Ending student loan forgiveness for congressional staffers? Students next?

[GUH]

Yes, I am proposing cutting them. Privatizing them, really. Instead of putting SS and medicare money into a government fund, it should go into a private account that you have access to and control over. Currently that money goes to the government and they just spend it- by privatizing it, you would actually own your money. Privatization would also stimulate the market, as those funds would go into investments rather than being instantly blown by the government. And you'd be able to retire far better off, since a lifetime of market returns on the amount you put into SS will net you far, far more than the paltry amount SS eventually pays you. I've done the math in previous threads, but the average worker would more than double their retirement income by being forced to put that money in the market rather than collecting SS.

As of right now (under government management), Social Security will be insolvent by the time I'm eligible.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Mad Jack]

stop joking me. use the federal calculator (https://studentloans.gov/myDirectLoan/mobile/repayment/repaymentEstimator.action): suppose I owe $200k (which I will, which is still less than many people owe) and earn $100k as a pharmacist, I will end up paying $300k under PAYE (and more under IBR). If I earn more, I will end up paying EVEN MORE than I owe. Where's the "forgiveness"?

That isn't accounting for the value of your payments in net present dollars. 300k spread out over 25 years is worth a whole lot less than 200k now.

 

[deleted158872]

there are jobs in this world that do not require a high school education much less a college education. In order for our society to function, we need janitors, garbage collectors, fast food workers, manual laborers, etc. etc.. Giving everyone access to education is not going to change that reality nor will it change the fact that people in those jobs will be paid a lower wage.

Do you realize that you are advocating for a dumber, more ignorant, poorer country as a whole?

second, all the jobs you listed as examples can be, and will be, replaced by robots in ~50 years.

 

[W19]

And, similarly, US corporations compared to other OECD corporations aren't tax cheat leaches that Elizabeth Warren et al would like you to believe. Reality lies somewhere in the middle.

The solution to these problems are easy IMO...

They just have come to come up with 5 tax brackets and ZERO loopholes or itemized deductions (everyone has to have a skin in the game)
20% tax rate for corporation
20% tax rate for capital gain
cut the budget by 2% for the next 5-10 years and our budget will be balanced...

 

[NickNaylor]

Do you realize that you are advocating for a dumber, more ignorant, poorer country as a whole?

second, all the jobs you listed as examples can be, and will be, replaced by robots in ~50 years.

No I'm not. And frankly whether the population is "dumber" or "more ignorant" isn't my concern. What I care about is that they have productive lives and are able to contribute to both their own well-being as well as the well-being of a society such that I (as a person likely in the top tax bracket in the future) do not have to pay for their existence. Your point implies that college will necessarily correct those things. Hopefully you can see that that isn't the case. See: college grads working jobs that do not require a college education.

Great, and what are we to do until then? That's a whole generation away.

 

[Mad Jack]

Do you realize that you are advocating for a dumber, more ignorant, poorer country as a whole?

second, all the jobs you listed as examples can be, and will be, replaced by robots in ~50 years.

And as they're replaced, we'll sink further into a service-sector economy, as is already happening. You don't need a degree to work a register, make a coffee, give a massage, or check someone into a hotel.

 

[GUH]

The solution to these problems are easy IMO...

They just have come to come up with 5 tax brackets and ZERO loopholes or itemized deductions (everyone has to have a skin the game)
20% tax rate for corporation
20% tax rate for capital gain
cut the budget by 2% for the next 5-10 years and our budget will be balanced...

In your opinion, what is the maximum fair tax rate for the highest bracket?

 

[NeuResurgens]

I'm no expert in this issue and don't quite know all of the details, but as I read the discussion, I get certain impressions. Some thoughts:

-Physicians are a necessary facet of society. This isn't really something that we can just let the free market regulate, because a lot of people will suffer in the process. Think about it: let's say medical school tuition increases to 60-80K/year on average, not including living expenses. Meanwhile, physician salaries continue to decrease for practicing physicians, and student loan interest continues its upward climb. It'll reach a breaking point when becoming a physician is a net loss, so fewer people will do it. This is free market economics - the return doesn't match the investment, so demand goes down. But this isn't just some product - this will lead to a massive physician shortage, which in turn will affect the general health of the public in the United States. So, while the free market is "correcting" itself (schools start lowering tuition to try to increase attendance), in theory, a large number of people will suffer and die from illnesses which likely could have been prevented or cured simply because there weren't enough physicians to treat them all. This isn't even considering medicare/insurance implications to pay those few physicians to take on so many patients anyway, and since we're trying to head toward universal coverage in some form, it can be assumed that the cost and strain for the budget will be large as well. In short, just letting the free market control this issue will cross into ethical and human rights issues not seen in other sectors since the services provided by physicians are often an absolute necessity.

