6 Million More Students With Bachelor’s Degrees Than Jobs Available for Them
WASHINGTON, DC
Expert says one-third of those with bachelor’s degrees are in jobs that don’t require them.BTW, for the past 7 years the man in charge of creating new jobs in America has been Joe Biden.
There are 6,455,300 more students with bachelor’s degrees today than jobs available for them, including jobs that would be created in the next seven years, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the National Center for Education Statistics.
freebeacon.com/issues/6-million-more-students-with-bachelors-degrees-than-jobs-available-for-them/
Comments
-
Digs2Dicks....2022 is going to be special.
This means that the number of Americans who hold bachelor’s degrees now, in their working years, exceeds the number of jobs created by 2022 for bachelor’s degrees by 6,458,300. -
Amazing there are 6 million pre-law/polo-sci grads out there.
Learn to code, account or weld and you're employable for life. -
But how is college a scam?
-
Everyone should get a college education and it should be free.
That will fix everything. -
I know you like memes. -
Right before I graduated, I remember the Limousine Lib Nancy Pelosi talking about how college was getting too expensive and the Feds needed to step in to provide financing. I felt so lucky to get the heck out before my school started raising tuition due to the influx of money (similar to housing from the mid 90's onwards).
Of course the empty suit in the White House more than doubled down and gave away even more money and subsidized loans:
-
So how is college a scam ?HFNY said:Right before I graduated, I remember the Limousine Lib Nancy Pelosi talking about how college was getting too expensive and the Feds needed to step in to provide financing. I felt so lucky to get the heck out before my school started raising tuition due to the influx of money (similar to housing from the mid 90's onwards).
Of course the empty suit in the White House more than doubled down and gave away even more money and subsidized loans: -
I know you're being satcastic, but I don't think anyone is saying everyone should be admitted. That's retarded. The cost has skyrocketed over the past 20 years though. It was free or at a very low cost in most if not all states post WW2 well in to the 70s, maybe the 80s too.JaWarrenJaHooker said:Everyone should get a college education and it should be free.
That will fix everything.
They should do a European model in which kids take an aptitude test between 7th and 9th grade. The smart kids can prepare for a college career. The others can figure a trade or some vocation they like and prepare for that Instead of wasting time at a job they hate in their 20s. -
We need an aptutude test and make shur every group gets equal admission but that those that need the most help funanshally get it and those that need the best tuders get em for free so they can compete withall the internashanal kids and no loans so they can buy houses when they get out too
-
Do you even understand what this is saying? By your comment, is clear you don't. Not to mention you don't provide the source. (CSN "News")HFNY said:Right before I graduated, I remember the Limousine Lib Nancy Pelosi talking about how college was getting too expensive and the Feds needed to step in to provide financing. I felt so lucky to get the heck out before my school started raising tuition due to the influx of money (similar to housing from the mid 90's onwards).
Of course the empty suit in the White House more than doubled down and gave away even more money and subsidized loans: -
I think he was saying, the explosion of free financing for college kids has caused an explosion in cost to attend college.
why.
What do you think he was saying? -
Um there is no "explosion of free financing for kids". And that has nothing to do with what the chart says.sarktastic said:I think he was saying, the explosion of free financing for college kids has caused an explosion in cost to attend college.
why.
What do you think he was saying?
He was actually saying, falsely, that Obama has caused student loan debt to increase from $19 billion to $707 billion because of Obama. Which is about as fucktarded of statement as he can make. You on the other hand clearly have the skills to make a more fucktarded statement.
Any more questions? -
The empty suit didn't take over the White House until Jan 20, 2009 so the increase from $17 billion to $59 billion was under Bush (and Democratically controlled Congress).
Still, the cumulative amount the Federal Government borrowed from 2009 through 2014 was reckless and the year over year increases appalling:
From 2009 to 2010: increase of $80 billion
From 2010 to 2011: increase of $148 billion
From 2011 to 2012: increase of $151 billion
From 2012 to 2013: increase of $149 billion
From 2013 to 2014: increase of $123 billion
Feel-good bleeding heart intentions actually lead to nimbler / smarter enterprises bleeding them of taxpayer money. From this chart excluding residential mortgages, you'll see that the excesses of the previous cycle (HELOCs & Credit Card Debt) have been replaced by Federally financed (meaning taxpayers) Student Debt:
And why we should be concerned about the Hildabeast winning since she'll likely continue the empty suit's misallocation of capital and malinvestment towards people wanting to major in gender studies:
2001400ex said:
Um there is no "explosion of free financing for kids". And that has nothing to do with what the chart says.sarktastic said:I think he was saying, the explosion of free financing for college kids has caused an explosion in cost to attend college.
why.
