that some people made zero, and the $100,000 was the person who was a go-getter AND was in his top earning years. No, no, she told me I didn't understand how to read that internet page. She was SO SURE of herself that she would not correctly interpret facts.

I agree. But, I would have never asked my parents to sign for student loan debt b/c then it also becomes their debt.

Okay, I'm going to be really cold-hearted here. If you co-sign loans for your child, take out life/disability insurance on the child. In a worst-case situation, the child could borrow-borrow-borrow, then die/become disabled -- and you would owe all the money AND have no useful degree. Having been a teacher so long, I've seen and heard a bunch of awful stories, but this was one of the worst. And it's avoidable.

Have you consider that there are many many many students who could not attend college at all if it were not for student loans??

No, I don't think many, many, many students are so without options that borrowing is genuinely their only option; rather, I think borrowing has become the easiest /fastest option, and people just accept it. All too many people don't bother to get creative with ways they could attend college without debt.

I believe every student should have at least some responsibility for the cost of their college education, some "skin in the game". I think this helps them better value their education.

Eh, no. By the time your child is 18 years old, you know him. You know whether he's appreciative of what he's given, whether he is a hard worker, whether he is emotionally /academically ready for college. If you haven't already taught him about gratitude and responsibility, paying a portion of his own college education isn't going to suddenly help him "see the light".

I agree about employers requiring college degrees. A BA/BS is basically equivalent to what a high school diploma used to be for employers.

A big part of that is that high school keeps getting easier and easier (as a high school teacher, I am not proud of that). We want a near-100% graduation rate, but many of our students are not willing to work like they did a generation ago -- and many families are just not supportive of education. A high school degree doesn't mean what it used to mean.

But is it really for lack of life skills? Or lack of the opportunities that allowed previous generations to be independent at younger ages? I know a lot of kids (teens/young adults) who have been slow to leave the nest too... but it is because rent, even in my low COL rural area, is about 1/3 higher than it was a decade ago, while most entry and early-career level jobs are paying the same thing they were 10 and sometimes even 20 years ago.

Mark Twain said, "I'm a great believer in luck, and I find that the harder I work, the more of it I have." The world isn't getting any easier, but I definitely see "life skills" slipping in my high school students over the years -- people skills too.

t just seems like a lot of young people expect to graduate and step into a high-paying job right off the bat and have nice things. They don't want to share a crappy apartment with 3 other people, they don't want to drive a 10yo car (or worse, take the bus), they have to have their iPhone and their Starbucks. Not all young adults, obviously, but it seems like a lot of them look at what their parents have achieved--after decades of hard work and sacrifice--and think they should live like that right out of the gate.

Yes, the idea of "I'm going to graduate and step into a $50,000 job with a company car" has always been a problem, but it is worse in today's 20-somethings. I see it in about half my co-workers; for example, some of my co-workers whine that they can't save for a house because rent is so expensive, yet they drive a new leased car every two years, fly to Vegas for bachelorette parties with college girlfriends, eat out constantly, absolutely must have a new outfit for New Year's Eve ... yet, on the other hand, I have one co-worker who has had massive medical problems -- yet because she lives frugally, she and her husband just moved into a nice little ranch house of their own. And I overheard a couple of the "can't saves" talking behind her back, saying it's just "not enough" for someone of their caliber. Hmmm ... wonder who's going to be quite comfortable in 10 years while someone else will still be whining that her generation just can't catch a break?

My own oldest child and her husband have been in their house about a year, and they have a plan to pay it off when they're 28. How? Well, they bought all used furniture. She works an extra shift at the hospital every two weeks, and that money goes straight to the mortgage. He does some under-the-table work. They're working hard, and they are reaping the benefits.

