Let's say if you were in charge of closing down pharmacy schools due to the oversupply of pharmacist

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Judgment Dragon

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
377
Reaction score
65
Let's say if you were in charge of closing down USA pharmacy schools due to the oversupply of pharmacists in the USA, what criteria would you use to close down USA pharmacy schools? Which USA pharmacy schools would you close down?

Members don't see this ad.
 
1) Low full time job placement rate
2) Low NAPLEX pass rate
3) Inability to secure enough quality rotation sites for students
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
All those private, for profit schools that cost 60-80k a year and any school that refuses to publish employment outcomes for graduating classes
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
Pharmacy schools that produce graduates with a low starting salary would get closed under my rule.
 
it should be based on the date they opened.....if they were created after 2008....shut them down
 
I'd close the top 10 schools, because that's about as arbitrary and useful as this question.

Plus all the new grads would be extra extra dumb, so the gap between current pharmacist & new grad gets extra wide.

I'd also move out of the United States, because if someone can do this, it means the underlying free market mechanism is gone and the communists/socialists have won. Next thing you know, I'll need special papers from the commissar to travel to Nevada!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
How can it be a free market when the government gives student loans to just about anyone and everyone regardless of:

- demand for pharmacists
- price of tuition
- students' ability to pay it back

Easy access to student loans is the primarily cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
How can it be a free market when the government gives student loans to just about anyone and everyone regardless of:

- demand for pharmacists
- price of tuition
- students' ability to pay it back

Easy access to student loans is the primarily cause.

Because that's the "freer" market -- government money thrown at everyone regardless of situation and let everyone else sort it out is much better than showing up to the local death panel making the case why this or that should get the government blessing.

On the opposite end, if you have total student loan pull out by the government, only rich white and asian people will get private student loans, and pretty soon your healthcare core will look like something out of the Stepford Wives and this gigantic underclass of poor people will end up setting fire to the rest of the country in mass civil unrest.

So take your pick.... totalitarian state, indiscriminately spending money (our current situation), or plutocracy with high likelihood of mass civil unrest & The Hunger Games come alive.
 
You could allocate a set number of schools/graduates for each state based on population, and under-performing schools would get shutdown. Say 1 school for every 2 million people in a state, if a state of 6 million currently has 5 schools then the bottom 2 would lose accredation.
 
unaffordable tuition is the primary cause because colleges are allowed to operate like private businesses.

Unlimited professional student loan caused tuition to skyrocketed. If a university knows they can get away with charging you as much as they want and they know you are financially impaired, why not make a killing from you and from the government? That is exactly what happened.

On the opposite end, if you have total student loan pull out by the government, only rich white and asian people will get private student loans, and pretty soon your healthcare core will look like something out of the Stepford Wives and this gigantic underclass of poor people will end up setting fire to the rest of the country in mass civil.

The government can limit professional and graduate student loan, just like undergraduate. If you need more money? Get it from the private sector or from your parents or from work. Don't expect the government and therefore, the taxpayers to keep on paying and supporting you so you can stay in school for another 4 years as you pursue a XYZ graduate degree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Any program that actually enrolls over 200 students per class or any institution that has opened multiple "satellite" campuses to enroll more students in areas of "shortage."

Any program physically located in a medical office "strip mall" type of environment.

Any program that is part of a "health sciences" institution as opposed to a large research university.
 
Make schools responsible for dispensing at least 50% of the student loans, fed still dispenses the remainder. I would do this for undergraduate schools as well. I think we'd see a shift in operations if the schools themselves had some money in the game. I'd also add in the fun that schools wouldn't be protected completely from bankruptcy like the fed is
 
Make schools responsible for dispensing at least 50% of the student loans, fed still dispenses the remainder.

^^^

What does this mean?
 
Instead of money being guaranteed by the government, schools would have to fund some of the financial aid themselves

It might not necessarily cause a shut down in schools, but it might limit the number they can bring in. It would also be a barrier to entry for new schools
 
Last edited:
Do you mean the schools themselves would be the loan provider or the grant provider or a combination of both?
 
Force schools to pay the difference between monthly federal loan minimums and the IBR payments people are actually making. Make them have skin in the game to actually price out an appropriate cost for the education required to get an appropriately related income.

If the individual wants to defer payment while they seek more education or post-grad requirements for a future income, put the responsibility on the individual to get the new institution (or business) take on that liability. If they do not secure this from the new institution, do not grant deferment and do not remove the liability from the school.

Hold academic institutions accountable for their "product".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'd close the top 10 schools, because that's about as arbitrary and useful as this question.
Plus all the new grads would be extra extra dumb, so the gap between current pharmacist & new grad gets extra wide.
I'd also move out of the United States, because if someone can do this, it means the underlying free market mechanism is gone and the communists/socialists have won. Next thing you know, I'll need special papers from the commissar to travel to Nevada!

And maybe that is the point of the OP's thread, what criteria could possibly be universal to everyone.

Although BMB is 100% right, it is the government financing of loans without any accountability that is the problem. I don't believe in closing colleges, but I do believe the government should stop giving loans to colleges that don't meet certain criteria (unfortunately, this probably won't ever happen in a meaningful way, but it should.) In a free economy, bad schools close on their own, because nobody can get loans from private bankers to go there--the government giving loans to all schools had shut off the normal feedback process and led to the proliferation of bad schools (not just any pharmacy by any means, but in every area of education.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I would close down pharmacy schools that have a low average GPA for entering students as well.
 
Top