Jump to content

Jamie Dimon sounds off on student debt crisis: ‘What we’ve done is a disgrace’


MrB
 Share

Recommended Posts

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/26/jamie-dimon-weighs-in-on-student-loan-debt.html

 

What nonsense! How about taking personal responsibility? Not only Dimon, who is generally sensible, but especially the student.

 

It's not a disgrace, it's just plain stupid!

 

If you're stupid enough to sign up for debt or your parents failed to educate you on something as basic as personal finances and the danger of debt in today's day and age then why should society ride to the rescue just because stupidity of this nature spread wide?

 

So Socialist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is most frustrating is the fact that politicians continue to completely ignore the poor design of the original policies, and are attempting to paper over the federal government-fueled student loan debt by forgiving all of it instead of redesigning the system?

 

It's like taking a leaky gas tank and just adding gasoline. Sure the car will run, but not nearly as quickly or efficiently as it could.

 

How in the world do we have tens of thousands of open high-wage positions in this country and not nearly enough people to fill them? If the government wants to incentivize education, which helps the US with its competitiveness globally, the government should be incentivizing the types of education that make us more competitive, i.e. STEM careers, not psychology, English, and other liberal arts-type degrees (speaking as a liberal arts major).

 

It's just beyond insanity to address the problem in the way Democrats are proposing. But hey Modern Monetary Theory will take care of all this anyways, so no need to worry about the quality of our politicians' decision-making.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is most frustrating is the fact that politicians continue to completely ignore the poor design of the original policies, and are attempting to paper over the federal government-fueled student loan debt by forgiving all of it instead of redesigning the system?

 

It's like taking a leaky gas tank and just adding gasoline. Sure the car will run, but not nearly as quickly or efficiently as it could.

 

How in the world do we have tens of thousands of open high-wage positions in this country and not nearly enough people to fill them? If the government wants to incentivize education, which helps the US with its competitiveness globally, the government should be incentivizing the types of education that make us more competitive, i.e. STEM careers, not psychology, English, and other liberal arts-type degrees (speaking as a liberal arts major).

 

It's just beyond insanity to address the problem in the way Democrats are proposing. But hey Modern Monetary Theory will take care of all this anyways, so no need to worry about the quality of our politicians' decision-making.

 

An alternative, with terms based on major and results in universities having skin in the game, is the Income Share Agreement.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/purdue-invests-students-futures-new-model-financing?_ga=2.250327875.499797894.1561563684-1803910492.1535408883#

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/26/jamie-dimon-weighs-in-on-student-loan-debt.html

 

What nonsense! How about taking personal responsibility? Not only Dimon, who is generally sensible, but especially the student.

 

It's not a disgrace, it's just plain stupid!

 

If you're stupid enough to sign up for debt or your parents failed to educate you on something as basic as personal finances and the danger of debt in today's day and age then why should society ride to the rescue just because stupidity of this nature spread wide?

 

So Socialist.

 

What is almost never discussed is the culpability of the educators.

 

Sure, there are stupid students who have absolutely no idea what they are doing...but what about the students who are told, "we've got a 90%+ placement rate at $70k+ salaries upon graduation".  Student finds out at graduation that the employment rate is about 50%, and the average salary is in the 30's?

 

There are TONS of skools who are fraudulently inflating/promoting the outcome of their graduates.  That plays a HUGE part in the explosion of student loan debt.  If a lot of skools were honest about the outcome of their graduates, they would either close down OR have to totally redo their programs and a lot of profs and admins would be shown the door.  Those that remain would have to work 2x or 3x as hard.

 

So yeah, let us see some accountability on the part of the educators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is most frustrating is the fact that politicians continue to completely ignore the poor design of the original policies, and are attempting to paper over the federal government-fueled student loan debt by forgiving all of it instead of redesigning the system?

 

It's like taking a leaky gas tank and just adding gasoline. Sure the car will run, but not nearly as quickly or efficiently as it could.

 

How in the world do we have tens of thousands of open high-wage positions in this country and not nearly enough people to fill them? If the government wants to incentivize education, which helps the US with its competitiveness globally, the government should be incentivizing the types of education that make us more competitive, i.e. STEM careers, not psychology, English, and other liberal arts-type degrees (speaking as a liberal arts major).

