just met a newly licensed psych. 500k...loans. that's the post.

[borne_before]

I haven’t read all of the replies yet - but here is my take. And it’s one that happens a lot on our field but is never touched on.

This person is independently wealthy. They either have trust fund to draw on at a certain age, wealthy parents/grandparents, or a rich husband.

500k is nothing if you come from a certain level. This person like took a **** ton of trips and loans as an undergrad and then went to more expensive school. They grew up with money and never held a job or tried to hustle during this stuff. They paid sorority dues, went to Europe, etc.

This reeks of someone who has had everything handed to them.

A lot of people in our field are rich kids trying to contribute or create value from their privledged upbringing.

On my internship interviews I met a rediculous amount of interviewees in Boston - all vying for kid positions - whose were married to a phd level economist, doctors, and it was clear they went back to school after getting the Mrs degree. I’ve known many rich adjacent psychologists who voluntarily leave the field “temporarily” when they start popping kids out to be a stay home parent. They know what the real job is.

For many, being a psychologist is a hobby. Much like many rich kids pursing art and living on their parents wealth in Brooklyn.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[borne_before]

Think she will take a job for $80k/yr? My future private practice needs folks with debt above their eyeballs that can never afford to quit. The math is easier that way.

She doesn’t even need a job.

How does the government come out ahead on discharging 400k+ in student loan debt in this case?

She won’t work long enough to discharge. It’ll be paid off via a trust or some other form of windfall. The

 

[WisNeuro]

She doesn’t even need a job.

She won’t work long enough to discharge. It’ll be paid off via a trust or some other form of windfall. The

Do you know the person OP mentioned personally?

 

[Sanman]

She doesn’t even need a job.

She won’t work long enough to discharge. It’ll be paid off via a trust or some other form of windfall. The

Based on the 10 year comment, it sounds like this person in banking on PSLF. Now, they might have a parent or someone providing some economic assistance to keep them in the lifestyle they are accustomed to while they work a PSLF job. That is a separate issue.

 

[WisNeuro]

Based on the 10 year comment, it sounds like this person in banking on PSLF. Now, they might have a parent or someone providing some economic assistance to keep them in the lifestyle they are accustomed to while they work a PSLF job. That is a separate issue.

I know a lot of psychologists from low middle class families or below, SES-wise, who still get 200-400k in student loans at PsyDs. Definitely not just those with trust funds and such. If anything, the high cost PsyDs target those from disadvantaged backgrounds pretty hard.

 

[Sanman]

I know a lot of psychologists from low middle class families or below, SES-wise, who still get 200-400k in student loans at PsyDs. Definitely not just those with trust funds and such. If anything, the high cost PsyDs target those from disadvantaged backgrounds pretty hard.

I have seen all kinds of folks attend these programs. That said, I think there two types of folks that choose to attend them more often:
1. The upper middle class folks willing to spend to ensure that their children stay in the upper middle class
2. Those whose parents have little familiarity with the higher education system in the U.S. (immigrants, first gen college grads, etc.)

 

[borne_before]

I have seen all kinds of folks attend these programs. That said, I think there two types of folks that choose to attend them more often:
1. The upper middle class folks willing to spend to ensure that their children stay in the upper middle class
2. Those whose parents have little familiarity with the higher education system in the U.S. (immigrants, first gen college grads, etc.)

I feel like point two is severely underrated with respect to the problem of expensive private schools. It also speaks to one of the blessing and curses of capitalism. On the one hand, these schools are tremendously expensive. On the other, they do accept a group of people, who through no fault of their own, would traditionally be shut out of doctoral psychology. You have people who didn't play the game correctly from the moment they went to school. They had other worries instead of pursing unpaid volunteer work in research labs as undergrads.

Personally, I view the second issue as being a failure of the academy.

On the other side, we have some nepo babies and rich kids in the game of doctoral level psych and their parents love to boast about their child who is a psychologist.

 

[WisNeuro]

I feel like point two is severely underrated with respect to the problem of expensive private schools. It also speaks to one of the blessing and curses of capitalism. On the one hand, these schools are tremendously expensive. On the other, they do accept a group of people, who through no fault of their own, would traditionally be shut out of doctoral psychology. You have people who didn't play the game correctly from the moment they went to school. They had other worries instead of pursing unpaid volunteer work in research labs as undergrads.

Personally, I view the second issue as being a failure of the academy.

On the other side, we have some nepo babies and rich kids in the game of doctoral level psych and their parents love to boast about their child who is a psychologist.

In the two programs I was in, the nepo babies/rich kids were maybe only 10-20% of the grad students. Much more common to be middle class or lower. Clear majority of us were hustling secondary jobs.

 

[borne_before]

In the two programs I was in, the nepo babies/rich kids were maybe only 10-20% of the grad students. Much more common to be middle class or lower. Clear majority of us were hustling secondary jobs.

Shoot dude, you kind of remind me of my pops - he's a farm boy, too and ended up being a professor (not psychology, but a clinical field). Hell, I can be considered a nepo baby. Although he didn't use any connections to get me into school, I got really good mentorship, knew how the game was played, was very savvy about college, and even had really cheap school via a tuition waver because of my old man's job. I had a bro who completed a science phd before I started college. This allowed me to take an extra year, complete a useless masters, and then get competitive for a school psych program.

But, to be honest, many of the first gen/low ses, disadvantaged, simply aren't competitive, compared to Joe upper middle class, for subsidized phd programs. The would traditionally be shut out of doctoral level psychology work. I view that as a failing of the academy to create a niche for these types of students.

 

[MCParent]

In the two programs I was in, the nepo babies/rich kids were maybe only 10-20% of the grad students. Much more common to be middle class or lower. Clear majority of us were hustling secondary jobs.

Neither of my parents completed high school. My dad delivered potato chips and my mom had & raised five kids. I could never have afforded to go to anything but a fully funded school.
In fairness I did my undergrad in Canada, where I was able to pay tuition every year off my summer job.

 

[WisNeuro]

Neither of my parents completed high school. My dad delivered potato chips and my mom had & raised five kids. I could never have afforded to go to anything but a fully funded school.
In fairness I did my undergrad in Canada, where I was able to pay tuition every year off my summer job.

We were pretty blue collar, nurse mother, railroad worker father. I paid undergrad my own way, and had two years scholarshipped from academics. I didn't even consider anything but fully funded grad school. If that didn't work out, there were a couple other options I would have done instead.

 

[Sanman]

Neither of my parents completed high school. My dad delivered potato chips and my mom had & raised five kids. I could never have afforded to go to anything but a fully funded school.
In fairness I did my undergrad in Canada, where I was able to pay tuition every year off my summer job.

We were pretty blue collar, nurse mother, railroad worker father. I paid undergrad my own way, and had two years scholarshipped from academics. I didn't even consider anything but fully funded grad school. If that didn't work out, there were a couple other options I would have done instead.

You elitists from your overprivileged backgrounds suggesting your fully funded programs. 200k PsyDs are for the everyman.

 

[WisNeuro]

You elitists from your overprivileged backgrounds suggesting your fully funded programs. 200k PsyDs are for the everyman.

I know. I mean, when you plebs were driving to school in your pedestrian late model sedans, I was driving in luxury style in my 10+ year old station wagon. You can only imagine all of the ladies throwing themselves at me as I cruise up in that beauty.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Neither of my parents completed high school. My dad delivered potato chips and my mom had & raised five kids. I could never have afforded to go to anything but a fully funded school.
In fairness I did my undergrad in Canada, where I was able to pay tuition every year off my summer job.

Dad was a millworker (master mechanic) and mom was stay-at-home. Very middle-class here. Also was common in my grad program as well. I agree with approx 10% 'rich kids' figure...but I did not attend Ivy League.

 

[Sanman]

I know. I mean, when you plebs were driving to school in your pedestrian late model sedans, I was driving in luxury style in my 10+ year old station wagon. You can only imagine all of the ladies throwing themselves at me as I cruise up in that beauty.

Loser. I wanted to be one of the cool kids. Worked a part-time job for 4 years and got me an 8 year old base Corolla. Came complete with fancy stuff like an AM/FM cassette radio with two speakers and a hand crank window knob that came off in your hand for easy storage. All the ladies passed over those other guys rocking Mustangs and their dad's Mercedes for a ride in my whip. I even spent money for some window tints and one of those gizmos that connected your cassette player to your Sony Discman.

As you can tell, I was from the "nice" part of town....with the old Chevys. Not those ugly large houses with swimming pools and those European junkers.

