42:15 This guy is so out of touch. Gen Zers don't "house hack" with 5 roommates because they don't want to own a home, it's because that's the only way any of them can afford to live in a home. Boomers said the same thing about millennials years ago. It's sad to see that this take still persists.
Was just about to come down here and say the same thing. My partner and I just recently had a discussion about this exact topic and the bull**** around people saying that younger generations are "choosing to rent". WE WANT TO OWN A HOME. We do not rent "by choice". We rent because post-grad wages are stagnant. To seriously suggest we rent by choice and would rather have "access" than "ownership" is just laughable. I did not chose to have everything in my life be a f****** subscription. I'll be damned if I am going to let someone tell me to be okay with something that should be a basic human right being a subscription.
@@voicedbirdAbsolutely. Parkinson's "Law" is not applicable when basic needs are not being met with the lower wage. If you are underhoused or have no car or no health insurance, a wage increase is not going to a fucking massage chair. What a clown.
I love Chelsea brought up staying in a career long term. My husband has been with his company 23 years and plans to retire from his company. He has no degree and makes six figures. He has an amazing work ethic and he has gotten promotions and raises over the years which has helped him to be able to stay in his job. He works for an employee owned company and he gets 8% of his pay in stocks which has helped us save for retirement faster too. He will be able to retire at 61 years old comfortably. This is definitely not the norm in today’s society.
"He works for an employee owned company and he gets 8% of his pay in stocks which has helped us save for retirement." This is the key part of that equation, and something most people on the planet will never have access to.
I agree with the idea of finding an industry and sticking with it for your career. Eventually you learn the “tricks of the trade” and become really valuable. Plus there is a social/emotional component working with the same people for years.
This is why I stay in state jobs. They match 6% in retirement. So I have 12% in the pension. The I put an extra 10% Into the 401k. It’s the only way I can retire. I should be able to retire if I can keep my whole career in state jobs. Luckily there are tons. I’ve moved all around the school district the last 7 years. Once my kids are grown I’ll find a high paying state job to throw more money into retirement.
Re: The argument against wiping out student loans. He makes the case that universities will just use that as an excuse to raise their rates, but they're already doing that under a system in which they're guaranteed a captive audience that cannot contest or escape from their payments as it is. As the system stands right now, they have no incentive to keep costs under control, much less low, and it shows.
I mean the obvious answer is to stop guaranteeing loans at the federal level. Or at the very least having a maximum time or maximum pay back level. If you've paid back the cost of your principle in interest+ inflation then there's no reason for you to have to continue paying. Maybe that's too generous but it's certainly true that neither the government nor the universities should be able to continue collecting interest indefinitely just because someone is unable to pay at a rate high enough to exceed the accrual of interest. It's usurious and exploitative.
Exactly. Also, trends are already starting to show that fewer teens are going to choose to go to a four-year college/university over the next decade or so due to the exorbitant cost and their decision not to take on a substantial amount of debt. If anything, most schools that have inflated tuition rates will be forced to lower them. We're already seeing it happen with schools like Colby-Sawyer. I'm not sure what information he's basing his theory on...
My friend, is grandfather runs for Governor, I believe that, even if he tried, he simply cannot understand the struggles of normal people, let alone the struggles of people who grown without connection and background wealth
@IshtarNike YES!!! This is 1000% the answer. For the current crisis, blanket forgiveness isn't it. But adopting this and applying it would be way to go. As for the future, reform has to happen. Like you said, colleges will keep price gauging if the government keeps "backing" the loans. The government needs to call the bs and stop allowing them to raise prices higher and higher and higher; I mean, an institution can still do it but they wouldn't qualify for *any* government loans. Kinda like hospitals... if they don't make certain concessions they won't get medicaid money (or something like that). Either institutions play ball or their students have to come up with private loans.
As an European watching this it is absolutely baffling to me how the guest argument was not “I pretend more from my government and from the taxes I pay because this is how society should be built” instead he is essentially saying “this is the deal just go out and be more entrepreneurial about it” or “Just read this inspiring book I WROTE on how to architect your life and think big, take risks.” I am stunned. What risks can i person take more than be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt betting on a university degree that does not guarantee you anything in the current state of the world?
Most people don't take out that many loans. Also, if you come from a poor background you tend to get more help in the form of government grants towards college and it doesn't need to be paid back. Also, you can go to a school that is free like SUNY/CUNY in New York City. There are other options besides taking out $100,000 in debt. Some Universities are fairly affordable and you can work while you go to school and save up for it too. However, I agree we need to make it more affordable.
this is a reductionist and delusional take on the options american students have, the commenters above are correct - and yes, I was born and live in the US@@mmatosac
The thing that I really struggle with in “Envisioning my future self” is that it assumes a level of stability that I just don’t think is reasonable. If I think about how much has changed just in the two decades I’ve been alive, combined with climate change and the rapid growth of new tech like the internet, I have a really hard time imagining what my life might be like by the time I reach retirement age. It’s not just that people are defeatest and nihilistic, it’s that we are afraid. We see crazy stuff happen to people all around us, people who didn’t make the wrong choice, or who had no control in massive disasters and upheaval. So it’s hard to sit down and make a sensible plan for the future when everything around us is so nonsensical. I don’t like the implication that young people don’t think about the future. For many of us it looms in our mind like an impenetrable storm that rushes toward us. That’s not to say we shouldn’t try to make smart moves and think through financial decisions, just that it’s difficult and that the difficulty is not simply some irresponsible pleasure seeking.
@@rory644 I mean sure but a lot of lives were lost and ruined by an event like that. And I’ll bet some of those people had sensible financial plans laid out that were obliterated by something outside their control. At the end of the day you just make the best call you can, but it feels foolish to just assume everything is going to stay exactly like it is currently set up over the next 50-70 years
I thought he raised some interesting points but I feel like the backbone of his argument still boils down to “Debt is Original Sin and Avocado toast is the apple”. He has a more compassionate tone but it still sounds like Dave Ramsey’s brand of “Personal Responsibility will save us all”
I’m just getting very libertarian vibes that always end up tied in a knot between not wanting to involve the government but wanting some magical force to come in and adjust the economy for everyone…
And expecting the worse in people with him practically saying that raising wages wouldn't help people. Just make them spend more, insinuating poor spending habits in those having money troubles vs them NOT HAVING A LIVABLE WAGE
Personal responsibility may not be able to save all of us but many would have the ability to live comfortably if they controlled their spending. There’s a different RUclips channel that gives people financial audits and it shows that even when they are making great money they tend to lack the control to spend within their means with constant trips, eating out excessively, etc which in turn snowballs them into credit card debts. All you see on things like TikTok is just the complaining side of things where it’s blamed on everything except themselves. It’s easy to play the victim online when it’s actually only half of the story.
The biggest thing about these people is that they are fundamentally unable to offer a systemic critique, ONLY being able to understand broad societal problems through the narrow lenses of the status quo and the individual. The concepts of exploitation, or of systemic progress are not even things that they register.
He really seems to be at a disconnect with what’s actually happening and why, or at least what’s happening to people who aren’t like him, well-off Gen Xers.
“I want to be wealthy to do charity in my family’s name” is some of the weirdest logic ever. I get wanting to do charity, of course, but why for glory? And why not be more involved in reform so that the government can provide the social services that are lacking that require charity to exist in the first place? I don’t know man, sometimes people go viral on TikTok and that’s just all there is to them. I’m glad Chelsea pushed back as politely as possible. My favorite was “gilded age philanthropy” which is truly a brilliant burn.
In studies, less wealthy people give more to charity as a part of their income and wealth. So middle class people give more than billionaires. Plus the uber-wealthy like to want their names on buildings
Yeah, I was thinking that when he brought up his grandfather. It felt like he just brought up his grandfathers achievements and said he’s had this conversation before, but didn’t say what his opinion was
Hi Chelsea (one of your few guy listeners). Thanks for sticking to your guns. It's tough to be poor, Ive seen it firsthand. I think its easy to blame people without money for the financial situation they are in. When in reality its really hard to get out of poverty and takes alot of work and I think some people would rather not loose friendships/family relationships just to be rich. In some ways I think people without alot of money are really rich in the things that matter and some rich people don't see that and are quick to judge. Its easy to make money when you have money. At some point I think some people just realize how hard it is to become rich and just start to appreciate the things they have around them, and there is nothing wrong with that. That being said people should not be struggling to live. We are the richest country in the world and so many of us live in constant financial fear/poverty. People need to be paid fairly for their work (bring back labor unions).
This guys answer to houses are too expensive is to say younger people don’t want to own they want to rent. Like gtfo, why do you think people rather rent than buy…
His answer to ‘what advice do you have for those who can’t envisage their future?’ is ‘envisage your future’. This really reveals how a confident white man can achieve so much without having anything to offer.
He did sound like someone who has had a lot of things come easily to him and not at all like someone who has had to work under an unfair system that pretends its a meritocracy...
I was just having a conversation with a friend of mine about how people in upper management (c-suite) talk about donating money/philanthropy, yet they have poor working conditions for their workers or sub-par wages. It's just funny to me how they "say" they want to make a difference, but there are poeple in their companies who they can have a direct positive effect on. It strikes me more that they want the greater society and media to think they are good people, but don't care about how they treat the actual people in their lives lol. They sometimes sum it up to getting dirty(walking over people) and having a good work ethic for the greater good loll The irony is sadly beautiful
Considering he wraps up that comment with how he wants to make Carroll a grand name everyone knows, yeah, I'd agree. It's the same mentality I had in elementary when asked what I wanted to do. It had everything to do with notoriety and nothing to do with actually improving anything. It's a fundamentally selfish want, no matter how nicely it's packaged.
I just wanted to add my little two cents on 4 year (or more…I worked and took time off) Bachelor’s degrees. I actually have found that the random electives I was required to take have vastly helped me in my life. The art history, anthropology, and linguistics have helped me better understand other cultures and language and increase my joy when at a museum (and ire, because anthropology 😅). I don’t even work in my main focus of my degree, biology, so all the essays I had to write in those arts courses have come to be great help me in my job today! BUT!! - I did my degree in Canada, lived at home, and went to university locally, so it was not particularly expensive.