 

It's just beyond insanity to address the problem in the way Democrats are proposing. But hey Modern Monetary Theory will take care of all this anyways, so no need to worry about the quality of our politicians' decision-making.

 

As someone who thinks the government shouldn't forgive student debt or give out guaranteed loans to 18 year old kids, I agree with what you're saying (as a first step). We need to move away from this for profit, sky rocketing education cost model that has been ushered in by government. The best way as you pointed out would be to incentivize  certain careers. One, I don't think government loans should be given to students unless they meet strict GPA and SAT scores coming out of HS. Two loans should only be given for students who are pursuing STEM careers. Perhaps even do a census and give loans to the top 25 career field demands. Three in order to keep receiving the ability to take the loans out students need to have strict GPA requirements (depending on major) to meet. There needs to be terms for a major change as well. Limit them to changes within the top 25. All of that being said I don't think that is a permanent solution. It will create a lot of division and issues if done for a long period. But it is a step in the right direction.

 

I think the best process forward is to start introducing apprenticeships in high school. If a Junior in High School has a good inclination for math and engineering then have a course which allows them to work at a local engineering firm for a few hours a week. Not only does this teach the kid real life work vs study, it gives employers good insight to potential candidates. I bet a lot of these employers would be willing to give out scholarships (with terms) if they had a kid they really liked. I also think that apprenticeships could be used as a path to a career directly out of high school without needing a college degree. I mean how many careers are out there that really don't require a whole lot of education. Maybe they require a certification or something that a local employer would be willing to train and test their apprentice on. But there are TONS of business jobs that shouldn't require a degree.

 

We need to bring value back to k-12 education. Not diminish it by making a bachelors degree the new high school GED. We also need to bring value back to a bachelors degree. Not diminish it by making masters degrees the new bachelors. I mean it's quite ridiculous...The issue is employers want to know if a person is smart enough to do a simple job....But we are using a bachelors degree as a checkbox when that is not its intended purpose. We already see this hypocritical attitude and standard in the business world. Look how many people run successful businesses with just a high school degree. Look how many entrepreneurs there are with only a high school degree. You mean to tell me those same people need a 4 year degree from a state university to manage a Sherwin Williams?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/26/jamie-dimon-weighs-in-on-student-loan-debt.html

 

What nonsense! How about taking personal responsibility? Not only Dimon, who is generally sensible, but especially the student.

 

It's not a disgrace, it's just plain stupid!

 

If you're stupid enough to sign up for debt or your parents failed to educate you on something as basic as personal finances and the danger of debt in today's day and age then why should society ride to the rescue just because stupidity of this nature spread wide?

 

So Socialist.

 

I agree with you completely regarding the stupidity of taking on excessive debt that will not earn a ROI.  Perhaps loans for college education should be rationalized and focus on degrees with a chance of employment.

 

However, one problem is that many parents are too naive or even dumb to educate their children in these areas.  Some of those children will educate themselves about personal finance (if they have the capacity and the interest), but we can't rely on that. We aren't doing enough with financial education in K-12 schools and that is time of life when you need to learn this stuff. Even children with low capacity and aptitude can improve through basic education. 

 

I have met a number of successful functional adults that can't understand their own credit card statements, let alone understand the fine print on personal loan terms.  Debt is everywhere and it is designed to be easy for most people to get in too deep.

 

If we want a society made of intelligent people making good decisions then we need to educate them well as children. If we want sheep to support the economy and only think about buying 60" TVs and new cars that they can't afford, then we should keep attacking and cutting K-12 education system.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who thinks the government shouldn't forgive student debt or give out guaranteed loans to 18 year old kids, I agree with what you're saying (as a first step). We need to move away from this for profit, sky rocketing education cost model that has been ushered in by government. The best way as you pointed out would be to incentivize  certain careers. One, I don't think government loans should be given to students unless they meet strict GPA and SAT scores coming out of HS. Two loans should only be given for students who are pursuing STEM careers. Perhaps even do a census and give loans to the top 25 career field demands. Three in order to keep receiving the ability to take the loans out students need to have strict GPA requirements (depending on major) to meet. There needs to be terms for a major change as well. Limit them to changes within the top 25. All of that being said I don't think that is a permanent solution. It will create a lot of division and issues if done for a long period. But it is a step in the right direction.