 

[Peacemaker36]

I haven’t read all of the replies yet - but here is my take. And it’s one that happens a lot on our field but is never touched on.

This person is independently wealthy. They either have trust fund to draw on at a certain age, wealthy parents/grandparents, or a rich husband.

500k is nothing if you come from a certain level. This person like took a **** ton of trips and loans as an undergrad and then went to more expensive school. They grew up with money and never held a job or tried to hustle during this stuff. They paid sorority dues, went to Europe, etc.

This reeks of someone who has had everything handed to them.

A lot of people in our field are rich kids trying to contribute or create value from their privledged upbringing.

On my internship interviews I met a rediculous amount of interviewees in Boston - all vying for kid positions - whose were married to a phd level economist, doctors, and it was clear they went back to school after getting the Mrs degree. I’ve known many rich adjacent psychologists who voluntarily leave the field “temporarily” when they start popping kids out to be a stay home parent. They know what the real job is.

For many, being a psychologist is a hobby. Much like many rich kids pursing art and living on their parents wealth in Brooklyn.

I have known many people who fit this description. Grad school students driving luxury cars, living in luxury apartments, etc. I do think the discussions here on SDN about diploma mills sometimes seem to ignore that the diploma mill path is totally viable for people of considerable means. And there are a lot of those people in major cities, at least on the East Coast. There is so much wealth in this country.

SDN does a good job spelling out the problems with the diploma mill path for underprivileged students who don't really understand the system and get taken to the cleaners by predatory schools and predatory lenders. I hope that SDN has convinced some of these student to move in another direction.

It seems likely to me that some patients prefer therapists from similar class backgrounds, in the same way that some patients prefer therapists of similar racial backgrounds. I think it's good for our profession to represent the full spectrum of socioeconomic statuses.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

If we're talking about first cars now, mine was a ~10-year-old Civic hatchback with no power steering and no power windows. It was great, ran for quite a while.

I do agree that it's important to have a good representation of socioeconomic diversity in all respects in the field. I honestly don't know, and don't know if there's data out there for psych specifically, about the proportion coming from the top 1-5%. My program was funded and not on a coast, so it probably isn't representative of such a sample; similar to WisNeuro, there were maybe ~10% throughout the program who seemingly came from money (not necessarily the kind to sneeze at a $500k loan balance, but one or two physician-level parents, etc.).

If having large debt levels convinced psychologists to hustle and earn more, and to focus more fervently on professional activism efforts to increase reimbursement, it might not be as bad a thing. But unlike medicine, where it seems tuition has steadily risen in response to high pay, psychology tuition is rising in response to...low pay and government loan forgiveness options.

 

[WisNeuro]

I have known many people who fit this description. Grad school students driving luxury cars, living in luxury apartments, etc. I do think the discussions here on SDN about diploma mills sometimes seem to ignore that the diploma mill path is totally viable for people of considerable means. And there are a lot of those people in major cities, at least on the East Coast. There is so much wealth in this country.

SDN does a good job spelling out the problems with the diploma mill path for underprivileged students who don't really understand the system and get taken to the cleaners by predatory schools and predatory lenders. I hope that SDN has convinced some of these student to move in another direction.

It seems likely to me that some patients prefer therapists from similar class backgrounds, in the same way that some patients prefer therapists of the same race. I think it's good for our profession to represent the full spectrum of socioeconomic statuses.

I think so, too. But I think we can do it without condoning the practices of predatory diploma mills.

 

[borne_before]

I have known many people who fit this description. Grad school students driving luxury cars, living in luxury apartments, etc. I do think the discussions here on SDN about diploma mills sometimes seem to ignore that the diploma mill path is totally viable for people of considerable means. And there are a lot of those people in major cities, at least on the East Coast. There is so much wealth in this country.

SDN does a good job spelling out the problems with the diploma mill path for underprivileged students who don't really understand the system and get taken to the cleaners by predatory schools and predatory lenders. I hope that SDN has convinced some of these student to move in another direction.

It seems likely to me that some patients prefer therapists from similar class backgrounds, in the same way that some patients prefer therapists of the same race. I think it's good for our profession to represent the full spectrum of socioeconomic statuses.

I was feeling gaslit lol.

I’d say 10-20% come from pretty reasonable wealth! Psychology is a bit of a hobby.

I do think they also deserve to be psychologists just as much as anyone. Rich people also have problems that can benefit from psychology. Same with their kids.

My first car was a 1964 Chevy pickup that my dad bought from his grandfather. First gear was called compound. Didn’t have ac or, as I found out after totaling it, anti lock brakes. It didn’t take much to total it. My dad wasn’t even mad about it. If I ever see it in our small college town again, I’m gonna try to buy it back.

 

[psych.meout]

I have known many people who fit this description. Grad school students driving luxury cars, living in luxury apartments, etc. I do think the discussions here on SDN about diploma mills sometimes seem to ignore that the diploma mill path is totally viable for people of considerable means. And there are a lot of those people in major cities, at least on the East Coast. There is so much wealth in this country.

SDN does a good job spelling out the problems with the diploma mill path for underprivileged students who don't really understand the system and get taken to the cleaners by predatory schools and predatory lenders. I hope that SDN has convinced some of these student to move in another direction.

It seems likely to me that some patients prefer therapists from similar class backgrounds, in the same way that some patients prefer therapists of similar racial backgrounds. I think it's good for our profession to represent the full spectrum of socioeconomic statuses.

Financially viable, maybe, but the outcomes from some of these diploma mills would have me investing that quarter million in something else while I spend time getting experience for a good program.

 

[ClinicalABA]

I was first Gen college student. Dad was a draftsman. Passed away when I was 4, necessitating that mom get a job as a secretary. In retrospect, we were poor but mom did an an amazing job of making sure I never knew that. I was pretty ignorant about graduate school- thought it was for rich people only. Had no knowledge of the existence of professional schools. Was surprised to find out that phd programs were fully funded, and very fortunate to get into the local one a few miles down the road. Not sure I could've even considered an expensive fsps, even if I knew they existed. My cohort was pretty middle class as far as upbringing, though I was at the lower end of the ses spectrum.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Also, from a middle class background and I don’t think my cohort skewed wealthy. i am curious if there are any stats about this. As far as big debt goes, wow! I thought mine was bad. What is funny is that because I started my business last year and was able to write off a lot of expenses and made less money, my student loan payments are only 250 dollars a month this year. At that rate I can pay off my loans in…never amount of years.
Seriously though, I borrrowed more than I should have and am not the most financially savvy or frugal. Not sure how much that has cost me though because we have a nice house, a couple of nice cars, a hot tub, season passes to local ski resort, and can afford to travel when we want. Since I started my career a bit later in life though, not so sure about exit strategy and I figure I have about ten years to shift from the financially neutral position I am in now to a position more suitable for retirement.

 

[borne_before]

Also, from a middle class background and I don’t think my cohort skewed wealthy. i am curious if there are any stats about this. As far as big debt goes, wow! I thought mine was bad. What is funny is that because I started my business last year and was able to write off a lot of expenses and made less money, my student loan payments are only 250 dollars a month this year. At that rate I can pay off my loans in…never amount of years.
Seriously though, I borrrowed more than I should have and am not the most financially savvy or frugal. Not sure how much that has cost me though because we have a nice house, a couple of nice cars, a hot tub, season passes to local ski resort, and can afford to travel when we want. Since I started my career a bit later in life though, not so sure about exit strategy and I figure I have about ten years to shift from the financially neutral position I am in now to a position more suitable for retirement.

I plan on doing this until my license gets revoked for senility. I’m selfish - and this work is too important and personally meaningful.

 

[smalltownpsych]

I plan on doing this until my license gets revoked for senility. I’m selfish - and this work is too important and personally meaningful.

Retirement for me includes providing some therapy and maybe even occasional testing and/or consulting. I also doubt that I will stop completely until I have to. As far as ability to generate significant cash though, I might only have the energy to do that for so long so thats what I mean by the next ten years. Also, I still want to have some freedom to travel and enjoy the last few years of my life while I am still healthy enough to do that and some things I like cost money. Spend a month skiing in the alps and eating great food for instance.

 

[quickpsych]

Likely an unpopular, opinion here , but I generally don't see a problem with someone doing this and utilizing the same loopholes and strategies that large companies, billionaires, and banks take advantage of every day. The only problem I see here is that often the everyday borrower gets screwed or feels some obligation to the loan while people who know the system go into it knowing they’re going to bend the rules and exploit the loopholes.