Lol the clases I appreciate the most from my bachelor's degree are not part of my degree. My sociology of the family and intro to psychology (which I eventually majored in from business administration) were my favorite classes.
I wasn't sure what i wanted to major in and i took some psych classes in first year and i wanted to help people so i majored in psychology and i have my honours ba in psychology now. kind of hard to do anything with just a ba in psych but i loved my education and i know i still have lots of time to find my career.@@CaraMarie13
I agree with this take, and it’s something I mention all the time as my biggest take away from going to college despite not getting a degree. That said, it still shouldn’t be so expensive to obtain that knowledge. Personally I wouldn’t mind if the 4 year degrees that include electives stuck around as an option but it being mandatory can make the already high price tag that much more daunting.
This. I would have been one of the lemmings to the sea if not for my electives. And what keeps me going to a 9 to 5 I don't enjoy is the things I earned in those electives.
I took a class that was outside my major about the design of the world and how to design a world thats friendlier to everyone, now I have a son with cerebral palsy and put it into practice every day to advocate for him and create a home / space that he can navigate as well as our other son.
Really appreciate Chelsea pushing back against the guest's constant focus on personal choice. Even if he's not invoking avocado toast in every argument, I'm still seeing this frustrating insistence on individuals making bad, frivolous choices. Maybe I live in a very different social bubble than this guy, but none of my 30-something friends are talking about buying luxury cars or whatever whenever we get a little extra money.
Right as if any of us could have perfectly planned our life around the two recessions we've been in, a pandemic, inflation, housing costs being almost unaffordable, etc.
In order to stay afloat financially and avoid debt, it is very vital and important to have a longterm financial plan. Personally, I work with a fixed income planner and portfolio manager in the USA.
This is very true! A lot of people downplay the role of a financial planner until burnt by their mistakes. After my last job layoff, I had to stay afloat, hence researched for licensed fiduciary advisors. Thankfully, I came across someone of practical knowledge and experience. My reserve fund of $75k has yielded nearly $370k after subsequent investments.
It is challenging to create a strong financial portfolio therefore it would be wise to get much needed assistance from a real finance professional. You can then receive strategies that are specifically suited to your long term objectives and financial goals.
Insightful. I need some advice on how to rebuild my portfolio and develop successful market tactics. Where can I find this professional portfolio manager?
Reading, research, patience and seeking guidance is the best way to approach or break into the market system. I have been inclined with CHRIS RYAN STEWART, a CFA whose experience and expertise speak for itself. I saw his take on risk management a couple of years back and I was amazed.
He has been the CFA responsible for my portfolio success, he operates a private client base you can confirm him yourself on the internet, regulation and all that.
I went on a tour of Germany a couple of months ago, and the tour guide mentioned that even foreign students could study at the University level for free given they had the appropriate visa. He mentioned that a lot of the STEM coursework was taught in English although knowledge of German would be required for some classes. The motivation was that the government hoped the students would stay and fill needed professional positions there.
American here studying in Germany! It’s about $200/year in university fees, plus living costs, plus 11,000€ in a blocked account (and foreigners aren’t eligible for student loans). I also had to learn German to a C1 level (about 2 years of 30 hours/week of learning German). It’s also still harder for me concerning the language. But doable!
It's funny I see this comment because just last week I was watching a video on foreign teachers trying to move to Germany but having to get to B2 in German language proficiency. It's good they provide this to attract students but it seems that the way they are going about it to get foreign labor is playing a bad hand on them.
I live by myself with my dog in an apartment I rent. I work hard to provide that for myself. It feels like a luxury to me to be able to do that for myself.. even with a decent job. Well 2 jobs lol but it’s so hard to watch my friends decide to live with family or room mates because otherwise they have to struggle so damn hard to make ends meet or they just can’t afford it. And what’s even harder is seeing single mothers work around the clock and barely be able to be around their kids because it’s too damn expensive even with “decent” paying jobs. Like this is the reality. We’re just trying to live a good and healthy life and its incredibly difficult even with good jobs
That idea of a college student buying a sweatshirt or textbooks and the money not feeling real because it's coming out of their student loans that they won't pay for for several years - I went to flight school to be an airline pilot and have racked up six figures of debt, of which the first figure isn't "1", in flight hours. I ended up unable to complete the program for medical reasons. I work in IT now, but I'm still saddled with the debt. It was so easy to just keep flying, borrow more when I needed it, keep going. There was ostensibly an incentive to study outside of the paid flight hours and save myself time in the plane but that just never happened. I never felt any pressure about the loans until I was out of school. Now, the pressure is immense. I should have been cut off long before I had to stop.
His argument about housing affordability only matches with reality if you switch "Wants to" with "have no other option" Gen Z doesn't want to own? Nonsense! There are fewer realistic options to own. So "house-hacking" (aka. Having roommates, subletting, etc.) is the only route to effective housing security. And as you can imagine, having your housing situation be dependent on the whims of an overabundance of room-mates is not particularly stable.
If the government wants more revenue, they can tax the rich more. Increase tax rates for investment sells, tax disbursements for borrowing from their own portfolios, tax appreciation for multiple property owners, tax art appreciation, etc. Student loan borrowers already pay taxes 🙄
him: "everything is about making good individual choices" Chelsea: *gestures broadly to all the shit everyday people are pressured by* him: well yeah that too, but debt!
Universities will raise tuition by a few grand pretty often. His argument on universities response to student loans is the same as conservatives take on why we shouldn't raise the minimum wage.
I'm listening to this on Spotify right now, and I dunno. His Parkinson's Law/induced demand comment is true I guess.... when your basic needs are already met. But a lot of people are out here not even getting basic needs met: it's not "out of control" to get an apartment for your single self instead of continuing to live with 5 roommates or feeling like you have to have a live in boyfriend to afford rent. Or being able to afford actual healthy foods and not just processed stuff. Have these people seen the cost of things like, grapes and strawberries?
Right?? He mentions massage tables and vacations. Bruh people are out here driving with no brake pads because they can’t afford the $600 to replace them.
So out of touch. Like the 10k raise thing really got me. Yes, it’s gonna be spent because with the cost of living and inflation we can’t keep up with basic needs so if we get a raise it’s already gonna go to needs and probably to help pay for debt accrued from not being able to meet those needs before the raise which means we still aren’t saving.. And massages are part of my wellness plan so I can show up in my job well. But, I sure the hell am not goin to go buy a massage chair first chance I get like wth
Eduational equity is probably much more cost effective to address far before the college level. We are very reactive as a nation when we need to become a lot more preventative in how we address so many of our social issues.
Exactly when I attended high-school in Illinois driver's education was a mandatory course BUTTTTT, when you took driver's ed you had to take personal finance along with it. That was what started my personal finance education. Years later I was shocked to hear from friends that this was not a nation wide requirement 😢
The “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality has been around a lot longer than the 1970’s. The quote is based on a comic that ran from 1913 to 1938. While I don’t agree 100% with Chelsea’s take on certain things, her comments definitely have more depth and are more carefully thought out than his. He seems to be a friendly “bootstraps” kind of guy. Dave Ramsey Lite. It has its place, I suppose, but it neglects a lot of people at the very bottom rungs of society for whom there is little hope to “envision” a better future.
This man said a whole lot of nothing throughout this entire hour. Reminded me of the interview Chelsea had with the minimalists. But go off queen, she gathered him
Doesn't what he describes at 20:30 already exist? I believe it's called an associates degree. 2-3 years and not tens of thousands of dollars. Especially at a community college. You can even get even get one in a subject that takes you in many directions if you're indecisive
They should make an even more realistic version of Monopoly that takes inherited land and capital into account across generations. Real life for most people in America is actually MUCH worse than the game where everyone starts out pretty much evenly and the rest is luck of the roll. It's actually like "the majority of players start out with nothing, a few start out with the cheapest properties with one house, and one starts out with all the best properties with hotels..." That's really how capitalism works in America.
His daughter will likely be pursuing a degree in higher ed, but he encourages his kids and others to find a way of creating value that doesn't need "the piece of paper"? Not sure about the coherence of his message here. About student loans he says, "The fact of the matter is...the universities might say...this might happen again at some point...my fear is if we go to the extreme we're devaluing our currency..." This is not a fact, and it is a fallacious slippery slope. The blindness to debt as a symptom, not a cause, which Chelsea straighten out politely (I thought), is yet another issue. I think a critical response to the misconceptions of this speaker is in order.
Yes, this, regarding the coherence of his message and his daughter’s pursuit of a higher ed degree. If I wasn’t already rolling my eyes at him, that would have sealed it for me. Higher ed is absurdly competitive and it’s extremely difficult to find a job teaching in higher ed that provides a sustainable living, especially in something like English which I believe is what he said his daughter is studying. It’s an over saturated profession and most positions are adjunct positions that pay crap and have very high demands. If you’re lucky you can find a lecturer position. Tenure track positions are very few and far between and require years of moving around, taking any position you can find that pay mostly below a living wage before you luck into something more stable. The fact that he points to that as a better option than middle school teaching shows the privilege of time and financial stability he is able to provide to his daughter to even allow her to consider such a pursuit. And of course she’ll finish her undergrad degree in only 3 years-they live in Iowa. Iowa has a system where high school kids can start taking college courses through their local community colleges for free in their junior years of high school which does cut down on overall cost of college and years spent in college. But of course, being able to take advantage of that and do well requires stability in the home. Good for her that she was able to take advantage of that-I don’t think that’s the norm nationwide, though it is a nice system here in Iowa for kids who can take advantage of it. In any case, he definitely came off as about as out of touch as Dave Ramsey when he talks about how his children weren’t raised with privilege and had to work their way up like anyone else. So many eye rolls at the things he had to say.
