Slog Comments
Tuition Skyrockets as Incomes Stay Flat
1
This graph and your previous graph are not related.
One has all prices adjusted for 2013 dollars, this one is in percentages without adjustment.
Obnoxious over a 23 year period.
One has all prices adjusted for 2013 dollars, this one is in percentages without adjustment.
Obnoxious over a 23 year period.
2
@#1 It's not in the chart, but the text says:
Given that the chart shows a 214% increase since 1989, it's safe to say the chart is indeed adjusted for inflation. Indeed, the income line says it's adjusted for inflation (in 2010 dollars, not that it matters since there are no units on the Y axis).
Adjusted for inflation, the price of UW tuition has more than tripled since 1989
Given that the chart shows a 214% increase since 1989, it's safe to say the chart is indeed adjusted for inflation. Indeed, the income line says it's adjusted for inflation (in 2010 dollars, not that it matters since there are no units on the Y axis).
3
Washington State deadbeats have been getting the deal of the century for too long while people with real jobs on the East Coast send you lazy bones their tax monies through the military and Boeing.
The typical Washingtonian is a grey bearded guy in Silverdale who things a Dodge Ram Diesel with duellies and 3 nights a week out at Showgirls is written into the state Constitution.
And half the time you sit around biting the hands that feed your asses with stupid liberal politics.
It's time for you guys to get off your duff and do some work and pay fair dollar for fair value.
The typical Washingtonian is a grey bearded guy in Silverdale who things a Dodge Ram Diesel with duellies and 3 nights a week out at Showgirls is written into the state Constitution.
And half the time you sit around biting the hands that feed your asses with stupid liberal politics.
It's time for you guys to get off your duff and do some work and pay fair dollar for fair value.
4
I think the rising cost of higher education is a bit of a problem. On the other hand, do we really want to go back to the old system in which pretty much anybody who could fog a mirror could go to college on the tax payer's dime? I know I don't want to pay for that shit.
5
@3 Actually the median age in Washington state is only 35.3, as opposed to 36.9 in the entire US. Hardly a grey beard kind of state.
6
As Goldy has pointed out, the COST of education hasn't changed, but the PRICE for in state residents has.
7
FWIW it's dualies not duellies....
One of the lesser reasons that a college education is important
One of the lesser reasons that a college education is important
8
there are no real jobs on the east coast.
and washington state is a net contributor state, that is, we pay a lot more in to the feds in taxes than we get back.
its republican states that are getting their lazy bones sent tax money, mostly in the south.
you know, the ones with stupid conservative politics.
here's a nice little map-
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-kl…
unfortunately, it doesnt show which states hang fake testicles off the trailer hitches of their duellies, but I will give you a hint- its not washington.
and washington state is a net contributor state, that is, we pay a lot more in to the feds in taxes than we get back.
its republican states that are getting their lazy bones sent tax money, mostly in the south.
you know, the ones with stupid conservative politics.
here's a nice little map-
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-kl…
unfortunately, it doesnt show which states hang fake testicles off the trailer hitches of their duellies, but I will give you a hint- its not washington.
9
@3 Your comment is so hyperbolic I can't tell if you're a satire or the real deal. WA may get government contracts but we pay more in taxes than we get in straight funding, .88 cents per dollar back. Furthermore gov't contracts aren't just handouts there is a transaction where the gov't gets airplanes, it kind of needs those things and Boeing has to operate somewhere.
Also, Boeing underbid (losing money) to build Airforce 1 for the president.
In regards to UW and tuition, state funding is just part of the problem, here is a good article you should consider.
http://nobudgetcutsuw.blogspot.com/2010/…
Also, Boeing underbid (losing money) to build Airforce 1 for the president.
In regards to UW and tuition, state funding is just part of the problem, here is a good article you should consider.
http://nobudgetcutsuw.blogspot.com/2010/…
10
Student loans are an asset-backed security whose repayment to lenders is guaranteed by the federal government. This means that from the point of view of lenders, they are both profitable and essentially risk-free to grant. In consequence, they are very easy for borrowers (students) to obtain, even in the case of students with bad or no credit.
For the universities, the customers' (students') easy access to credit encourages them to raise tuition - if your customers can easily obtain money to pay for your service, there is no reason NOT to raise prices on them.
Tightening the requirements for student loans, or forcing lenders to assume some of the risk of granting them, would reduce the money supply available to students and thereby encourage universities to lower tuition rates.
But of course, who wants to be the lawmaker that "denied students their college money"?
For the universities, the customers' (students') easy access to credit encourages them to raise tuition - if your customers can easily obtain money to pay for your service, there is no reason NOT to raise prices on them.
Tightening the requirements for student loans, or forcing lenders to assume some of the risk of granting them, would reduce the money supply available to students and thereby encourage universities to lower tuition rates.
