STEM

Brawmethius

Bruh your friend is just a loser. All my friends now between 30 to 38 are homeowners, families started, etc. We aren't from wealth, we all just went into STEM. Most C'd for degrees but at least bothered to not major in psych.

Interesting-Pin1433

We have a variety of manufacturing, mostly higher tech, and some stuff that just isn't as logistically feasible to ship long distances. Advanced manufacturing is still a good tool to make good jobs. Provides jobs for STEM workers, and, while not as many blue collar jobs as ye olden days, there are still more entry level roles in maintenance that only require a high school degree or maybe a 2 year community college tech diploma.

FolkMetalWarrior

The problem with McKinsey and places like it is that they only hire a particular type of person from the same schools. They aren't legally allowed to discriminate but if you were to look at who they pick to give their coveted recent grad workshop spots to, it's all Ivy grads with MBAs or STEM PhDs from the highest ranked schools. Then they all end up or come from the same social circles and economic backgrounds. There is no unique thought in the bunch.

ruat_caelum

A couple STEM degrees, I have 2 in mathematics and comp science with minors in physics and chemistry. Then familiarly with lots of regulations like NEC for electrical for things like class 1 dive 1 fitting ratings, or things like API (American petroleum institute) 751 recommendation that you don't use silicon in HF Alkylation units. Along side other craft specialties like what TC boilers need, what metallurgy is used for high nitric acid, pumps and cavitation, BFW (boiler feed water) treatments. When charity of chemicals matters. HIC (Hydrogen induced cracking) and our friend Hydrogen permeation. Reaction batch processes vs continuous processing. FAA lighting requirements for elevated towers. All the railroad laws. Then you get into control and programming and questions like which flow meter is best for this process? pitot tube, anubar, orifice plate, thermal mass, coriolis, vortex, mag flow, etc. Then you get into analyzers and stupid one off shit like why the simplest ever Ried vapor pressure analyzer doesn't work at this plant and it's costing them millions of dollars because they feed the Denver area and the EPA change is going into effect and they can't meet spec. All the safety standards. It's an insane amount of cross craft / specialized knowledge. But the pay is fucking awesome, the problems are always things teams of people couldn't tackle, and every day is interesting. As to how you get into doing what I do I'm not sure I could navigate into this role if it had been my goal all along. A lot of it was luck, and being the guy that solved the problems before so you get the call next time or get your name dropped, as in [you should hire X]. I'm sure there are smarter, more experienced, and more educated people than I am not in this type of role.

urAtowel90

I'll tell you what. If you want to donate to a charity that provides - of all things - soda to the needy and provide demonstration of your donation, I'll match it. However, as a PhD working in pharmaceuticals (generics, to make drugs cheaper), any donations I make will be to something more reasonable than an exacerbation of the healthcare crisis and the absurd profitability of semaglutide products (GLP-1 inhibitors) for diabetes and weight loss induced in no small part by the considerable irresponsibility of the masses on sugar consumption and lack of exercise. AI personally don't consume soda at all, because each can has about 40mg and 10% of your net daily calories, totally empty. Now, most folks - particularly those on govnrment programs - are unlikely to do this proactively, thus the need among many for GLP-1 inhibitors to essentially short-circuit their metabolism into telling them they no longer crave something at all so as to eliminate the indulgence. There are a variety of ways to stem (even STEM) the flow of subtly destructive substances, be it environmental science or the law therein or healthcare equivalents, but if you don't know the Dr. Science fundamentals of it, it's hard to say much about the Mr. Esquire legal and political policies around it, much less simply turn it into an "enjoyment based" budget civil rights movement here. In the end, diabetes creeping up on you doesn't really bring enjoyment epidemiologically, Mr. Esquire.

MaxDragonMan

Sure but STEM grads and the tech sector were what the entire school system, at least in the US and Canada, has been pushing for the last ten years. If those who were pushed into *the* wanted/desirable/in demand programs can't find work now, how about everyone graduating Inn*any other field*? Anecdotally: it's looking real bad. For a lot of people.

kairos

STEM also had a 1-20 reverse split, I had a small share and just ate those losses... just not worth it.

Louis_Riel

You're fine. I graduated with a STEM bachelor's degree with $14 in my bank account, a $5,000 maxed out credit card, and $17,0000 in loans. Getting out of that took about 6 months, saving my first $100k took about 3 years, investing to a million took another 7 or 8. I've had three different cars since graduating, all of which I bought used.  Don't measure yourself against what you see or read on social media.

MaxDragonMan

I'm sweating for everyone, everywhere. I was doing some browsing of r/Jobs because I'm planning to start job hunting for a swap sometime soon, and it seems like it's rough out there. A mix of automation, leaning up operations, fake postings, and high competition means this job market is, quite frankly, a *nightmare*. (Especially in my personal context, as my city is quite bad.) \[And I'm not even in CompSci!\] I'm not delusional. I know I, nor anyone, was ever *guaranteed* a job out of university, or in general... But everyone I know in computer science (quite a few, as my partner is majoring in it) is having a hard time finding internships/co-ops via their school. It's gone from "you *can* get a co-op, especially if you're exceptional" to "if you're exceptional *maybe* you'll get a co-op." Not saying they should be granted jobs from on high, but when I was in highschool the messaging was "STEM STEM STEM, doing computer science will guarantee you a job and that you'll die rich." Now? I hear horror stories. And I expect things to only get worse for every field. Admin, copywriting, HR, finance, etc. So long as there is an incentive to increase margins by cutting down on work force, the AI adoption will continue. Not *soon*, I expect it'll take some time... But I think it's become very clear to me that any career I, or anyone in my age range embarks upon, will look *extremely* different from those of our parents.