A lot of people , simplistically just say: "I paid mine, so you have to do," "don't take them if you can't pay them," or "my tax dollars should go to something else."

The problem with those arguments is that it's very case by case. If it makes sense for you to pay your loans back faster and you'll save more doing that then just going on a low repayment plan and after X years rest is wiped then so be it. But for many, myself included, it's a business decision nothing more nothing less, I'll save far more by not paying them off.

After all, our tax dollars went to :

- Bailing out the auto industry in 2008 and then just having those loans forgiven for every auto maker except one who paid it back.
- Bailing out the banking industry in 2008 after some people gambled with others' money, then took tax handouts for bailouts.
- Offering those pandemic era loans to billion dollar companies, multi-millionaires, etc then forgiving/wiping most of them.
- Offering tax loopholes to ultra rich and big businesses to shelter their money and avoid paying taxes or pay far less % of taxes than they should.
- Funding grants and money that paid for some of those who went to funded PhD programs.

I lose no sleep over the fact that I found loopholes against a predatory lender of my private undergrad loans that wanted to play games and kept lying and changing terms , did my research, leveraged what was going on, and now get offers of pennies on the dollar to settle the loans if I ever wanted to knowing the SOL ran out and I have in writing they can't get that money otherwise. They would have done the same to me and just another line of numbers on a spreadsheet of profit/loss. School got paid, I got educated, society benefited. The funny thing is, as long as you keep acknowledging and paying those, they have no reason to offer to negotiate or settle. Take away the money and suddenly the cost of your private loans is a fraction of what they claimed. Obviously very case by case.

I also lose no sleep over knowing I pick the federal loan repayment plan with the lowest payment and in X years at least 100K of it will be wiped. Just like Tom Brady and his pandemic business loan he, for some reason got? Also why are there interest rates on federal student loans? Education should be tax funded.

Our tax dollars bail out billionaire companies and people. Those same people exploit legal loopholes to avoid taxes. But let's keep the average working class graduate in debt for life! The blame lies with the system, not the individual.

Some people have a battle cry of "but ethics and morals!" To that, well that's some slick gaslighting there to make you feel bad and feel like you've failed. I don't think any of those who benefited from the massive forgiven loan bailouts of 2008 and 2020 feel they did anything wrong, they followed the system as designed and made an informed decision.

It's nothing personal, it's business. Besides, your tax dollars, my tax dollars, others' tax dollars should contribute to paying off your loans and my loans, we provide benefits to society, society should foot some of the bill because we're footing bills on giving ultra wealthy companies and people more free money.

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

 

[Sanman]

Likely an unpopular, opinion here , but I generally don't see a problem with someone doing this and utilizing the same loopholes and strategies that large companies, billionaires, and banks take advantage of every day. The only problem I see here is that often the everyday borrower gets screwed or feels some obligation to the loan while people who know the system go into it knowing they’re going to bend the rules and exploit the loopholes.

A lot of people , simplistically just say: "I paid mine, so you have to do," "don't take them if you can't pay them," or "my tax dollars should go to something else."

The problem with those arguments is that it's very case by case. If it makes sense for you to pay your loans back faster and you'll save more doing that then just going on a low repayment plan and after X years rest is wiped then so be it. But for many, myself included, it's a business decision nothing more nothing less, I'll save far more by not paying them off.

After all, our tax dollars went to :

- Bailing out the auto industry in 2008 and then just having those loans forgiven for every auto maker except one who paid it back.
- Bailing out the banking industry in 2008 after some people gambled with others' money, then took tax handouts for bailouts.
- Offering those pandemic era loans to billion dollar companies, multi-millionaires, etc then forgiving/wiping most of them.
- Offering tax loopholes to ultra rich and big businesses to shelter their money and avoid paying taxes or pay far less % of taxes than they should.
- Funding grants and money that paid for some of those who went to funded PhD programs.

I lose no sleep over the fact that I found loopholes against a predatory lender of my private undergrad loans that wanted to play games and kept lying and changing terms , did my research, leveraged what was going on, and now get offers of pennies on the dollar to settle the loans if I ever wanted to knowing the SOL ran out and I have in writing they can't get that money otherwise. They would have done the same to me and just another line of numbers on a spreadsheet of profit/loss. School got paid, I got educated, society benefited. The funny thing is, as long as you keep acknowledging and paying those, they have no reason to offer to negotiate or settle. Take away the money and suddenly the cost of your private loans is a fraction of what they claimed. Obviously very case by case.

I also lose no sleep over knowing I pick the federal loan repayment plan with the lowest payment and in X years at least 100K of it will be wiped. Just like Tom Brady and his pandemic business loan he, for some reason got? Also why are there interest rates on federal student loans? Education should be tax funded.

Our tax dollars bail out billionaire companies and people. Those same people exploit legal loopholes to avoid taxes. But let's keep the average working class graduate in debt for life! The blame lies with the system, not the individual.

Some people have a battle cry of "but ethics and morals!" To that, well that's some slick gaslighting there to make you feel bad and feel like you've failed. I don't think any of those who benefited from the massive forgiven loan bailouts of 2008 and 2020 feel they did anything wrong, they followed the system as designed and made an informed decision.

It's nothing personal, it's business. Besides, your tax dollars, my tax dollars, others' tax dollars should contribute to paying off your loans and my loans, we provide benefits to society, society should foot some of the bill because we're footing bills on giving ultra wealthy companies and people more free money.

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

Cool, so we should all cheat the system until there is nothing left? Then when the rules change and the people behind you get left holding the bag, that's cool, right? That's what the boomers are doing now and is the problem with all Ponzi schemes. Just don't be mad when the people before you do it better and you are stuck with that bag.

As I haven't managed to benefit from any government bailouts, I will continue to be outraged. Now get off my lawn, I have turkey to eat!

 

[WisNeuro]

Likely an unpopular, opinion here , but I generally don't see a problem with someone doing this and utilizing the same loopholes and strategies that large companies, billionaires, and banks take advantage of every day. The only problem I see here is that often the everyday borrower gets screwed or feels some obligation to the loan while people who know the system go into it knowing they’re going to bend the rules and exploit the loopholes.

A lot of people , simplistically just say: "I paid mine, so you have to do," "don't take them if you can't pay them," or "my tax dollars should go to something else."

The problem with those arguments is that it's very case by case. If it makes sense for you to pay your loans back faster and you'll save more doing that then just going on a low repayment plan and after X years rest is wiped then so be it. But for many, myself included, it's a business decision nothing more nothing less, I'll save far more by not paying them off.

After all, our tax dollars went to :

- Bailing out the auto industry in 2008 and then just having those loans forgiven for every auto maker except one who paid it back.
- Bailing out the banking industry in 2008 after some people gambled with others' money, then took tax handouts for bailouts.
- Offering those pandemic era loans to billion dollar companies, multi-millionaires, etc then forgiving/wiping most of them.
- Offering tax loopholes to ultra rich and big businesses to shelter their money and avoid paying taxes or pay far less % of taxes than they should.
- Funding grants and money that paid for some of those who went to funded PhD programs.

I lose no sleep over the fact that I found loopholes against a predatory lender of my private undergrad loans that wanted to play games and kept lying and changing terms , did my research, leveraged what was going on, and now get offers of pennies on the dollar to settle the loans if I ever wanted to knowing the SOL ran out and I have in writing they can't get that money otherwise. They would have done the same to me and just another line of numbers on a spreadsheet of profit/loss. School got paid, I got educated, society benefited. The funny thing is, as long as you keep acknowledging and paying those, they have no reason to offer to negotiate or settle. Take away the money and suddenly the cost of your private loans is a fraction of what they claimed. Obviously very case by case.

I also lose no sleep over knowing I pick the federal loan repayment plan with the lowest payment and in X years at least 100K of it will be wiped. Just like Tom Brady and his pandemic business loan he, for some reason got? Also why are there interest rates on federal student loans? Education should be tax funded.

Our tax dollars bail out billionaire companies and people. Those same people exploit legal loopholes to avoid taxes. But let's keep the average working class graduate in debt for life! The blame lies with the system, not the individual.

Some people have a battle cry of "but ethics and morals!" To that, well that's some slick gaslighting there to make you feel bad and feel like you've failed. I don't think any of those who benefited from the massive forgiven loan bailouts of 2008 and 2020 feel they did anything wrong, they followed the system as designed and made an informed decision.