But of course, who wants to be the lawmaker that "denied students their college money"?
11
As long as people are without housing, medical care, and food, I really don't care about how much people pay for college tuition. There aren't enough jobs to employ college graduates anyway. The problems we have are so systemic that complaining about unfair tuition increases is just absurd. I realize that most people who are not independently wealthy and who have kids who will be college-age in a few years are concerned, but that doesn't mean their concern should trump any other concern.
13
"As long as people are without housing, medical care, and food, I really don't care about how much people pay for college tuition. "
And I'm tired of social spending crowding out actual productive investments.
And I'm tired of social spending crowding out actual productive investments.
15
tsk tsk tsk
stagnant incomes,
no housing,
no medical care,
no food........
sounds like your socialist welfare state is collapsing.
well,
on the bright side, the faggots can marry.....
stagnant incomes,
no housing,
no medical care,
no food........
sounds like your socialist welfare state is collapsing.
well,
on the bright side, the faggots can marry.....
16
@#12
What part of normalized don't you understand?
I mean, I suppose it's possible he pulled a fast one and the axis isn't linear, but excluding that who cares if we know exactly where on the chart a 50% increase is? What additional information does it provide?
What part of normalized don't you understand?
I mean, I suppose it's possible he pulled a fast one and the axis isn't linear, but excluding that who cares if we know exactly where on the chart a 50% increase is? What additional information does it provide?
17
When I graduated from high school in 1998, in-state four-year tuition was approximately $850/quarter.
When I got my shit together and paid my way through college on my own, starting in 2006, BCC was $1000/quarter. When I graduated from UW in 2010, it was $2900/quarter.
Even with inflation factored in (I used the first inflation calculator to come up on Google), that's almost a 300% increase in 12 years.
When I got my shit together and paid my way through college on my own, starting in 2006, BCC was $1000/quarter. When I graduated from UW in 2010, it was $2900/quarter.
Even with inflation factored in (I used the first inflation calculator to come up on Google), that's almost a 300% increase in 12 years.
18
Hate to point out the bleedin' obvious, but the median income earner doesn't actually pay for college (or even go to college, on average). Those who do have their tuitions highly subsidized. Looking at the sticker price on tuition is a very misleading statistic for not only that reason. The other is that there is a very substantial wage premium for having had gone to college. Even with these growth rates, tuition is technically lower than it should be economically speaking (though as someone with two degrees, it doesn't feel like it).
The only way this graph really would be so relevant public policy-wise would be if those median wages were for workers AFTER they went to college. It just is not the case; on average, degree holders make substantially more over their lifetimes as compared to non-degree holders (holding other factors constant).
I say this as someone who thinks higher ed should be completely subsidized by taxpayers, so I am no conservative reactionary. But this is just a silly graph to try to make substantive statistical inferences.
The only way this graph really would be so relevant public policy-wise would be if those median wages were for workers AFTER they went to college. It just is not the case; on average, degree holders make substantially more over their lifetimes as compared to non-degree holders (holding other factors constant).
I say this as someone who thinks higher ed should be completely subsidized by taxpayers, so I am no conservative reactionary. But this is just a silly graph to try to make substantive statistical inferences.
19
I can't escape the feeling that universities, individually, are shooting for the stars and trying to be everything to everybody—as though they were all, like Lake Wobegon's children, above average—instead of focusing on a few key strengths.
The buildings are kind of a metaphor for this. The ones constructed in the 1920s and '30s are heavy, neoclassical brick piles with enormous columns on the front, with lots of varnished wood inside, but surprisingly inexpensive if you go back into the news archives and read the stories about them.
The 1950s and '60s were the heyday of the Bauhaus barns, utilitarian and unassuming structures built to deal with the swarms of returning servicemembers on the G.I. Bill.
But from the mid-80s on, there's been an avalanche of huge new structures on many campuses having sophisticated themes, expensive finishes, and very high-tech innards. They're multi-purpose arenas and libraries where bins of books (those not yet digitized) are moved about by robots and grand palaces of molecular diagnostics and nanotechnology.
They attract showers of major donations from corporations and wealthy individuals, but I'd like to know a lot more about the financing of these jewel-boxes and how the effort to build, equip, maintain, and administer all of them detracts and distracts from universities' essential classroom-education function.
In states with multiple campuses in their public-university systems, it seems as if they are all in competition with each other to duplicate the same types of facilities and currently-popular programs.
The buildings are kind of a metaphor for this. The ones constructed in the 1920s and '30s are heavy, neoclassical brick piles with enormous columns on the front, with lots of varnished wood inside, but surprisingly inexpensive if you go back into the news archives and read the stories about them.