As someone who owns and had no issue with renting prior to buying, I think the idea of renting forever, like Chelsea said, is about options. I bought because I could. He seems to have a pure "get people out of debt" perspective, so he is going purely on the experiences of the people he works with. And we already know the majority of people who consume a lot of financial literacy media tend to have higher income and often its the behavior keeping them in debt. But the moment it turns towards systemic issues, they start spilling things that are nonsense because they just don't get it or dont beneath from getting it.
I would be happy renting forever (or for longer) if renting wasn't so unfair for the tenant. In my country the laws are very much in favour of landlords and you can't so much put a picture up without using those 3M strips, can't often own pets, can't paint, can't easily get on a periodic lease and are often at the mercy of the owner selling or putting up the rent aggressively. I have no idea how families that are low income or have kids in school cope with having to move rentals every couple of years.
I feel one of the big issues we have with property is that people who already own see it as an investment, and, of course, they always want to sell with max profit. (Chelsea mentions that people who retire need to offload their properties which I find a very interesting point.) People who are not able to afford purchasing these properties often speak of housing as a basic human right. But how are we going to align these two very different groups with very different views?
Regarding the four hour workweek.... we all bought the book to subsidize his 4 hours! People who make money tend to want to keep making money. I have yet to meet a rich person who was content with what they had. There is no such thing as a four hour work week.
It's always very interesting to me how people who live in the U.S. normalize the U.S. system without acknowledging or realizing that most other countries do not operate this way lol. Whether it is our debt system, college costs, labor rights, driving vs public transit, healthy food costs, etc... They make it sound like there is no other way or that no one else has thought about other ways to deal with these issues lol. In most cases, I think that people have lost faith in our political system (Chelsea mentioned lobbyists) so they believe that none of these issues will get resolved or truly addressed without outside influences pulling the puppet strings.
Chelsea… you’re better than me bc you handled that interview extremely well with your polite pushback throughout. For someone who did so much ‘research’ he is very out of touch with what’s actually going on in society. It seems he relies on thinly veiled conservative talking points to justify the haves and the have nots of our current system. Couldn’t believe some of the things he was kindly, but confidently saying.
The biggest issue is the profit incentive. Profit is sought in every industry from big to small firm. When we have a system like this, we need a large poor class of people to do the labor for the rich to extract the value.
I just read a book called Ninth Street Women which is about artists in NYC in the abstract expressionist movement. Most of them, for most of their careers, through the Great Depression and beyond, were dirt poor-like no hot running water, no heat in their studios, eating ketchup mixed with water at the automat. They did not lack a vision for retirement, they simply were driven for other purposes and had other passions and values. Moreover, the main reasons most of those artists survived, and that movement was able to even happen, were 2 government programs: the WPA and the GI Bill. Also, this notion that anyone can engineer any life without limits is mind-bogglingly out of touch and goes against all the evidence about poverty. And also disability. I found this guy remarkably glib and lacking any real structural understanding of wealth and poverty. Chelsea, on the other hand, seems to be getting more and more unapologetically radical, and I wish one could apply to be her friend, lol.
I'm sorry but this was just exhausting. It is feels almost gaslighty to suggest that people actually want to rent forever and live with 5 roommates as a trend? Like bro, it's called poverty. Let's start calling things poverty. also do these people really think that poor people are living the height of luxury off of debt!?!? People take out debt to give their kids slightly healthier food and get an education. You don't really want college loans to be cancelled, you don't really think people should have higher wages, and the best you think we can do as a society is try to get rich and then the few who make it might donate a little to the poor. I love how they always say these things as if it's not the same idea people have been pushing for decades if not centuries. What we need is actual social reform. Like kindly miss us with this nonsense. It's very unserious and we are tired.
Not really liking this guy's takes. Education should be based solely on merit, it's the state investing in the future so if education was free to anyone it would pay dividends decades later. Want more doctors and teachers in 5 years time? Then don't create a barrier to entry with student loans! Being saddled with debt puts people off going to college in the first place. And younger generations wanting to rent forever? Yeah right. It's only because that's what realistic for them to do given how ridiculous house prices are. If something feels impossible you won't aim for it.
On the topic of "lifestyle will increase to fit the money you have." I mean... sure. But, my dude, I know at least three different people who had to go on social media and beg for help buying food and paying rent. We're not talking about "raise income so that we can go on vacation." We're talking about "raise income so we don't have to choose between food and heating."
And another thing: the rise of credit cards also coincided with passage of the civil rights and voting rights acts, the passage of Medicaid and Medicare programs (and no national health insurance program mind you), women gaining financial freedom/ability to get bank accounts/credit cards, etc (in the 70s and 80s is when all of this was realized). So I doubt it's just credit cards being out there... it's the fact that so many people were not even close to being paid their value being able to finally participate fully in the economy and not having the head start that so many white males in this country have had. Let's not kid ourselves that the Don Drapers of the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s weren't playing Keeping Up With The Joneses.
I checked the website of the program he advertised on his hat. I could find NO information whatsoever on how much these services cost. That's all I needed to know to never want to use them.
He seems to confuse "lifestyle" with survival. On average, people don’t get multiple jobs to support the luxuries they want in life, they do it to survive. Some people are fools with their money, this much is true, but most are just trying to get by. Studio apartments these days go for upwards of $1000/m and landlords are renting out rooms instead of apartments at nearly the same cost. I’ve seen many listings saying you need to make triple the cost of rent in income to even apply. The price of groceries have gone up nearly double since the pandemic and basic healthcare is still inaccessible to the majority of the population. Even “middle class" families with good salaries, a home of their own, and healthy financial habits are living paycheck to paycheck these days.
Thanks for interviewing someone with a very clearly different point of view! The conversation was very interesting and stimulating. I admire how you both were able to express your beliefs respectfully and professionally!
So he basically admitted that he wants to make as much money as possible to have time to just hang out and also have a legacy name … ok, you want to be rich and famous for being charitable?! How novel and uninspiring
The issue with staying at a company long term is companies will put more money into hiring new employees as apposed to increasing the wages for the employees that have stayed with the companies. When state minimum wages increase the wages for the long term employees don't match the increase. I've worked for a few companies for years and when the starting wages for said company was equal to what I was getting paid after years of raises, hard work and dedication. My raises were not applied to the company starting wages, because I was already making the starting wage. There for if I wanted to get paid accordingly to my skill set and experience, I didn't have a choice but to change jobs in the same field. I believe that most employees if they're treated and paid fairly would be more likely to stay with the companies. If a tenured employee that has received let's say 7 raises being the companies that they should be paid for said raises after the starting wage increased. Example if starting wage is 16.75 an hr and tenured employee was already at said wages due to raises, of 3.50 for "company loyalty and increased experience. That employee should be paid 20.25 hr. But this doesn't happen, either employee if laid off or those said raises are not applied to employees wages because they're already making the starting wage.
I’m replying to my own comment here because I want to add that I liked Chelsea’s guest. And it seems that her lack of student debt and successful channel both underscore his stance on starting young people’s careers without a financial millstone around their necks. I hope she invites him back to delve into the concerns shared in the comment section!
Colleges and the government caused the student loan problem together. The US gov gave a loan to anyone who breathed, which allowed colleges to raise tuition exponentially as a result. Anyone could get a loan and it inflated everything.
While I hated hearing this person's views, it was motivating to hear opinions that I disagree with. I will maintain empathy for others and I will vote!
@@pmmakeup5316 that's the fault of the employer, not the degree. They can say "must have a bachelor's" because so many people have them. They shouldn't, usually, but they do.
Housing is a need. It is therefore not really controllable by free market (supply and demand). You will pay what you need to pay to have housing. Under rational conditions that would be called signing under duress. Which normally would be a reason to void a contract if it weren't housing or medical.
Agreed. It's so sad. We literally do sign under duress because we have no other choice. We HAVE to live somewhere - van life is awesome for a break but not a long-term solution. Rent control is vital. Nobody has the right to charge like this for rent or anything. 20% maximum of one's take home should be the upper limit, capped at a predetermined amount. There can be a separate class of luxury housing set aside from this but in general this should be the rule for dll standard rental housing. Other rental reforms are also necessary.
Really enjoyed him, but agree more with Chelsea lol The whole response of people will spend their whole paycheck no matter the amount they make as a response to wages needing to increase really misses the mark with me. It's false since many people who can afford to save manage to. But also spending your who paycheck and barely meeting you need (optimistically) and spending your whole paycheck and having a comfortable life is SOO much better and should be expected as bare min in a country as wealthy as ours.
"I definitely think that increasing the value of your own labor to more prioritize the value of your time is a really worthwhile endeavor, I just personally believe that that should not be at the expense of everyone else's value, y'know?" "Hmm...yeah...I get that...totally."
Who else was surprised to hear that student loans is the second largest pot of revenue for the US government? I genuinely did not realize that they monopolize it to that extent. Which then makes it make more sense why student loan forgiveness goes no where. It’s just posturing. Neither side have any real incentive to poke a hole in something that keeps the lights on for the gov’t. Literally makes me wonder what were the highest pools of revenue before student debt and the history of how our government has historically made money. Perhaps in understanding this we can figure out what to advocate as its replacement. Also interested in the way that revenue is disbursed.
I'm not sure if it's the largest, but a quick glance at tuition history shows tuitions stayed pretty low until the government stepped in. My mom paid her fall tuition every year with a check from money she made working over the summer as a waitress - approximately $300-400 a semester. They hit the nail on the head here with the comments about schools doing extra stuff like climbing walls to attract people - the schools can keep raising prices because the government is the loan backer and have no incentive to bring prices down.
46:00 this is an issue withnot having a systemic critique. Where does the "culture" of debt come from? Clue: this isnt a case of everyone just deciding to take on debt. It's a result of the system and the people who designed it. Same thing applies with his thing on Parkinson's law. Its entirely restricted to an individual level and ignores the system. There's a reason people in 2010 can take out 50k loans in the first place when in 1910 most normal people probably didn't have a bank account.