 

I think the best process forward is to start introducing apprenticeships in high school. If a Junior in High School has a good inclination for math and engineering then have a course which allows them to work at a local engineering firm for a few hours a week. Not only does this teach the kid real life work vs study, it gives employers good insight to potential candidates. I bet a lot of these employers would be willing to give out scholarships (with terms) if they had a kid they really liked. I also think that apprenticeships could be used as a path to a career directly out of high school without needing a college degree. I mean how many careers are out there that really don't require a whole lot of education. Maybe they require a certification or something that a local employer would be willing to train and test their apprentice on. But there are TONS of business jobs that shouldn't require a degree.

 

We need to bring value back to k-12 education. Not diminish it by making a bachelors degree the new high school GED. We also need to bring value back to a bachelors degree. Not diminish it by making masters degrees the new bachelors. I mean it's quite ridiculous...The issue is employers want to know if a person is smart enough to do a simple job....But we are using a bachelors degree as a checkbox when that is not its intended purpose. We already see this hypocritical attitude and standard in the business world. Look how many people run successful businesses with just a high school degree. Look how many entrepreneurs there are with only a high school degree. You mean to tell me those same people need a 4 year degree from a state university to manage a Sherwin Williams?

 

This. All of this.

 

The problem with a lot of the "solutions" proposed to end the student loan issue is that people are only thinking about the first bounce of the ball. Sanders' and (to a slightly lesser extent) Warren's solution of loan forgiveness is only going to further incentivize loan taking (i.e. the second bounce of the ball).

 

It's an unpopular opinion, but the idea that you have government subsidized loans for education is one of the big reasons that we have tuition inflation! If you then subsidize loan repayment on the backend, that's effectively putting another layer of subsidization on the issue. What do people think is going to happen when you subsidize demand and supply doesn't increase at the same levels?

 

And I get it. I really do. It's hard to tell people that the solution to the problem is to reduce the financial accessibility of college, but increasing demand is... not the way to go. The Dems are dead wrong on this issue, and I say that as a Dem.

 

Moreover, that last paragraph is a huge part of the problem. When you churn out too many college educated students, but the actual jobs that legit require a college degree don't increase at the same pace, you get situations where people say "well, you don't need a college degree to do this job, but there's so many college graduates out there, why wouldn't I use this as a checkbox?" And slowly you get job requirement inflation. A receptionist doesn't need a college degree. Come on, folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The moral hazard isn't going away.

You screw up, you pay; mommy/daddy might bail you out, but it's not going to be you or I.

 

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/moral-hazard?from=mdr

 

Example: You have not insured your house from any future damages. It implies that a loss will be completely borne by you at the time of a mishappening like fire or burglary. Hence you will show extra care and attentiveness. You will install high tech burglar alarms and hire watchmen to avoid any unforeseen event. But if your house is insured for its full value, then if anything happens you do not really lose anything. Therefore, you have less incentive to protect against any mishappening. In this case, the insurance firm bears the losses and the problem of moral hazard arises.

 

SD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another option which I’m teaching my kids, which I have to admit is hard as a post grad Father of 3, with the oldest being 13, is that it is not necessary to go to Uni immediately after school or at all. It is perfectly fine to start a business, start work or an apprenticeship immediately.  I have to admit though that I find it does not come naturally to teach my kids that Uni is not The way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the income share programs are a wonderful alignment of incentives which should most definitely have some regulatory oversight to avoid abusive practices.

 

One of my friends graduated the music program last semester & started studying full stack web development through

 

www.lambdaschool.com (not an accredited program)

 

He came to the conclusion that an AA in music wasn't enough & he wasn't interested in going on through the BA & MA programs & becoming an orchestral musician or a professor. I can't say that I blame him for deciding that he'd like to actually make a living wage & have the option of making some extra fun money with music.

 

Since starting at LAMBDA he's learned HTML, CSS & Javascript & will be continuing through the program which he says he enjoys.

