• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Cincinnati Bearcats (Juggalos official thread of Faygo)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
CincyInterloper said:
Thinking about the demise of the student athlete and whether the student-athlete ever existed at all as I stared out my window a moment ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the non-athlete students in college are not really students either. Or, at least, not very good students.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of college students are putting themselves in mountains of debt to simply party for a few years.
 
Upvote 0
Jagdaddy said:
I think I'd say a lot rather than the the vast majority.
Click to expand...

Thats fair, although, my personal experience at one of the "little ivies" (no, I did not deserve to be there) really opened my eyes.

Even at a school of that caliber, most of the kids could've saved a lot of money and still had the same job thereafter. I don't believe college is doing the same good for kids as it used to, on average of course.
 
Upvote 1
CincyInterloper said:
Thinking about the demise of the student athlete and whether the student-athlete ever existed at all as I stared out my window a moment ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the non-athlete students in college are not really students either. Or, at least, not very good students.
Click to expand...

They are just a reason for colleges to step up to the federal free money window and collect.

Kind of like you are waxing poetic about student athletes, I wonder when schools stopped being a place of higher education and became just another hustle.
 
Upvote 0
RhodeIslandBuck said:
Thats fair, although, my personal experience at one of the "little ivies" (no, I did not deserve to be there) really opened my eyes.

Even at a school of that caliber, most of the kids could've saved a lot of money and still had the same job thereafter. I don't believe college is doing the same good for kids as it used to, on average of course.
Click to expand...
1. Are you talking about education or training? 2. Based on twenty years of teaching college freshman at “Frodo” and a less than “elite” regional university, I can’t help but note the high % of students who are trying to to afford college by working 20 to 30 hours a week and carry a full academic load. Do I have worthless jack offs in my classes? Yes. But most seem to me to be making a serious effort. I would add that I averaged more jerks per class at Frodo that at NKU. Maybe because most were there on their parent‘s money. If, like me, you went to college in the 60s you were subjected to liberal arts based core curriculum. That course has been turned into tech-based vo-Ed curriculum.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
cincibuck said:
1. Are you talking about education or training? 2. Based on twenty years of teaching college freshman at “Frodo” and a less than “elite” regional university, I can’t help but note the high % of students who are trying to to afford college by working 20 to 30 hours a week and carry a full academic load. Do I have worthless jack offs in my classes? Yes. But most seem to me to be making a serious effort. I would add that I averaged more jerks per class at Frodo that at NKU. Maybe because most were there on their parent‘s money. If, like me, you went to college in the 60s you were subjected to liberal arts based core curriculum. That course has been turned into tech-based vo-Ed curriculum.
Click to expand...

You certainly know more than I give your experience, I have no issue defaulting here seeing as I'm basing this mostly off of my personal experience.

I would say it's more of an issue of colleges providing training at an exorbitant cost when the information is readily available for motivated folks as it is. 100 years ago, I think college made more sense for the general populace to aspire to, seeing as academic information and research were only things you could find in large libraries or around educated professors.

Now? I think it's asinine that these places charge what they do for things you can find literally anywhere with a search engine. It's not that I think colleges don't provide good training or education, it's that they're overvaluing what they provide in a modern context, hence not being as good for students as it once was. There are obvious exceptions (medical doctors, etc) but on the whole, I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze for the average person.

I believe most people's college experience is as helpful as they want it to be, to me it's always been more of about the student individually than the instruction.

I will definitely say the kids at my alma mater were definitely not the type to work 30 hours a week, mostly trust fund and prep school folks. I was a bit out of my element.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 1
Jaxbuck said:
They are just a reason for colleges to step up to the federal free money window and collect.

Kind of like you are waxing poetic about student athletes, I wonder when schools stopped being a place of higher education and became just another hustle.
Click to expand...
I'm sure there are others on this board more qualified to answer that than I, but something happened between about 1992-1994 and accelerated between 2002-2008 that increased the amount of money loaned to students to pay for college. Anytime that much money flows into something, it's bound to turn into a hustle. And whenever the root cause of a problem is too much money flowing into a questionable investment, my suspicion is that the bankers are up to no good. But that's just a hunch on my part.

US Student Debt
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
I wonder when schools stopped being a place of higher education and became just another hustle.
Click to expand...
Maybe always?
I think doctors, lawyers, and a handful of other careers really do require a 4-year degree, plus some post-grad schooling, probably.
I'm an engineer. And, while what I'm doing now has very little to do with any classes I took, I for sure didn't need ALL of my classes. We had to take 7 classes (3 credits each) in arts & humanities. 4 of those had to be a sequence - all in one subject. At least 2 had to be in "arts" and 2 had to be in "humanities". They said this all was to make you a "more-rounded" student. Bullshit. College is to prepare you for working, and my music theory classes don't help in any way.
As for what I'm doing now, I couldn't fill up a curriculum of 4 semesters of classes that would be useful, let alone 8. And even if I fluffed up the curriculum to make 4 full semesters, anyone graduating would be way ahead of where I was when I started here.
 