It's nothing personal, it's business. Besides, your tax dollars, my tax dollars, others' tax dollars should contribute to paying off your loans and my loans, we provide benefits to society, society should foot some of the bill because we're footing bills on giving ultra wealthy companies and people more free money.

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

It's possible to oppose absurd tax loopholes for corporations, as well as opposing loan repayment for irresponsible *****s who choose to go to diploma mills on my dime. These are not mutually exclusive things.

 

[quickpsych]

It's possible to oppose absurd tax loopholes for corporations, as well as opposing loan repayment for irresponsible *****s who choose to go to diploma mills on my dime. These are not mutually exclusive things.

The problem here is the diploma mills and the system that allows them to operate. I’m talking about the individual , the diploma mill would take the bailout in a second, but the individual isn’t allowed to ? Besides the same people that complain about their tax dollars being used to subsidize education are often the same ones who think private health insurance is the bees knees or don’t realize how their tax dollars are being skimmed and used for far less beneficial things 😂.

 

[quickpsych]

Cool, so we should all cheat the system until there is nothing left? Then when the rules change and the people behind you get left holding the bag, that's cool, right? That's what the boomers are doing now and is the problem with all Ponzi schemes. Just don't be mad when the people before you do it better and you are stuck with that bag.

As I haven't managed to benefit from any government bailouts, I will continue to be outraged. Now get off my lawn, I have turkey to eat!

Cool, so we should all cheat the system until there is nothing left? Then when the rules change and the people behind you get left holding the bag, that's cool, right? That's what the boomers are doing now and is the problem with all Ponzi schemes. Just don't be mad when the people before you do it better and you are stuck with that bag.

As I haven't managed to benefit from any government bailouts, I will continue to be outraged. Now get off my lawn, I have turkey to eat!

There’s change being blocked in government by those who benefit from the system as it is. Why get exploited by it , why should I or others be stuck holding these loans or these proverbial bags when others take advantage of every loophole to make more money.

On a side note for some reason on here I thought you were boomer age.

I’d rather see an individual get benefit off it then Joe Millionaire or X company that’s been bailed out on my dime over and over.


Enjoy your turkey, that was probably subsidized by @WisNeuro ’s tax dollars in some way through government farming subsidies. I’m sure someone is skimming somewhere off the top 😂 along the way.

It is funny how people get outraged on these issues thought. I mean have you turned on Fox News lately ? Breaking news : person with student loans enjoys turkey dinner instead of paying more to loans!”

 

[Sanman]

There’s change being blocked in government by those who benefit from the system as it is. Why get exploited by it , why should I or others be stuck holding these loans or these proverbial bags when others take advantage of every loophole to make more money.

On a side note for some reason on here I thought you were boomer age.

I’d rather see an individual get benefit off it then Joe Millionaire or X company that’s been bailed out on my dime over and over.


Enjoy your turkey, that was probably subsidized by @WisNeuro ’s tax dollars in some way through government farming subsidies. I’m sure someone is skimming somewhere off the top 😂 along the way.

It is funny how people get outraged on these issues thought. I mean have you turned on Fox News lately ? Breaking news : person with student loans enjoys turkey dinner instead of paying more to loans!”

Two points:

1. Based on this argument, should we all rob banks because some people get away with it?

2. Joe Millionaire is still an Individual. For that matter so is Tom Brady and corporations in the government's eyes. You seem to be okay with certain individuals getting breaks but not others.

 

[quickpsych]

Two points:

1. Based on this argument, should we all rob banks because some people get away with it?

2. Joe Millionaire is still an Individual. For that matter so is Tom Brady and corporations in the government's eyes. You seem to be okay with certain individuals getting breaks but not others.

On the robbing bank analogy, am I supposed to feel bad for these private lenders who ripped people off or feel bad that tax dollars are covering lots of forgiven student loans? I don’t , in fact more tax dollars should be doing that.

By the way robbing a bank is against the law but getting loans forgiven , using tax loopholes,or using SOL isn’t. No different than any other business minded decision.

Not to mention student loans are a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of free money of your tax dollars the government handed to auto makers, banks, and corporations.

I’m ok with making sure the average person has the same access to the same loopholes and write offs they use. But I’m also ok with loans being wiped and tax dollars covering that for all because education should be paid for by tax dollars. Why do we saddle people with student loan debt again? What benefit does that do for society ?

The benefit should be for all, not just those with wealth or access to loopholes.

I understand from other posts that you paid your loans off and feel tax dollars shouldn’t go towards paying other’s loans off. Maybe in your financial situation it made sense for you to pay them off fully, but that’s in the past. Things change and times change of course.

 

[Sanman]

On the robbing bank analogy, am I supposed to feel bad for these private lenders who ripped people off or feel bad that tax dollars are covering lots of forgiven student loans? I don’t , in fact more tax dollars should be doing that.

By the way robbing a bank is against the law but getting loans forgiven , using tax loopholes,or using SOL isn’t. No different than any other business minded decision.

Not to mention student loans are a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of free money of your tax dollars the government handed to auto makers, banks, and corporations.

I’m ok with making sure the average person has the same access to the same loopholes and write offs they use. But I’m also ok with loans being wiped and tax dollars covering that for all because education should be paid for by tax dollars. Why do we saddle people with student loan debt again? What benefit does that do for society ?

The benefit should be for all, not just those with wealth or access to loopholes.

Again, you seem to be comparing student loans to bank and automaker bailouts. I was fine with not bailing out either of those industries. That is the free market at work. It is not an either or situation. As @WisNeuro mentioned, you can be against both.

As for publicly funded higher education, it exists. That is where I got a low cost undergraduate and fully funded graduate education. If one chooses to go a different route and take out more loans, pay them back. End of story.

You seem to be for loopholes when it helps you or people you happen to identify with on some level but against them when it helps a bank, automaker, or private lender. I am against loopholes for everyone. The problem with these loopholes is it does not fix the problem. You get a break and the next guy pays even more. What happens when there is no loophole for him/her?

 

[quickpsych]

Again, you seem to be comparing student loans to bank and automaker bailouts. I was fine with not bailing out either of those industries. That is the free market at work. It is not an either or situation. As @WisNeuro mentioned, you can be against both.

As for publicly funded higher education, it exists. That is where I got a low cost undergraduate and fully funded graduate education. If one chooses to go a different route and take out more loans, pay them back. End of story.

You seem to be for loopholes when it helps you or people you happen to identify with on some level but against them when it helps a bank, automaker, or private lender. I am against loopholes for everyone. The problem with these loopholes is it does not fix the problem. You get a break and the next guy pays even more. What happens when there is no loophole for him/her?

The auto and bank bailout was an example of how tax dollars go towards things that benefits neither you or I or society as a whole. Student loans are a great example of where tax dollars should go.

Btw Why are my tax dollars going towards subsidizing your college and funded graduate program? So I had to take loans and also subsidize your education too?

Same argument. Why should there be different tiers or different benefits for some students and not others ?

This also tells me your student loans were probably less than the average student which is akin to someone who went to school decades ago and laments why can’t people just get a summer job and pay for their tuition.

I guess doctors shouldn’t go to medical school because it costs too much and many have high debt loads?

You pretend it’s a problem with the individuals but the problem is the system. You took advantage as well and I see no fault in your choice or my choice. End of story education should be covered and well there’s different ways that’s happening.

As for the OP example , who cares what they do? They took loans within the terms and the terms say in repayment they’re eligible for some forgiveness of those loans. Them paying on a plan until X years per the agreement means they did “pay them back.” Most probably aren’t going to “pay them in full “ because they don’t need to.

Student loans are moving towards further forgiveness and lower repayments . This is a good thing for the individual although i would like to see more regulation on cost of tuition and more funding to graduate programs not just a handful of people here and there.

I do have to chuckle though, the amount of taxes you and I pay is insignificant to the overall money spent by government. But the amount of taxes avoided by those who should pay more is not so insignificant.

I wouldn’t care if I had no loans or had paid off loans and taxes paid off everyone else’s later. Good for them.

If every outstanding student loan today was erased tomorrow and moving forward tax dollars covered cost of tuition for current and future students , the impact to you would be nonexistent. Why shouldn’t we push for free education, after all you got it why shouldn’t others get it?

Put your energy towards causes such as government actually closing loopholes on things like capital gains taxes , offshore money stashing, excessive write offs, etc etc that corporations and some individuals who make millions or more utilize to pay less than their fair share in taxes. Instead of, as you said earlier, being an old man yelling to get off their lawn at individuals who took out student loans and are just navigating the system.

