Brent P
Buying a car or a plasma TV does not allow to make more income, does not train you for further advancement, nor do they do anything except acculuate debt.
Going to college isn't like that.
If you're being pedantic and *just focusing on a dollar amount*, then yes, that's absolutely correct.
But we're not talking *just* about debt, are we?
I don't need to justify it. You're the one claiming it's better not to have debt right out of school. That ain't the case. Recasting the argument is kinda lame.
Oh, you *think* you do, but since you're trying every weasel way to avoid the core of my argument, I would say that you really don't get it.
There are only so many hours in a day. You work a McJob to support your car, pay 25% of that McJob's gross in taxes, and you have to spend time doing it. Time that could be spent studying and getting summa cum laude grades (contrary to popular thought, good grades *do* mean something to prospective employers.)
I dunno - maybe you didn't have to study, or take lab clbuttes, or maybe your job paid much better than minimum wage. For you, then, working through it paid off.
See, that's the whole thing - I know lots of folks who were on the "five-year plan", and I was told that it would be hard to get it done in four years. Five years of full-time tuition as compared to 3 years of full-time tuition, plus some winter break clbuttes - the interest paid on my student loans doesn't even scratch the difference. Hey, pay $200 for this item, or pay $275 for the very same item - yeah, everyone picks the higher price.
Oh, wait - they don't.
I agree. But it may help one to avoid *extending* the time to five or more years. That extra year of tuition is going to cost a hell of a lot more than the interest on a set of student loans.
What the folks in the registrar's office called a full load for a hard science major was about 14-16 credit hours. I routinely took 20-22. Three lab clbuttes, a writing clbutt, calculus, and a history course all in my first semester. I was already a half-semester up on my clbuttmates by winter break.
Wrong.
Of course they aren't. The logical fallacy of the false dilemma doesn't improve your position. I'm arguing that taking student loans isn't all about rest and destruction of one's life after college. "All debt is the same" or "all debt is bad debt" are atbreastudes that are just completely fantasy-based. *My* experience shows clearly how those things are NOT the case. It's an example, not the definition.
Reasons for taking student loans (not all-inclusive):
1.) You don't have enough dough to do it, even with work.
2.) You want to get multiple degrees in four years.
3.) You want to get a regular degree in less than four years (five for pharmacy and the like).
4.) You want to get a degree in the regular time, but can't do the distraction of working a job and trying to get good grades.
5.) A job that would pay the requisite amount is not available.
Etc.
E.P.