-We do need to be careful of government meddling into private matters like private school tuition, since this often is a segway into more tight and unproductive regulation. I don't have a specific solution in mind when it comes to this problem of balancing between public interests and private freedom, but I do think that one area to consider changing is that of public support for private programs which are raising tuition, rather than imposing strict and binding limits on tuition itself. We need to think of incentivizing/disincentivizing rather than coercion, which is a common temptation when dealing with those whose actions we consider harmful.

-What is the purpose of student loan forgiveness for public servants? If I'm seeing this from the right angle, it seems to be there as an extra incentive to make up for the pay cut taken by public sector employees when compared to their private sector counterparts. Whether or not to axe these programs will be a good or bad idea depending on the profile and circumstances of those to whom it applies. A better choice might be to decrease the degree of forgiveness rather than to cut it completely, such that the ratio of debt to salary for public employees should be roughly equal or somewhat less than what is typically seen in the private sector. Provided tuition rates don't rise out of control, as discussed above, which would make any public sector work much more of a burden.

-NN makes an interesting point about the culture of the US changing with respect to success, and this is an important overarching theme when it comes to dealing with these issues, since social climate is a big factor in how much of the populace is going to behave. General ambition in the workplace seems to be on the decline, which of course will factor in when considering that, from a healthcare standpoint, the costs of entering the profession are only increasing at the moment.

 

[Bloodmoney]

And as they're replaced, we'll sink further into a service-sector economy, as is already happening. You don't need a degree to work a register, make a coffee, give a massage, or check someone into a hotel.

Access to education improves quality of life for the poor. Our society needs people studying social sciences. It's too bad that a lot of them end up working in coffee shops, but if they are I think it's good that my baristas are educated. I want my farmers to be educated as well.

 

[GUH]

Access to education improves quality of life for the poor. Our society needs people studying social sciences. It's too bad that a lot of them end up working in coffee shops, but if they are I think it's good that my baristas are educated. I want my farmers to be educated as well.

That's all fine and good but forcibly taking money from people who earned it in order to give a college degree to a barista who will never make practical use of it is not.

 

[NickNaylor]

Access to education improves quality of life for the poor. Our society needs people studying social sciences. It's too bad that a lot of them end up working in coffee shops, but if they are I think it's good that my baristas are educated. I want my farmers to be educated as well.

Sure, in a perfect world I would want everyone to have a top-notch liberal arts education that teaches them to think critically. Unfortunately that dream requires resources which are necessarily limited. There are only so many dollars to go around. Using them to pay for a well-educated college barista is a complete waste from a utilization perspective even if it might contribute to what ultimately comes down to "good vibes, man."

 

[W19]

In your opinion, what is the maximum fair tax rate for the highest bracket?

5% 10% 15% 20% 25%. These will be the brackets if I was in charge. And I am sure whether or not one should call paying taxes as a 'fair' exercise.

 

[Bloodmoney]

Sure, in a perfect world I would want everyone to have a top-notch liberal arts education that teaches them to think critically. Unfortunately that dream requires resources which are necessarily limited. There are only so many dollars to go around. Using them to pay for a well-educated college barista is a complete waste from a utilization perspective even if it might contribute to what ultimately comes down to "good vibes, man."

I am learning not to underestimate the power of "good vibes, man " haha. Our education system is pretty great for research and innovation. We have great private universities. I see massive influx of Germans, Finnish, Chinese postdocs to research at our institutions. However our general population is considerably more ignorant than most other countries you visit. Edit: probably the improvement needs to be made at the secondary school and elementary school level and not the college level for general population.

And I completely agree that the defense spending was a distraction from main argument @W19. It was incorrect to say that @Mad Jack couldn't make this point had he wanted to. Defense spending does need to be cut though. Even if your values suggest otherwise, there are trillions of dollars of spending completely unaccounted for.