It starts much earlier than graduation ... It isn't the specific ways that we scrimped that I want kids to emulate. It's that we did creative things to make ends meet and afford rent

Agree. I can definitely relate to living with lots of roommates, going to events because free food would be available. I also remember sharing textbooks with friends in the dorm, tucking cardboard in to my shoes because I had holes in the soles, sharing dresses and shoes with friends who were going on big dates. Sure, sometimes I felt deprived, but mostly I had a great time being young and free!
In contrast, my daughters' college friends seem spoiled rotten. My girls were some of the few who didn't have cars on campus in their early years (practically none of us had cars "back in the day"). Some of their classmates genuinely never cook or go to the cafeteria -- they go out constantly. And yet these people are are "living large" are also borrowing. I don't get it. It seems to be a lack of introspection.

TBH. I don't even care for the term "the greatest generation". I have heard of negatives coming out of that era, too. So many cases of abuse and racism were "ok" to that generation.

Eh, they did live through the Depression (with less whining than today's Millies) and then went on to win WWII. They did it without air conditioning, polio vaccines, or fast food. I think we can cut them some slack -- and, no, I'm not one of that generation.

 

[mjkacmom]

^^^ Dd22 decided she wanted to be an accountant junior year in high school, and will be making more than $50,000 when she starts her job. My kids attend the same HS DH and I went to, so much harder today! They just take honors/AP classes (so many more offered today), as do most of their friends, with parents who put an emphasis on education. Since my kids attended public in state colleges, not a lot of students had money.

 

[barkley]

I always worked 2-3 jobs during college. I was perpetually exhausted, but it was okay. The best was being an RA in the dorms because it gave me a free room, half my tuition paid, and half my meal plan paid. The worst was working a 3rd shift job, then going straight to class. But I was young and determined -- and I've never regretted it at all

PREACH!

i never worked less than 2 jobs during college and that was in addition to any temp gigs i could get. i can laugh about them now but i still hate wrapping gifts b/c of the hell of working a couple of christmas breaks at the gift wrap counter at sears & roebuck (damn those sales people who would offer free wrapping to people who bought floor sample lamps and vacuums-neither came with boxes) but i can clean any room to surgical room standards (b/c i used to clean surgical suites and e/r rooms and patient rooms....) and i can haggle down the price of an electronic purchase like no one (p/t bookkeeping for an electronics store-i know what the profit margin looks like).

yeah it was exhausting but the flip side was i didn't have allot of time to spend looking around comparing what i did/didn't have to anyone else (and really-the bulk of my friends were in the same boat). for me it was akin to my late mom's memories of working in the ww2 shipyards as a welder. the times weren't the easiest, we certainly could have done with more than we had but it didn't kill us, probably made us a little bit stronger and def. made us able to stretch money way further than we ever could have imagined.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I don't think I've ever heard of anyone going full-scale drill-sergeant on their kids demanding, "You will study ___ and you will like it!"

In theory, yes, kids who are "walked through the numbers" will understand, but -- no -- they don't always respond to facts. I'm thinking of a student I taught some 5-6 years ago. She was looking at art school, and her parents were AGAINST it. She looked up expected salaries for people entering the field that interested her (furniture design), and she showed me online that people with that degree tended to earn -- I'm kinda making up these numbers, but my point is valid -- $12,000 - $100,000 per year. She went on to explain to me that if that's average, a person who's a real go-getter could do better -- maybe $140,000 or so! And she'd be quite happy on $140,000. I tried to help her see that those were averages -- that some people made zero, and the $100,000 was the person who was a go-getter AND was in his top earning years. No, no, she told me I didn't understand how to read that internet page. She was SO SURE of herself that she would not correctly interpret facts.

I was more or less responding to the various comments made already on the thread.

 

[meggiebeth]

In the UK, we have a really good student loan system. Tuition fees for British students are capped at just over £9000 (I think around $12000) a year, and the government offers a loan to cover the full amount to all potential British students. Then, depending on your household income, you’re also eligible for a maintenance loan to cover other expenses, taking into account whether or not you’re living away from home and if you’re living inside London or outside the capital. Although I only got the minimum maintenance loan, around £3000 ($4000), this covered most of my expenses. In total, my student debt probably amounted to around £31,000 ($40,000). The great thing about our student loans here is that you’re only obliged to make payments when you earn over a certain amount each month, and after a certain number of years, all of your student debt is completely wiped.