The question shouldn’t be “why aren’t more people just paying off what they owe in full like me?” The problem isn’t those borrowing, the problem is the need for loans in the first place for this.


Nothing personal, it’s just money. Enjoy your thanksgiving.

 

[quickpsych]

I think so, too. But I think we can do it without condoning the practices of predatory diploma mills.

If only there was something our field could do ? If only there was an accrediting body that could do something?!

Sadly money talks.

 

[quickpsych]

Maybe the more important question here to ask is...why is this important to you? So what if that is what she is facing, what she thinks, what she did? When you go home for the day, did you do right by you? Did you make money? Are you supporting you and your family? Are you following your values and passions? Maybe they are too...or not, but so what?

Well said.

It’s certainly not one size fits all.

But of course you can see from some replies on this thread some people really think they have some skin in the other person’s game because the other person get loans where a good chunk will be forgiven with …. <gasp> tax dollars! The horror!

 

[BuckeyeLove]

Whoah didnt realize this one would blow up hahaha. (Well maybe i deep down knew it would, yeah let's go with that). Isn't PSLF written in contract into the master promissory note?

 

[Sanman]

The auto and bank bailout was an example of how tax dollars go towards things that benefits neither you or I or society as a whole. Student loans are a great example of where tax dollars should go.

Btw Why are my tax dollars going towards subsidizing your college and funded graduate program? So I had to take loans and also subsidize your education too?

Same argument. Why should there be different tiers or different benefits for some students and not others ?

This also tells me your student loans were probably less than the average student which is akin to someone who went to school decades ago and laments why can’t people just get a summer job and pay for their tuition.

I guess doctors shouldn’t go to medical school because it costs too much and many have high debt loads?

You pretend it’s a problem with the individuals but the problem is the system. You took advantage as well and I see no fault in your choice or my choice. End of story education should be covered and well there’s different ways that’s happening.

As for the OP example , who cares what they do? They took loans within the terms and the terms say in repayment they’re eligible for some forgiveness of those loans. Them paying on a plan until X years per the agreement means they did “pay them back.” Most probably aren’t going to “pay them in full “ because they don’t need to.

Student loans are moving towards further forgiveness and lower repayments . This is a good thing for the individual although i would like to see more regulation on cost of tuition and more funding to graduate programs not just a handful of people here and there.

I do have to chuckle though, the amount of taxes you and I pay is insignificant to the overall money spent by government. But the amount of taxes avoided by those who should pay more is not so insignificant.

I wouldn’t care if I had no loans or had paid off loans and taxes paid off everyone else’s later. Good for them.

If every outstanding student loan today was erased tomorrow and moving forward tax dollars covered cost of tuition for current and future students , the impact to you would be nonexistent. Why shouldn’t we push for free education, after all you got it why shouldn’t others get it?

Put your energy towards causes such as government actually closing loopholes on things like capital gains taxes , offshore money stashing, excessive write offs, etc etc that corporations and some individuals who make millions or more utilize to pay less than their fair share in taxes. Instead of, as you said earlier, being an old man yelling to get off their lawn at individuals who took out student loans and are just navigating the system.

The question shouldn’t be “why aren’t more people just paying off what they owe in full like me?” The problem isn’t those borrowing, the problem is the need for loans in the first place for this.


Nothing personal, it’s just money. Enjoy your thanksgiving.

I have no problem with free education. Not sure where you got that idea. I am a product of the public education system. Both public school and public universities. Were public colleges and universities not available to you and others? Last I checked they were. I have no problem with free community College or other programs that benefit all. I received a full academic scholarship to one public university near my home. I chose to attend my state flagship U instead. My choice and my debt to pay.

That is different from subsidizing loan forgiveness for some. Loan forgiveness as a scheme is a terrible idea as it does nothing to manage costs or ensure quality in the system. It also allows people to rationalize poor decisions. Take the dentist with one million in loans that could "only" afford a used Tesla and ski trips to Vail. Why exactly am I funding this guy's poor life choices to go to USC and other expensive places? I chose to forgo attending the expensive private schools that admitted me and skipped out on luxury cars to pay my loans back ahead of schedule. There are avenues to do this stuff. A lot of people just don't want to do it. Not so different from the bailouts you are upset about. The reason the financial industry didn't learn from 2008 is that they got bailed out with no long term consequences or laws that were not repealed. The same issue arises with bailouts for student loans. The system won't change if there are no consequences. As a student of behavior, what are your thoughts on that?

 

[quickpsych]

I have no problem with free education. Not sure where you got that idea. I am a product of the public education system. Both public school and public universities. Were public colleges and universities not available to you and others? Last I checked they were. I have no problem with free community College or other programs that benefit all. I received a full academic scholarship to one public university near my home. I chose to attend my state flagship U instead. My choice and my debt to pay.

That is different from subsidizing loan forgiveness for some. Loan forgiveness as a scheme is a terrible idea as it does nothing to manage costs or ensure quality in the system. It also allows people to rationalize poor decisions. Take the dentist with one million in loans that could "only" afford a used Tesla and ski trips to Vail. Why exactly am I funding this guy's poor life choices to go to USC and other expensive places? I chose to forgo attending the expensive private schools that admitted me and skipped out on luxury cars to pay my loans back ahead of schedule. There are avenues to do this stuff. A lot of people just don't want to do it. Not so different from the bailouts you are upset about. The reason the financial industry didn't learn from 2008 is that they got bailed out with no long term consequences or laws that were not repealed. The same issue arises with bailouts for student loans. The system won't change if there are no consequences. As a student of behavior, what are your thoughts on that?

I think, respectfully, you're missing the point. I get the idea you have a problem with free education when it's done in a way that costs you tax dollars, even though you got a massively subsidized education off...tax dollars.

You're comparing faceless massive corporations who received free tax dollar money to bail them out , with individual people. Let's also not forget the mental health impact these debts have on individuals. As a psychologist my role and my direction of advocacy is for helping the individual. I could care less for academic intellectualizing exercises of analyzing the behavioral aspects of should we give someone a break or should we let them keep struggling because that's how it is. I understand that you feel some people take advantage of these financial systems and make choices you disagree with, but as with anything there's going to be outliers. But, even then, they've done nothing outside the bounds of the system.

“Loan forgiveness is a scheme”- I think you mean student loans themselves are a scheme that does nothing to ensure cost and quality control. Of course schools and lenders are going to keep the scheme going if they can make money. Loan forgiveness on this point isn’t the problem; the fact schools know they can keep raising tuition because government money will keep flowing in the form of student loans is a big part of the problem.

You make broad assumptions that people are splashing out on luxury on your dime, but most aren't. In fact many didn't have the luxury that some have where they can focus on academics to the level of getting free rides. You claim you made a choice, but how many external factors, other individuals, and the system played a role in that? There's many different ways this can be viewed. "A lot of people just don't want to do it" sounds a lot like "why don't people just get more money?" from the tone deaf folks who can't understand financial struggles in today's economy.

Again why did I and others fund your free ride in grad school? Ah yes, different tiers and different paths for different people. I don't know you or your upbringing or background but there's plenty of people who simply don't have the advantages and access to the path that creates the free rides you received. So that's the fault of the borrower who then took another path because the system didn't afford them the other path?

Didn’t you also post another reply joking that you need people in debt so you can pay them less in a private practice so you can make more profit? 🤔 Perhaps an incentive to prevent loan forgiveness?

Businesses aren't people. They don't "learn." But I do agree there should have been more meaningful change after 2008 to prevent the free bailout bonanzas for businesses to keep occurring.

The consequences should be for the system, not the individual. It's frankly overall simplistic, if not pedantic to keep beating the "I paid mine in full so everyone must have the same situation I have and can do the same!" drum. "I had access, why didn't you?"

By the way, in regards to "I paid my ahead of schedule." Re-read my original reply. From a financial perspective it does make sense for some people to not pay theirs off in full ahead of schedule.

The simple solution financially is for student loans to be forgiven and moving forward education is funded by tax dollars. And maybe in the shorter term, to throw you a bone here, maybe more could be done to cap the cost of education and reduce the amount one can borrow until the better solution can be fully realized. Blaming the borrowers and saying they should just do what you did isn't going to fix the problem. Educated populations are a good thing.

 

[Sanman]

I think, respectfully, you're missing the point. I get the idea you have a problem with free education when it's done in a way that costs you tax dollars, even though you got a massively subsidized education off...tax dollars.

