Valerie Strauss wrote here about Betsy DeVos’s plan to remove consumer protections from students who were scammed.
“Why would anyone want to make it harder for defrauded students? Well, the Education Department says that college students are “adults who can be reasonably expected to make informed decisions and who must take personal accountability for the decisions they make.” Supporters of the proposed changes say it is too easy for students to apply for loan forgiveness and that too much public money will have to be used to repay bad loans.
“To be sure, college students are indeed adults who can be reasonably expected to make informed decisions. And adults should indeed take personal accountability for the decisions they made.
“But the proposed regulation says, among other things, that to qualify for loan forgiveness, students who claim they have been defrauded have to prove the college intended to defraud them and show that the college had exhibited a “reckless disregard” for the truth.
“That is not, for example, the standard for state lemon laws, which offer compensatory remedies to consumers who buy cars and other goods that prove to be defective. They don’t insist that the consumers prove that a car dealer or manufacturer intended to commit fraud by making and selling a flawed product.
“Let’s say DeVos, a billionaire from Michigan, decided to buy a new yacht and it turned out to have a bum engine that broke down repeatedly. Would she have to prove the seller intended to defraud her to seek replacement or some kind of compensation?
“Consumer products are not college education, for sure, but the Trump administration believes in operating schools as if they were businesses, so the comparison seems apt.”

This is so sad. People attend college to better their lives, not to get ripped off.
LikeLike
To answer the question: Because they can. It’s the cheap thrill that bullies get.
LikeLike
Good one, Duane. These folks are immoral, greedy, entitled bullies to the max. They are SCUM to the max.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The more money corporations dump into representatives’ pockets, the less they represent the interests and well-being of people. We have become a hyper-capitalized society. Our new motto should be “Caveat Emptor.” Our only hope for democratic representation is to get the money out of politics.
LikeLike
Our only hope is to dismantle capitalism.
LikeLike
This is all part of the GOP/libertarian cult of deregulation now, tomorrow and forever. The regulatory agencies are being gutted, Dodd-Frank is being dismantled.
Big business and congressional Republicans (libertarians) are gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the brainchild of Sen. Elizabeth Warren. In other words, give all the power to the wealthy and the corporations.
LikeLike
I am not surprised. We already know the Trump Model….Trump and his Cabinet like to save themselves some cash here and there, whether it’s spending more than 1 million taxpayer dollars on flights or letting the public foot the bill for unnecessarily frequent golf weekends. Now, some of them may benefit from a provision they jammed through in December’s tax scam.
Why would anyone in a real democracy tear kids from their parents.
The Trump presidency will go down in history as the degradation of our governent,.
This problem we have with violence and apathy extends beyond such callousness to even mass shootings. From healthcare to the homeless, we have adopted a very dangerous mindset that suggests if something doesn’t affect us directly, it’s not our problem. But this lack of compassion for others is in absolute opposition to the foundation of any great and truly successful society:
View at Medium.com
LikeLike
WHY? Answer: Because they are GREEDY OPPRESSIVE Pr****.
LikeLike
Prasterisks?
LikeLike
A person who revels in power over others who are considered as “lesser” would.
LikeLike
“Prove the college intended to defraud them and show that the college had exhibited a “reckless disregard” for the truth.”
This stipulation was made to fatten the pockets of lawyers who are also finding class action lawsuits are almost impossible to put together. If they do succeed, they take so much money students should wonder if the whole project was worth it.
There is more than just money lost from a worthless investment of time. These are the intangibles that are making economists pay attention. Among these are the dashed aspirations and trust in a program representing itself as educational, and the unrecoverable rearrangements of time to enroll in and pursue program completion, typically with attendant stress in a family and often with some sacrifice of income from work in order to pay for the program.
There is another problem brewing from the loan servicing scandals associated with college-going whether for profit or not. Public colleges and universities are being underfunded for programs (even including athletics). One consequence is total elimination of majors in the arts, humanities, and education. Only money made by a recent graduate matters.
Some of this reasoning is attached to tracking the “gainful employment” of program graduates. Students who enroll in the arts, humanities, and education are not earning great salaries five years out from graduation. The graduates are not exempt from debt, and so enrollments are dropping.
The ratings of colleges from US News and World Report are fueling the problem. So is Elizabeth Warren and others in Congress who, like Bill Gates, insist that a college degree be worth dollars in the pocket and the sooner the better. Meanwhile economists are also speaking plainly about the gig economy and garanteed minimum income for the many whoses “careers” and jobs will be accomplished by robots and computing machines with artificial intelligence systems.
The monetizing of education as if a commodity is wrong. It is an intangible asset and in spite of the recent hoopla of economists, it is not equivalent to “a brand,” patent, delimited “skill set” or other intangible a business can monetize.
Call me conservative, but I do not think that the educational horizons of any generation be conditioned on the potential for economic payoff, with profiteering in educationjust fine as a federal policy.
LikeLike
“Call me conservative, but I do not think that the educational horizons of any generation be conditioned on the potential for economic payoff, with profiteering in educationjust fine as a federal policy.”
Ditto. Well said.
LikeLike
Ment to add this link https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/marylands-goucher-college-is-eliminating-several-majors-including-math/2018/08/16/31c62228-a173-11e8-8e87-c869fe70a721_story.html?utm_term=.43403dd87715
LikeLike
I prefer this one: “Let’s say DeVos, a billionaire from Michigan, decided to buy a new yacht and on its maiden voyage with her on board, the yacht sunk and she went down with the ship that had appropriate name of ‘Betsy’s Titanic Sequel’.”
Would her family be allowed to take the boat’s builder to court because “Betsy’s Titanic Sequal” sunk and she didn’t escape and there was no iceberg to blame?
LikeLike
The fruit of deregulation: caveat emptor…. and what’s the solution if the buyers make too many bad decisions? Blame the schools.
LikeLike