Share
Five days after Occupy Virginia Tech rallied at the War Memorial Chapel, what has changed? About 100 students and community members gathered to yell and air their grievances, primarily about student loans and job prospects to whoever would listen. To observers, the rally was reminiscent of a flash mob, dispersing as quickly as they came.
The university has not since responded to the protesters, and it seems unlikely that they will. Why would they? They have no obligation to assent to the demands of a group of students who willingly took their money with a promise to repay it. The protesters, here and on Wall Street, seem to forget that businesses aren’t political. With the exception of consumer retail stores, they don’t care if people don’t like them — as long as it doesn’t affect their profits.
The inefficacy of the protests only further questions the motives and reasoning of the protesters. If they truly expect Tech president Charles Steger to walk out of his office, bow at their feet and wipe out their loans, they are in for a major disappointment. The university, just like the financial firms on Wall Street, cares only about getting repaid by its borrowers.
But this does not have to be the legacy of Occupy Virginia Tech. If the group — if it can be called such — shifts its priorities to warning high school and college students interested in higher education about the dangers of taking on student loans and the need to examine the job market for their majors, it would be counted as a socially useful movement.
Instead of complaining about bleak job prospects with a tone that gives the impression that they feel entitled to graduate and immediately enter a well-paying position, the protesters could encourage high school seniors to consider cutting costs by studying at a community college before finishing their degree at a four-year institution.
Likewise, graduate students feeling pressure could warn undergraduates to not accept the traditional logic that more education necessarily means higher pay and a guaranteed job.
Regardless of whether these students made wise decisions to take out the loans that are now burdening them, the Occupy Virginia Tech movement is unlikely to accomplish any special reform of their debts to the university. However, there is no reason they cannot contribute to prevent younger students from making the same mistakes. If they move on this goal, they will be able to claim a positive impact on the “99 percent” they claim to defend.
-The editorial board is comprised of Scott Masselli and Sean Simons
A version of this article appeared in the Oct 18 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 5 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
I am a millionaire, but I never held a real job in my life.
I went to Harvard and Columbia.
I have one of the biggest private jets in the world take me wherever I want.
My wife wears $44,000 diamond bracelets.
I play golf every weekend and the most expensive resorts.
Goldman Sachs gives me millions of dollars.
When I retire, I'll get paid hundreds of millions $ in speaking fees by big companies.
I'll make millions more as a board member of the corporations you are protesting.
MY NAME IS BARACK OBAMA, AND I AM THE 1%.
#OccupyWallStreet!
Reply to this Top
It's sad that the only thing that the editorial board could have come away with from that rally was that 5 days later, there has not been a change.
And get you facts right. The students did not "willingly take {the universities} money." Student loans don't come from Virginia Tech, generally they come from Sallie Mae and the debts are made through them and frequently farmed out to other instututions.
The complaint is not that they must re-pay them, instead that the promise of a better future used to sell higher education and thus the loans is a lie and that a those loans are owned by an industry who's business practices have evolved to be predatory and pathological, even after being bailed out by the American people.
I think your editorial demonstrates a willful recalcitrance to even attempt to understand your audience and a betrayal of your journalistic responsibilities.
Reply to this Top
True, the students did not "willingly take {the university's} money." They did, however, take on a loan - willingly. I struggle with understanding WHY someone would take anything but Federal student loans and then complain about it. If you do take federal loans, that 3.4% rate is hardly predatory. Community college for 2 years significantly reduces your overall cost (probably by 40% or so), and if you transfer your degree still says Virginia Tech at the top.
I think the people doing the griping about this particular issue are attacking the wrong people. Take a look at VT's administration. Research facilities and classroom space are one thing. I understand the need for up to date facilities there. But can anyone explain to me why it's necessary for there to be a fitness center and day spa constructed in the AJ renovations? What about the dining facilities? Do you really need to be able to get lobster on campus? Your money is paying for this stuff. If you don't like that, do something about it.
Reply to this Top
Why does education have to equal a job? Why should I only be forced (through cost coercion) to only learn profitable endeavors? It would seem the editorial board is encouraging workers not thinkers.
Reply to this Top
This is perhaps one of the most insightful stories I've ever read on Collegiate Times. Well done. The attitude among protesters of thinking "the world owes me something" is a sure sign of an individual who did not plan ahead in their life. The university is not to blame if you failed to research the job market. The university is not to blame if you put yourself into debt. Take some personal responsibility for your own life and actions.
Reply to this Top