 

No cash outlay & as per their website,

 

"Under an ISA you agree to pay 17% of your post-Lambda School salary for 24 months, only when you're making more than $50k per year (or the equivalent of $4,166.66 per month). The income share agreement is also capped at a maximum repayment of $30k, so you'll never pay more than $30k under any circumstances."

 

---

 

I've read a Reddit that criticizes the program for basically not handholding you after you get through the basics, but in my experience most instructors do not force feed the course material to you & I tend to read between the lines of these negative comments.

 

At first, it annoyed the crap out of me that my music theory instructor would require us to read a chapter before the lecture. Almost everyone in class had the same opinion mainly because after you read the chapter you'd come away confused as shit, but then, lo & behold, the lecture would make things a bit less muddy & then after you did the assigned homework exercises all would become clear as glass. The instructor was always receptive to office visits & when he saw you were working on the material he would gladly spend extra time to clarify things.

 

Who knew you actually had to work for an education?

 

IMO, youngsters are being pandered to by far left politicians & oldsters are being pandered to by the neocons.

 

Neither will get what they want if they wait for a handout.

 

There seems to be no center anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just make these loans default-able in bankruptcy after 8 years.

 

Yes, and the degrees should be repossessed in the process.

 

That is a perfectly acceptable solution...BUT FOR ONE THING...the educators that profited in the creation of these things also need to be addressed.  Perhaps they should also pay a penalty?

 

I know SCORES of attorney that have paid TENS of thousands of dollars toward their student loans, that have worked for YEARS, that would GLADLY give up their license and be barred from ever practicing law in the future in exchange for simple cancellation of their remaining student loans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just make these loans default-able in bankruptcy after 8 years.

 

Yes, and the degrees should be repossessed in the process.

 

That is a perfectly acceptable solution...BUT FOR ONE THING...the educators that profited in the creation of these things also need to be addressed.  Perhaps they should also pay a penalty?

 

I know SCORES of attorney that have paid TENS of thousands of dollars toward their student loans, that have worked for YEARS, that would GLADLY give up their license and be barred from ever practicing law in the future in exchange for simple cancellation of their remaining student loans.

 

Yes! Teachers should be forced to pay reparations to anyone who was ever in a classroom of any kind. And there should be special pain and suffering payments for anyone who ever received a grade that is lower than what they felt they deserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just make these loans default-able in bankruptcy after 8 years.

 

Yes, and the degrees should be repossessed in the process.

 

That is a perfectly acceptable solution...BUT FOR ONE THING...the educators that profited in the creation of these things also need to be addressed.  Perhaps they should also pay a penalty?

 

I know SCORES of attorney that have paid TENS of thousands of dollars toward their student loans, that have worked for YEARS, that would GLADLY give up their license and be barred from ever practicing law in the future in exchange for simple cancellation of their remaining student loans.

 

Yes! Teachers should be forced to pay reparations to anyone who was ever in a classroom of any kind. And there should be special pain and suffering payments for anyone who ever received a grade that is lower than what they felt they deserved.

 

While we're on it, we should also round up and deport any parents who have sent their kids into skools and collages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jurgis and "Read the Footnotes", is it so far outside the realm of possibility that educators are not engaged in shady stuff?  That with $1.5 trillion of student loan debt, that something funny might not be going on?

 

Obviously not all teachers, educators, and administrators are in on the scam, but I think most people would be shocked by how many are.

 

Obviously some education is worth every penny and then some...but a shocking amount is not.

 

Think about this, educators are paid up front.  Once they've got the money, it does not matter so much the outcome for the student.

 

It would be interesting to see how many students wind up in default on their loans, in forbearance for an extended time, OR in IBR.

 

So let us say that a school has 10% of their students not paying the loans back.  Not good, but certainly not a catastrophe.  What if that hit 20%?  35%, 50% or more?  Why should the educators not have "skin in the game".  Clearly there is a problem with the quantity and quality of what they are producing.

 

Is it so far outside the realm of possibility that some skools are fudging, manipulating and lying about the worth of their diplomas(education) and the results of their graduates?

