This really might be the end of ITT

I read up a little, Steve and yes, that view meets a lot of acceptance. Some say the major difference between U.S. and Europe isn't free market vs. socialism, but two different kinds of corporatism: American-style vs. European-style.

Corporatism Is Not the Free Market - Reason.com
Corporatism vs. the Free Market - Reason.com

Thanks for pointing me in this direction.

J.

 

ITT Tech might be shutting down . . .like today

ITT Tech Might Be Shutting Down, Like, Today

 

And they are. Done. Bruce was totally right. Good call.

All ITT Technical Institutes closing after ban on federal financial aid | khou.com

 

Closing schools like ITT Tech and killing ACICS might be the best thing for for-profit schools in general.

Look at how many operate without any real controversy and which have been lumped in with shady schools like Everest or ITT Tech.

The truly unfortunate thing is that ITT Tech, at one point, pumped out decent graduates. And many of those decent graduates now have a pretty big stain on their resumes because of what their alma mater became years after they graduated. Hopefully the current students are able to take advantage of a decent teach-out and can move on with their lives. And hopefully the AMUs and Pattens of the world can do their thing without taking flak for the sins of these mega-operators.

 

But my point is that is a sort of backward approach to fixing a shortage.

"We need people to take this job and make $35k/year. But you need to spend $50 - $80k on education in order to qualify."

I'm sure there are people looking at that and deciding against it based solely on the ROI for the tuition. But people still become social workers, mental health counselors etc. They are doing it not because they expect a big paycheck but because that's what they want to do for a living. So you might entice a few more people into the profession using that incentive. But I doubt it sways many. Even if you take the debt out of the equation you're still talking about 5-7 years of schooling for a low salary (or rolling the dice by starting your own practice).

Worse yet, if I were a rich man, I would absolutely exploit this program for my kids. I already know two executives who took great pride in the fact that they took a year off of work just prior to their kids going to college so that they could maximize financial aid for the first year. We see how the wealthy use 529 plans for their advantage. Why lay out cash when you can take out loans, with tax deductible interest, that will be wiped clean in 10 years?

That student would benefit the most. Mom and Dad can invest that $50-80k elsewhere and just make monthly payments. Ten years down the road the balance is wiped away and they got the education at a discount.

For the typical student (of non-wealthy parents) they are likely to struggle to balance living expenses and making those loan payments with a qualifying payment plan for 10 years. They're more likely to utilize income based repayment and just be on the hook for the full amount.

It's the government's attempt to manipulate a labor market in a weird and indirect way. Instead, they should probably let the problem get worse and force employers to pay more and schools to reduce the overall expense of those programs. But neither has to do that because the government intervenes and instead shifts the burden to all taxpayers.

 

I meant to say Bruce and Michigan 68. Sorry about that.

 

Unfortunately, Daniel Webster might go the way of Heald College and for very similar reasons.