 

[barkley]

i find it very disturbing that the advertisement that pops up at the bottom of my last post on this thread is for a consolidation student loan company that charges as much as 5% more than the highest interest rate my this year college grad will pay if she just stays with her existing lender

oooooops-i clicked on it to see the rate so now it's poofed away so there's just an unassuming and unrelated sparkle ball/outside decor ad

 

[J'aime Paris]

And, unfortunately, a specialist will be in the higher end of the range thanks to the extra time for their residency. The cost of becoming a dentist has contributed greatly to the shift of dentistry from a "Mom and Pop" business to a corporate one. The current levels of student debt force many new graduates into becoming employees of a practice rather than owners, at least in the short to medium term. Ownership often becomes a mid-life option with that debt carried even later in life.

Even though our DD is only a sophomore in undergrad, we've decided to make provisions to help her either buy into an existing practice, or establish her own. No way will she work at an Aspen Dental!!

 

[Kellydelly]

I personally feel that up to $50,000 in undergrad debt is reasonable, if the degree is actually in something that will get you a good job with a decent wage. My oldest is a freshman in college and she is taking the federal loans (which will amount to $27000 in debt) and we are currently able to pay the rest out of our pockets (she thankfully got $10,000 a year scholarship which was a blessing). We did not have college funds set up, not able to with a modest income and 4 kids. I know we can handle paying the extra her first two years, but I am not sure what happens when a second child starts college. We will have three kids in college at one time when my youngest, who are twins start. That is going to be rough. I think they are going to figure out that living on campus is a luxury.

I think it is interesting how different families handle college expenses. We didn't feel like our kids shouldn't have to pay for some, if not most of their educations. I work with people who are slaving away (nurses) paying off loans they took out for their kids. They are even paying the federal loans for their kids too. I can see doing that if you have money falling out of your pockets, but I don't agree with parents have to work well into their retirement age just to save junior from paying a dime of the college loans. I really think they should have a lot of skin in the game, it is for their future, not mine! I don't want to be poor when I am a senior citizen while my kids are living it up. But to each their own. I am envious of people who's parents offer to pay for the grand kids to go to college. How nice!

Anyone who is sending a kid to college in the next few years should read the college confidential discussion boards. I found out about it from members here and it is such a wealth of information on choosing the right schools and maximizing the merit you may get.

 

[Colleen27]

just b/c people say everyone should be doing something doesn't mean they are or even should be. recent studies show that about 40% of american adults don't have savings to cover so much as a $400 emergency and 25% have zero dollars in any form of retirement savings so while it's all well and good to say people should be including in their saving plans monies for their children's college education i personally think that's at about the lowest priority, and at the cost of non funding/short changing these same savings, financially supporting a f/t employed college grad just so that grad can save for a down payment for their first home or enter their first non collegiate independent living debt free seems an even more foolish idea.

before you think me totally heartless here's my reasoning-if mom/dad are short changing their retirement (or emergency) savings to save for/pay out of pocket for their kid's college costs what happens down the line when mom/dad have insufficient funds for their post retirement self subsistence? is it their expectation that their adult child is going to financially support THEM? if so i hope that they are forthcoming with that adult child about those plans NOW b/c then that adult child can start to make their own plans about they will manage to support themselves, any future children/partner as well as their parents.....sounds like a much bigger financial burden to that adult child than either opting from day one to pick a reasonably priced education or one that they can reasonably pay for over time.

i wasn't one of them but i grew up with WEALTHY classmates and i honestly didn't know a one whose parents full rided their college educations. those kids for the most part were working the same part time jobs the rest of us were, applying for scholarships and making decisions on where to apply to based on cost vs. value of a particular school for a particular degree. at our 10 year high school reunion it was a rare person who wasn't finishing up paying off some form of student loans and either just getting into or managing to save for the down payment on a starter home (no bells or whistles just something to get our feet wet and ideally move up from before we had our own kids) so i don't know when/where the whole everyone should be paying for their kid's college education started b/c at least on the west coast it wasn't prevalent in the 70's-90's.