Private citizens and corporations want to choose how to perform their philanthropy and not be forced in their choices. One reason why our school system is so great is due to excellent schools founded based on this wealth. It would be a good thing for private money to create new medical schools.

 

[W19]

-NN makes an interesting point about the culture of the US changing with respect to success, and this is an important overarching theme when it comes to dealing with these issues, since social climate is a big factor in how much of the populace is going to behave. General ambition in the workplace seems to be on the decline, which of course will factor in when considering that, from a healthcare standpoint, the costs of entering the profession are only increasing at the moment.

By most experts' account, US workers have become more productive. Then again I am no expert, I just listen to them...

 

[Mad Jack]

Access to education improves quality of life for the poor. Our society needs people studying social sciences. It's too bad that a lot of them end up working in coffee shops, but if they are I think it's good that my baristas are educated. I want my farmers to be educated as well.

Education doesn't necessarily require a college degree.

 

[W19]

Like many things in the US, there are always somewhat two classes... Our educational system is good for the upper middle class and wealthy folks... i.e people who can afford to live in wealthy suburbia... At least that is how it is in FL.

 

[NickNaylor]

By most experts' account, US workers have become more productive. Then again I am no expert, I just listen to them...

"Productivity" and "ambition" aren't the same thing. Much of the productivity gains are generally due to capital investment in things like automation rather than people simply "working harder." In other words, I don't think the factory line worker is making more widgets because he/she is intrinsically working faster or more efficiently. Instead, he/she has the ability to use e.g. robotic systems that allow him/her to produce widgets more quickly with the same relative degree of individual effort.

 

[Bloodmoney]

Education doesn't necessarily require a college degree.

Good point but it does require access. How can we improve public school system prior to college without additional spending? Until the public school system is improved before college, attending university is the only way to get decent education.

 

[notbobtrustme]

Why is the counterargument to bring up military spending?

That's like me saying your pool is dirty, and you respond by saying there is way more pollution in the ocean than in your pool. That doesn't change the fact that you need to clean your pool...

because it's all in the same pool, not "your pool" and "my pool". Pointing out inefficiencies in one part of the budget, which has an overall impact measured in tenths of a percent while ignoring the major drivers of waste is nothing more than a distraction. We're arguing over scraps while the real wasters go unnoticed.

 

[Mad Jack]

I'm no expert in this issue and don't quite know all of the details, but as I read the discussion, I get certain impressions. Some thoughts:

-Physicians are a necessary facet of society. This isn't really something that we can just let the free market regulate, because a lot of people will suffer in the process. Think about it: let's say medical school tuition increases to 60-80K/year on average, not including living expenses. Meanwhile, physician salaries continue to decrease for practicing physicians, and student loan interest continues its upward climb. It'll reach a breaking point when becoming a physician is a net loss, so fewer people will do it. This is free market economics - the return doesn't match the investment, so demand goes down. But this isn't just some product - this will lead to a massive physician shortage, which in turn will affect the general health of the public in the United States. So, while the free market is "correcting" itself (schools start lowering tuition to try to increase attendance), in theory, a large number of people will suffer and die from illnesses which likely could have been prevented or cured simply because there weren't enough physicians to treat them all. This isn't even considering medicare/insurance implications to pay those few physicians to take on so many patients anyway, and since we're trying to head toward universal coverage in some form, it can be assumed that the cost and strain for the budget will be large as well. In short, just letting the free market control this issue will cross into ethical and human rights issues not seen in other sectors since the services provided by physicians are often an absolute necessity.

-We do need to be careful of government meddling into private matters like private school tuition, since this often is a segway into more tight and unproductive regulation. I don't have a specific solution in mind when it comes to this problem of balancing between public interests and private freedom, but I do think that one area to consider changing is that of public support for private programs which are raising tuition, rather than imposing strict and binding limits on tuition itself. We need to think of incentivizing/disincentivizing rather than coercion, which is a common temptation when dealing with those whose actions we consider harmful.

-What is the purpose of student loan forgiveness for public servants? If I'm seeing this from the right angle, it seems to be there as an extra incentive to make up for the pay cut taken by public sector employees when compared to their private sector counterparts. Whether or not to axe these programs will be a good or bad idea depending on the profile and circumstances of those to whom it applies. A better choice might be to decrease the degree of forgiveness rather than to cut it completely, such that the ratio of debt to salary for public employees should be roughly equal or somewhat less than what is typically seen in the private sector. Provided tuition rates don't rise out of control, as discussed above, which would make any public sector work much more of a burden.

