or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Paul fussell's "class"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Paul fussell's "class" - Page 3  

post #31 of 55
Higher education is one of the best investments available. The average return is just tremendous. Add to this the fact that the interest rate on school loans is below the market rate due to government subsidies and loan guarantees, and it is a no-brainer to attend the best school one can. The fact a few people are unable to find employment after graduation a) in no way speaks to the group of college graduates as a whole and b) simply demonstrates that they expect a well paying job to come along soon, else they would have accepted a low paying job already (certainly they could have been hired at McDonalds at any point). Also, very few schools cost 47k per year and your calculus seems to involve a masters (6 years) which is a different animal.
post #32 of 55
Quote:
Higher education is one of the best investments available. The average return is just tremendous. Add to this the fact that the interest rate on school loans is below the market rate due to government subsidies and loan guarantees, and it is a no-brainer to attend the best school one can. The fact a few people are unable to find employment after graduation a) in no way speaks to the group of college graduates as a whole and b) simply demonstrates that they expect a well paying job to come along soon, else they would have accepted a low paying job already (certainly they could have been hired at McDonalds at any point). Also, very few schools cost 47k per year and your calculus seems to involve a masters (6 years) which is a different animal.
There is no such thing as "average return" on higher education. And just because the interest rate is subsidized and low does not mean you did not take on the debt. Are you planning on ever paying off the debt or are you just one of those debt junkies that keep on taking refi and taking on more and more debt? Most recent graduates are unemployed after college and graduate school. I added graduate school expenses to the calculation, and 50K is about average annual tuition, room, and board for most private schools (NYU, Stanford, Yale). And I know plenty of unemployed and underemployed Stanford, NYU, and Yale grads. And if you think flipping burger is a career and you ever will have a chance to payoff $300K in student loan by being a hamburger engineer, you are out of your mind.
post #33 of 55
Technically, I fall relatively closely into that last category (art history major).  I miss your debt estimates by 150k though. I'll only have 150-175 accrued by the time I start working.  Actuallly, it could be even worse if all goes as planned.
post #34 of 55
Quote:
Quote:
Quote Will the upper class members of this forum please identify themselves immediately and settle our debate.
What is your definition of upper class? (an entire debate onto itself, no?) I assume, everybody has a slightly different definition. Jon.
This one is easy. If you have to ask, you are not. If you don't know if you are, you are not.[/quote] No. You are incorrect, it is a relative term which is quite complex, would you consider Puff Daddy upper class? Are you in the US? Europe? Asia? (That's it for now, I am curious as to what your answer is). Jon. P.S. Using the J.P. Morgan line and paraphrasing it: "If you have to ask how much it costs, you can't afford it." Is quite proletarian at best, and shows a lack of erudition at worst.
post #35 of 55
In my opinion, a college education is essential, and a college education at a "brand name" school makes a lot of difference compared to a regular school. I go to a highly competitive liberal arts college, but despite our academic rigorousness (95% med school acceptance, for instance), we are not well known by the general public. This means a student here at my college will be lose out to an student at Harvard eventhough the former may be smarter. That's the truth. Companies have "target schools" and they like their employees to come from prestigious colleges -- especially in investment banking or consulting because their proposals to clients often contain the biographies of their client-service teams. It's not even a question of how good you are / how good your college is. It's whether you are at a college where lots of prestigious employers like to recruit. It is a general phenomenon: the general public will pick Armani, Versace, and they will pick Yalies and Harvardmen. In Harvard, they refer to the dropping of their college name to prospective employers, dates, etc as "dropping the H-Bomb". Also, the old boy network is well and alive, I assure you. http://www.pennclub.org - Penn Club NY http://www.hcny.com - Harvard Club NY Harvard Club of New York Article: Where you learn to be a billionaire If your son or daughter is accepted to Princeton, Harvard, or Yale, rob if you must, but send him/her there.
post #36 of 55
Quote:
No. You are incorrect, it is a relative term which is quite complex, would you consider Puff Daddy upper class? Are you in the US? Europe? Asia? (That's it for now, I am curious as to what your answer is). Jon. P.S. Using the J.P. Morgan line and paraphrasing it: "If you have to ask how much it costs, you can't afford it." Is quite proletarian at best, and shows a lack of erudition at worst.