The 1950s and '60s were the heyday of the Bauhaus barns, utilitarian and unassuming structures built to deal with the swarms of returning servicemembers on the G.I. Bill.
But from the mid-80s on, there's been an avalanche of huge new structures on many campuses having sophisticated themes, expensive finishes, and very high-tech innards. They're multi-purpose arenas and libraries where bins of books (those not yet digitized) are moved about by robots and grand palaces of molecular diagnostics and nanotechnology.
They attract showers of major donations from corporations and wealthy individuals, but I'd like to know a lot more about the financing of these jewel-boxes and how the effort to build, equip, maintain, and administer all of them detracts and distracts from universities' essential classroom-education function.
In states with multiple campuses in their public-university systems, it seems as if they are all in competition with each other to duplicate the same types of facilities and currently-popular programs.
20
I don't want to be the one who says student loans are a bad thing. In concept anyway, they have allowed many to get an education who - for one reason or another - couldn't get on the scholarship track or weren't from wealthy families. But I have noticed over the years that whenever the annual maximum loan amount is increased, so is tuition - usually at the same or greater percentage.
21
...and don't believe that hooey about good debt either. Mortgage and loan officers, Equifax et al., business loan makers all look at that debt as debt and score you that way until it is paid off (that's something they don't tell you when you sign on the dotted line).
22
UW is basically a joke of a school at this point. It's a place where rich foreigners get babysat for four years, to fill the pockets of a bunch of pointless pencil-pushing administrators. The NY times made national news of how pathetic this university is:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/educat…
Keep thinking it's "prestigious," you misinformed locals. Any university where the seats are basically for sale is no legit institution of higher learning. If you want a decent education, jump ship to another state. If you're smart that is. If you're a dumb rich kid on the other hand, then UW is the place for you!
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/educat…
Keep thinking it's "prestigious," you misinformed locals. Any university where the seats are basically for sale is no legit institution of higher learning. If you want a decent education, jump ship to another state. If you're smart that is. If you're a dumb rich kid on the other hand, then UW is the place for you!
23
Cost is determined by inputs, price by supply and demand. The price of public education was and continues to be kept low by taxpayer subsidies. Is this a good thing? I think good arguments can be made on both sides. Rather than subsidizing all students, I would favor direct subsidies to low-income students. As was pointed out earlier in this thread, the returns from a college degree continue to be excellent, so those most directly benefitting from the returns should pay more if they can. An excellent discussion of this topic appears here. http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/0…
24
Confluence,
I went to the UW, over a dozen years ago, and there were a lot of useless seat fillers, especially in the lower-level humanities courses. I described them as people looking to get their Suit License, people who wanted to obtain a generic college degree with as little effort and education as possible so they could work in a white-collar job for the rest of their life. But the UW was then and is today one of the top research universities in the country, and for the student willing to seek them out offers resources and an education that are just tremendous. It is very easy to get a degree from the UW that is utterly meaningless; it's also very possible to use the UW as one of the very best schools in the country.
My impression (as a complete outsider) is that the virtue of the smaller and more elitist schools is that there's much more attention paid to each student, it's harder to skate and to slack, and the poor student is less likely - less able - to graduate without having learned anything. But I'm not sure they offer greater or even equal resources to the better, more motivated students.
I went to the UW, over a dozen years ago, and there were a lot of useless seat fillers, especially in the lower-level humanities courses. I described them as people looking to get their Suit License, people who wanted to obtain a generic college degree with as little effort and education as possible so they could work in a white-collar job for the rest of their life. But the UW was then and is today one of the top research universities in the country, and for the student willing to seek them out offers resources and an education that are just tremendous. It is very easy to get a degree from the UW that is utterly meaningless; it's also very possible to use the UW as one of the very best schools in the country.
My impression (as a complete outsider) is that the virtue of the smaller and more elitist schools is that there's much more attention paid to each student, it's harder to skate and to slack, and the poor student is less likely - less able - to graduate without having learned anything. But I'm not sure they offer greater or even equal resources to the better, more motivated students.
25
I don't know if I buy this. Smaller, elite colleges do pay more attention to each student, but often in the form of hand-holding and letting students turn in assignments ridiculously late, like after the end of the semester late. I went to a large university where that shit would never have been tolerated by even my most jaded professors, and I was flabbergasted to hear what my friends at small, elite colleges could get away with.
My impression (as a complete outsider) is that the virtue of the smaller and more elitist schools is that there's much more attention paid to each student, it's harder to skate and to slack
I don't know if I buy this. Smaller, elite colleges do pay more attention to each student, but often in the form of hand-holding and letting students turn in assignments ridiculously late, like after the end of the semester late. I went to a large university where that shit would never have been tolerated by even my most jaded professors, and I was flabbergasted to hear what my friends at small, elite colleges could get away with.
Comments (25) RSS