I wondered when he kept saying his team, his coworkers, really great workers were paid a 'livable wage', does that mean they are not thriving? He wants to be a philanthropist and not share profits with his 'team'?
i couldnt even make it to the end bc it felt so hopeless to listen to him…the housing bit killed me, sir in my town if you dont own the rent options are shit or slim and only apartments but still $$, tell me thats not outside of my control and a factor for why i rent but cant forever or dont want to. also didnt answer the Q at all! 😵💫
The cutting down on degree time I think is huge. I’ve said for YEARS that the first two years of college was like a repeat of high school; just a way to fleece more $
I’m astonished that someone thinks a 4 year degree could be boiled down to 2.5 years. Yes, higher education is supposed to do more than give you very specific information in your field, it’s suppose to teach you how to think critically and engage in the world. I’m in a science field and I have peers who don’t vote or care to get involved in their community. We need places that are dedicated to more than teaching people how to make money.
I'm late, but I wanted to say that I've worked in US higher ed for over a decade, and Chelsea hit the nail on the head when she was talking about the original purpose of uni. The og purpose was to learn as much as possible and be a well-rounded, knowledgable human. Then with the GI bill and baby boom, more people were able to go to college. Then we realized the correlation between having a degree and earning more on average. And at some point in there, someone had the bright idea to make colleges businesses, so then they're marketing to kids, who become customers instead of students. And then colleges become competition with each other instead of kind of supporting each other in the community. And at some point during this process, the birth rate starts to decline, so marketing has to become more aggressive for the business model to work. The problem with American higher ed is not that people have to learn things outside their major. The major problem is that it's run as a business, which is in direct conflict with the actual historical purpose of uni. We do spend on amenities like student support services that other countries do not, but in my experience, those people are not the ones making bank. The last giant problem is athletics. Allegedly athletic budgets are self-sufficient, but that's not always the case-- it was recently uncovered that a coach were I work was getting hundreds of thousands in extra benefits (like a car allowance) from the actual university. Meanwhile a lot of us who care about actually educating students are adjunct profs or low-level staff who are struggling to make ends meet and whose departments are barely able to cover office supplies.
Hearing that the US government gets so much of its income from interest is horrifying. It feels like a misplaced tax. It penalises people that get jobs with lower incomes. The people that get high paying jobs will pay the least interest. It’s an unbalanced allocation of the budget. It worsens the quality of life of most of these people.
You guys have to fight for accessible higher education. Protest the endless, unpayable loans. Look up what happened in 2012 in Quebec regarding education costs and get inspired!
He makes it seem like the important difference was that they were using real money to play instead of Monopoly money, but that money wasn't even really in play anyways since they didn't get to keep it. To me it seems like their game play was different because there were real financial stakes (winner gets $40), not because they played with real bills. Which echoes what Chelsea was saying about people playing Texas Hold 'Em differently when there's actual money at stake. Not even 15 minutes in and I'm already annoyed with this guy.
Your rant that starts about 22 minutes in is everything people should be upset about in modern America. That’s the conversation we have in my circle and I love to see it here. ❤
For our country, we should have courses on finance basics embedded in our education system; if we had a country full of folks who have some financial wisdom….maybe we wouldn’t have such volatile economic periods like the one we’re in now (I mean the govt should get it together too! They aren’t off the hook!)or just be prepared for emergencies. I wish as a young college (1st generation Latina) student I would’ve opened up a mutual fund, save here and there and allowed money to sit and grow, I’d be in a different financial situation……but….there ya go, you live and learn.
I really enjoyed Chelsea's response to the four hour work week. I asked students their favorite books in class the other day, and had a similar reaction to someone touting "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."
What an episode. I was bugged about the comment about student loans. Adam did point out that the Federal Gov makes a lot of money on student loan interest, about 6.5% per year from direct loans which ends up being $70-80 billion (this info is available on Dept. of Ed. Annual Financial Report). So the Federal Gov has not incentive to cancel student loan debt. But I strongly disagree with his take that wages should go up in order to solve the debt/student loan debt issue. Private and public companies have no reason to raise wages for workers nor provide any additional benefits to general population. Companies aim to increase their own value. That is why it is the federal government's job to support the people, but circle back to the above. Long story short, graduates are left in the dust for student loan debt. I just disagree with Adam that companies are supposed to save the people, not the government. In no scenario will companies attempt to save anyone but themselves. And why its important to keep pressuring the and electing a government that will actually help people. Complacency and status quo are still a net loss for the U.S.
There is no force pushing prices down. "competition" isn't a market force it's a cost of doing business, able to be planned around and subverted. Regulation and oversight are the only things that hold a chance of allowing a future where americans can reliably purchase what they're looking for safely and at a reasonable cost. De-regulation and privatization is genuinely going to kill at minimum hundreds of thousands over the coming years unless this turns around. "It's the court's opinion that the damage done to your son was not the fault of the Nestle corporation, but rather the subcontractor Nestle hired. Said subcontractor falsely claimed to be a licensed employer while secretly dying and employing "oompa-loompa" child slave labor. Despite Nestle's non-complicity in your child's years of crippling manual servitude, and as part of a charity program mandated by another case; Nestle would like to provide one year's supply of its new Oompa-bars. Let the record show that the court find's Nestle's offerings to look delicious." *gavel noises*
You had an incredibly rich woman who had written a book on for one of the earliest seasons of this series. I cant remember her name. This is like listening to the male equivalent. So out of touch it's almost unbelievable. Unrelated: My biggest question about student loans would be: What happens to all of the people who had to financially suffer for decades to pay them off, who would no longer qualify for loan forgiveness?
This guest was incredibly out of touch and misinformed. He keeps talking about choices when so many of his examples are of people in systems designed for one outcome. We were barely adilts, lied to about the value of college. You *have* to have a credit score to get a loan for a house. We jave no safety nets so who's to say another pandemic wont radically reshape how we can live? I tried looking up his claim about the government and student loans. The vast majority still comes from personal income and business tax, I dont know where he got thay idea. Im also insulted that he implied the money we got during the pandemic was a problem when so many corporations abused ppe loans ans overinflated prices.
Power increases when you’re the ultra rich. No several people should have that power and exploit the people. But people dream about being rich and powerful
she made a great point dismanteling what he claimed previously, he made a 'charming comment' and told a story about his grandfather, making the moment of her great point entirely about him, who now has become "sort of part of it" via his grandfather and not adressing any of her points.
His comments just reek capitalism but with compassion. Screw that. He is not addressing system issues. Thank goodness workers are organizing an demanding more because our elected officials are bought off by the same forces that refuse for the system to change.
Promoting austerity as a solution to rising education costs is going to be a tough sell. The bar has already been set, millions of people have 4 year degrees or higher, do you really expect that you can just tell the employers of the world to lower their expectations, associates is the new bachelors, bachelors is the new masters, etc. Especially when, as Chelsea pointed out, college is free or cheap in nearly every developed nation, and they did not need to lower standards or time in school to do that. Also, given how inequitable funding for high school is in this country with some students receiving great educations with college-level classes while students at other schools barely read at grade level, the idea of stripping away gen-ed college credits is scary. Reminds me of all the engineering freshmen who genuinely feel as though history and writing classes are useless and have nothing to do with their degree. God help us lol.
42:15 This guy is so out of touch. Gen Zers don't "house hack" with 5 roommates because they don't want to own a home, it's because that's the only way any of them can afford to live in a home. Boomers said the same thing about millennials years ago. It's sad to see that this take still persists.
Yeah, he made it seem like they just changed their minds about wanting to own a home 😂
Was just about to come down here and say the same thing. My partner and I just recently had a discussion about this exact topic and the bull**** around people saying that younger generations are "choosing to rent".
WE WANT TO OWN A HOME.
We do not rent "by choice". We rent because post-grad wages are stagnant. To seriously suggest we rent by choice and would rather have "access" than "ownership" is just laughable. I did not chose to have everything in my life be a f****** subscription. I'll be damned if I am going to let someone tell me to be okay with something that should be a basic human right being a subscription.
@@gyll4201and his response to Chelsea's question about stagnant wages was some BS about "Parkinson's law." This guy can't be serious. 😂
@@voicedbirdAbsolutely. Parkinson's "Law" is not applicable when basic needs are not being met with the lower wage. If you are underhoused or have no car or no health insurance, a wage increase is not going to a fucking massage chair. What a clown.
It's very hard for me to believe he'd find "house hacking" a viable option for his own children...
I love Chelsea brought up staying in a career long term. My husband has been with his company 23 years and plans to retire from his company. He has no degree and makes six figures. He has an amazing work ethic and he has gotten promotions and raises over the years which has helped him to be able to stay in his job. He works for an employee owned company and he gets 8% of his pay in stocks which has helped us save for retirement faster too. He will be able to retire at 61 years old comfortably. This is definitely not the norm in today’s society.
"He works for an employee owned company and he gets 8% of his pay in stocks which has helped us save for retirement."
This is the key part of that equation, and something most people on the planet will never have access to.
I agree with the idea of finding an industry and sticking with it for your career. Eventually you learn the “tricks of the trade” and become really valuable. Plus there is a social/emotional component working with the same people for years.
This is why I stay in state jobs. They match 6% in retirement. So I have 12% in the pension. The I put an extra 10% Into the 401k. It’s the only way I can retire. I should be able to retire if I can keep my whole career in state jobs. Luckily there are tons. I’ve moved all around the school district the last 7 years. Once my kids are grown I’ll find a high paying state job to throw more money into retirement.
It is for white men 🙄 They can be mediocre or not have degrees and do just fine.
You do know that all can change tomorrow in today's world, right?
Re: The argument against wiping out student loans. He makes the case that universities will just use that as an excuse to raise their rates, but they're already doing that under a system in which they're guaranteed a captive audience that cannot contest or escape from their payments as it is. As the system stands right now, they have no incentive to keep costs under control, much less low, and it shows.