You're comparing faceless massive corporations who received free tax dollar money to bail them out , with individual people. Let's also not forget the mental health impact these debts have on individuals. As a psychologist my role and my direction of advocacy is for helping the individual. I could care less for academic intellectualizing exercises of analyzing the behavioral aspects of should we give someone a break or should we let them keep struggling because that's how it is. I understand that you feel some people take advantage of these financial systems and make choices you disagree with, but as with anything there's going to be outliers. But, even then, they've done nothing outside the bounds of the system.

You make broad assumptions that people are splashing out on luxury on your dime, but most aren't. In fact many didn't have the luxury that some have where they can focus on academics to the level of getting free rides. You claim you made a choice, but how many external factors, other individuals, and the system played a role in that? There's many different ways this can be viewed. "A lot of people just don't want to do it" sounds a lot like "why don't people just get more money?" from the tone deaf folks who can't understand financial struggles in today's economy.

Again why did I and others fund your free ride in grad school? Ah yes, different tiers and different paths for different people. I don't know you or your upbringing or background but there's plenty of people who simply don't have the advantages and access to the path that creates the free rides you received. So that's the fault of the borrower who then took another path because the system didn't afford them the other path?

Didn’t you also post another reply joking that you need people in debt so you can pay them less in a private practice so you can make more profit? 🤔 Perhaps an incentive to ensure the system keeps the same?

Businesses aren't people. They don't "learn." But I do agree there should have been more meaningful change after 2008 to prevent the free bailout bonanzas for businesses to keep occurring.

The consequences should be for the system, not the individual. It's frankly overall simplistic, if not pedantic to keep beating the "I paid mine in full so everyone must have the same situation I have and can do the same!" drum. "I had access, why didn't you?"

By the way, in regards to "I paid my ahead of schedule." Re-read my original reply. From a financial perspective it does make sense for some people to not pay theirs off in full ahead of schedule.

The simple solution financially is for student loans to be forgiven and moving forward education is funded by tax dollars. And maybe in the shorter term, to throw you aq bone here, maybe more could be done to cap the cost of education and reduce the amount one can borrow until the better solution can be fully realized. Blaming the borrowers and saying they should just do what you did isn't going to fix the problem. Educated populations are a good thing.

Respectfully, I think you are missing the point. Corporations are just groups of people and human behavior is just human behavior. Everyone has access to public education. Right now community colleges are struggling to retain students while private college costs are out of control. Why? That is not telling people to "get more money", it is telling them to make better choices. Helping people is not just about handing them things. Sometimes it is about navigating difficult choices and accepting things you don't want to in life. Guess what? Being a psychologist was not my "dream job". It was the path I chose because it was open to me and it made sense. When my original plans in grad school did not work out, I pivoted as well. That is life.

But, I get it. As the child of first generation immigrants who came here with nothing and couch surfed with family and friends while making a middle class life, I don't understand the struggle of the "poors". I have only been working non-stop since the age of 14 with all of my privileges in life. Similar to all the other elitist folks who shared their privileged backgrounds and attended elitist funded programs.

 

[smalltownpsych]

A point I take from @quickpsych posts is why blame the individual for what the system created? I also take the point that student loans aren’t inherently a bad thing and I am a beneficiary of that and it made sense for me and my situation. Is 500k in debt to become a psychologist a “bad thing”? Big question and it depends. The people who work in higher education benefit. Maybe the individual benefits or not in the long run. Does greater society benefit from this? Does our field benefit from it? Where do we draw the lines and how and who should do that? Some people are way better at manipulating systems to benefit themselves than psychologists are no matter how educated and talented we might be.

 

[Sanman]

A point I take from @quickpsych posts is why blame the individual for what the system created? I also take the point that student loans aren’t inherently a bad thing and I am a beneficiary of that and it made sense for me and my situation. Is 500k in debt to become a psychologist a “bad thing”? Big question and it depends. The people who work in higher education benefit. Maybe the individual benefits or not in the long run. Does greater society benefit from this? Does our field benefit from it? Where do we draw the lines and how and who should do that? Some people are way better at manipulating systems to benefit themselves than psychologists are no matter how educated and talented we might be.

It depends on what you consider blaming the individual. If you look to Europe or other places without private educational institutions, your career choices are based on your placement/final exams. So, in that kind of system, you either get into a funded position or you do something else. In the U.S., you take out loans and take your chances if you don't choose or gain entrance into the public programs. So, which system do we want? Or do people want all the choices of both systems and none of the systemic risk associated with either of those choices?

 

[smalltownpsych]

It depends on what you consider blaming the individual. If you look to Europe or other places without private educational institutions, your career choices are based on your placement/final exams. So, in that kind of system, you either get into a funded position or you do something else. In the U.S., you take out loans and take your chances if you don't choose or gain entrance into the public programs. So, which system do we want? Or do people want all the choices of both systems and none of the systemic risk associated with either of those choices?

I personally like having a private option despite the pitfalls of that both from individual making “bad“ choices or private institutions taking advantage of that based on financial motives. I think our complex private/public system has some benefits to go along with the problems. If we want a system with the best of both worlds and none of the downsides then we are looking for utopia and someone will take advantage of that for their own gain. The powerful love to take advantage of the naive and our field is a great microcosm of that because we care about people and skew a little more naive than the average successful corporate type. I never did that well in business because I was a bit too honest and nice. I would love a better world, but many of the people I have interacted with in the real world are not so nice and are really good at selfishly justifying behavior that harms others so long as it benefits themselves. I am not a saint either so am guilty of the same type of behavior, I’m just not as good at it as they are.

 

[borne_before]

It depends on what you consider blaming the individual. If you look to Europe or other places without private educational institutions, your career choices are based on your placement/final exams. So, in that kind of system, you either get into a funded position or you do something else. In the U.S., you take out loans and take your chances if you don't choose or gain entrance into the public programs. So, which system do we want? Or do people want all the choices of both systems and none of the systemic risk associated with either of those choices?

I wish the myth of European education as a meritocracy would end. Not that you’re saying that. You’re largely tracked from an early age there. Your track mostly depends on what your parents did. If you have level of neurodevelopmental disorder, you’re kind of tracked out of higher ed - even though things like ADHD and dyslexia are largely independent of reasoning capacity. I would have been tracked out of being a psychologist in Europe as would many of you with more blue collar parents.

 

[albatross_at_crossroads]

I wish the myth of European education as a meritocracy would end. Not that you’re saying that. You’re largely tracked from an early age there. Your track mostly depends on what your parents did. If you have level of neurodevelopmental disorder, you’re kind of tracked out of higher ed - even though things like ADHD and dyslexia are largely independent of reasoning capacity. I would have been tracked out of being a psychologist in Europe as would many of you with more blue collar parents.

I also wish people would stop seeing Europe as one big lump. As a collection of different countries, there is quite a diversity in approaches when it comes to education.
I am one of these (from a European country, first gen, blue collar parents) that was placed where I wanted based on my performance on some final exams. It's not exactly a myth. Not sure if meritocracy or not, since some neurodiverse folk probably struggle within this system, but it's out there.

I also heard the stories about what you are mentioning - some family friends had a kid in Germany, who was being actively "tracked-out" by the school system out of pursuing higher-ed (mostly because kid was an immigrant and had German as a second language). Parents moved to Austria, kid got into higher-ed, is now a productive member of society.
So yeah, it can happen, my only wish is that educational systems would take a closer look at one another, learn from each other, and move on from there.

On topic: I am not against student loans (have them, paying them) or private institutions. I can, however, see how taxpayers might not be happy to cover loans for diploma mills that churn out not so great quality clinicians. Also, it should not cost as much as a house (or two) to get educated in a profession. Yes, I know physicians take huge loans, it still boggles my mind. In "Europe" (haha) in many countries physicians have no or few loans, with the expectation that they are integrated into the (most probably public) healthcare system. They do have somewhat lower salaries, (as PsyDr. was pointing out on a different topic), but the quality of life seems comparable overall with their North American counterparts.

What I'm trying to say, perhaps not very coherently, is that I personally don't see the point of huge amounts for education, and worse quality education at that. Forgiving loans (while with good intentions), feels counterproductive in the long term, since it only incentivizes bad behaviors. That money that comes from the budget to forgive some of these loans could be used to improve schools (maybe public education - blasphemy!) and then increase access to a larger diversity of students to the profession. The schools should have to really provide a good quality education, and not invest it all in some sports field. This would be much more sustainable and fair.