I am in San Francisco, but I have been to Europe and Asia. Puff Daddy is definitely not upper class. But the Morgans are definitely upperclass, so are the Rothschilds, kennedys.
post #37 of 55
Quote:
Quote:
No. You are incorrect, it is a relative term which is quite complex, would you consider Puff Daddy upper class? Are you in the US? Europe? Asia? (That's it for now, I am curious as to what your answer is). Jon. P.S. Using the J.P. Morgan line and paraphrasing it: "If you have to ask how much it costs, you can't afford it." Is quite proletarian at best, and shows a lack of erudition at worst.
I am in San Francisco, but I have been to Europe and Asia. Puff Daddy is definitely not upper class. But the Morgans are definitely upperclass, so are the Rothschilds, kennedys.
And thus, I repeat myself: what constitutes upper class? Not, who is the image or epitome of upper class, but what are the principles, the rules that separate (seemingly) them from everybody else?
post #38 of 55
Quote:
Quote:
Quote No. You are incorrect, it is a relative term which is quite complex, would you consider Puff Daddy upper class? Are you in the US? Europe? Asia? (That's it for now, I am curious as to what your answer is). Jon. P.S. Using the J.P. Morgan line and paraphrasing it: "If you have to ask how much it costs, you can't afford it." Is quite proletarian at best, and shows a lack of erudition at worst.
I am in San Francisco, but I have been to Europe and Asia. Puff Daddy is definitely not upper class. But the Morgans are definitely upperclass, so are the Rothschilds, kennedys.
And thus, I repeat myself: what constitutes upper class? Not, who is the image or epitome of upper class, but what are the principles, the rules that separate (seemingly) them from everybody else?[/quote] First, I am certain that I am not. I think some of the symptoms of the upper class are: work is optional and is merely a hobby. The size of paycheck is irrelevant. almost no debt, as in can live off interest and dividends of past wealth. have significant family, political, and business connections that can get you out of troubles of epic proportion. have wit, intelligent (either you have it or you buy it) that you can spot significant changes in social and economic trends.
post #39 of 55
"The only thing I like about rich people is their money."-Lady Astor
Quote:
almost no debt, as in can live off interest and dividends of past wealth.
That certainly isn't true of certain members of the British aristocracy or for that matter the emgires of the Russian nobility. But that is into a whole concept unto itself. I find that those above mentioned people are much easier to communicate with as opposed to the American "aristocracy." Education is certainly a very fine investment although on a certain conceptual level tends to be rather all for pretentiousness. I am quite sure the majority of Harvard graduates boast of being the alumni of such a school. Such academies are in short a male version of a lady's finishing school; it prepares the man into this particular world into he which enters by his vocation. Prepared by various ways even as a general manner assumed by milling about with essentially the people at the school.
post #40 of 55
Ugghh... are we having yet another discussion about "class." We should start a new class forum. Do not any of you realize class is a more or less a defunct phenomenon that is widely ignored by 99% of the population. Gregory: Have you even visited those Ivy League clubs? I'll tell you that they are not so "alive and well," membership is very low, the only members are guys who are left over from graduating decades ago. I wouldn't doubt if they close down sooner or later; to run places like that is very expensive. And I hate to break it to you, the fact is that class is defined by the size of your bank account in America for the most part. No one cares what circles you run in or what your family has been doing for the past 100 years.
post #41 of 55
Quote:
He says:
Quote:
"[L]aboring to present yourself scrupulously clean and neat suggests that you're worried about status slippage and that you care terribly what your audience thinks, both low signs. The perfect shirt collar, the too neatly tied necktie knot, the anxious over attention to dry cleaning--all betray the wimp. Or the nasty nice. The deployment of the male bowtie is an illustration. If neatly tied, centered, and balanced, the effect is middle-class. When tied askew, as if carelessly or incompetently, the effect is upper-middle or even, if sufficiently inept, upper. [. . .] "Too careful means low--at least middle-class, perhaps prole. 'Dear boy, you're almost too well dressed to be a gentleman,' Neil Mackwood, author of Debrett's In and Out (1980), imagines an upper-class person addressing someone in the middle class, as if the speaker were implying that the addressee is not a gent but a model, a floorwalker, or an actor."
Back to the original thread: What he's talking about here can be boiled down to trying too hard. If you've got it, you don't need to prove it.
post #42 of 55
Quote:
There is no such thing as "average return" on higher education.  And just because the interest rate is subsidized and low does not mean you did not take on the debt.  Are you planning on ever paying off the debt or are you just one of those debt junkies that keep on taking refi and taking on more and more debt?   Most recent graduates are unemployed after college and graduate school.  I added graduate school expenses to the calculation, and 50K is about average annual tuition, room, and board for most private schools (NYU, Stanford, Yale).  And I know plenty of unemployed and underemployed Stanford, NYU, and Yale grads.  And if you think flipping burger is a career and you ever will have a chance to payoff $300K in student loan by being a hamburger engineer, you are out of your mind.