-NN makes an interesting point about the culture of the US changing with respect to success, and this is an important overarching theme when it comes to dealing with these issues, since social climate is a big factor in how much of the populace is going to behave. General ambition in the workplace seems to be on the decline, which of course will factor in when considering that, from a healthcare standpoint, the costs of entering the profession are only increasing at the moment.

Even if American medical school seats went unfilled, there would be no shortage of doctors. The slack would simply be taken up by more foreign grads, and the net amount of care provided would still be the same. That is really a non-issue.

 

[notbobtrustme]

Yes, I am proposing cutting them. Privatizing them, really. Instead of putting SS and medicare money into a government fund, it should go into a private account that you have access to and control over. Currently that money goes to the government and they just spend it- by privatizing it, you would actually own your money. Privatization would also stimulate the market, as those funds would go into investments rather than being instantly blown by the government. And you'd be able to retire far better off, since a lifetime of market returns on the amount you put into SS will net you far, far more than the paltry amount SS eventually pays you. I've done the math in previous threads, but the average worker would more than double their retirement income by being forced to put that money in the market rather than collecting SS.

this has worked exactly zero times in the history of the world.

 

[NeuResurgens]

Even if American medical school seats went unfilled, there would be no shortage of doctors. The slack would simply be taken up by more foreign grads, and the net amount of care provided would still be the same. That is really a non-issue.

Oh yeah, I hadn't thought about the FMG for some reason. Perhaps a natural correction could be more economically and socially feasible (i.e. fast enough) due to competition of foreign medical schools then?

 

[Mad Jack]

because it's all in the same pool, not "your pool" and "my pool". Pointing out inefficiencies in one part of the budget, which has an overall impact measured in tenths of a percent while ignoring the major drivers of waste is nothing more than a distraction. We're arguing over scraps while the real wasters go unnoticed.

1.2 trillion dollars is hardly scraps.

this has worked exactly zero times in the history of the world.

http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-05-30/in-australia-retirement-saving-done-right

 

[Mad Jack]

Oh yeah, I hadn't thought about the FMG for some reason. Perhaps a natural correction could be more economically and socially feasible (i.e. fast enough) due to competition of foreign medical schools then?

That's what I'd suspect.

 

[W19]

Education doesn't necessarily require a college degree.

While some education does not require a college degree, you need that paper to get a good job (or even a job). You are not going to become an attending by attending (no pun intended here) YOUTUBE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE.

 

[Bloodmoney]

It's all the same water...

because it's all in the same pool, not "your pool" and "my pool". Pointing out inefficiencies in one part of the budget, which has an overall impact measured in tenths of a percent while ignoring the major drivers of waste is nothing more than a distraction. We're arguing over scraps while the real wasters go unnoticed.

It's just important to make the point without logical fallacy. Waste in both areas is interesting to discuss. But waste in defense has not to do with waste from student loan debt.

 

[notbobtrustme]

1.2 trillion dollars is hardly scraps.

of which only a few percentage points will ever be forgiven by PSLF/forgiveness programs.

 

[deleted390966]

In addition, this ignores the reality that there are jobs in this world that do not require a high school education much less a college education. In order for our society to function, we need janitors, garbage collectors, fast food workers, manual laborers, etc. etc.. Giving everyone access to education is not going to change that reality nor will it change the fact that people in those jobs will be paid a lower wage.

IF this becomes reality, you (the upper/middle class) will be paying for the poor/jobless people. You wonder why there are too many poor people in this country that cost us all more money - those who are on non-livable wages even though they work full time, hence have to rely on public assistance: http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoc...t-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/.

 

[Mad Jack]

While some education does not require a college degree, you need that paper to get a good job (or even a job). You are not going to become an attending by attending (no pun intended here) YOUTUBE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE.

The only reason you need a college degree to get a job is because there's too many people with degrees out there already. Trying to fix the problem by giving everyone a degree isn't fixing the problem, it's exacerbating it.

I'm a big believer in college for the fields that require it, and technical school or career-focused education for those fields that don't. We should be expanding vocational and technical education and providing people with actual skills that they can use to obtain a job without needing a college degree.