 

[quickpsych]

Respectfully, I think you are missing the point. Corporations are just groups of people and human behavior is just human behavior. Everyone has access to public education. Right now community colleges are struggling to retain students while private college costs are out of control. Why? That is not telling people to "get more money", it is telling them to make better choices. Helping people is not just about handing them things. Sometimes it is about navigating difficult choices and accepting things you don't want to in life. Guess what? Being a psychologist was not my "dream job". It was the path I chose because it was open to me and it made sense. When my original plans in grad school did not work out, I pivoted as well. That is life.

I'll give you that about corporations of groups of people doing people things. But groups of people as corporations can take advantage, ruin people's retirement funds, investments, houses, livelihood, etc under the umbrella of a company not a person (as in the 2008 recession) and give them free money to continue? , but give kids loans on their own with terms that offer forgiveness...no we mustn't have that!

I appreciate your honesty in sharing your experience, but not going to lie...that sounds a bit sad in regard to how you didn't perhaps go where you wanted to go career wise. Maybe you took a funded spot from someone whose dream it was too? And hey, maybe you've made peace with settling for second best option and not your dream job and that's all good. But many choose to take the path that takes them where they want to go, and like you, well within the bounds of the systems and rules, as you did in another way.

But, I get it. As the child of first generation immigrants who came here with nothing and couch surfed with family and friends while making a middle class life, I don't understand the struggle of the "poors". I have only been working non-stop since the age of 14 with all of my privileges in life. Similar to all the other elitist folks who shared their privileged backgrounds and attended elitist funded programs.

Good on your parents for building a middle class life for you to have the opportunities; they sound like they did the best with what they could so you could focus on your studies to get where you are. Not that it was within your control, but also what role do you think back then affirmative action played in the life of a student coming in as an immigrant? Did that play a factor in your trajectory into a funded program?

If we're sharing, I've been working in some capacity since 14 as well. From late middle school through high school ,I would describe my home and environmental situation as not conducive to opportunities for being in the place or time to focus on checking all the boxes necessary to get to a fully funded route. Take what you will from that but lets just say was definitely low SES, coming home some days not knowing if we had electricity still on for food in fridge to be good. And quite disruptive environment, coming home some days not knowing what state my parent was in and who or what was going to be destroyed, threatened, or challenged. I knew a lot of latchkey kids like that, and my own high school guidance counselor framed me as a kid who shouldn't have even bothered to go to college. Or being told at home go to college or get out of the house, then being told to leave college to take care of the house or some variation of that.

I knew a colleague a few years ahead of me in doctoral program who got custody of their younger sister while still in high school and worked two jobs, had to drop out and re enroll in a masters, then went back to get her doctorate on federal loans. Neither her nor I got there on our own or through traditional paths, and often there was someone along the way willing to vouch for me, and that other student, to take a chance, give them a foot in the door. I guess I should have just done something else instead of looking for opportunity in the ways I knew how at the time? I was probably the definition of a non-traditional student and even coming into graduate school I was probably a little rough around the edges. I'm grateful i had some mentors along the way as well that played a role in my journey.

Anyways maybe I digress, my point isn't to compare upbringings, just that experiences are going to be different. There were those who had it far easier than me and far harder than me.

Let's not forget that by definition, funded PhD programs are often elitist. You need the environment , time and resources to be competitive to apply to them and beat out hundreds of applications for a few slots with often someone deciding if you'd be a good fit in their research lab which can be a bit arbitrary. But there's nothing wrong with getting there, good for you and for others who did. If funded programs took more students there'd also be more access to these opportunities and less need for loans. Imagine a system where instead of lending out money for those who didn't get in to funded programs, the government instead funded those programs so more students can be in that position.

As for loans, I admit "loophole" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was that these loans have in their terms and contracts the built in SOL (for private loans ) and loan forgiveness after X years (in federal loans). You paying yours in full and early may have made financial sense for you, but not for others. Your doing so has zero bearing on whether others can or should because, again, the contracts and promissory notes of these loans include ways to have the loans forgiven. There's absolutely nothing wrong with utilizing the terms of the contract.

I certainly didn't buy luxury cars or fancy accommodations with my loans. I took two trains to my part time job and walked a few miles at times when couldn't get there that way for a few dollars in my pocket. I caught rides and took the bus for my entire Master's degree and some of my doctoral degree until finally had to buy a used car for cheap because otherwise I would have not been competitive for practicums and internships to get there. Let's not forget the economic barriers that continue to exist in this field just to actually get licensed.

Some others in my program had family that paid for everything , good for them. I'm sure there's funded PhD students as well as diploma mills students and those in between who never worked a day in their life, and I'm sure there's some in those positions that had it far harder than you or I ever did. But we were all there for a common goal.

You asked in another comment if we can have it both ways a la European model. And I think that we can. Funding education can be expanded, it doesn't need to be held behind gatekeeping due to limited funds in funded PhD programs who only have X funds for X students. Many countries offer free or heavily subsidized college education for citizens and non citizens on tax dollars if you meet requirements.

As for student loans, most are forgivable and maybe in that way this is a quasi-method of funding education for more people who should be where you were academically but life circumstances didn't make that path possible. Arguing that we need to change student loan terms to "make sure" people "pay all of it back" is just nonsense and not the solution to the problem; it's systemic.

We could also wonder why medical schools require student loans and aren't "fully funded." As a field we seem to be moving more and more towards a healthcare/medical professional model of education and yet we still have academic/research "funded" routes. Imagine if medical schools said "you need to do research and work for us for funding but we can only take 5 of you a year."

End of the day, I get the sense we both agree the educational system in the US is not sustainable in it's current form and that diploma mills that take 90 students a year and charge absurd tuition with poor match rates and licensure rates need to disappear. There's a lot to unpack and a lot of variables, which I've said numerous times on this forum. Again it's nothing personal and maybe someone reading these back and forth debates one day will get into a role where they make effective changes to the system. As others have said to, the field needs psychologists from varied backgrounds and experiences as well.

 

[quickpsych]

I also wish people would stop seeing Europe as one big lump. As a collection of different countries, there is quite a diversity in approaches when it comes to education.
I am one of these (from a European country, first gen, blue collar parents) that was placed where I wanted based on my performance on some final exams. It's not exactly a myth. Not sure if meritocracy or not, since some neurodiverse folk probably struggle within this system, but it's out there.

I also heard the stories about what you are mentioning - some family friends had a kid in Germany, who was being actively "tracked-out" by the school system out of pursuing higher-ed (mostly because kid was an immigrant and had German as a second language). Parents moved to Austria, kid got into higher-ed, is now a productive member of society.
So yeah, it can happen, my only wish is that educational systems would take a closer look at one another, learn from each other, and move on from there.

On topic: I am not against student loans (have them, paying them) or private institutions. I can, however, see how taxpayers might not be happy to cover loans for diploma mills that churn out not so great quality clinicians. Also, it should not cost as much as a house (or two) to get educated in a profession. Yes, I know physicians take huge loans, it still boggles my mind. In "Europe" (haha) in many countries physicians have no or few loans, with the expectation that they are integrated into the (most probably public) healthcare system. They do have somewhat lower salaries, (as PsyDr. was pointing out on a different topic), but the quality of life seems comparable overall with their North American counterparts.

What I'm trying to say, perhaps not very coherently, is that I personally don't see the point of huge amounts for education, and worse quality education at that. Forgiving loans (while with good intentions), feels counterproductive in the long term, since it only incentivizes bad behaviors. That money that comes from the budget to forgive some of these loans could be used to improve schools (maybe public education - blasphemy!) and then increase access to a larger diversity of students to the profession. The schools should have to really provide a good quality education, and not invest it all in some sports field. This would be much more sustainable and fair.

Well said. And on the loan problems, I've said this before and will say it again: imagine if accrediting bodies took action against diploma mills and government funding of loans instead went towards funding more spots for more students to get their education low or no cost at the levels needed for our profession. I'm not naive here, I'm sure someone is lining someones' pockets to keep these diploma mills around.

The irony on so many taxpayers raising their pitchforks over loan forgiveness would probably be more supportive if it was reframed as funding those who needed the loans to go to become doctors, psychologists, and other professionals , including those in trades that may be exploited by their own version of diploma mills, that arguably provide benefits to society.

Interestingly you mention some schools who dump money, often taxpayer money, into sports teams and not academic programs...quite a few of them have funded PhD programs , imagine how many more great minds they could fund if they took some from the multi million dollar football coach salary and added a few more PhD students .