All quotes are agent.5. "There is no such thing as "average return" on higher education." Yes there is.  It is (the total sum earned by all graduates minus the amount those graduates would have earned without school) divided by the number of graduates.  This figure may not correpsond to the amount anyone actually makes, but it does decribe the amount that one can expect to make upon graduation. "And just because the interest rate is subsidized and low does not mean you did not take on the debt." Actually, it almost means that.  Because of the time value of money, we know that a dollar now is worth (1 + the nominal interest rate) a year from now.  School loans are given out at below this interest rate, so students receiving more money than they are required to pay back. "Most recent graduates are unemployed after college and graduate school." This is demonstrably false.  The unemployment rate is slightly above 5%.  There would need to be almost no unemployed individuals beyond recent grads in order for this figure to be possible.  You are just making things up now. "I added graduate school expenses to the calculation, and 50K is about average annual tuition, room, and board for most private schools (NYU, Stanford, Yale)." You are badly misinformed.  The actual tuition is about 40k, but all of these schools give generous financial aid.  The average student at NYU gets 18k in aid. "And I know plenty of unemployed and underemployed Stanford, NYU, and Yale grads." I don't want to sound like an a**, but I really doubt that you do, given that 1. the employment rate from these schools is very high, 2. only a small portion of the country attends these three schools, so the odds of anyone knowing "plenty" of them is low, 3. you don't know the tuition of these schools or even what the word "average" means. "And if you think flipping burger is a career and you ever will have a chance to payoff $300K in student loan by being a hamburger engineer, you are out of your mind." Please read more carefully.  I wasn't arguing that flipping burgers would pay for a college degree, I was arguing that, assuming rationality, these people you claim to know would have taken low paying jobs if they did not foresee getting a better job.  The fact that they are unemployed in the short-term is itself evidence that they will get a high-paying job eventually. Did it ever occur to you that the vast bulk of intelligent people in this country make the very choice you deride?  How arrogant can you possibly be to think that all of these people are making a bad economic decision?
post #43 of 55
I will begin by what I first wrote: "Granted, a higher education is probably necessarily but not necessarily cost effective." I didn't say an education is not important, I am saying it is freaking expensive. And the rest of the craps that you wrote, I don't even feel like answering them, because they cannot pass muster of economic 101. To argue that it is free money because the government is actively devaluing the money is just plainly crap. Remember, you signed the dotted line and took on a loan. Sure some students receive financial aids, but most financial aids are just debt, not free money. You cannot even discharge student loans in bankruptcy proceedings. And just because everyone is betting on one thing (say that Nasdaq will go to the moon) does not mean that they will be right. Nasdaq crashed. And I will say that those retards that bet on real estate goes up forever and thus can extract refi money forever will also be proven wrong. Your following statement is false. "[A]verage return" .... does decribe the amount that one can expect to make upon graduation." And if you happen to be unemployed after graduation, then what? Should one expect to even have a "job" after graduation? And all those unemployed graduates simply what -- do not exist? or early retirement? The fact, in my opinion, is that one simply cannot expect anything after graduation. One cannot expect a job, let alone a job that pays a lot of money. One may receive an education, and that's about all one can expect. Your following statement must earn the you got to be serious award: "The fact that they are unemployed in the short-term is itself evidence that they will get a high-paying job eventually." It is circular reasoning and I will simply leave readers to read this statement twice and make up their mind. Then, I will add that many high paying jobs have simply be offsourced and will never return. This includes but not limited to law, medicine, technology, and accounting. And I do know a lot of people that went to good schools, that have advanced degrees, and that are very struggling.
post #44 of 55
I guess we agree then. Some people, if they could predict the future would be better off not going to college. This seems to be your argument. Looking backwards, the post-collegiate unemployed may have gambled and lost. But my point is that before the fact, the decision to attend college is always a good idea. One cannot know that they are going to be one of the unlucky unemployed before they enter college. In this sense, attending college is like gambling with the odds stacked very very heavily in your favor (large probability of gain) but with a still existent chance of loss.
post #45 of 55
Quote:
In this sense, attending college is like gambling with the odds stacked very very heavily in your favor (large probability of gain) but with a still existent chance of loss.
I do not want to argue about this point. Because education has been a vehicle for people to move up the social ladder. And I am not here to bust people's dream. But the odd is getting worse and worse. An example, http://www.nylawyer.com/news/04/04/042704f.html
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Paul fussell's "class"