 

There is a problem with this, and it is unfortunately going to grow in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think anyone is arguing educators inflate their numbers. But I think the point is that if colleges prices hadn’t been inflated so much, this would be less of an issue. In other words, it is not a root cause but rather a symptom of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DTEJD1997, you are totally right. The schools that cheat, lie, and defraud are called "for profit colleges". I am sure you will talk to your congress/senate persons to regulate these stronger including revoking federal student loans unless these skools clean up their act. Maybe support the lawsuits against these companies, their management and shareholders too. Way to go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Granted, on day 1 the student may have been conned.

But if he/she kept coming back every year, and added new borrowings to finance it, he/she became complicit.

 

Most professors are not tenured, and a course will not run unless there are a minimum number of students. If the course is an elective, it will fill primarily according to the average grade, and amount of work required – not subject matter. Students game to maximize GPA, professors’ game to maximize student count … but it would not occur were it not demanded.

 

Not every student is there for an education; for many it’s for visa purposes, and to wind down the clock on residency requirements. Depending on location and type of school, this may exceed 30%+ of the total student population. Money that school, all other students, researchers and professors benefit from.

 

No student participation, no fire.

No free pass.

 

My own view is that debt write-offs should be tied to community service, and used as ‘top-up’ compensation.

Work in an NGO, in a remote, rural, or underserved community – and receive a formula driven loan write-off along with your low pay.

The social worker in a nursing home, getting the same loan repayment opportunity as the star.

An FDR type, ‘new deal’.

 

SD

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Granted, on day 1 the student may have been conned.

But if he/she kept coming back every year, and added new borrowings to finance it, he/she became complicit.

 

Most professors are not tenured, and a course will not run unless there are a minimum number of students. If the course is an elective, it will fill primarily according to the average grade, and amount of work required – not subject matter. Students game to maximize GPA, professors’ game to maximize student count … but it would not occur were it not demanded.

 

Not every student is there for an education; for many it’s for visa purposes, and to wind down the clock on residency requirements. Depending on location and type of school, this may exceed 30%+ of the total student population. Money that school, all other students, researchers and professors benefit from.

 

No student participation, no fire.

No free pass.

 

My own view is that debt write-offs should be tied to community service, and used as ‘top-up’ compensation.

Work in an NGO, in a remote, rural, or underserved community – and receive a formula driven loan write-off along with your low pay.

The social worker in a nursing home, getting the same loan repayment opportunity as the star.

An FDR type, ‘new deal’.

 

SD

 

Good idea. Are there any legislators talking about this kind of program?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Granted, on day 1 the student may have been conned.

But if he/she kept coming back every year, and added new borrowings to finance it, he/she became complicit.

 

Most professors are not tenured, and a course will not run unless there are a minimum number of students. If the course is an elective, it will fill primarily according to the average grade, and amount of work required – not subject matter. Students game to maximize GPA, professors’ game to maximize student count … but it would not occur were it not demanded.

 

Not every student is there for an education; for many it’s for visa purposes, and to wind down the clock on residency requirements. Depending on location and type of school, this may exceed 30%+ of the total student population. Money that school, all other students, researchers and professors benefit from.

 

No student participation, no fire.

No free pass.

 

My own view is that debt write-offs should be tied to community service, and used as ‘top-up’ compensation.

Work in an NGO, in a remote, rural, or underserved community – and receive a formula driven loan write-off along with your low pay.

The social worker in a nursing home, getting the same loan repayment opportunity as the star.

An FDR type, ‘new deal’.

 

SD

 

Good idea. Are there any legislators talking about this kind of program?

 

These sorts of programs already exist. Many public service jobs, governmental jobs and non-profit jobs can qualify. Teachers, nurses and doctors are pretty obvious professions that are specifically targeted, but they even have programs specifically for lawyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DTEJD1997, you are totally right. The schools that cheat, lie, and defraud are called "for profit colleges". I am sure you will talk to your congress/senate persons to regulate these stronger including revoking federal student loans unless these skools clean up their act. Maybe support the lawsuits against these companies, their management and shareholders too. Way to go!

 

You are right that a lot of the "for profit" skools are indeed frauds OR up to their hips in unsavory stuff....Not 100% are, but perhaps the majority?  Of course, things are not quite as bad now as they were 5-10 years ago.

 

There have been several that were sued and shut down.  If you go in the "way back" machine, you'll see I was railing against them back then even.  So I've been 100% consistent over the years with that.