I mean the obvious answer is to stop guaranteeing loans at the federal level. Or at the very least having a maximum time or maximum pay back level. If you've paid back the cost of your principle in interest+ inflation then there's no reason for you to have to continue paying. Maybe that's too generous but it's certainly true that neither the government nor the universities should be able to continue collecting interest indefinitely just because someone is unable to pay at a rate high enough to exceed the accrual of interest. It's usurious and exploitative.
Exactly. Also, trends are already starting to show that fewer teens are going to choose to go to a four-year college/university over the next decade or so due to the exorbitant cost and their decision not to take on a substantial amount of debt. If anything, most schools that have inflated tuition rates will be forced to lower them. We're already seeing it happen with schools like Colby-Sawyer. I'm not sure what information he's basing his theory on...
My friend, is grandfather runs for Governor, I believe that, even if he tried, he simply cannot understand the struggles of normal people, let alone the struggles of people who grown without connection and background wealth
@IshtarNike YES!!! This is 1000% the answer. For the current crisis, blanket forgiveness isn't it. But adopting this and applying it would be way to go. As for the future, reform has to happen. Like you said, colleges will keep price gauging if the government keeps "backing" the loans. The government needs to call the bs and stop allowing them to raise prices higher and higher and higher; I mean, an institution can still do it but they wouldn't qualify for *any* government loans. Kinda like hospitals... if they don't make certain concessions they won't get medicaid money (or something like that). Either institutions play ball or their students have to come up with private loans.
As an European watching this it is absolutely baffling to me how the guest argument was not “I pretend more from my government and from the taxes I pay because this is how society should be built” instead he is essentially saying “this is the deal just go out and be more entrepreneurial about it” or “Just read this inspiring book I WROTE on how to architect your life and think big, take risks.” I am stunned. What risks can i person take more than be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt betting on a university degree that does not guarantee you anything in the current state of the world?
right? i'm from Portugal and felt the exact same. this man is just here to make a self promotional add
Most people don't take out that many loans. Also, if you come from a poor background you tend to get more help in the form of government grants towards college and it doesn't need to be paid back. Also, you can go to a school that is free like SUNY/CUNY in New York City. There are other options besides taking out $100,000 in debt. Some Universities are fairly affordable and you can work while you go to school and save up for it too. However, I agree we need to make it more affordable.
this is a reductionist and delusional take on the options american students have, the commenters above are correct - and yes, I was born and live in the US@@mmatosac
I'm pretty sure you're a Russian troll.@@lfriasurzua
@@mmatosac I've taught at those institutions. For someone who is poor, these are far from affordable options.
Bless Chelsea for pushing back on his b.s.
The thing that I really struggle with in “Envisioning my future self” is that it assumes a level of stability that I just don’t think is reasonable. If I think about how much has changed just in the two decades I’ve been alive, combined with climate change and the rapid growth of new tech like the internet, I have a really hard time imagining what my life might be like by the time I reach retirement age.
It’s not just that people are defeatest and nihilistic, it’s that we are afraid. We see crazy stuff happen to people all around us, people who didn’t make the wrong choice, or who had no control in massive disasters and upheaval. So it’s hard to sit down and make a sensible plan for the future when everything around us is so nonsensical.
I don’t like the implication that young people don’t think about the future. For many of us it looms in our mind like an impenetrable storm that rushes toward us. That’s not to say we shouldn’t try to make smart moves and think through financial decisions, just that it’s difficult and that the difficulty is not simply some irresponsible pleasure seeking.
Don’t stress too much I’m sure the people who lived through world war 2 thought life was pretty fucked and the future looked bleak
Exactly 🙌
@@rory644 I mean sure but a lot of lives were lost and ruined by an event like that. And I’ll bet some of those people had sensible financial plans laid out that were obliterated by something outside their control. At the end of the day you just make the best call you can, but it feels foolish to just assume everything is going to stay exactly like it is currently set up over the next 50-70 years
I thought he raised some interesting points but I feel like the backbone of his argument still boils down to “Debt is Original Sin and Avocado toast is the apple”. He has a more compassionate tone but it still sounds like Dave Ramsey’s brand of “Personal Responsibility will save us all”
I’m just getting very libertarian vibes that always end up tied in a knot between not wanting to involve the government but wanting some magical force to come in and adjust the economy for everyone…
And expecting the worse in people with him practically saying that raising wages wouldn't help people. Just make them spend more, insinuating poor spending habits in those having money troubles vs them NOT HAVING A LIVABLE WAGE
Personal responsibility may not be able to save all of us but many would have the ability to live comfortably if they controlled their spending. There’s a different RUclips channel that gives people financial audits and it shows that even when they are making great money they tend to lack the control to spend within their means with constant trips, eating out excessively, etc which in turn snowballs them into credit card debts. All you see on things like TikTok is just the complaining side of things where it’s blamed on everything except themselves. It’s easy to play the victim online when it’s actually only half of the story.
The biggest thing about these people is that they are fundamentally unable to offer a systemic critique, ONLY being able to understand broad societal problems through the narrow lenses of the status quo and the individual.
The concepts of exploitation, or of systemic progress are not even things that they register.
"Avocado toast in an apple" LOL
He really seems to be at a disconnect with what’s actually happening and why, or at least what’s happening to people who aren’t like him, well-off Gen Xers.
don't worry, the economic reality will eventually hit the so called "well off"
top 1% eating everyone will eventually start eating the top 10%
“I want to be wealthy to do charity in my family’s name” is some of the weirdest logic ever. I get wanting to do charity, of course, but why for glory? And why not be more involved in reform so that the government can provide the social services that are lacking that require charity to exist in the first place? I don’t know man, sometimes people go viral on TikTok and that’s just all there is to them. I’m glad Chelsea pushed back as politely as possible. My favorite was “gilded age philanthropy” which is truly a brilliant burn.
@elenakalliste, 💯 it’s giving effective altruism
It's still charity. No one has to give away money, so I personally don't care what the motivation is.
Maybe because using the government power requires force?
In studies, less wealthy people give more to charity as a part of their income and wealth. So middle class people give more than billionaires. Plus the uber-wealthy like to want their names on buildings
Plus actual charity doesn't require being wealthy.
He sidesteps questions like a politician.
It runs in the family (he mentions his grandpa campaigning for Governor)
@@AlexandriatheRedfrom what he said, i think his grandpa wouldve been a pretty dope governer
OMG! I was just coming to say something similar
Yeah, I was thinking that when he brought up his grandfather. It felt like he just brought up his grandfathers achievements and said he’s had this conversation before, but didn’t say what his opinion was
Hi Chelsea (one of your few guy listeners). Thanks for sticking to your guns. It's tough to be poor, Ive seen it firsthand. I think its easy to blame people without money for the financial situation they are in. When in reality its really hard to get out of poverty and takes alot of work and I think some people would rather not loose friendships/family relationships just to be rich. In some ways I think people without alot of money are really rich in the things that matter and some rich people don't see that and are quick to judge. Its easy to make money when you have money. At some point I think some people just realize how hard it is to become rich and just start to appreciate the things they have around them, and there is nothing wrong with that. That being said people should not be struggling to live. We are the richest country in the world and so many of us live in constant financial fear/poverty. People need to be paid fairly for their work (bring back labor unions).
This guys answer to houses are too expensive is to say younger people don’t want to own they want to rent. Like gtfo, why do you think people rather rent than buy…
His answer to ‘what advice do you have for those who can’t envisage their future?’ is ‘envisage your future’.
This really reveals how a confident white man can achieve so much without having anything to offer.
It’s one step above “reach for the stars”.
He did sound like someone who has had a lot of things come easily to him and not at all like someone who has had to work under an unfair system that pretends its a meritocracy...
Something something bootstraps was all I heard
Looool right?
Because the last 10 years were predictable, and not just one string of absolutely chaotic nonsense.
I was just having a conversation with a friend of mine about how people in upper management (c-suite) talk about donating money/philanthropy, yet they have poor working conditions for their workers or sub-par wages. It's just funny to me how they "say" they want to make a difference, but there are poeple in their companies who they can have a direct positive effect on. It strikes me more that they want the greater society and media to think they are good people, but don't care about how they treat the actual people in their lives lol. They sometimes sum it up to getting dirty(walking over people) and having a good work ethic for the greater good loll The irony is sadly beautiful
Considering he wraps up that comment with how he wants to make Carroll a grand name everyone knows, yeah, I'd agree. It's the same mentality I had in elementary when asked what I wanted to do. It had everything to do with notoriety and nothing to do with actually improving anything. It's a fundamentally selfish want, no matter how nicely it's packaged.
I just wanted to add my little two cents on 4 year (or more…I worked and took time off) Bachelor’s degrees. I actually have found that the random electives I was required to take have vastly helped me in my life. The art history, anthropology, and linguistics have helped me better understand other cultures and language and increase my joy when at a museum (and ire, because anthropology 😅). I don’t even work in my main focus of my degree, biology, so all the essays I had to write in those arts courses have come to be great help me in my job today! BUT!! - I did my degree in Canada, lived at home, and went to university locally, so it was not particularly expensive.
Lol the clases I appreciate the most from my bachelor's degree are not part of my degree. My sociology of the family and intro to psychology (which I eventually majored in from business administration) were my favorite classes.
I wasn't sure what i wanted to major in and i took some psych classes in first year and i wanted to help people so i majored in psychology and i have my honours ba in psychology now. kind of hard to do anything with just a ba in psych but i loved my education and i know i still have lots of time to find my career.@@CaraMarie13
I agree with this take, and it’s something I mention all the time as my biggest take away from going to college despite not getting a degree. That said, it still shouldn’t be so expensive to obtain that knowledge. Personally I wouldn’t mind if the 4 year degrees that include electives stuck around as an option but it being mandatory can make the already high price tag that much more daunting.
This. I would have been one of the lemmings to the sea if not for my electives. And what keeps me going to a 9 to 5 I don't enjoy is the things I earned in those electives.