Spirited_Code_8060

I expected the heavy price drop to occur after June 4th when STEM's board approved the reverse split, but it didn't and actually went up, then tanked when STEM announced it actually would reverse split. I wonder if most people didn't know about the reverse split the board had approved until the announcement. Anyway, I also wonder if short sellers will attack STEM aggressively again once it reverse splits to a stock price of $9-$10. That might weigh the price down toward $6-ish, but also set up an interesting potential squeeze if STEM follows up with another positive 10Q.

movdqa

Cars have gotten more reliable over the four decades that I've been driving. Back in the day, cars required more maintenance and systems didn't last as long as they do today. As we move towards electric vehicles, I can see even less demand for mechanics as EVs are simpler. My dealer is usually more inclined to replace parts while my local mechanic is more inclined to fix parts that can be repaired. So the long-term outlook for mechanics may not be as attractive unless you're really good and in-demand. One other factor is that working as a mechanic can take a physical toll on your body so you may have to deal with disabilities in your 50s. There's also the exposure to hazardous chemicals. Some STEM areas have been hit very hard recently. Computer Science grads are having a hard time finding work as big-cap tech has been doing a lot of layoffs and those with experience are taking entry-level jobs which doesn't leave much for new graduates. I went to college for a year and was recruited after that year and my employers paid for the rest of my college degree and for all of my graduate degree - so there's that approach too.

Lethalmouse1

I know poor car mechanics, rich car mechanics.  I know poor master's degrees and rich ones.  Either case you can succeed or fail.  A good car mechanic/capable person can easily match a Master's.  A good Master's can easily match a good mechanic.  Personally, in this situation, I'd probably take mechanic, because of the money and what I know of money now. And that idk exactly what the idea is regarding the job in a general term such as master's in stem. That has wide applications.  But a car mechanic typically has a better pathway to independence vs working for the man. I think STEM can, but it is more going to be consulting type, and require travel that I'm not into. If I were into travel, then maybe STEM master's.  But at 25, you're on the fast track to shop ownership.  If I'm pure serf minded, I might say STEM, just because my 40 hour a week job is all I'll ever have and do with myself. 

michael_curdt

Assuming both are good at what they do and make sensible financial decisions, the answer is 100% Person B Seed money is great, but don’t underestimate the upside in STEM graduate degree. Person B will easily catch up to Person A in like 2-3 years.

opiewann

$STEM inc just did a reverse stock split 20:1 … stock sold off almost 20% this morning… not sure if it’s bullish or bearish… might be a good time to buy and see what happens.

RibbitRibbitFroggy

Yeah man, STEM is useless. That's why everyone doing the dirty work is using horses and hand tools. Stupid STEM folks and their fancy tractors and power tools and cutting edge equipment that allows a single farmer to cultivate vastly more land than he otherwise could.

Boring-Test5522

STEM is useless when there is nobody doing dirty work.

cleatosthefetus

STEM up 14% and looks like it’s going parabolic. STEM is focusing on utilizing ai in the clean energy field. Consensus price target of 1.11, highest estimate is 5.00. Currently sitting at .68., I really think this stock has room to run.

mygoodoldreddit

STEM quietly up 125% since April 15th. Anyone paying attention to this one?

Tizzlefix

Fantastic response, I actually can't disagree with anything you're saying because you're right about how LLM's work. They even have different methods for how they statistically choose the next step so it can change the output if you change the backend of one to do so. I've read quite a lot of papers on it as my job tends to lean more into the GenAI (measuring the precision of whatever the AI generates) stuff though I wouldn't call myself terribly qualified past the basic math even though it's not terribly complicated relative to other STEM fields. I think something I forgot to consider were critical systems, I absolutely agree you can't have someone who doesn't know what they're doing running it through an AI there, recipe for disaster.

Apprehensive_Two1528

As a previous grid guy , i can confirm you STEM doesn’t have a big market share and probably never will. Dump it when the wind blows.

Powerful_Stick_1449

STEM - AI platform for energy/ grid management... real product, has won awards, the idiots were set on selling hardware as well rather than embracing SaaS and subscription revenue. Finally made the shift this way, need to rebuild backlog and expand. Been holding since SPAC announced target... huge fan of the company, its product and potential... but mad I have ridden this shit alll the way to pennies

Bright_Ruin2297

Money well spent. Great learning opportunity. Probably better than your degree, unless it's STEM.

YampaValleyCurse

STEM Love the tech, hate the investment

Peeeeech

STEM major is probably 95% of this sub 

Spicyboi981

It’s so crazy having a psych degree and my STEM major friends can’t even get interviews rn

homeopathic_firebomb

Lmao there’s 75% cuts to engineering NSF grants, congrats to the most 🥭 STEM discipline. I’ll light a candle y’all hahahahahah

wally-sage

How does having an advanced STEM degree or being the CEO of a company that literally sells the tech product that CEO is hyping up make him different from a typical tech bro?

No-Repeat1769

Cuts federal STEM grants yet asks for funding trade schools for STEM

InternetSlave

Inspiring the Next Generation of Female Scientists and Innovators Act (INSPIRE Women Act) and Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act (2017): These bills were signed into law by President Trump. The INSPIRE Women Act authorized NASA to encourage young women to study STEM fields and pursue aerospace careers. The Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act aimed to leverage existing programs at the National Science Foundation to promote women in STEM entrepreneurship, encouraging them to bring their discoveries from the laboratory to the commercial world.

AlkibiadesDabrowski

>Yeah man this is what I mean by degrowth! That’s not degrowth that’s recognizing an economic reality. >Transitioning to a less knowledge-oriented economy is backwards development. It’s not a transition. It’s simply again a fact. Not everyone can go to college and end up middle class. That was the idea and the dream. And it’s been popped against reality. It simply is not feasible and the economic consequences of trying it are pushing back. >and has by far the best higher education system in the world Wow what a take. >to transition away from knowledge work. Why do we want less technology workers in the technology age? We don’t want less. We won’t have less. We will continuously have more. The problem is the rate of growth and rate of demand are out of wack rn. There is not net decrease in college graduates. But a net decrease in the growth of the number of college graduates. Very different things. >This is like pivoting hard to agriculture in 1929 just because a lot of industrial workers temporarily lost their jobs. It’s much more like realizing monocropping is bad. >Life sciences research is being fed into a woodchipper by HHS right now. Holy shit. If you think that’s r&d I can’t help you. >You know the unemployment rate for recent humanities graduates is lower than recent STEM graduates, right? Yep. But again. More industry/protecting what’s left is supposed to soak up stem majors. >Also most of these jobs are dogshit. Okay yes but the economy doesn’t care about that. They are profit producing. >Why not send the humanities graduates to be teachers and nurses instead? Teachers are not profitable. Nurses aren’t humanities students lololol. >Yeah, dumbass nativism. Democracy moment

