I get it. The United States, like much of the rest of the world, is peering into an abyss of debt that threatens our quality of life, our security, and our potential for future growth. I am the father of two children and very much want them to inherit a country more prosperous, safe, and economically just than the one we currently inhabit.
I am also no economist, which may or may not be a bad thing in discussions of these matters. Even a quick scan of the economic literature reveals no consensus among economists about the relations among debt, investments, and growth, though it is a pretty sure bet that economists writing for the Heritage Foundation, the Brookings Institute, and the Congressional Budget Office are likely to come to different conclusions. As to forecasting the future? I am a big fan of John Kenneth Galbraith's observation that "the only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable."
Still, history, evidence, and common sense all suggest pretty strongly that higher, better, and more widespread levels of educational attainment are virtually certain to enhance the quality of both economic and civic life. Is there an example to the contrary, that is, an example of a society that has bettered its condition by lowering the level of educational attainment of its population? If there is one, my studies to date have missed it.
Yet as we grapple with the current debt burden at the state and national level, we seem determined to slash investments in the one area, education, that has the greatest potential to drive economic growth and social well-being over the medium and long term. States in particular seem to be competing in a sort of perverse Race to the Bottom: we'll see your sharp cuts to K-12 education and raise you draconian cuts to post-secondary education.
Again, I get it. We have a major debt problem and we can't live beyond our means. But we have seen in recent years, in both the public and private sectors, the woeful results of short-term thinking, and we should be capable even in moments of stress of distinguishing between decisions that clearly do not foster economic growth and those that do, such as investment in the education of our children. Fear and anger do not as a rule inspire our best thinking, and they are driving at this time far too much of our public discourse and far too many of our policy decisions.
Arthur Rolnick is the former senior vice president and director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank in Minneapolis -- hardly a hotbed of radical thought. He has for years made the case, based on careful study, that the Return on Investment for expenditures on early childhood education is extraordinarily high: according to his research, 16 percent annually, inflation-adjusted. So forget for a moment arguments about social justice. From a purely economic perspective, one can argue that the best place to invest a public or philanthropic dollar is in the early education of an at-risk child. This is not only acting in the public interest, but, at a societal level, in pure financial self-interest.
The Return on Investment of expenditures on K-12 and post-secondary education, while not as high, is unmatched by the ROI in most other areas or by the return on upper-income tax cuts. Yet we seem systematically to be undermining our public education system at every level. Our flagship public university systems, arguably one of the greatest achievements of American democratic society in the 19th century and unequaled anywhere else in the world, are being devastated. What does it say about our shift in priorities when universities founded during the cataclysmic stress of the Civil War are being dismantled at a time when, despite our challenges, we remain by many measures the most prosperous country on earth?
I am the president of a highly selective private college that is actually benefiting from the de-funding of public higher education. As more and more families question the value proposition of once-stellar public institutions, we are seeing a surge in applicants whom we are unable, as a small college, to accommodate. Many of these are students from working-class families who are attracted to Macalester College by our policy of meeting the full need of every student we admit; some are students from families of means who are concerned about larger classes, fewer faculty members, and declining graduation rates at the publics. But I am a citizen and a father even before I am a college president, and I would trade the increase in applications to my institution for more thoughtful and informed public policy at the state and federal level and for a robust system of public education from early childhood through graduate school.
Macalester is a great and respected institution and will thrive. I want to be able to say the same, with an equal level of confidence, about American education across the board and, by extension, American civic life.
Michael Rebell: Educational Budget Cuts: Unconscionable -- and Unconstitutional
Higher Education Funding Cut by $89 Billion Over 10 Years in Obama ...
The 10 Most Painful Education Budget Cuts | TakePart - Inspiration ...
Education Slammed In Pa. Budget Cuts
Northwest Voices | Education budget cuts hit hard | Seattle Times ...
Senate makes deep cuts to education budget
School Budget Cuts: No End In Sight
School budget cuts across the US projected for next academic year ...
http://piecrustbeats.blogspot.com/2011/03/american-education.html
But we must also look at what happens when we herd all students into higher ed, and then, the next bubble appears, and the house of cards folds.
America has survived for the past 20 odd years on bubbles...this is the latest...and it's a doozy!
http://bit.ly/eEuhLu
A typically concise and compelling argument for investing in that most fundamental capital - human capital.
Urban Institute's blog - www.blog.metrotrends.org - just published a similar argument. What do you think?
A college administrator's citing a high ROI in college education is self-serving and disingenuous.
First,whether in parody or not,you've written ,"two write".Not a good reflection of your intellect.Secondly,as I mentioned Glenn (Instapundit) Reynolds has been talking of the "Higher Ed' Bubble" ,where he hypothesizes students blithely load too much debt on their future.Allowing it to be dischargeable means more of this.The world doesn't need more Hunaities Majors who are lightly educated. My job certainly isn't inn high finance,but my income is rising about 30 % /year.That's substantial and not by chance.
ANd,college expenses are really inflated
- One typically places a space after a comma; one typically does not place a space between a word and a comma. Elementary school stuff.
- Your comma placement in general is atrocious, showing a great lack of understanding of punctuation.
- Periods and commas go inside of the end of a quotation, not outside of it. Only question marks and semi-colons go outside of a quotation.
- your percentage sign should not have a space between it and 30, and it is improper to use both % and /. Try "% per year" or "percent/year," but not "% / year."
- "First....Secondly" is not how one makes a list
- Hunaities? Inn? ANd?
- You forgot a period after your last sentence. Good lord, I do hope these errors are intentional trolling.
As to the crux of your message, making student loans dischargeable will make lenders honestly assess how much they are lending for a given education. Lenders only lend $200k for a liberal arts education because they are guaranteed to get the money back. Hence the bubble.
By the way, both my UG and my law school sport admissions rates of about 20%, if that lends a better reflection of my intellect.
Despite Mr. Rosenberg's exhorations that Macalester will thrive in the future, that will only happen as long as two conditions remain. One: student loans will remain dischargeable in bankruptcy. Two: the government will continue to provide and guarantee hundreds of billions in loans to students. Because of these two conditions, providing college loans are foolproof ways of making money. Lenders take money from the government, give it to the students, tack on interest, and watch the profits come in. If a student defaults for whatever reason, the government pays off the loan, and then the lender can continue to go after the student to get the balance of the loan a second time, plus hefty collection/default fees.
Anyhow, if either of those two conditions go away, restoring risk to the lendig system, then student lending will collapse overnight, and most colleges go bust, probably including Macalester. Few institutions have enough $$$ to operate off their endowments.
So, either a future where college grads are indentured servants unable to support the economy or one where no one can get an education. Great choices, indeed.
And,you're mouthing platitudes,but you don't seem to get it. Robert Ruark wrote a novel I recall my mother reading titled,"Something of Value".That's what's lacking .
And when their poor decisions have caused damage to the economy, they'll do what they've been doing for decades: claim a larger portion of the pie for themselves.
The problems in education funding, while huge and real, are a symptom of the larger problem: the elevation of greed as a virtue, and the basis of all decision making shifting to "what can my country do for me?" unbalanced by "what can I do for my country?"