I took a class that was outside my major about the design of the world and how to design a world thats friendlier to everyone, now I have a son with cerebral palsy and put it into practice every day to advocate for him and create a home / space that he can navigate as well as our other son.
Really appreciate Chelsea pushing back against the guest's constant focus on personal choice. Even if he's not invoking avocado toast in every argument, I'm still seeing this frustrating insistence on individuals making bad, frivolous choices. Maybe I live in a very different social bubble than this guy, but none of my 30-something friends are talking about buying luxury cars or whatever whenever we get a little extra money.
Right as if any of us could have perfectly planned our life around the two recessions we've been in, a pandemic, inflation, housing costs being almost unaffordable, etc.
If we lose public eduation our society is really going to suffer.
As much as I would like to keep watching Chelsea continue politely calling out this man’s BS, life is too short to waste it on BS.
In order to stay afloat financially and avoid debt, it is very vital and important to have a longterm financial plan. Personally, I work with a fixed income planner and portfolio manager in the USA.
This is very true! A lot of people downplay the role of a financial planner until burnt by their mistakes. After my last job layoff, I had to stay afloat, hence researched for licensed fiduciary advisors. Thankfully, I came across someone of practical knowledge and experience. My reserve fund of $75k has yielded nearly $370k after subsequent investments.
It is challenging to create a strong financial portfolio therefore it would be wise to get much needed assistance from a real finance professional. You can then receive strategies that are specifically suited to your long term objectives and financial goals.
Insightful. I need some advice on how to rebuild my portfolio and develop successful market tactics. Where can I find this professional portfolio manager?
Reading, research, patience and seeking guidance is the best way to approach or break into the market system. I have been inclined with CHRIS RYAN STEWART, a CFA whose experience and expertise speak for itself. I saw his take on risk management a couple of years back and I was amazed.
He has been the CFA responsible for my portfolio success, he operates a private client base you can confirm him yourself on the internet, regulation and all that.
I went on a tour of Germany a couple of months ago, and the tour guide mentioned that even foreign students could study at the University level for free given they had the appropriate visa. He mentioned that a lot of the STEM coursework was taught in English although knowledge of German would be required for some classes. The motivation was that the government hoped the students would stay and fill needed professional positions there.
American here studying in Germany! It’s about $200/year in university fees, plus living costs, plus 11,000€ in a blocked account (and foreigners aren’t eligible for student loans). I also had to learn German to a C1 level (about 2 years of 30 hours/week of learning German). It’s also still harder for me concerning the language. But doable!
It's funny I see this comment because just last week I was watching a video on foreign teachers trying to move to Germany but having to get to B2 in German language proficiency. It's good they provide this to attract students but it seems that the way they are going about it to get foreign labor is playing a bad hand on them.
I live by myself with my dog in an apartment I rent. I work hard to provide that for myself. It feels like a luxury to me to be able to do that for myself.. even with a decent job. Well 2 jobs lol but it’s so hard to watch my friends decide to live with family or room mates because otherwise they have to struggle so damn hard to make ends meet or they just can’t afford it. And what’s even harder is seeing single mothers work around the clock and barely be able to be around their kids because it’s too damn expensive even with “decent” paying jobs. Like this is the reality. We’re just trying to live a good and healthy life and its incredibly difficult even with good jobs
That idea of a college student buying a sweatshirt or textbooks and the money not feeling real because it's coming out of their student loans that they won't pay for for several years - I went to flight school to be an airline pilot and have racked up six figures of debt, of which the first figure isn't "1", in flight hours.
I ended up unable to complete the program for medical reasons. I work in IT now, but I'm still saddled with the debt. It was so easy to just keep flying, borrow more when I needed it, keep going. There was ostensibly an incentive to study outside of the paid flight hours and save myself time in the plane but that just never happened. I never felt any pressure about the loans until I was out of school. Now, the pressure is immense. I should have been cut off long before I had to stop.
His argument about housing affordability only matches with reality if you switch "Wants to" with "have no other option"
Gen Z doesn't want to own? Nonsense! There are fewer realistic options to own. So "house-hacking" (aka. Having roommates, subletting, etc.) is the only route to effective housing security. And as you can imagine, having your housing situation be dependent on the whims of an overabundance of room-mates is not particularly stable.
If the government wants more revenue, they can tax the rich more. Increase tax rates for investment sells, tax disbursements for borrowing from their own portfolios, tax appreciation for multiple property owners, tax art appreciation, etc. Student loan borrowers already pay taxes 🙄
👏👏👏👏👏👏
Hahaha. You don't know the first thing about money, do you?
him: "everything is about making good individual choices"
Chelsea: *gestures broadly to all the shit everyday people are pressured by*
him: well yeah that too, but debt!
Universities will raise tuition by a few grand pretty often. His argument on universities response to student loans is the same as conservatives take on why we shouldn't raise the minimum wage.
I'm listening to this on Spotify right now, and I dunno. His Parkinson's Law/induced demand comment is true I guess.... when your basic needs are already met. But a lot of people are out here not even getting basic needs met: it's not "out of control" to get an apartment for your single self instead of continuing to live with 5 roommates or feeling like you have to have a live in boyfriend to afford rent. Or being able to afford actual healthy foods and not just processed stuff. Have these people seen the cost of things like, grapes and strawberries?
Right?? He mentions massage tables and vacations. Bruh people are out here driving with no brake pads because they can’t afford the $600 to replace them.
So out of touch. Like the 10k raise thing really got me. Yes, it’s gonna be spent because with the cost of living and inflation we can’t keep up with basic needs so if we get a raise it’s already gonna go to needs and probably to help pay for debt accrued from not being able to meet those needs before the raise which means we still aren’t saving.. And massages are part of my wellness plan so I can show up in my job well. But, I sure the hell am not goin to go buy a massage chair first chance I get like wth
Yeah, I understood he meant that the principle is true once your basic needs have been met.
Eduational equity is probably much more cost effective to address far before the college level. We are very reactive as a nation when we need to become a lot more preventative in how we address so many of our social issues.
Exactly when I attended high-school in Illinois driver's education was a mandatory course BUTTTTT, when you took driver's ed you had to take personal finance along with it. That was what started my personal finance education.
Years later I was shocked to hear from friends that this was not a nation wide requirement 😢
Loved this! Such a great conversation and necessary to have. Also, thank you Chelsea for being honest with the guest in standing up for labor rights.
I'm very surprised at how amikable this conversation is considering this guest's opinions. Chelsea is truly the classiest.
Thank you for your comments regarding labor rights! Couldn't agree more.
Chelsea won that friendly debate in my opinion!
Guest was a clown. So disconnected from reality.
I do not feel that debates have to have a winner but I enjoy listening to different points of views.
The “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality has been around a lot longer than the 1970’s. The quote is based on a comic that ran from 1913 to 1938.
While I don’t agree 100% with Chelsea’s take on certain things, her comments definitely have more depth and are more carefully thought out than his. He seems to be a friendly “bootstraps” kind of guy. Dave Ramsey Lite. It has its place, I suppose, but it neglects a lot of people at the very bottom rungs of society for whom there is little hope to “envision” a better future.
This man said a whole lot of nothing throughout this entire hour. Reminded me of the interview Chelsea had with the minimalists. But go off queen, she gathered him
Doesn't what he describes at 20:30 already exist?
I believe it's called an associates degree.
2-3 years and not tens of thousands of dollars. Especially at a community college. You can even get even get one in a subject that takes you in many directions if you're indecisive
yeah like we dont need to change a bachalors, just get rid of it and make the associates whats required instead
It's so depressing how Monopoly was created to teach us how bad capitalism is and then it just became the gateway drug.
They should make an even more realistic version of Monopoly that takes inherited land and capital into account across generations. Real life for most people in America is actually MUCH worse than the game where everyone starts out pretty much evenly and the rest is luck of the roll. It's actually like "the majority of players start out with nothing, a few start out with the cheapest properties with one house, and one starts out with all the best properties with hotels..." That's really how capitalism works in America.
His daughter will likely be pursuing a degree in higher ed, but he encourages his kids and others to find a way of creating value that doesn't need "the piece of paper"? Not sure about the coherence of his message here.
About student loans he says, "The fact of the matter is...the universities might say...this might happen again at some point...my fear is if we go to the extreme we're devaluing our currency..." This is not a fact, and it is a fallacious slippery slope.
The blindness to debt as a symptom, not a cause, which Chelsea straighten out politely (I thought), is yet another issue. I think a critical response to the misconceptions of this speaker is in order.
Yes, this, regarding the coherence of his message and his daughter’s pursuit of a higher ed degree. If I wasn’t already rolling my eyes at him, that would have sealed it for me. Higher ed is absurdly competitive and it’s extremely difficult to find a job teaching in higher ed that provides a sustainable living, especially in something like English which I believe is what he said his daughter is studying. It’s an over saturated profession and most positions are adjunct positions that pay crap and have very high demands. If you’re lucky you can find a lecturer position. Tenure track positions are very few and far between and require years of moving around, taking any position you can find that pay mostly below a living wage before you luck into something more stable. The fact that he points to that as a better option than middle school teaching shows the privilege of time and financial stability he is able to provide to his daughter to even allow her to consider such a pursuit. And of course she’ll finish her undergrad degree in only 3 years-they live in Iowa. Iowa has a system where high school kids can start taking college courses through their local community colleges for free in their junior years of high school which does cut down on overall cost of college and years spent in college. But of course, being able to take advantage of that and do well requires stability in the home. Good for her that she was able to take advantage of that-I don’t think that’s the norm nationwide, though it is a nice system here in Iowa for kids who can take advantage of it. In any case, he definitely came off as about as out of touch as Dave Ramsey when he talks about how his children weren’t raised with privilege and had to work their way up like anyone else. So many eye rolls at the things he had to say.
Hold on, the claim that student loan interest is the second biggest revenue source for the federal government isn’t remotely true.