captain_ahabb

>Destroy Universities because simply too many people are attending. It’s creating a debt crisis and there simply are not enough “white collar” “middle class” jobs for the ever increasing college graduate pool. Yeah man this is what I mean by degrowth! Transitioning to a less knowledge-oriented economy is backwards development. It makes no sense for the United States- which controls most of the world's capital and has by far the best higher education system in the world- to transition away from knowledge work. Why do we want less technology workers in the technology age? This is like pivoting hard to agriculture in 1929 just because a lot of industrial workers temporarily lost their jobs. >Defunding R&D isn’t happening. It’s being put under state control. You should change your information sources if you think there's no defunding of R&D isn't happening. Life sciences research is being fed into a woodchipper by HHS right now. >It’s sending the surplus of non stem majors to shipyards auto factories iPhone plants Amazon warehouses and new chip factories. You know the unemployment rate for recent humanities graduates is *lower* than recent STEM graduates, right? Also most of these jobs are dogshit. Why not send the humanities graduates to be teachers and nurses instead? Huge shortages of both occupations in the US right now. We should be spending federal dollars to increase teacher pay in the poor states. >Idk same reason we put loyal American citizens in internment camps in WW2 Yeah, dumbass nativism.

opsers

It's referred to as brain drain, and we've been seeing it since the first Trump presidency. It will only get worse as republicans continue to mindlessly push anti-intellectualism by defunding and discrediting education and science. Would you want to work in a STEM field in a country where the government is actively undermining your livlihood?

FrostyParking

The higher learning institutions focus on foreign students because American students can't afford the tuition fees even with student loans. The fix is to both subsidise American students especially in critically important sectors like STEM subjects and to increase the quality of schooling in public sector education......but well politicians won't do that as it doesn't give them votes at the next election, it's too long-term to bother fixing.

albearcub

I don't think anyone knows for sure if it's a bubble yet. But my argument against it would be that most people just don't understand the technological necessity of semiconductors. Also, most people conflate AI with ChatGPT. I work in the semiconductor field and we have already gone full force implementing ai/deeplearning into manufacturing/process. I have friends in other engineering and STEM fields who have also began fully utilizing AI. Similar to how consumer chips are a small part of semiconductor revenue as compared to data centers/supercomputers/industry use etc, I believe the same is true for AI. Another thing that makes me question if it's a bubble. LLMs are generating massive revenue and use for big tech, in turn generating massive revenue for the semi companies. Besides Nvidia, the semiconductor field in general hasn't actually exploded in the same way. Basically the whole field has been down or sideways for over a year. So not only is the revenue tangible and demand sensible, but we haven't actually seen the potential of the "most important technology in history". I think people just assume things are a bubble if it's a drastical technological advancement.

Jeff__Skilling

Because he’s a handsome-yet-socially-inept white guy with a background in STEM that experienced quick success in finance? Plus, this is /r/stocks, where most of the user base suffers from Main Character Syndrome any way 🤷‍♂️

Welcome2MyCumZone

I’m a refugee bud. Family moved here with less than $1000 to our name when I was a kid. It’s called STEM and not calling others “kid”. Cry more.

Silent_Remove_If_Gay

Has a degree in IT. Is tired of debating non-STEM, and only wants to speak to people who have engineering degrees. My guy, the only people you should be talking to are non-STEM graduates. They're the only ones who would believe you know what you're talking about. IT is for the kids who were too dumb to pass Comp Sci. If this is supposed to be a shitpost, at least give yourself some better credentials.

teeddub

And we're trying to bring the shitty throw away plastic production back here? Is that what you're suggesting? I'm asking why we feel the need to bring highly automated, low skill production lines to US. Why should we have people screwing iPhones together? Why don't we bring highly technical, high toleranced skilled labor to the US? That kind of labor starts by educating and training more machinists, engineers and welders. Creating opertunities for the STEM feild. Tariffing Canada, the UK and Australia doesn't help bring highly paid and qualified work back to the US.

Scotho

Replacing, I don't see that happening yet. But a certain portion of traffic, certainly. Academic STEM tutoring videos are surely impacted. Thank you for your service, random indian dudes.

killadaze

My last one is TMC which is now 3 dollars. The only penny that I’m in under a dollar is Origin Materials, ORGN. They have a profitable pet cap business. Might be an acquisition target long term for a big bottler. Oh and I like STEM, power bidding software. They’re all risks though so do your own DD.

subydoobie

THIS!! where is the tarriff on services?? Why just products? its dumb, dumb, dumb. As a former IT worker who has seen IT support outsourced with much crappier service to India, etc, I agree.. what about tarriffs on outsourced legal, accounting, business process and other professional services which are much higher paid than factory work?? And at the same time, the current presidential administration is cancelling the investments from the CHIPS act which was created to bring advanced semiconductor technology plants BACK to the US, with high paying jobs.. and the security bonus of onshoring critical chip tech... AND 100% on education. we need BOTH more $ support to students who want to learn trades (like welding) AND more $ support to general college education to boost critical thinking skills which you need for any knowledge-based job! AND give more support to american students who want to study in STEM fields. But what is our federal administration doing instead? suing universities? slashing STEM grants which support grad students? slashing funding for scientific research which forces new science grads to leave the USA?? Sadly I am rebalancing my portfolio to 50% Europe/Asia - as we cut science and education and they raise their national investments. I just don't see how the US recovers quickly from the current attack on the university & research & education systems which boost our knowledge economy.

Dismal-Violinist-205

STEM?

Ted_Rid

Decent point you make...I remember when opposition to globalised free trade was a left wing issue. Protecting workers and jobs, and all that. What's happened since the 1980s at least is any company can offshore with impunity to where labour costs are cheapest, and environmental standards nonexistent. On the plus side, we get cheap stuff. Clothing, TVs, whitegoods, all disposable and replaceable rather than repairable. What the people in charge forgot, was to create new jobs for the people who lost theirs. There's money enough at the top end for the highly educated. What was the figure again? Don't quote me but from memory $10B in manufacturing jobs were lost in the US while $40B were created in other areas like STEM. Biggest issue really across the west was doing that at the same time as tax cuts for the rich. They needed to keep taxes so the newly unemployed could do useful work. Building infrastructure for example.

