isadore;1573171 wrote:No sir it is the same chart and 35% have no debt.

Again, learn basic math. The chart does not conflict with the average of $29k AMONG BORROWERS. There's no contradiction, that chart is only showing you what % don't have debt. The weighted average of those with debt is @ $26k I believe (2008 data).

$77B in free money (grants and tax breaks)?!? Along with another $110B or so in federal loans? No one but the wealthy (and middle class stupid) pays even close to full boat. The wealthy, out-of-staters and international students are already providing a large subsidy to the "less fortunate" - they pay more (because of less grant money) for the exact same education and experience.

And isn't that precisely how it should be - basically a self-contained progressive cost structure for college students? Most people who graduate college will do much better than high school grads and better than the median incomes (heck the average graduating salary is already higher than median FAMILY income). There's no need to subsidize those people - they are generally in the top 2 quintiles. They will be net payers and do not need such welfare.

isadore;1573176 wrote:gosh I guess you got to know the secret code.

Nope, just have to provide some form of proof you are able to follow through on your word. That's all. It's not a secret. I found the information. ...so can you....or you can follow through on your declaration.

Con_Alma;1573179 wrote:Assumptions, assumptions. tsk, tsk.

Here's an actual account. I used no family resources and graduated with no debt.

during that time your family did not feed you at any time, did not house you at anytime, so that you could apply any money earned through that subsidy toward your education.
well many others lack the resources today, especially since college costs have grown rapidly since when you were in school.

Con_Alma;1573180 wrote:I can't deprive them. There are resources in place to enable them to gain the education they seek.

not for many of them and that is why their hope for upward mobility is diminishing. College costs increase as the incomes of those in the lower 60% financially fall

Con_Alma;1573182 wrote:Nope, just have to provide some form of proof you are able to follow through on your word. That's all. It's not a secret. I found the information. ...so can you....or you can follow through on your declaration.

obviously it is something you wish to hide. It could possibly help someone reading this thread. But of course your philosophy is screw'em.

gut;1573183 wrote:Again, learn basic math. The chart does not conflict with the average of $29k AMONG BORROWERS. There's no contradiction, that chart is only showing you what % don't have debt. The weighted average of those with debt is @ $26k I believe (2008 data).

$77B in free money (grants and tax breaks)?!? Along with another $110B or so in federal loans? No one but the wealthy (and middle class stupid) pays even close to full boat. The wealthy, out-of-staters and international students are already providing a large subsidy to the "less fortunate" - they pay more (because of less grant money) for the exact same education and experience.

And isn't that precisely how it should be - basically a self-contained progressive cost structure for college students? Most people who graduate college will do much better than high school grads and better than the median incomes (heck the average graduating salary is already higher than median FAMILY income). There's no need to subsidize those people - they are generally in the top 2 quintiles. They will be net payers and do not need such welfare.

You said that those who did not borrow were not included in the chart, they are.
In fact they are over 1/3 the total. Mainly those whose families have the resources to pay their way.
If you think the college experience is the same for those with and without money, you are delusional or more probably willfully blind to the advantages of extra resources money can supply. Wow you put quotation marks around the “less fortunate.” Unbelieveable, they lack resources, they work, they borrow, the scrimp to get by. But to you with quotation marks, they are some type of parasite, taking advantage of the wealthy students.
If post secondary education was publicly funded, they could come closer to having the same college experience as the wealthy as could many others who because of harsh circumstances are unable to attend. They have lost one of their best chances to rise and America has lost some valuable human capital.

isadore;1573202 wrote:during that time your family did not feed you at any time, did not house you at anytime, so that you could apply any money earned through that subsidy toward your education.
well many others lack the resources today, especially since college costs have grown rapidly since when you were in school.

I lived in another State than my family. I walked out of my house at 18 years old with $12 in my pocket. I had no more resources than anyone else.

isadore;1573203 wrote:not for many of them and that is why their hope for upward mobility is diminishing. College costs increase as the incomes of those in the lower 60% financially fall

There is nobody that can't access the resources available. Anybody can benefit from them.

isadore;1573204 wrote:obviously it is something you wish to hide. It could possibly help someone reading this thread. But of course your philosophy is screw'em.

I looked for one of the insititutions offering to pay for a students college loans if they are not employed. They will pay 100% of the loan. That means there isn't anybody that cant' afford to go to school.

If you are so worried about others are you willing to register at the College like you declared? Are you an honest person of your word?

Con_Alma;1573239 wrote:I lived in another State than my family. I walked out of my house at 18 years old with $12 in my pocket. I had no more resources than anyone else.

and I worked as a store clerk and in a steel mill and took out loans to pay for my education. So what. Tuition and books have risen precipitously, funding is nowhere near as easy to obtain as all you folks make out. But of course, you got yours, so screw'em.