 

[Mad Jack]

of which only a few percentage points will ever be forgiven by PSLF/forgiveness programs.

A percentage that is going to continue to grow as long as we keep letting the government hand out unlimited funds to graduate and professional students, in a world where graduate and professional degrees are increasingly required due to there being far more bachelor's degree holders than necessary.

 

[W19]

The only reason you need a college degree to get a job is because there's too many people with degrees out there already. Trying to fix the problem by giving everyone a degree isn't fixing the problem, it's exacerbating it.

I'm a big believer in college for the fields that require it, and technical school or career-focused education for those fields that don't. We should be expanding vocational and technical education and providing people with actual skills that they can use to obtain a job without needing a college degree.

I agree with you, but some industries are too regulated... Without a paper in hand, you are just worthless.

 

[Bloodmoney]

A percentage that is going to continue to grow as long as we keep letting the government hand out unlimited funds to graduate and professional students, in a world where graduate and professional degrees are increasingly required due to there being far more bachelor's degree holders than necessary.

It sounds like you are saying our education system is superior to the systems in other countries, but also that you want to make it more European. Would you be willing to give up your bachelor's and go straight to medical school? I really loved what I learned as an undergraduate.

 

[Mad Jack]

It sounds like you are saying our education system is superior to the systems in other countries, but also that you want to make it more European.

I want it to be more diverse overall. Liberal arts education isn't for everyone- I want to leave the liberal arts system intact, but to have options for those that are going into careers that aren't particularly well-served by a liberal arts education.

 

[NeuResurgens]

The only reason you need a college degree to get a job is because there's too many people with degrees out there already. Trying to fix the problem by giving everyone a degree isn't fixing the problem, it's exacerbating it.

I'm a big believer in college for the fields that require it, and technical school or career-focused education for those fields that don't. We should be expanding vocational and technical education and providing people with actual skills that they can use to obtain a job without needing a college degree.

I agree with this. Even in high school we could start with degree emphases for students who do not wish to attend college for more advanced degrees. A common complaint with American high schools is that they are too college-focused and don't develop a lot of skills for students who do not attend college. Don't GB and other countries do this in their secondary education?

 

[deleted158872]

Liberal arts education isn't for everyone- I want to leave the liberal arts system intact, but to have options for those that are going into careers that aren't particularly well-served by a liberal arts education.

I agree with this. if i know early on that i want to be a doctor or a scientist, i feel that liberal art education doesn't benefit me.

 

[W19]

@Mad Jack... For instance, many in my class (not me) can just study for a year without even attending med school and they will pass step1... But most people will be against these people bypassing the first 2 years... Why not let these people do that and give them a 1-2 months intensive clinical skills class so they can be ready for rotation. These people will save a ton of money by doing that. The system is too tightly controlled...

I know there will be a counter argument that the first two years is NOT only about passing step1...

 

[Mad Jack]

I agree with you, but some industries are too regulated... Without a paper in hand, you are just worthless.

The majority of jobs don't require a certification that you get with a 4-year college degree though. The only ones that do are generally the professions (engineering, advanced health care positions, law, accounting) and teaching. Even many of those jobs within healthcare don't truly require a 4-year degree, such as nursing, OTA, PTA, RT, RRT, etc. A community college degree or vocational/technical program is enough to suffice for the vast majority of positions.

 

[deleted390966]

I agree with this. Even in high school we could start with degree emphases for students who do not wish to attend college for more advanced degrees. A common complaint with American high schools is that they are too college-focused and don't develop a lot of skills for students who do not attend college. Don't GB and other countries do this in their secondary education?

Germany has this system. For people who know that they don't want to go to college, technical/trade schools should be an option for them, and college degrees shouldn't be required to get a job for them.

 

[Mad Jack]

@Mad Jack... For instance, many in my class (not me) can just study for a year without even attending med school and they will pass step1... But most people will be against these people bypassing the first 2 years... Why not let these people do that and give them a 1-2 months intensive clinical skills class so they can be ready for rotation. These people will save a ton of money by doing that. The system is too tightly controlled...

I know there will be a counter argument that the first two years is NOT only about passing step1...

Just because you can pass a test doesn't mean that you are equipped to actually begin clinical practice. We learn (at least at my school) a whollllle lot more than just basic sciences in the first two years. H&P, radiology, basic procedures, interviewing skills, etc- things that require hands-on time to practice and can't just be picked up from a book and practiced proficiently.