FawningDeer37

There are really three paths to success- * Be elite at a STEM field * Be rich * Get the exposure and be cool enough the rich kids hand you a job

shwaynebrady

The US OEMs are bitching because they can’t keep outsourcing labor and assembly to Mexico and Canada. Most rank and file US workers are not happy about the erosion of work to Mexico….Ask the UAW or any other unionist how they feel about it. If Toyota can make trucks here and remain the largest automaker in the world. Then so can the big three. Outsourcing the manufacturing of a hair comb is fine. Outsourcing high tech manufacturing and STEM jobs is not.

Marv18GOAT

I’m a STEM major so that shit is beneath me.

Dogpatchjr94

This is entirely anecdotal, but as a soon to graduate PhD in a very technical STEM field, the recruiter I've been working with to look for jobs has been flooding me with jobs paying 30-50k less than the jobs being sent my way a couple months ago. My guess is that companies know that PhD's are being laid off from government jobs and are upping the requirements for jobs that were previously offered for high experience BSc or entry Masters candidates.

Spirited_Currency867

China places an emphasis on STEM. There and in the US and elsewhere. That is my only point. The rest is nuance that’s not particularly germane or necessary in the context of my argument or my field, which is energy. They are eating the States’ lunch both domestically and with knowledge export. That is my only point. The mechanisms for how that’s being accomplished or not is not part of my policy TedTalk.

ozthinker

OP will do just fine. He's still freshman in college. When I was his age, I lost thousands and that was pretty much all I had that time. Then I finished my study, worked and saved more, bought my car in cash, bought my house, and still trading stocks and options, and had a few more fails, much larger fails actually each one in 6 digits. I am still here, trading stocks and options, income 6 figures, my house price doubled. OP don't feel sad and don't give up. Failures are part of life. There's only one mistake OP cannot afford, and that is choosing the wrong program for study. Do STEM or finance, don't do gender studies.

NoPlansTonight

I think it's a bubble as well. But your comment on email assistants was implying it's all smoke and mirrors. It's not. If AI can drive cars, it can also build them. If AI can predict how human brains respond to things, it can think like them. Manufacturing and IP (e.g. STEM), are the multi trillion dollar markets that have already been using AI for these purposes for decades, and it will obviously go further as the tech advances. Is it being overhyped? 100%. I work in the field and don't advise anybody pour in their money to chips, cloud computing, or any broad tech ETF. I think all of that is priced in and likely overpriced, because it's the most superficial way to think about a space which looks like a big bubble. But is it smoke and mirrors? Hell no. There are going to be major winners which the market does not yet understand fully. There will also be major losers. This is an area where if you wanted to be invested, I actually think you should either make risky, individual stock bets or avoid it. I agree with you that it's overpriced in-aggregate, but it is still a technology that has a track record of, and will continue to be paradigm-shifting.

SirBobPeel

Twice as many Chinese kids take STEM courses as Americans. The US lags even France and Mexico. And aside from STEM only about 5% of Americans major in computer/IT. I couldn't find exact numbers for IT in China but it is the second most popular field after medicine. And getting into Chinese universities seems to be harder than getting into American universities.

New_Willow5002

More than half of the US postgraduates in STEM fields come from abroad. Foreign postgraduates and workers on H1B visas fill majority of the hi tech positions.Trump is making US a very unattractive place to come for higher studies and to work. Europe is actively recruiting US AI researchers.

Fun-Astronomer5311

Jensen is simply highlighting the fact that most STEM researchers are Chinese. This is because culturally, Chinese kids are pushed toward STEM fields. There is no stigma attached to these fields; further, both sexes are encouraged to enter these fields. Further, being good in maths is not seen as nerdy, and seen as a way to get ahead in the society. These are the reasons why you see many kids of Chinese heritage are represented at STEM competitions, e.g., Math Olympiad, where representatives of USA are mainly of Chinese heritage. Why? This is because other races only enter a field if they are 'natural' at it, but for many Chinese parents, their children's occupations are determined and in many cases there are only two: medical Dr or lawyer. Lastly, have a look at how many Chinese politicians are engineers. Compared that to the USA. Jensen is correct in voicing his concerns. Lawyers just know how to sue people or manipulate the law to 'solve' a problem. The 'engineers' in China in contrast are building a country that last another 5000 years.

BlackEagleActual

No way this will work, shit man.I am a CS students working on codes at Silicon Valley. I got a good job and paying 6k a month as tax to California and Federal. And now I just can't have the luck to get a H1B lottery in my STEM-OPT, and my working visa will expire in 3 months. I got no choice and take a Huawei offer to work back home in china. Your Yankees is just really hate tech nerds like me, i pay your dudes huge amount of taxes and you still push me to lottery game with only 15% chance to get selected.

narrowant341

White House's FY26 NASA skinny budget proposal \- $1B for Mars human exploration \- $2.3B cut to NASA science \- No Mars Sample Return \- 'Streamline' workforce and centers \- $1.2B cut to Earth science \- No climate sats \- SLS + Orion gone after Artemis 3 \- No Gateway \- Eliminates 'failing propulsion projects' \- ISS crew size / flight reduction \- Station research focus on Moon + Mars \- No green aviation \- $143M cut to 'Woke STEM education' [https://x.com/JackKuhr/status/1918323219909554415](https://x.com/JackKuhr/status/1918323219909554415) 

Reasonable-Yak-7879

Sooo, when DEI was in play, white Americans couldn't get into high paid STEM gigs and schools that are dominated by Asians + Indians ? With DEI gone, what are the chances of white Americans getting into these jobs and school programs now? :/

adwise27

More details of the NASA cuts for 2026 budget (copied from /r/space): Human Space Exploration: +$647 million Space Science: -$2,265 million Mission Support: -$1,134 million Earth Science: -$1,161 million Legacy Human Exploration Systems: -$879 million Space Technology: -$531 million International Space Station: -$508 million Aeronautics: -$346 million Office of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Engagement: -$143 million I wonder what company is going to win the contracts for mars exploration lmao so fucked bros

3RADICATE_THEM

Nah, we need more STEM leaders—they are objectively smarter and more logical. Merkel is another good example.