As someone who owns and had no issue with renting prior to buying, I think the idea of renting forever, like Chelsea said, is about options. I bought because I could. He seems to have a pure "get people out of debt" perspective, so he is going purely on the experiences of the people he works with. And we already know the majority of people who consume a lot of financial literacy media tend to have higher income and often its the behavior keeping them in debt. But the moment it turns towards systemic issues, they start spilling things that are nonsense because they just don't get it or dont beneath from getting it.
I would be happy renting forever (or for longer) if renting wasn't so unfair for the tenant. In my country the laws are very much in favour of landlords and you can't so much put a picture up without using those 3M strips, can't often own pets, can't paint, can't easily get on a periodic lease and are often at the mercy of the owner selling or putting up the rent aggressively. I have no idea how families that are low income or have kids in school cope with having to move rentals every couple of years.
I feel one of the big issues we have with property is that people who already own see it as an investment, and, of course, they always want to sell with max profit. (Chelsea mentions that people who retire need to offload their properties which I find a very interesting point.) People who are not able to afford purchasing these properties often speak of housing as a basic human right. But how are we going to align these two very different groups with very different views?
Regarding the four hour workweek.... we all bought the book to subsidize his 4 hours! People who make money tend to want to keep making money. I have yet to meet a rich person who was content with what they had. There is no such thing as a four hour work week.
It's always very interesting to me how people who live in the U.S. normalize the U.S. system without acknowledging or realizing that most other countries do not operate this way lol. Whether it is our debt system, college costs, labor rights, driving vs public transit, healthy food costs, etc... They make it sound like there is no other way or that no one else has thought about other ways to deal with these issues lol. In most cases, I think that people have lost faith in our political system (Chelsea mentioned lobbyists) so they believe that none of these issues will get resolved or truly addressed without outside influences pulling the puppet strings.
Capitalist realism to its logical extreme
He avoided so many questions to bring it back to college planning and mentioning university admins he talked to. Not a lot of value there
I'm only 20 minutes in and this guy is dodging so well he should be in sports.
He just talks to get paid. Seems like a huge hypocrite and grifter.
He dodged every point he didn't have an answer for with a condescending pat on Chelsea's head. "Aw my grandpa would love you, bless your heart" 🤮
Chelsea… you’re better than me bc you handled that interview extremely well with your polite pushback throughout. For someone who did so much ‘research’ he is very out of touch with what’s actually going on in society. It seems he relies on thinly veiled conservative talking points to justify the haves and the have nots of our current system. Couldn’t believe some of the things he was kindly, but confidently saying.
The biggest issue is the profit incentive. Profit is sought in every industry from big to small firm. When we have a system like this, we need a large poor class of people to do the labor for the rich to extract the value.
He talks about inflation as if it hasn't been a global phenomenon. It's not just the USA, buddy.
I just read a book called Ninth Street Women which is about artists in NYC in the abstract expressionist movement. Most of them, for most of their careers, through the Great Depression and beyond, were dirt poor-like no hot running water, no heat in their studios, eating ketchup mixed with water at the automat. They did not lack a vision for retirement, they simply were driven for other purposes and had other passions and values. Moreover, the main reasons most of those artists survived, and that movement was able to even happen, were 2 government programs: the WPA and the GI Bill.
Also, this notion that anyone can engineer any life without limits is mind-bogglingly out of touch and goes against all the evidence about poverty. And also disability. I found this guy remarkably glib and lacking any real structural understanding of wealth and poverty. Chelsea, on the other hand, seems to be getting more and more unapologetically radical, and I wish one could apply to be her friend, lol.
I'm sorry but this was just exhausting. It is feels almost gaslighty to suggest that people actually want to rent forever and live with 5 roommates as a trend? Like bro, it's called poverty. Let's start calling things poverty. also do these people really think that poor people are living the height of luxury off of debt!?!? People take out debt to give their kids slightly healthier food and get an education. You don't really want college loans to be cancelled, you don't really think people should have higher wages, and the best you think we can do as a society is try to get rich and then the few who make it might donate a little to the poor. I love how they always say these things as if it's not the same idea people have been pushing for decades if not centuries. What we need is actual social reform. Like kindly miss us with this nonsense. It's very unserious and we are tired.
I’ve been watching for 6 years and never remember hearing all these Chelsea gambling stories from the intro (childhood and adult).
Not really liking this guy's takes. Education should be based solely on merit, it's the state investing in the future so if education was free to anyone it would pay dividends decades later. Want more doctors and teachers in 5 years time? Then don't create a barrier to entry with student loans! Being saddled with debt puts people off going to college in the first place.
And younger generations wanting to rent forever? Yeah right. It's only because that's what realistic for them to do given how ridiculous house prices are. If something feels impossible you won't aim for it.
On the topic of "lifestyle will increase to fit the money you have." I mean... sure. But, my dude, I know at least three different people who had to go on social media and beg for help buying food and paying rent. We're not talking about "raise income so that we can go on vacation." We're talking about "raise income so we don't have to choose between food and heating."
And another thing: the rise of credit cards also coincided with passage of the civil rights and voting rights acts, the passage of Medicaid and Medicare programs (and no national health insurance program mind you), women gaining financial freedom/ability to get bank accounts/credit cards, etc (in the 70s and 80s is when all of this was realized). So I doubt it's just credit cards being out there... it's the fact that so many people were not even close to being paid their value being able to finally participate fully in the economy and not having the head start that so many white males in this country have had. Let's not kid ourselves that the Don Drapers of the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s weren't playing Keeping Up With The Joneses.
Him talking about Tim Ferris' 4hour Work week as a source of influence is so telling . Ferris is a phenomenal grifter.
Omg Chelsea's very unexpected response at 21:50 hahahaha - love this gal so much!! Always sees to the heart of the real economic issue at hand.
I checked the website of the program he advertised on his hat. I could find NO information whatsoever on how much these services cost. That's all I needed to know to never want to use them.
Also, why are schools ratcheting up tuition fees? It's not going to teaching positions. That's what needs to be questioned.
He seems to confuse "lifestyle" with survival. On average, people don’t get multiple jobs to support the luxuries they want in life, they do it to survive. Some people are fools with their money, this much is true, but most are just trying to get by. Studio apartments these days go for upwards of $1000/m and landlords are renting out rooms instead of apartments at nearly the same cost. I’ve seen many listings saying you need to make triple the cost of rent in income to even apply. The price of groceries have gone up nearly double since the pandemic and basic healthcare is still inaccessible to the majority of the population. Even “middle class" families with good salaries, a home of their own, and healthy financial habits are living paycheck to paycheck these days.
Thanks for interviewing someone with a very clearly different point of view! The conversation was very interesting and stimulating. I admire how you both were able to express your beliefs respectfully and professionally!
One of my favourite TFC episodes so far, great job TFD Team 😃
So he basically admitted that he wants to make as much money as possible to have time to just hang out and also have a legacy name … ok, you want to be rich and famous for being charitable?! How novel and uninspiring
The issue with staying at a company long term is companies will put more money into hiring new employees as apposed to increasing the wages for the employees that have stayed with the companies. When state minimum wages increase the wages for the long term employees don't match the increase. I've worked for a few companies for years and when the starting wages for said company was equal to what I was getting paid after years of raises, hard work and dedication. My raises were not applied to the company starting wages, because I was already making the starting wage. There for if I wanted to get paid accordingly to my skill set and experience, I didn't have a choice but to change jobs in the same field. I believe that most employees if they're treated and paid fairly would be more likely to stay with the companies. If a tenured employee that has received let's say 7 raises being the companies that they should be paid for said raises after the starting wage increased. Example if starting wage is 16.75 an hr and tenured employee was already at said wages due to raises, of 3.50 for "company loyalty and increased experience. That employee should be paid 20.25 hr. But this doesn't happen, either employee if laid off or those said raises are not applied to employees wages because they're already making the starting wage.
This was a gem of an interview!
I’m replying to my own comment here because I want to add that I liked Chelsea’s guest. And it seems that her lack of student debt and successful channel both underscore his stance on starting young people’s careers without a financial millstone around their necks. I hope she invites him back to delve into the concerns shared in the comment section!
When this topic is so hard to talk about Chelsea needs a giant redbull 🤣😢😪
My thought exactly. Glad she did it though. Maybe he’ll think about these issues for real instead of living in his little bubble
Colleges and the government caused the student loan problem together. The US gov gave a loan to anyone who breathed, which allowed colleges to raise tuition exponentially as a result. Anyone could get a loan and it inflated everything.
I really appreciate Chelsea pushing back to many points the guy made🙏
While I hated hearing this person's views, it was motivating to hear opinions that I disagree with. I will maintain empathy for others and I will vote!
I’m not even American, but I think Chelsea should run for office. She seems to have so much vision for the country 🤩
OMG I love That beautiful Sapphire velvet jacket you're wearing. absolutely stunning!!
Yes, Chelsea looks amazing!
A 2-3 year bachelor's degree is called an associates degree, and it already exists lol.
True but a bachelor degree is required for most jobs
@@pmmakeup5316 that's the fault of the employer, not the degree. They can say "must have a bachelor's" because so many people have them. They shouldn't, usually, but they do.
Housing is a need. It is therefore not really controllable by free market (supply and demand). You will pay what you need to pay to have housing.
Under rational conditions that would be called signing under duress. Which normally would be a reason to void a contract if it weren't housing or medical.
Agreed. It's so sad. We literally do sign under duress because we have no other choice. We HAVE to live somewhere - van life is awesome for a break but not a long-term solution.
Rent control is vital. Nobody has the right to charge like this for rent or anything.
20% maximum of one's take home should be the upper limit, capped at a predetermined amount. There can be a separate class of luxury housing set aside from this but in general this should be the rule for dll standard rental housing.
Other rental reforms are also necessary.
Really enjoyed him, but agree more with Chelsea lol The whole response of people will spend their whole paycheck no matter the amount they make as a response to wages needing to increase really misses the mark with me. It's false since many people who can afford to save manage to. But also spending your who paycheck and barely meeting you need (optimistically) and spending your whole paycheck and having a comfortable life is SOO much better and should be expected as bare min in a country as wealthy as ours.