What do you think he was saying?
He was actually saying, falsely, that Obama has caused student loan debt to increase from $19 billion to $707 billion because of Obama. Which is about as fucktarded of statement as he can make. You on the other hand clearly have the skills to make a more fucktarded statement.
Any more questions? -
Are you really that fucktarded? First of all, investing in education is probably the best investment a government can make.HFNY said:The empty suit didn't take over the White House until Jan 20, 2009 so the increase from $17 billion to $59 billion was under Bush (and Democratically controlled Congress).
Still, the cumulative amount the Federal Government borrowed from 2009 through 2014 was reckless and the year over year increases appalling:
From 2009 to 2010: increase of $80 billion
From 2010 to 2011: increase of $148 billion
From 2011 to 2012: increase of $151 billion
From 2012 to 2013: increase of $149 billion
From 2013 to 2014: increase of $123 billion
Feel-good bleeding heart intentions actually lead to nimbler / smarter enterprises bleeding them of taxpayer money. From this chart excluding residential mortgages, you'll see that the excesses of the previous cycle (HELOCs & Credit Card Debt) have been replaced by Federally financed (meaning taxpayers) Student Debt:
And why we should be concerned about the Hildabeast winning since she'll likely continue the empty suit's misallocation of capital and malinvestment towards people wanting to major in gender studies:2001400ex said:
Um there is no "explosion of free financing for kids". And that has nothing to do with what the chart says.sarktastic said:I think he was saying, the explosion of free financing for college kids has caused an explosion in cost to attend college.
why.
What do you think he was saying?
He was actually saying, falsely, that Obama has caused student loan debt to increase from $19 billion to $707 billion because of Obama. Which is about as fucktarded of statement as he can make. You on the other hand clearly have the skills to make a more fucktarded statement.
Any more questions?
That being said, you are being blinded by " facts " and don't even understand the charts you are presenting.
Yes the government is lending to students and yes the amount is growing. But unlike what Sark says, it's not "free". They generate income in the form of interest that the student pays.
That being said, what is your proposed solution? What do you think your candidate will do to fix this issue? -
Not all education is the same. Financing someone to study engineering at MIT is different than financing someone to major in Gender Studies at Evergreen State College or Art History at the University of Phoenix. Are you not able to understand the difference?
And how can student loans generate income if students default on their loans because no one wants to hire a Gender Studies grad from a crappy school? Not only is that loss of interest income, it's loss of principal...forget return on taxpayer money, that's not even return OF taxpayer money. The highest amount of dropouts are from for-profit schools like Apollo or Corinthian, money the Federal Government shoveled out:
And the Federal Government can "fix" the issue by withdrawing from their financing. Plus birthrates peaked in 1989-1990 so college enrollment has been declining, which will naturally put downward pressure on tuition at most decent schools.2001400ex said:
Are you really that fucktarded? First of all, investing in education is probably the best investment a government can make.HFNY said:The empty suit didn't take over the White House until Jan 20, 2009 so the increase from $17 billion to $59 billion was under Bush (and Democratically controlled Congress).
Still, the cumulative amount the Federal Government borrowed from 2009 through 2014 was reckless and the year over year increases appalling:
From 2009 to 2010: increase of $80 billion
From 2010 to 2011: increase of $148 billion
From 2011 to 2012: increase of $151 billion
From 2012 to 2013: increase of $149 billion
From 2013 to 2014: increase of $123 billion
Feel-good bleeding heart intentions actually lead to nimbler / smarter enterprises bleeding them of taxpayer money. From this chart excluding residential mortgages, you'll see that the excesses of the previous cycle (HELOCs & Credit Card Debt) have been replaced by Federally financed (meaning taxpayers) Student Debt:
And why we should be concerned about the Hildabeast winning since she'll likely continue the empty suit's misallocation of capital and malinvestment towards people wanting to major in gender studies:2001400ex said:
Um there is no "explosion of free financing for kids". And that has nothing to do with what the chart says.sarktastic said:I think he was saying, the explosion of free financing for college kids has caused an explosion in cost to attend college.
why.
What do you think he was saying?
He was actually saying, falsely, that Obama has caused student loan debt to increase from $19 billion to $707 billion because of Obama. Which is about as fucktarded of statement as he can make. You on the other hand clearly have the skills to make a more fucktarded statement.
Any more questions?
That being said, you are being blinded by " facts " and don't even understand the charts you are presenting.
Yes the government is lending to students and yes the amount is growing. But unlike what Sark says, it's not "free". They generate income in the form of interest that the student pays.