Con_Alma;1573241 wrote:There is nobody that can't access the resources available. Anybody can benefit from them.

for many in financial need, from families with few resources they are not sufficient.

Con_Alma;1573243 wrote:I looked for one of the insititutions offering to pay for a students college loans if they are not employed. They will pay 100% of the loan. That means there isn't anybody that cant' afford to go to school.

If you are so worried about others are you willing to register at the College like you declared? Are you an honest person of your word?

gosh a ruddies the secret college whose identity must be hidden. But gosh sir is this service available to the several millions who may need it?

isadore;1573265 wrote:gosh a ruddies the secret college whose identity must be hidden. But gosh sir is this service available to the several millions who may need it?

???

It's not hidden. Lol I am not the steward of the information. It's available for all to see. Are you a man of your word?

isadore;1573262 wrote:for many in financial need, from families with few resources they are not sufficient.

Then nothing will be sufficient. All the potential student needs to do is inquire with a respective University.

isadore;1573261 wrote:... So what....

...so it's just one example of the ability to gain a degree without being of means.

Isadora has a new word "ruddies" has used it a few times in this thread. Not sure he understands the word, the urban definition and the context of its usage.

The word Ruddy: Someone completely ignorant of historical fact and world affairs (Ruddies would be more than one)
Or as my UK friend uses the word as a means to intensify something: Isadora is a ruddy fool..

gosh a ruddies the secret college whose identity must be hidden. But gosh sir is this service available to the several millions who may need it?

He’s posting to Con_Alma single individual using “a” to indicate one but using the “ruddies” as plural ..


I’m thinking the Union boss used this term and Isadora picked it up and in Isadora cutting and paste frenzy he saw it so because he has no ruddy original thought processing powers Isadora just uses it because he now not what he is posting.

This is just laughable. A college student graduating with even $60k in debt should be able to pay that back within 5-6 years if it's a priority with good financial management.

More laughable still is $60k is a mortgage for a lot of people, whom are considerably older than that college grad and making a lot less than that college grad - talking someone with 2-3X the earning power and their whole life ahead of them.

With average starting salaries over $50k, $30k in average debt is really no big deal. For comparison sake, a gross income of $50k would easily qualify you for a $200k mortgage.

This is nothing but bullshit class warfare, but the sad part is it really makes no difference rather the student pays for their education up front, or for someone else's on the back-end thru higher taxes. And effectively that's kind of exactly how a student loan works.

Con_Alma;1573277 wrote:???

It's not hidden. Lol I am not the steward of the information. It's available for all to see. Are you a man of your word?

but gosh a ruddy you seem unwilling to provide that site for some unfathomable reason.

Con_Alma;1573278 wrote:Then nothing will be sufficient. All the potential student needs to do is inquire with a respective University.

no that is not true, for many the resources are not available or insufficient.

Con_Alma;1573279 wrote:...so it's just one example of the ability to gain a degree without being of means.

for one individual's supposed story based on circumstances many years ago. A story that provides your excuse for ignoring the obvious fact that many Americans are denied a chance at post secondary education.

isadore;1573351 wrote:no that is not true, for many the resources are not available or insufficient.

They are available and more doesn't need to be offered than zero expense to the student.

isadore;1573353 wrote:for one individual's supposed story based on circumstances many years ago. A story that provides your excuse for ignoring the obvious fact that many Americans are denied a chance at post secondary education.

Ican show universities that have lower costs today than I paid 20 plus years ago.....large, prominent universities.

You are out of touch.

isadore;1573348 wrote:but gosh a ruddy you seem unwilling to provide that site for some unfathomable reason.

...because you are not credible in your word and commitment. I'm sorry you cannot fathom that.

Belly35;1573297 wrote:Isadora has a new word "ruddies" has used it a few times in this thread. Not sure he understands the word, the urban definition and the context of its usage.

The word Ruddy: Someone completely ignorant of historical fact and world affairs (Ruddies would be more than one)
Or as my UK friend uses the word as a means to intensify something: Isadora is a ruddy fool..



He’s posting to Con_Alma single individual using “a” to indicate one but using the “ruddies” as plural ..


I’m thinking the Union boss used this term and Isadora picked it up and in Isadora cutting and paste frenzy he saw it so because he has no ruddy original thought processing powers Isadora just uses it because he now not what he is posting.

gosh a ruddies or ruddy it refers to people or in this case person to whom I am corresponding. Calling me "Isadora" you sad little man, either you are a poor speller or you think labeling me a woman is some great put down. Wow, that is pathetic, labeling me a woman is no problem, be my guest. But it is the kind of attempt at insult that would come from a pre-adolescent ruddy.

Con_Alma;1573357 wrote:...because you are not credible in your word and commitment. I'm sorry you cannot fathom that.

but it would be an act of possible charity to some poor young person reading this read. But of course, you got yours, so screw'em.