But certainly you see how that becomes cyclical, if the advice is followed - parents have student loans and are told to prioritize debt repayment and retirement over college savings, so their kids have even larger student loans (which often need to be cosigned by the parents anyway). At some point, some generation was bound to feel like doing things differently might give their kids a better start. Odds are they figure they can't afford to retire anyway - I can't believe how many people I know are on the "work till I die" retirement plan - so they think at least giving their kids a shot at better is within reach.

As far as when paying for college became a norm... My grandfather put one of his daughters through college and would have paid for the other as well, had she decided to go. He was very upset when my mother had to take a $300 student loan one year, and worked extra shifts to make sure it wouldn't happen again. Because he believed it was his job to educate his kids.

^^^ Dd22 decided she wanted to be an accountant junior year in high school, and will be making more than $50,000 when she starts her job. My kids attend the same HS DH and I went to, so much harder today! They just take honors/AP classes (so many more offered today), as do most of their friends, with parents who put an emphasis on education. Since my kids attended public in state colleges, not a lot of students had money.

Yeah, I'm not sure how high school has gotten easier over the years. If anything, I think the college-for-all push has made it harder, adding graduation requirements that didn't exist a generation ago, and the increasingly competitive nature of college admissions and financing has made it a pressure-cooker for higher achieving students. My son, who graduated from an alternative high school, had about as much homework and about the same course load I had as a high-achieving high schooler in the 90s. My daughter? Three or four hours of homework is a norm, and that's with the "easier" course load I encouraged her to take during her senior year with "only" 3 AP and 1 honors course (as opposed to the 5 AP and 2 dual-enrollment college courses some of her friends are taking). But perhaps this is another of those things that varies from place to place, like <$3000 community college (ours is twice that!).

 

[Southernmiss]

But certainly you see how that becomes cyclical, if the advice is followed - parents have student loans and are told to prioritize debt repayment and retirement over college savings, so their kids have even larger student loans (which often need to be cosigned by the parents anyway). At some point, some generation was bound to feel like doing things differently might give their kids a better start. Odds are they figure they can't afford to retire anyway - I can't believe how many people I know are on the "work till I die" retirement plan - so they think at least giving their kids a shot at better is within reach.

As far as when paying for college became a norm... My grandfather put one of his daughters through college and would have paid for the other as well, had she decided to go. He was very upset when my mother had to take a $300 student loan one year, and worked extra shifts to make sure it wouldn't happen again. Because he believed it was his job to educate his kids.



Yeah, I'm not sure how high school has gotten easier over the years. If anything, I think the college-for-all push has made it harder, adding graduation requirements that didn't exist a generation ago, and the increasingly competitive nature of college admissions and financing has made it a pressure-cooker for higher achieving students. My son, who graduated from an alternative high school, had about as much homework and about the same course load I had as a high-achieving high schooler in the 90s. My daughter? Three or four hours of homework is a norm, and that's with the "easier" course load I encouraged her to take during her senior year with "only" 3 AP and 1 honors course (as opposed to the 5 AP and 2 dual-enrollment college courses some of her friends are taking). But perhaps this is another of those things that varies from place to place, like <$3000 community college (ours is twice that!).

Yep. My 4 kids high school education is far different than my own was. And we live in the same area I grew up in.

Studying for the ACT test was unheard of. We got a score which allowed us entrance into college and that was good enough. Now, kids study and prepare for the tests and try to maximize their scores. My kids scores are up there. Their education at school made the difference.

AP tests and scores, another story.

Dd a high school junior wrote an essay last week for entrance in a summer leadership program that she asked me to proofread. It was so above my head that I could not do it. And I'm usually pretty astute.

 

[arminnie]

Student loans literally changed my life. I am not opposed to student loans when used prudently. I borrowed approximately 50% of my post degree first year salary. It was never a burden. So for me borrowing was a good thing. Undergrad - Tulane. Grad - Stanford. Both very, very expensive. But oh so worth it.