"I definitely think that increasing the value of your own labor to more prioritize the value of your time is a really worthwhile endeavor, I just personally believe that that should not be at the expense of everyone else's value, y'know?"
"Hmm...yeah...I get that...totally."
nothing made me happier than mother saying shes a card carrying member of DSA
Who else was surprised to hear that student loans is the second largest pot of revenue for the US government? I genuinely did not realize that they monopolize it to that extent. Which then makes it make more sense why student loan forgiveness goes no where. It’s just posturing. Neither side have any real incentive to poke a hole in something that keeps the lights on for the gov’t. Literally makes me wonder what were the highest pools of revenue before student debt and the history of how our government has historically made money. Perhaps in understanding this we can figure out what to advocate as its replacement.
Also interested in the way that revenue is disbursed.
How do European countries find their governments and afford to make higher education, including grad school free?
I'm not sure if it's the largest, but a quick glance at tuition history shows tuitions stayed pretty low until the government stepped in. My mom paid her fall tuition every year with a check from money she made working over the summer as a waitress - approximately $300-400 a semester. They hit the nail on the head here with the comments about schools doing extra stuff like climbing walls to attract people - the schools can keep raising prices because the government is the loan backer and have no incentive to bring prices down.
This guy name-drops so many books from the If Books Could Kill podcast....
46:00 this is an issue withnot having a systemic critique. Where does the "culture" of debt come from? Clue: this isnt a case of everyone just deciding to take on debt. It's a result of the system and the people who designed it.
Same thing applies with his thing on Parkinson's law. Its entirely restricted to an individual level and ignores the system. There's a reason people in 2010 can take out 50k loans in the first place when in 1910 most normal people probably didn't have a bank account.
I wondered when he kept saying his team, his coworkers, really great workers were paid a 'livable wage', does that mean they are not thriving? He wants to be a philanthropist and not share profits with his 'team'?
i couldnt even make it to the end bc it felt so hopeless to listen to him…the housing bit killed me, sir in my town if you dont own the rent options are shit or slim and only apartments but still $$, tell me thats not outside of my control and a factor for why i rent but cant forever or dont want to. also didnt answer the Q at all! 😵💫
The cutting down on degree time I think is huge. I’ve said for YEARS that the first two years of college was like a repeat of high school; just a way to fleece more $
His video quality is terrible yet he does (online videos ) for a living?! I played the interview on my tv and he was so pixelated
Chelsea keeps it real! And love the jacket! 💙💙💙
I’m astonished that someone thinks a 4 year degree could be boiled down to 2.5 years. Yes, higher education is supposed to do more than give you very specific information in your field, it’s suppose to teach you how to think critically and engage in the world. I’m in a science field and I have peers who don’t vote or care to get involved in their community. We need places that are dedicated to more than teaching people how to make money.
I'm late, but I wanted to say that I've worked in US higher ed for over a decade, and Chelsea hit the nail on the head when she was talking about the original purpose of uni. The og purpose was to learn as much as possible and be a well-rounded, knowledgable human. Then with the GI bill and baby boom, more people were able to go to college. Then we realized the correlation between having a degree and earning more on average. And at some point in there, someone had the bright idea to make colleges businesses, so then they're marketing to kids, who become customers instead of students. And then colleges become competition with each other instead of kind of supporting each other in the community. And at some point during this process, the birth rate starts to decline, so marketing has to become more aggressive for the business model to work.
The problem with American higher ed is not that people have to learn things outside their major. The major problem is that it's run as a business, which is in direct conflict with the actual historical purpose of uni. We do spend on amenities like student support services that other countries do not, but in my experience, those people are not the ones making bank. The last giant problem is athletics. Allegedly athletic budgets are self-sufficient, but that's not always the case-- it was recently uncovered that a coach were I work was getting hundreds of thousands in extra benefits (like a car allowance) from the actual university. Meanwhile a lot of us who care about actually educating students are adjunct profs or low-level staff who are struggling to make ends meet and whose departments are barely able to cover office supplies.
Hearing that the US government gets so much of its income from interest is horrifying. It feels like a misplaced tax. It penalises people that get jobs with lower incomes. The people that get high paying jobs will pay the least interest. It’s an unbalanced allocation of the budget. It worsens the quality of life of most of these people.
You guys have to fight for accessible higher education. Protest the endless, unpayable loans. Look up what happened in 2012 in Quebec regarding education costs and get inspired!
He makes it seem like the important difference was that they were using real money to play instead of Monopoly money, but that money wasn't even really in play anyways since they didn't get to keep it. To me it seems like their game play was different because there were real financial stakes (winner gets $40), not because they played with real bills. Which echoes what Chelsea was saying about people playing Texas Hold 'Em differently when there's actual money at stake. Not even 15 minutes in and I'm already annoyed with this guy.
Your rant that starts about 22 minutes in is everything people should be upset about in modern America. That’s the conversation we have in my circle and I love to see it here. ❤
Everyone interested in this topic should read “Debt: the first 5000 years by David Graeber”
This 👆. So much this.
For our country, we should have courses on finance basics embedded in our education system; if we had a country full of folks who have some financial wisdom….maybe we wouldn’t have such volatile economic periods like the one we’re in now (I mean the govt should get it together too! They aren’t off the hook!)or just be prepared for emergencies.
I wish as a young college (1st generation Latina) student I would’ve opened up a mutual fund, save here and there and allowed money to sit and grow, I’d be in a different financial situation……but….there ya go, you live and learn.
I really enjoyed Chelsea's response to the four hour work week. I asked students their favorite books in class the other day, and had a similar reaction to someone touting "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."
What an episode. I was bugged about the comment about student loans. Adam did point out that the Federal Gov makes a lot of money on student loan interest, about 6.5% per year from direct loans which ends up being $70-80 billion (this info is available on Dept. of Ed. Annual Financial Report). So the Federal Gov has not incentive to cancel student loan debt. But I strongly disagree with his take that wages should go up in order to solve the debt/student loan debt issue. Private and public companies have no reason to raise wages for workers nor provide any additional benefits to general population. Companies aim to increase their own value. That is why it is the federal government's job to support the people, but circle back to the above. Long story short, graduates are left in the dust for student loan debt. I just disagree with Adam that companies are supposed to save the people, not the government. In no scenario will companies attempt to save anyone but themselves. And why its important to keep pressuring the and electing a government that will actually help people. Complacency and status quo are still a net loss for the U.S.
There is no force pushing prices down. "competition" isn't a market force it's a cost of doing business, able to be planned around and subverted.
Regulation and oversight are the only things that hold a chance of allowing a future where americans can reliably purchase what they're looking for safely and at a reasonable cost. De-regulation and privatization is genuinely going to kill at minimum hundreds of thousands over the coming years unless this turns around.
"It's the court's opinion that the damage done to your son was not the fault of the Nestle corporation, but rather the subcontractor Nestle hired. Said subcontractor falsely claimed to be a licensed employer while secretly dying and employing "oompa-loompa" child slave labor. Despite Nestle's non-complicity in your child's years of crippling manual servitude, and as part of a charity program mandated by another case; Nestle would like to provide one year's supply of its new Oompa-bars. Let the record show that the court find's Nestle's offerings to look delicious." *gavel noises*
You had an incredibly rich woman who had written a book on for one of the earliest seasons of this series. I cant remember her name. This is like listening to the male equivalent. So out of touch it's almost unbelievable.
Unrelated: My biggest question about student loans would be: What happens to all of the people who had to financially suffer for decades to pay them off, who would no longer qualify for loan forgiveness?
Nothing? Which shouldn't bother anyone unless they think that because things sucked for them that they should suck for everyone else forever more.
@moboticusmaximus7320 I think that's an oversimplification of the issue, but arguments based on emotion usually are.
@wick3dwords but... your entire point is about the emotions of people that wouldn't be affected by this...
@gladiatorinsweats no, my point is about the argument of fairness. It isn't about their feelings about it, it's about how to make it equitable.
Woah such a great episode respectful to the point information sharing bw 2 inspiring adults
This guest was incredibly out of touch and misinformed. He keeps talking about choices when so many of his examples are of people in systems designed for one outcome. We were barely adilts, lied to about the value of college. You *have* to have a credit score to get a loan for a house. We jave no safety nets so who's to say another pandemic wont radically reshape how we can live?
I tried looking up his claim about the government and student loans. The vast majority still comes from personal income and business tax, I dont know where he got thay idea. Im also insulted that he implied the money we got during the pandemic was a problem when so many corporations abused ppe loans ans overinflated prices.
Power increases when you’re the ultra rich. No several people should have that power and exploit the people. But people dream about being rich and powerful
Listened to this one on podcasts and it was fantastic!
I absolutely love your blazer Chelsea! ❤
she made a great point dismanteling what he claimed previously, he made a 'charming comment' and told a story about his grandfather, making the moment of her great point entirely about him, who now has become "sort of part of it" via his grandfather and not adressing any of her points.
His comments just reek capitalism but with compassion. Screw that. He is not addressing system issues. Thank goodness workers are organizing an demanding more because our elected officials are bought off by the same forces that refuse for the system to change.
Promoting austerity as a solution to rising education costs is going to be a tough sell. The bar has already been set, millions of people have 4 year degrees or higher, do you really expect that you can just tell the employers of the world to lower their expectations, associates is the new bachelors, bachelors is the new masters, etc. Especially when, as Chelsea pointed out, college is free or cheap in nearly every developed nation, and they did not need to lower standards or time in school to do that.
Also, given how inequitable funding for high school is in this country with some students receiving great educations with college-level classes while students at other schools barely read at grade level, the idea of stripping away gen-ed college credits is scary. Reminds me of all the engineering freshmen who genuinely feel as though history and writing classes are useless and have nothing to do with their degree. God help us lol.