That being said, what is your proposed solution? What do you think your candidate will do to fix this issue? -
It's not working so let's just quit financing all students. Or better yet, let's only finance students that want to go to top notch schools in your approved majors.HFNY said:Not all education is the same. Financing someone to study engineering at MIT is different than financing someone to major in Gender Studies at Evergreen State College or Art History at the University of Phoenix. Are you not able to understand the difference?
And how can student loans generate income if students default on their loans because no one wants to hire a Gender Studies grad from a crappy school? Not only is that loss of interest income, it's loss of principal...forget return on taxpayer money, that's not even return OF taxpayer money. The highest amount of dropouts are from for-profit schools like Apollo or Corinthian, money the Federal Government shoveled out:
And the Federal Government can "fix" the issue by withdrawing from their financing. Plus birthrates peaked in 1989-1990 so college enrollment has been declining, which will naturally put downward pressure on tuition at most decent schools.2001400ex said:
Are you really that fucktarded? First of all, investing in education is probably the best investment a government can make.HFNY said:The empty suit didn't take over the White House until Jan 20, 2009 so the increase from $17 billion to $59 billion was under Bush (and Democratically controlled Congress).
Still, the cumulative amount the Federal Government borrowed from 2009 through 2014 was reckless and the year over year increases appalling:
From 2009 to 2010: increase of $80 billion
From 2010 to 2011: increase of $148 billion
From 2011 to 2012: increase of $151 billion
From 2012 to 2013: increase of $149 billion
From 2013 to 2014: increase of $123 billion
Feel-good bleeding heart intentions actually lead to nimbler / smarter enterprises bleeding them of taxpayer money. From this chart excluding residential mortgages, you'll see that the excesses of the previous cycle (HELOCs & Credit Card Debt) have been replaced by Federally financed (meaning taxpayers) Student Debt:
And why we should be concerned about the Hildabeast winning since she'll likely continue the empty suit's misallocation of capital and malinvestment towards people wanting to major in gender studies:2001400ex said:
Um there is no "explosion of free financing for kids". And that has nothing to do with what the chart says.sarktastic said:I think he was saying, the explosion of free financing for college kids has caused an explosion in cost to attend college.
why.
What do you think he was saying?
He was actually saying, falsely, that Obama has caused student loan debt to increase from $19 billion to $707 billion because of Obama. Which is about as fucktarded of statement as he can make. You on the other hand clearly have the skills to make a more fucktarded statement.
Any more questions?
That being said, you are being blinded by " facts " and don't even understand the charts you are presenting.
Yes the government is lending to students and yes the amount is growing. But unlike what Sark says, it's not "free". They generate income in the form of interest that the student pays.
That being said, what is your proposed solution? What do you think your candidate will do to fix this issue?
There will not be downward pressure on tuition at schools. Our economy is transitioning to one where there is less blue collar jobs and more jobs that require degrees. Not to mention, more gay people that want to major in gender studies. -
I think a lot of people are thinking everyone who wants to go will be admitted and the only thing that will change is it will be free.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I know you're being satcastic, but I don't think anyone is saying everyone should be admitted. That's retarded. The cost has skyrocketed over the past 20 years though. It was free or at a very low cost in most if not all states post WW2 well in to the 70s, maybe the 80s too.JaWarrenJaHooker said:Everyone should get a college education and it should be free.
That will fix everything.
They should do a European model in which kids take an aptitude test between 7th and 9th grade. The smart kids can prepare for a college career. The others can figure a trade or some vocation they like and prepare for that Instead of wasting time at a job they hate in their 20s.
Most people hear "Free College" and disengage their brain at that point. They don't think about how it would actually work and that by its very nature, "free college" would be rationed by the government. -
2001400ex said:
I'm a stupid fuck and deserve to be rendered carbon neutral to save the planetsarktastic said:I think he was saying, the explosion of free financing for college kids has caused an explosion in cost to attend college.
why.
What do you think he was saying?
.
Any more questions? -
-
Great analysis as always.sarktastic said:No
-
The more "help" students can get from the government to pay for school, the higher tuition prices will be. It's basic supply and demand.
All the students who are getting subsidized loans to major in Journalism, Political Science, Latin, etc. are contributing to the increased tuition price for students who are majoring in something that will actually economically benefit society like Engineering, Medicine, etc...which is decreasing the return on their investment and contributing to a shortage of workers in those fields.
Once you grasp the concept that wealth isn't about money, and rather about what people are physically contributing to society (things getting built, service being performed, etc), you realize how detrimental having a shortage of Engineers and Doctors is to the health of our economy.
TL:DR - Having the government subsidize tuition and student loans for shit tier majors is fucking retarded.