 

[barkley]

Studying for the ACT test was unheard of. We got a score which allowed us entrance into college and that was good enough. Now, kids study and prepare for the tests and try to maximize their scores.

studying for the act was around when i went to high school in the late 70's. most of us did p(ractice)act's or psats in our soph or junior years to find out what we needed to brush up on for the actual test (kind of depended on where you were applying to that drove if you were doing act or sat study classes/testing) so for at least some regions it's been the norm for decades.

as far as high school getting easier-not the case here b/c whereas it was previously just an option for kids to take the college prep route in high school that's no longer a choice. all students in our district are required for high school grad to take classes that exceed the minimum required entry criteria for our state funded universities and in some subjects meet the requirements for 'highly selective' national private universities. i'm waiting to see graduation rates plummet b/c those added requirements are just going to take students who never intended to go to college/planned on pursing other high paying non college degree required career paths and encourage them to drop out. why take a bunch of classes that are strictly for the intent of qualifying for college when you could better spend that year or two in an apprenticeship for the job you want? waiting to see the stats in a year or two....

But certainly you see how that becomes cyclical, if the advice is followed - parents have student loans and are told to prioritize debt repayment and retirement over college savings, so their kids have even larger student loans (which often need to be cosigned by the parents anyway).

unless the parents prioritize debt repayment over college savings if their kids need student loan co-signers the parents won't likely be able to do so in the first place (prospective co-signers who fail to pay their own financial obligations are not looked upon highly as a good credit risk to guarantee the debts of others).


At some point, some generation was bound to feel like doing things differently might give their kids a better start. Odds are they figure they can't afford to retire anyway - I can't believe how many people I know are on the "work till I die" retirement plan - so they think at least giving their kids a shot at better is within reach.

i can't see that there's any evidence that this particular way of 'doing things differently' has proven itself a success, and if the mindset of any number of people is that they are doing this b/c they are giving up on ever being able to support themselves in retirement and plan on working until their deaths....................let's see what happens with they reach the point of being unable to work and either have to rely financialy on their children or public resources to meet even their most basic needs before we decide if their individual choice to take on this financial experiment is successful for those who ultimately pay for their choices.

 

[aprilgail]

I am hoping my daughter gets out with under 50,000 in student loans. Right now she is only taking the 2 Stafford loans each year and I am paying the difference of what she owes after those. Her college is now over 70,000 a year for tuition, room and board. We get a lot of financial aid which allows her to go there and be affordable to us but some of the kids like her room mate get zero aid and are paying it. Her boyfriend goes to Boston College and it is over 70,000 a year and his parents are paying it all, he has zero in loans.

 

[Skippy918]

I don’t think high school is easier now than when I went. I only took 2 AP classes my senior year. Now, high school freshman can take AP classes and it seems like there’s an AP class for every single subject. Also, back in my day, you had to get a recommendation and have certain grades and pre requisites to be eligible to take AP classes. Those in the honors program had more AP classes. I have heard that these days they are open to everyone regardless of grades or pre requisites.

 

[Colleen27]

i can't see that there's any evidence that this particular way of 'doing things differently' has proven itself a success, and if the mindset of any number of people is that they are doing this b/c they are giving up on ever being able to support themselves in retirement and plan on working until their deaths....................let's see what happens with they reach the point of being unable to work and either have to rely financialy on their children or public resources to meet even their most basic needs before we decide if their individual choice to take on this financial experiment is successful for those who ultimately pay for their choices.

I don't think it has proven a success either, nor do I think it will. I believe it is just another coping strategy that people are using to deal with the fact that the middle class simply can't afford the things they once did - shorting retirement savings to fund college is robbing Peter to pay Paul, but to do otherwise and watch one's kids take on massive debt to get an education is so unthinkable to many that ends up feeling like the right thing to do anyway. Especially for parents who feel like their own student loans were the reason they couldn't adequately save for their kids' educations - they don't want to pass that "failure" on to another generation.