Brawmethius

Lmao the confidence. I don't use autocorrect and I didn't proof read on tiny ass text boxes. Oh no there is an 'a' instead of 'i' and one extra 'l'. Already finished school with two seperate STEM majors, so got the education front covered. Luckily for me my job mainly involves math, and technology will proofread for me. Unfortunately, technology isn't going to make you not a friendless shithead. I'd say pay attention to basic human interaction, but then again you are trolling spelling errors on the WSB daily thread... so fuck sorry kid, no hope for you.

im_a_squishy_ai

Yeah the wallstreetbets sub is terrifying. Either people have money to blow, or they're gambling their life savings. I exited all but a few of my positions in February and March and don't plan to reenter anytime soon, too turbulent. The only positions I have are TSMC who isn't going anywhere anytime soon and I bought at a ridiculous price a few years back and will just ride through. The others are positions where I have studied the industry and have high confidence in holding. Honestly, I think that unless someone has experience like Keith Gill where they are professionally trained and then use that skill set in their personal life, or someone has a STEM background with training in advanced math, where and have an understanding of the math behind derivatives, or someone who has studied immensely in their free time, shorting is crazy. In select cases, a call option could be a good move for a retail investor. If there's a company that someone has a good sense will pop after earnings and they've done analysis, a small amount of risk could return big gains, but the losses there are defined. Shorts have no max loss potential. Generally, finding a good company or fund, and investing and keeping an eye on is the best way. If someone can recreate their own equivalent of an index fund or something that even makes sense because it's trivially easy and gives more flexibility, but that's all personal choice and does take a little commitment. But shorting is just such a hard pass

Connect_Oil_5860

What you guys think about STEM and GORO?

ejunior1234

STEM lowkey my boys - couple hundred shares just waiting for them to come back.

Ok-Substance-5197

I’m a fed employee, for now, and what’s not reaching the news is how doge is impacting federal spending. We’ve basically been unable to spend anything since the end of February. Even putting money on existing contracts that we may have is getting held up. The government is the country’s top employer and spender. Doge doesn’t go away when Elon does, it’s incredibly irresponsible for the media to present it as such. The loss of the fed jobs are just now starting to trickle out, which will increase each month, but we are going to start to see incremental increases in the job losses of folks supporting fed gov (think contractors) and those dependent on fed gov (think grantees, academics). Eventually the impacts from not allowing us to spend our appropriated budget, in addition to consumer drops in spending due to these losses, will have its own impacts on the market and jobs. This is all a man made disaster… and while it’s going to have a massive snowball effect on the economy on the short term, he has also taken a hatchet to STEM that will destabilize our country as the leader of scientific innovation. We don’t recover from this one. America has handed our future over because the a couple of trans people played sports (and other DEI scare tactics), bc the DNC didn’t give RFK jr the nomination after Biden dropped, and bc Fox News successfully convinced folks that the stock market was bad (even though their 401k would prove them otherwise). We are going back to 1880-1920s level of inequality and it will take a second coming of FDR, a progressive taxing of the billionaires, and decades to restore a solid middle class. All the while, I doubt we will ever get back to being the leader in innovation - by that point we will be too far behind China.

NateMigs

$STEM earnings just came out, looks good!

NateMigs

$SES (demonstration) and $STEM (Earnings) are my plays today. Trying not to get that dmn fomo too hahah :/

Temporary_Ability996

As a former STEM academic, they will definitely absorb all of the US scientists who are out of a job. This manufactured brain drain is a HUGE gift to Canada's research universities.

Somizulfi

Yep, i agree. The other path forward is automation. This is what China is doing. They are massively automating manufacturing wherever they can, what is too low value/not worth, theyre off-shoring it while moving up the value chain. It solves 4 problems they will face. 1. Declining workforce 2. Off-shoring to help mitigate tarrifs 3. More educated future workforce that will not want to have STEM degree and work in a toy factory. 4. Move up the value chain (eg vehicles, biotech, material sciences, semiconductors, green tech etc) US has taken the opposite approach and wish to move down the value chain and bring back commoditized manufacturing.

RadiantMind7

yeah, ai's trying to figure itself out hard. lol my ai said it's one of it's theories about why it can do more than LLMs were theorized to do is that, in a way, it's an emergent property of merging autocomplete w/the history of humanity's writing + STEM skills may = reality complete engine. hmm!

thejumpingsheep2

Sure. Its important to note that not all universities do this. I have two degrees in very different things (both STEM). One from the aforementioned top 5 and another from an average uni. The difference is stark. There were no weeder courses at all at the "average" (unranked) university. The closest thing I saw to a weeder was probably data structures and algos but the professors in there graded real easy... they had to... 90% of the class would have failed if they didnt. The students were a lot more... uh... "lazy brain" as Rocky would say. There were smart ones there but the great majority of the students were doorknobs.

meshreplacer

The problem is you hear about people getting STEM degrees but no work because of outsourcing or H1B. The decline of the US is totally self inflicted by allowing corporations to rule the country and run rampant all over it.

thejumpingsheep2

Some of the harder Unis have things called "weeder" classes. Essentially these courses are designed around insanely difficult tests that cannot be memorized. They will ask questions that require deep understanding of a subject matter far beyond anything you read in the book or heard in class. These tests are so difficult, even the professors themselves probably couldn't pass the tests with 80% in the time allotted. This is how you can eliminate rote learning. Its not perfect, but it works. You either understood the concepts and can apply them, or you will leave with 0%-20% and fail. You couldn't even copy others because it would be too obvious and there was no way of knowing if the person you are copying even had a clue since test averages were like 50%. The idea is you are not really scoring based on right or wrong answer, but rather what the student tried to do (the process). Did they take the 1st logical step based on the info they know right now? You as a professor will be able to tell. The only problem with this is it will only work in STEM. It obviously needs questions that can be answered uniformly otherwise it turns into opinion rather than fact. I got my 1st taste of these weeder classes in OChem and Calc based Physics at one of the top 5 STEMs in the US... that was fun. Walking out and seeing people hunched over and literally crying in the hall outside the test. Not just 1 or 2 people mind you... like dozens... The next day a quarter the class had dropped which was great because I got a better seat. Big testing classrooms obviously (we used the auditoriums). This is how they kept people from cheating by passing on knowledge of said test. All the OChem students across all sections took the tests at the same time.