 

HOWEVER, there are PLENTY of shenanigans going on with "traditional non-profit" skools also.  Obviously not all of them are...then there are some that are generally good, but have some problem programs...and then are a bunch that need to brought to heel or shut down.

 

I would submit that "non-profit" simply means that there are not shareholders or owners in the traditional sense.  The "shareholders" of the non-profits would be the administrators & tenured professors.  They are the stakeholders that are getting the money.

 

The law skool problem is especially egregious, and I'm not going to go into too many details here.  There have been MANY lawsuits against them, and enrollment is down at most law skools.  Some skools have finally been shut down! 

 

Obviously, some are law schools better than others.  For example, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford are probably worth paying full freight for.  There are maybe a dozen others that are also solid choices.  Once you get past the top 20 or so ranked schools, then you are starting to gamble...go down another 20 rankings, and it is insane to pay full tuition.  Heck, there are maybe 100+ law skools (out of about 200) that are NOT worth attending even with a full ride scholarship.

 

Law skools are perhaps the worst example of things gone amuck, but I've heard there are problems with architecture, journalism and some other fields of study.  Obviously most liberal art programs are not worth the money & effort.

 

This could be discussed for hundreds of pages...but make no mistake, there are SEVERE problems with a surprising number of "non-profit" skools.

 

Things have got to change!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Granted, on day 1 the student may have been conned.

But if he/she kept coming back every year, and added new borrowings to finance it, he/she became complicit.

 

Most professors are not tenured, and a course will not run unless there are a minimum number of students. If the course is an elective, it will fill primarily according to the average grade, and amount of work required – not subject matter. Students game to maximize GPA, professors’ game to maximize student count … but it would not occur were it not demanded.

 

Not every student is there for an education; for many it’s for visa purposes, and to wind down the clock on residency requirements. Depending on location and type of school, this may exceed 30%+ of the total student population. Money that school, all other students, researchers and professors benefit from.

 

No student participation, no fire.

No free pass.

 

My own view is that debt write-offs should be tied to community service, and used as ‘top-up’ compensation.

Work in an NGO, in a remote, rural, or underserved community – and receive a formula driven loan write-off along with your low pay.

The social worker in a nursing home, getting the same loan repayment opportunity as the star.

An FDR type, ‘new deal’.

 

SD

 

Good idea. Are there any legislators talking about this kind of program?

 

These sorts of programs already exist. Many public service jobs, governmental jobs and non-profit jobs can qualify. Teachers, nurses and doctors are pretty obvious professions that are specifically targeted, but they even have programs specifically for lawyers.

 

The devil is in the details, and there are some severe problems with PSLF (Public Service Loan Forgiveness).  Tens of thousands of people thought they were eligible for this and were enrolled, but come to find out that there were problems with the paperwork and they are out.  This is a scandal in of itself, but it is being addressed.

 

The BIGGER problem with this is that the skools still get the money!  The institutions should by and large not be getting the capital that they are.  There is no cost/benefit analysis, there is no underwriting with this.  Finally, the institutions have no skin in the game.  If 80% of their graduates are in PSLF or IBR (or other programs), how is that a good deal for ANYBODY other than the educators?  Students have huge debts that the government pays off if they do community service for 10 years?

 

The market is not working and there is no value or price discovery of the value of all this education.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the same argument that the drunk makes at the bar.

“I was drinking [young and dumb], and you [society] knew I wasn’t making rational decisions [not mature enough].

You should never have lent me the money to continue - this is all YOUR fault, not mine!!” 

 

Money was made available to finance an education, and yes it came with strings; that’s life. No different to the mortgage that millions of people pay every day. But we can foreclose on a house, whereas that stupid educational decision has to be worn. By both the drunk AND society.

 

If the drunk can’t repay, society gives the drunk the ability to earn debt forgiveness. If the drunk’s program does not qualify [art history], nothing prevents the drunk from returning to school, and doing something that DOES qualify. The drunk just doesn’t want to.

 

The only issue here is whether the money should have been made available. Most would say yes, but not until the following morning when the drunk is sober [student is mature]. With greater responsibility on the part of the student, comes a reduction in the educational abuses.

 

But until then it just comes across as spoilt brats, refusing to grow up.

 

SD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...