 

[PsyDr]

From a public finance perspective: until Bank of America pays more in taxes than me, or before a discussion about the operating cost of the Navy; I think the entire approach to the debate is straw man.

 

[Sanman]

I'll give you that about corporations of groups of people doing people things. But groups of people as corporations can take advantage, ruin people's retirement funds, investments, houses, livelihood, etc under the umbrella of a company not a person (as in the 2008 recession) and give them free money to continue? , but give kids loans on their own with terms that offer forgiveness...no we mustn't have that!

I appreciate your honesty in sharing your experience, but not going to lie...that sounds a bit sad in regard to how you didn't perhaps go where you wanted to go career wise. Maybe you took a funded spot from someone whose dream it was too? And hey, maybe you've made peace with settling for second best option and not your dream job and that's all good. But many choose to take the path that takes them where they want to go, and like you, well within the bounds of the systems and rules, as you did in another way.

Not sure why you find it sad, I don't. I have a good job with a six figure salary that allows me to keep a roof over my head, support my family, and give my child opportunities I never had. I happen to enjoy my job (most of the time) and I am good at it. Not sure why it matters what I or any other young person dreamed of before we had any real life experience. Hannah Kearney, the gold medal Olympic skier, has said that she was not very passionate about skiing growing up and considered leaving the sport prior to her gold medal in 2010. Did she take the spot of someone more passionate that dreamed of being in the Olympics? Does it matter if she did if that person did not have the ability to win a gold medal? Dreams are nice, but ability and aptitude matter when you have to perform.

Good on your parents for building a middle class life for you to have the opportunities; they sound like they did the best with what they could so you could focus on your studies to get where you are. Not that it was within your control, but also what role do you think back then affirmative action played in the life of a student coming in as an immigrant? Did that play a factor in your trajectory into a funded program?

I'm not an immigrant, I am a U.S. citizen. Affirmative action didn't really play a role as my gpa and GRE scores were above average for the class and program I attended. Did diversity factor in? You would have to ask the selection committee, but as 80% of my class was white women I can assume it was not a huge priority.

If we're sharing, I've been working in some capacity since 14 as well. From late middle school through high school ,I would describe my home and environmental situation as not conducive to opportunities for being in the place or time to focus on checking all the boxes necessary to get to a fully funded route. Take what you will from that but lets just say was definitely low SES, coming home some days not knowing if we had electricity still on for food in fridge to be good. And quite disruptive environment, coming home some days not knowing what state my parent was in and who or what was going to be destroyed, threatened, or challenged. I knew a lot of latchkey kids like that, and my own high school guidance counselor framed me as a kid who shouldn't have even bothered to go to college. Or being told at home go to college or get out of the house, then being told to leave college to take care of the house or some variation of that.

I knew a colleague a few years ahead of me in doctoral program who got custody of their younger sister while still in high school and worked two jobs, had to drop out and re enroll in a masters, then went back to get her doctorate on federal loans. Neither her nor I got there on our own or through traditional paths, and often there was someone along the way willing to vouch for me, and that other student, to take a chance, give them a foot in the door. I guess I should have just done something else instead of looking for opportunity in the ways I knew how at the time? I was probably the definition of a non-traditional student and even coming into graduate school I was probably a little rough around the edges. I'm grateful i had some mentors along the way as well that played a role in my journey.

Anyways maybe I digress, my point isn't to compare upbringings, just that experiences are going to be different. There were those who had it far easier than me and far harder than me.

Let's not forget that by definition, funded PhD programs are often elitist. You need the environment , time and resources to be competitive to apply to them and beat out hundreds of applications for a few slots with often someone deciding if you'd be a good fit in their research lab which can be a bit arbitrary. But there's nothing wrong with getting there, good for you and for others who did. If funded programs took more students there'd also be more access to these opportunities and less need for loans. Imagine a system where instead of lending out money for those who didn't get in to funded programs, the government instead funded those programs so more students can be in that position.

I would challenge the assertion that funded PhD programs are anymore elitist than PsyDs or any other graduate programs. The stories earlier in the thread can attest to that. Academia overall is elitist, but that is true based on its historical routes.

As for loans, I admit "loophole" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was that these loans have in their terms and contracts the built in SOL (for private loans ) and loan forgiveness after X years (in federal loans). You paying yours in full and early may have made financial sense for you, but not for others. Your doing so has zero bearing on whether others can or should because, again, the contracts and promissory notes of these loans include ways to have the loans forgiven. There's absolutely nothing wrong with utilizing the terms of the contract.

I certainly didn't buy luxury cars or fancy accommodations with my loans. I took two trains to my part time job and walked a few miles at times when couldn't get there that way for a few dollars in my pocket. I caught rides and took the bus for my entire Master's degree and some of my doctoral degree until finally had to buy a used car for cheap because otherwise I would have not been competitive for practicums and internships to get there. Let's not forget the economic barriers that continue to exist in this field just to actually get licensed.

Some others in my program had family that paid for everything , good for them. I'm sure there's funded PhD students as well as diploma mills students and those in between who never worked a day in their life, and I'm sure there's some in those positions that had it far harder than you or I ever did. But we were all there for a common goal.

You are overlooking the fact the the person in question in the OP racked up 500k in loans. This is not someone that just went to a program and had some student loan debt. Racking up that kind of debt generally means that you are either going to very expensive programs (USC and then PGSP, some places in NYC, or other destination cities), they had a high cost of living ( again expensive cities or lifestyle), or both. Based on statements made, this person believes that student loan forgiveness is the path to living it up during their educational years and ridding themselves of the debt. I would not have racked up 500k even if I attended a non-funded program, but I prioritized low debt and reasonable costs of living as part of educational goals.

You asked in another comment if we can have it both ways a la European model. And I think that we can. Funding education can be expanded, it doesn't need to be held behind gatekeeping due to limited funds in funded PhD programs who only have X funds for X students. Many countries offer free or heavily subsidized college education for citizens and non citizens on tax dollars if you meet requirements.

Very few offer a free education to non-citizens and most countries that subsidize education do to on the basis that they need a certain number of professionals in their country to fill the jobs they have. They are not subsidizing education for everyone. If they were, we would all go to college there for free and come back to the U.S. when done. They are usually more restrictive than the U.S. as far as controlling entrance into professions in their country. In the U.S., anyone can take a shot at getting their degree and competing, but it is an expensive gamble. There is no taking away all risk and letting everyone get an education. Because, then there simply won't be enough jobs. This is happening in China now. In the end, there will always be winners and losers.

As for student loans, most are forgivable and maybe in that way this is a quasi-method of funding education for more people who should be where you were academically but life circumstances didn't make that path possible. Arguing that we need to change student loan terms to "make sure" people "pay all of it back" is just nonsense and not the solution to the problem; it's systemic.

We don't need to change anything to ensure they "pay it back" and I never said we did. The programs already in place do a fine job of that.

We could also wonder why medical schools require student loans and aren't "fully funded." As a field we seem to be moving more and more towards a healthcare/medical professional model of education and yet we still have academic/research "funded" routes. Imagine if medical schools said "you need to do research and work for us for funding but we can only take 5 of you a year."

There are MD/PhD programs in this country that offer that deal and the programs are small. The goal is to train academic physicians.

End of the day, I get the sense we both agree the educational system in the US is not sustainable in it's current form and that diploma mills that take 90 students a year and charge absurd tuition with poor match rates and licensure rates need to disappear. There's a lot to unpack and a lot of variables, which I've said numerous times on this forum. Again it's nothing personal and maybe someone reading these back and forth debates one day will get into a role where they make effective changes to the system. As others have said to, the field needs psychologists from varied backgrounds and experiences as well.

I don't take it ever take it personally, people are entitled to their opinions. I don't have a problem with EDRP or PSLF for the most part. However, those programs require government or non-profit service. More blanket loan forgiveness seems pointless to me as it fixes nothing on the front end and encourages poor decision making based on the belief that you never have to pay back the money you borrow. That is separate from the issue of making education more affordable as education in this country, which I do think is important.

 

[Sanman]

From a public finance perspective: until Bank of America pays more in taxes than me, or before a discussion about the operating cost of the Navy; I think the entire approach to the debate is straw man.

Have you considered running for Congress?

 

[PsyDr]

Have you considered running for Congress?

Vote PsyDr: "I can't be bought, because I only want a letter of marque".