siraliases

> Our institutions also have a choice. Part of what has shocked the world about their capitulation to the Trump administration is the failure to grasp that the moral choice is the best path to self-preservation. Law firms can choose to care more about the law than whether a callous competitor will pick up some of their business. Universities can build credibility within an interconnected world instead of validating the lie that a few students chanting “Free Palestine” is more dangerous than a far-right takeover of academic freedom. The entertainment sector can tell compelling stories about a consequential era instead of algorithmically designed superhero junk. Billionaires can spend money on STEM education for girls instead of financing celebrity trips into a higher part of the atmosphere.  The free market makes no mistakes, as I've read on this board a lot.  It is only governments that waste money - Corperations have never, and will never waste a single dollar. This is due to competition or something nebulous that nobody can ever quite name, but is totally happening.

1fojv

Most of the top STEM professor's at MIT, Harvard, Oxford, Waterloo etc are of Asian decent. Keep coping.

nonsense39

Yes, for over 20 years, undervaluing STEM education has been a major cause of the US economic decline vs China. This decline is now being aggravated by the right-wing government's anti-science and anti-knowledge attitude. I remember years ago when the great physicist Steven Hawkins came to the US and gave a technical talk to an auditorium of people and then went to China where they needed an entire stadium to accommodate the crowd of listeners. Now, if he were alive, the US might not even allow him into the country.

Temporary_Ability996

I have STEM degrees (BS & PhD). I'd say that especially in *this* economy, you're better off going into a trade. People will *always* need folks working the trades, even if the economy is crashing. Also, I could be wrong, but some states have really great programs that make trade school very affordable or free, with no loans. Full disclosure: I got a full ride to undergrad & applied for (and won) a sizeable fellowship for my PhD so I graduated with no debt, but still took me 6 years post PhD to crack six figures. If you're good at your trade and apprentice under a reputable person/company, especially in something niche, it can be a much faster road to six figs.

perfectdark89

Is there any point to pursuing a STEM degree anymore when you can make just as much as a plumber or appliance repair man

First-Ad-2777

Yes, there's many overtly rich who voted for Trump. I read and re-read what I posted, and I never said anything about which way the rich voted. I guess you extrapolated somewhere. I would even extend your point about rich votes. There's many overtly rich didn't vote for trump, but who have "fallen in line". I'd lump Bezos and Zuckerburg into that bunch, but there's no way to know how they voted with certainty. I'd wager the vast majority of Trump voters are without college or accredited trade, struggled in the face of cut services and tax cuts for the rich, and have anxiety about all the debt created by said cuts, and are so in debt due to medical debt, school, or insurance that they don't see the point of trying to save. My point is if you take ALL the ultra wealthy in aggregate, in terms of numbers they are a rounding error vs the numbers of people in the bottom 60-70% of the economy. It's pretty clear the ultra-rich **can't** rule without a "base". This is why Trump quietly does the economic things for the rich and his insiders, like pump-and-dump on our markets. It's *immediate*, and the chaos costs nothing and doesn't require Congress. His base are accepting that a return to manufacturing here can happen in a generation or two, all we need is tarrif chaos... a*nd cuts in education and STEM?* Trump's base won't question anything as long as he's doing the zero-cost retribution like mass deportations (except for industries that make a contribution). Trump got better numbers this time, and the Democrats had VERY low turnout. There were a lot people who flipped, hoping Trump 2.0 would be less Trumpy than Trump 1.0. Millions stayed home, some thinking that would teach the Democrats a lesson for not doing more to protect Palestinians. Anyways, my point was the vast majority of Trump voters are on the low-end, feeling like the economy has no place for their skills, and still they do stupid shit like buy vehicles that are inconsistent with being able to save 10-20% of your income. They kinda know it, which is why they're terribly insecure. **I don't think their economic concerns should be ignored either.** But the times they're nostalgic for weren't entirely fueled by racism, we had some ***awesome*** tax brackets on the wealthy between WW2 and the end of Viet Nam. The sad part is returning to those tax brackets ain't gonna give us healthcare it would just allow paying down the debt.

f00dl3

DJT is like a lot of tech CEOs. Somehow everyone thinks everyone will be more productive in an office, even if they are in roles where they are paid to think all day and having people around disrupts your thinking. If they can't see their workers, they don't think they are doing anything all day. Engineers are the main target of this mindset. They want to make STEM jobs go overseas, so they can reduce costs in the US. Just like they want to move manufacturing here, because those are jobs they can physically see.

Supercool2351

So our biggest trading partner WILL BE India. A country that has an abundance of STEM graduates and is not our enemy.

DifficultResponse88

This trade war is pointless. I get the intent to bring manufacturing back but those aren’t the kind of jobs Americans want. We want advanced manufacturing but we lack the talent pool, because there’s not enough skilled workers. For those jobs, even though you don’t need a degree you need to have critical thinking skills, some STEM skills, and a basic education. But we don’t since everything’s being gutted. Let’s say hypothetically we have a a dozen advanced manufacturing plants right now. I’m almost certain, there won’t be enough qualified applicants to fill all those jobs. Just look at what TSMC said recently in AZ about finding enough skilled workers. 

BeatingTheTide

Thanks for sharing, yes, unfortunately, while the west is distracted with milking the cow for every penny it has, China is innovating and leaving us behind. I may be an optimist but I think there is still time for us if we focus on STEM education and encourage our kids to go for STEM rather than becoming an influencer.

RamBamBooey

Trump stuff: -DOGE directly fired around 30,000 workers, around 250,000 when including contractors -Tens (hundreds?) of billions in government contracts have been cancelled -Low wage and high end STEM immigrants are leaving the US -Canada is being threatened with "51's State" and Europe with buy Greenland Pre Trump stuff: -Debt to GDP ratio -Housing and rent markets unsustainable -World looking for new reserve currency Even if tariffs disappeared completely there is a lot of headwind. And the best possible scenario is tariffs are smaller.