Upvote 0
As for it becoming a hustle… lots of federal money poured into it. The intent was to make it more accessible; the unintended consequence was to cause tuition to rise faster than any other cost in the economy and by a huge margin.

But when did anyone ever ask if a government program was effective or had a result that was the opposite of the intent? Good money followed bad… rinse and repeat
 
Upvote 0
cincibuck said:
, I can’t help but note the high % of students who are trying to to afford college by working 20 to 30 hours a week and carry a full academic load.
Click to expand...
I did not do this

I worked 40 hours a week and took a full load of classes

I had to just to get by. Even though my parents didn’t help me at all, my father made too much for me to get a federal grant in year one. I made too much money to get a federal grant thereafter.

Sound like an easy trap to fall into? It was. That’s why I wasn’t alone. Lots of people were in that boat. All you had to do was tell the truth on your financial aid forms. Then, while you’re walking to work on a Saturday (a car is way outside your budget), you get to hear a frat boy bragging to a sun bathing hottie that he’d just put a car stereo in his BMW with his Pell Grant

Digressions aside, I promise you that no one who was working full time while taking a full load of classes gives a single fig about the History of Art. Education for the sake of education is still an extremely elitist commodity. It’s one of the things that makes elites think they’re better than the rest of us.

Better at what? I’ve never been able to ascertain that. Unless perhaps rigging the system is considered…. They’re running the university system into the ground and pricing it to the point where it is now far more expensive than it’s worth… yeah. That’s a feature. Not a bug

As for learning things “from Google”. There are better ways of learning things from the internet, and some of those can even result in credentials, including the credentials that have made me more money than my BSEE ever did. These alternative sources of education and credentialing are starting to replace the university system, and the people at the helm of the university system have done this to themselves
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
CincyInterloper said:
I'm sure there are others on this board more qualified to answer that than I, but something happened between about 1992-1994 and accelerated between 2002-2008 that increased the amount of money loaned to students to pay for college. Anytime that much money flows into something, it's bound to turn into a hustle. And whenever the root cause of a problem is too much money flowing into a questionable investment, my suspicion is that the bankers are up to no good. But that's just a hunch on my part.

US Student Debt
Click to expand...

Isn't that about the time when the banking lobby got Congress to change the bankruptcy laws so that student loans were non-dischargeable?
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
Isn't that about the time when the banking lobby got Congress to change the bankruptcy laws so that student loans were non-dischargeable?
Click to expand...
AI is awesome for summaries...

Student loans became more difficult to discharge in bankruptcy starting in 1978 with the passage of the Bankruptcy Reform Act.
Here's a breakdown of the key changes over time:
  • Before 1976: Student loans were generally dischargeable in bankruptcy like other unsecured debts.
  • 1978 (Bankruptcy Reform Act): Federal and government-backed student loans were initially made nondischargeable for the first five years of repayment.
  • 1990 (Crime Control Act): The nondischargeable period was extended from five to seven years.
  • 1998 (Higher Education Amendments): The seven-year waiting period was eliminated, making both federal and most private student loans nondischargeable unless the borrower could prove "undue hardship".
  • 2005 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act - BAPCPA): This act extended the nondischargeable status to virtually all qualified education loans, including most private student loans, regardless of association with a nonprofit organization.


What I do know is they REALLY started pushing the FAFSA stuff on us as students starting in 1991 and 1992. It wasn't exactly subtle.
 
Upvote 0
Mike80 said:
AI is awesome for summaries...

Student loans became more difficult to discharge in bankruptcy starting in 1978 with the passage of the Bankruptcy Reform Act.
Here's a breakdown of the key changes over time:
  • Before 1976: Student loans were generally dischargeable in bankruptcy like other unsecured debts.
  • 1978 (Bankruptcy Reform Act): Federal and government-backed student loans were initially made nondischargeable for the first five years of repayment.
  • 1990 (Crime Control Act): The nondischargeable period was extended from five to seven years.
  • 1998 (Higher Education Amendments): The seven-year waiting period was eliminated, making both federal and most private student loans nondischargeable unless the borrower could prove "undue hardship".
  • 2005 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act - BAPCPA): This act extended the nondischargeable status to virtually all qualified education loans, including most private student loans, regardless of association with a nonprofit organization.


What I do know is they REALLY started pushing the FAFSA stuff on us as students starting in 1991 and 1992. It wasn't exactly subtle.
Click to expand...

I can understand making federal loans non exempt.

Protecting private lenders is just so blatantly corrupt it makes my teeth hurt. Anyone naive enough to think that big government is a good idea because they have our best interest at heart should look at this timeline and no, it isn't a party line thing. Clinton and W both oversaw parts of it.

Consumer protection act...:lol:
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top