 

[Mad Jack]

I agree with this. if i know early on that i want to be a doctor or a scientist, i feel that liberal art education doesn't benefit me.

I think we should have more 6 year, straight through MD programs for people like yourself.

 

[W19]

The majority of jobs don't require a certification that you get with a 4-year college degree though. The only ones that do are generally the professions (engineering, advanced health care positions, law, accounting) and teaching. Even many of those jobs within healthcare don't truly require a 4-year degree, such as nursing, OTA, PTA, RT, RRT, etc. A community college degree or vocational/technical program is enough to suffice for the vast majority of positions.

People are attending these programs now... That is why most of them have waiting list... The job market for these professions is also getting saturated now.

 

[W19]

Just because you can pass a test doesn't mean that you are equipped to actually begin clinical practice. We learn (at least at my school) a whollllle lot more than just basic sciences in the first two years. H&P, radiology, basic procedures, interviewing skills, etc- things that require hands-on time to practice and can't just be picked up from a book and practiced proficiently.

That is why I suggest a 2-month clinical skills so people can pick up these 'skills' you talk about.

 

[Mad Jack]

People are attending these programs now... That is why most of them have waiting list... The job market for these professions is also getting saturated as well now.

Yep. And when they do, people will stop signing up, and programs will close. Happened with a bunch of health care programs in my state a few years back- LPN and MA programs closing left and right, along with a couple rad tech programs. That's how saturation should work- too many people go into something, the market for that thing collapses, programs close. But the opposite has happened in higher education- too many people were getting degrees, so they became worthless, and you had to get something bigger and better to stand apart, and have a degree just to land a job. The only way to reverse that is to have viable alternative paths established that provide employable options for people that fit the careers that are in-demand today.

 

[W19]

I think we should have more 6 year, straight through MD programs for people like yourself.

It does not have to be a straight 6-year program... People can just take 2 year prereqs anywhere and go to a 3-year med school (not 4-year)...

 

[Mad Jack]

That is why I suggest a 2-month clinical skills so people can pick up these 'skills' you talk about.

I still don't think it's a good idea. I'm a damn good test taker, and could probably cram for Step 1 and be able to pass it within 6 months, but I wouldn't truly understand the information and it would all leave me within a few weeks. Learning to integrate the things you're picking up is much more than can be measured by a simple test.

 

[NeuResurgens]

Germany has this system. For people who know that they don't want to go to college, technical/trade schools should be an option for them, and college degrees shouldn't be required to get a job for them.

This is something they could potentially focus on with the big push that's been going on for free community college. The funding could be directed at non-university degree requiring jobs.

Of course, there is still the issue of people doing these entry level jobs trying to support a family, while minimum wage is certainly not enough to make as a career. However, raising all minimum wage to livable standards has its own effects on the behavior of businesses, so it's hard to balance this even if we do give people vocational training. Perhaps some of these people, with their vocational schooling, would be able to open businesses of their own rather than work for an employer?

 

[Mad Jack]

It does not have to be a straight 6-year program... People can just take 2 year prereqs anywhere and go to a 3-year med school (not 4-year)...

I prefer the 6 year model. Most 3-year programs are tied to specific specialties or residency programs, which I really don't believe in. I think every physician should be trained broadly, as that, coupled with the first two years of basic sciences, is what separates us from NPs and other substandard providers.

 

[NontradCA]

@SouthernSurgeon a good reason to bring up the military is because it's not the same water. The military and police exist to protect the rich. We can agree on this point, right?

Well, I think poor people should have equal protections. You know, like food. Like the large percentage of enlisted members who use food stamps, who by the way, do all America's dirty work. But hey, these people vote against their own interests, so I can't defend them so much.

 

[Bloodmoney]

Only problem I see is that I have a good German friend made the decision to go with clinical psychology before she was really ready for it, as the system called for these kind of early choices. She came out and was dealing with seriously disgusting criminals when she was much too young in my opinion. Something to be said to allow for maturity. She ended up being able to switch careers though in a different country, and I think she is pretty happy now.

 

[Bloodmoney]

Perhaps the answer is that we should require everyone to go into the military for a couple years straight out of high school. ...Just kidding