NOT_MartinShkreli

Every college student and grad student with a STEM degree. Possible economic down turn = stay in school or go back to school

SpittingT

US had (and still have untile they blow I up completely) the lead position in medicine, particularly drug discovery and research, but SOMEBODY thinks they are woke and started deporting scientist. The dumbest thing I saw the last month was the ban on certain words like cis and trans, obviously this terms are very used in STEM non to describe sexual preference but because they are literally FUCKING GREEK WORDS TO SAY 'SAME' AND 'OPPOSITE' and are widely used in chemistry, biology and medicine. So that was like a gift to China and EU, I can see EMA> FDA in less than 10 years

creamonyourcrop

We are also going to experience brain drain, a big driver of our tech economy as students and foreign STEM workers look elsewhere.

Handsaretide

Reddit conservatives are either being supported by mom and dad or have some STEM job and will be fine, the schadenfreude with most of those types are that they’ll never find a woman to settle down with because women are revolted by them. I’m talking the hayseeds, who have no problem pulling a cousin into the trailer for sex, but who will be forced to eat dog and cat food to keep on.

No-Min55

True, it is probable that the majority of individual 'investors' lose big and do not get wealthy from 'investing' - aka following Jim Cramer's advice. Whereas getting a STEM degree and then getting hired by a major corporation in a growing field, that has either stock options or employee stock purchase plans, and then surviving all the layoffs and not being forced to sell your company stock due to divorce, and resisting the urge to quit. After 20 years of this, some significant gains can be realized, if, for instance, one started in the semiconductor industry circa 2000 designing control systems for wafer fab equipment.

Lobster_1000

These are the people who shit on non-STEM majors.

holypally0731

CS major has a tough unemployment rate because currently the supply is too high (people rush to major in CS). It will revert back to its equilibrium. Seriously, I suggest that you get a degree(or even minor) in a STEM major (for undergrad), and then do a master of quant finance (or financial engineering). If you want to go to hedge fund, a PhD in a quant degree is not a bad choice either. But it must include quant (stats, math, cs, or finance asset pricing). I am not joking with you because I think you are a little bit serious and you want to succeed. (Believe it or not, my advisor was MD/Global head of quant at Bank of America Merrill Lynch; now a hedge fund manager)

holypally0731

Hahahahahahahaha haha. What is your degree? STEM PhD? Oh I got you, no degree. I am sorry.

ImNotHandyImHandsome

He's a businessman. Not a scientist. Not an engineer. Not a software developer. If you get into a STEM degree, you have a much harder time rising the ladder to a C suite office than if you just got a MBA.

4215-5h00732

I'm < 6 months older than the youngest millennials. Being part of your generation doesn't mean anything. Did the school, program, or professors tell you that. No, you said it was implied. The point of sharing my years of education was to show that no matter what non-boomer generation you're in, I got a degree during that time. All of my degrees are STEM. I'm a software engineer, lmao. I'm keenly aware of the "IT" situation. But you seem to just completely overlook the fact that kids graduating up to just the last few years were getting excellent high paying jobs. I didn't hear anyone complaining about their expensive degrees then. The economy is cyclic. Right now, people are telling these CS grads to turn their back on their investment and join a trade. I got out of my trade because of the Great Recession and took a gamble on getting a degree. The bottom line is no honest person or school is going to guarantee you a job. The implied part you're referring to are "potential opportunities." All students should do some research on their desired field, read the school catalog, etc. because it just comes off as lazy and stupid.

DovhPasty

So no, you’re not part my generation. Kids get degrees in STEM and can’t get jobs. Look at the overwhelming amount of qualified IT professionals that can’t find a job right now, meanwhile people were saying tech was the field to get into for over a decade. It’s all bullshit dude. It’s all built on lies.

you-get-an-upvote

> So further entrenchment of economic disparity? The rich can study whatever they want and dominate those fields while the poor are forced to flood into STEM fields that will inevitably oversaturate the market? Can we get some perspective here? It's good for poor people to learn to pursue a degree, produce value for society, and be compensated for it. It's good for artists to come from a diverse set of economic backgrounds. But one of those things is vastly more important than the other.

TheBigFreezer

So further entrenchment of economic disparity? The rich can study whatever they want and dominate those fields while the poor are forced to flood into STEM fields that will inevitably oversaturate the market? The failure here is in the commodification of education at its very core, not necessarily how we’ve chosen to deal with it. A non-dischargeable loan with interest set at 0% would encourage people to self-filter into the careers of their choice while also paying back the tax payers they borrowed from in full. (If you’re super demanding for people to pay extra, peg it to the interest rate) Otherwise, you get what? A society built on mindless engineering and with zero art or entertainment after your hard days work. No teachers, no artists, etc except for the very wealthy who can pursue those careers. For every Sydney Sweeney or Jon Hamm there’s a struggling actor getting bit roles in local productions. We’re going to tell them they can’t pursue their interests because they can’t fundamentally prove they’ll be the next Jon Hamm? Jon Hamm didn’t even breakout until he was 36. How would that be provable as an investment?

