As I sat down to write, I wondered what I should write about. I considered continuing my History of the World series, but I don't want to run the risk of this blog getting stale with what are, quite frankly, reruns. Considering I enjoy writing nonsense, though, I have another subject ready to go. I'll probably post that one on a delayed basis.
"You can't be riding that Rerun Horse forever, you know." |
Then, I realized that I haven't really kept my "Stuff" posts on the same level as my "Nonsense" ones. In fact, it's been quite awhile since I've opined on anything serious. To be sure, there are plenty of topics from which to choose. Our world is a very precarious place nowadays. From the war in Ukraine to skyrocketing inflation to the pandemic hanging on for dear life to government shelling out millions of taxpayer dollars to fund sports stadium to Disney going absolutely Goofy over Florida's "Don't Say Gay Bill" which does not say "gay" at all.
To say nothing of the fact that Donald Duck doesn't wear pants. |
It can't possibly surprise you that I have an opinion on each of those.
For
this evening, though, I chose the campaign by irresponsible nitwits to have the
federal government waive their student loans.
While I'm sure their appeal falls on the deaf ears of most Americans,
there are those who see nothing wrong with it.
Yes, yes, I know the Eggplant-in-Chief promised that he would forgive student debt.
"I also promised unity. How'd that work out?" |
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, noted loonies from New England, are two of the most prominent folks calling on Joe Biden to wave his magic wand and cause millions of dollars of student debt to disappear like energy independence.
There
are many others, of course. To their dismay,
though, a PhD in Norwegian Folk Dancing isn't up to the task of settling hundreds
of thousands in loan debt. Starbucks doesn't
pay that well.
"Even with tips? Son of a..." |
Look, I get it. A college education is substantially more expensive than it was after I graduated from high school. While I want to smack one of these smarmy millennials with a "back in my day" revelation, I won't. Well, mostly. Facts are facts. It does cost more now.
But, the
colleges I looked at when I was a senior didn't offer the "perks" that
most do today. They didn't have lavish
meal plans, workout facilities which
would make Planet Fitness look like Average Joe's gym, lazy rivers at the
Student Union, and free laptops to incoming freshmen.
What I could have had. |
What I did have. |
Of course, there was a time when it was worse. |
Oh, can I even say freshmen, anymore?
"Freshpeople. Hater." |
At any
rate, back in my day (sigh...I said it), I enlisted in the Navy when it became
clear that my mother was unprepared to finance higher education. My goal was to spend four years seeing the
world and then, when I got out, go to school on the GI Bill to become a teacher.
Well, plans changed a bit, but that's another story.
I'm not sure the quality of education is commensurate with the outlandish tuition. Maybe, maybe not, probably not.
A
college/university education is a business, a competitive business. Meaning, College 'A' has to offer a youngster
something that College 'B' does not have.
Add to
that out-of-control tuition and you have a scenario where kids do incur a
staggering financial burden.
There
are ways to ease this financial albatross, to be sure. Sure, they have a bad rap, but why not
consider a community college for two years before you head off to the four-year
school? I guarantee you that degrees
from Stanford will not have a line saying you started in junior college. Or maybe try to get a ROTC scholarship, which
will pay most, if not all, the freight of a college education.
Or, now
here's a crazy thought, but hear me out.
How about a trade school? That
way, you'll could be making thousands of dollars wiring the house of a barista
with a degree in Pygmy Gender Studies.
"I'm working on my doctoral thesis. Which of you are girls and which are bo...oh, wait. I think I can guess." |
It is
their burden, their responsibility. Last
I checked, the Bill of Rights did not include the "Right To Other People's
Money." How in the world they
think folks who may not have gone to college or those who have paid off their
debt should finance their obligation is beyond me.
In
essence, it is their problem and theirs alone.
If the federal government were to adopt this cockamamie scheme, why not
take it to the logical conclusion of forgiving mortgages, erasing car loans, or
forgiving risky investments in the Stock Market? All at taxpayer expense!
Eventually,
though, everybody is going to be riding the Bread and Circuses bandwagon with
nobody left to pull it.
However,
if for some reason this hair-brained plan were to see the light of day-and
don't think it's impossible. I wouldn't
put anything past this bunch-why not add some requirements before they suckle on
Uncle Sam's teat?
"Suckle away, youngster." |
I'm
thinking something akin to a Peace Corps.
If
you're unwilling to do either of these things, then congratulations. That monetary millstone remains yours.
In any
event, by requiring that graduates give something back before reaping the
benefits of government largesse, the American taxpayer will get something
rather than nothing. I, and many others
like me, have zero problem helping the helpless. We just get a touch ornery when it comes to
helping the feckless.
Plus, perhaps the college graduate will discover that they've also minored in self-respect.
Now get off my lawn.