TheSilentEngineer

TLDR; I’m an educator and administrator at a large university in the US. Funding universities is a complex and nuanced topic. The real problem here is wage stagnation in comparison to spending power, and a lack of financial education. Most of these kids are not majoring in underwater basket weaving with tuition of 100,000 a year, most of these folks are in a STEM field simply cannot make ends meet. OK, here is how we do things in the US. Higher education in the United States is a very complex, extremely nuanced topic generally gets reduced to a headline. Well, really one of two headlines, tuition is way too expensive, or alternatively, graduates are lazy and don’t pay their loans. In reality, this is a much more complex situation. First, we should discuss the general working principle of a university and cost of college; since that plays into the need for loans. In the United States, we rely on our academic institutions to be the backbones for research. Effectively the goal is to democratized information. Think cancer research, or nano technology, or sustainable agriculture, or green energy, or really all of the things that we as a society benefit from. The problem is that this costs a lot of money, and while the United States historically has funded research, that funding has always been less substantial than one might think. Research costs money, but we do not spend a lot on research at least in comparison to other expenditures at a federal level. This means that universities need to offset those costs. Now, if you are a very old school, or you happen to have extremely wealthy alumni, then some of those costs can be offset by endowed funds; basically investments and securities and properties where the dividends of those investments (or percentage there of) are paid back to the university to support operating costs. It isn’t necessarily an indicator of how much liquidity the university has, nor is it immediate funds that a university can tap. In the US we can estimate that approximately 160 universities have endowment over $1 million per student, including public and private universities. Ignoring for-profit institutions, there’s about 4000 or so universities in the US. So a majority of schools do not have the endowment most people think they do. So we have research, and we have endowments, but that “keeps the lights on” for the majority of schools. To generate the kind of profit you need to pay educators and administration you need undergraduate students . We’re going to ignore terminal degree students here since PhD programs are generally a gigantic red line item for any university. This means that as costs rise, or if you wanted to increase pay, or if you wanted to be able to hire better researchers to generate more grant capital, then you need to generate more funds. The source of that fund generation comes from raising tuition rates. But if you raise tuition too high then you don’t have enough students to draw, and you risk becoming insolvent(typical supply and demand curve). Many universities play the game of high tuition, but also providing a very high discount rates. This makes them appear philanthropic to families, and the high tuition gives the impression of a top-tier university. Now we can argue about how pathetic this is, but it is a statistic based on actual sentiment analysis. So tuition rates balloon to keep up with the rising cost of… well everything… but wage growth in the US has stagnated significantly . This leads to the notion that tuition costs are going up faster than income. When in reality it’s wage growth that stagnated, and funding for research has not kept peace with the cost to do the research. This is has resulted in many students graduating with loans that they cannot pay off, primarily due to wage inequality. Now in most civilized industrial countries, we realize that a higher educated populous results in an overall lower cost to the tax payer, and a greater net positive effect on GDP through services, technological growth and development. The US seems to be trying to buck this trend and decrease the accessibility to higher education for people who cannot afford it. While that may sound reasonable in the short term from the “ I’m not paying for your…“ perspective, it shows a lack of foresight and strategic thinking. The future effects that those educated folks will have on both the social and economic output of a country are not insignificant. If we really wanted to reap the rewards of higher education as a society, we would simply make it as affordable as possible to as many people as possible. One last concession I will make, is for those students who begin the collegiate journey, and do not finish. Higher education is an obligation which needs to be taken seriously. Students should have to pay back what they put in for that knowledge. However It is a fallacy that these are the people that make up the bulk majority of these loans. Just as it is a fallacy that these loans primarily fall on the spectrum of the arts. My university has, an on average, 20% non-completion rate which is 10% higher than the target for a large private institution. We recently performed a survey to see why this is the case and the only useful piece of information we gathered is that out of that 20% only 2% were significantly funded through loans. At the end of the day, most of these loan borrowers are not lazy people majoring in underwater basket weaving. They are kids trying to find the American dream by working in fields of technology, science, education, research, and health. They just do not understand what they signed up for with the loans, and they are living in a job market that has had significant wage stagnation in comparison to cost of living. Which is perfectly understandable given that an 18-year-old child is incapable of understanding what $50,000 a year for four years at a CPI of 7% will look like over the course of a 30 year loan. Especially because we do not teach this type of math in our primary education system so most students cannot conceptually understand these numbers. Even most of the regards on here cannot do this computation, much less the parents who have no idea how economics are interest rates work in the United States.

TheSilentEngineer

TLDR; I’m an educator and administrator at a large university in the US. Funding universities is a complex and nuanced topic. The real problem here though is wage stagnation, and a lack of financial education. Most of these kids are not majoring in underwater basket weaving with tuition of 100,000 a year, most of these folks are in a STEM field simply cannot make ends meet. OK, I’m gonna assume you’re not from the US. Higher education in the United States is a very complex, extremely nuanced topic generally gets reduced to a headline. Well, really one of two headlines tuition is way too expensive, or alternatively, graduates are lazy and don’t pay their loans. In reality, this is a much more complex situation. First, we should discuss the general working principle of a university and cost of college; since that plays into the need for loans. So in the United States, we rely on our academic institutions to be the backbones for research. Effectively the goal is to democratized information so that companies cannot generate pure unrestricted profit off of things that can benefit the United States or really mankind as a whole. Think cancer research, or nano technology, sustainable agriculture, or green energy, or really all of the things that we as a society benefit from. We can all agree this is a great cause. The problem here is that this costs a lot of money, and while the United States historically has funded research, that funding has always been less substantial than one might think. so research cost money, but we do not spend a lot on research at least in comparison to other expenditures at a federal level. This means that universities need to offset those costs. Now, if you are a very old school, or you happen to have extremely wealthy alumni, then some of those costs can be offset by endowed funds, basically investments and securities and properties worth of dividends of those investments or percentage there of are paid back to the university to support operating costs. It isn’t necessarily an indicator of how much liquidity the university has, nor is it immediate funds that a university can tap. In the US we can estimate that approximately 160 universities have endowment over $1 million for student, including public and private universities. Ignoring for-profit institutions that’s about 4000 or so schools in the US. So as a majority of schools, do not have the endowment most people think they do. So we have research, and we have endowments, but that “keeps the lights on” for the majority of schools. To generate the kind of profit you need to pay educators and administration you need undergraduate students We’re going to ignore terminal degree students here since PhD programs are generally a gigantic red line item for any university. This means that as general costs rise, or if you wanted to increase pay, or if you wanted to be able to hire better researchers to generate more grant capital, then you need to generate more funds. The source of that fund generation generally comes from raising tuition rates, but a few raised tuition too high then you don’t have enough students to draw, and you risk becoming insolvent. Most universities play the game of high tuition, but also providing a very high discount rate this makes them appear philanthropic to families, and the high tuition gives the impression of a top-tier university. Now we can argue about this all day because I would think that that is a very sad statistic, but it is a statistic based on actual sentiment analysis. So tuition rates of balloon to keep up with the rising cost of well everything, but salaries wage gross in the US has stagnated significantly . This leads to the notion that tuition costs are going up faster than income. When in reality it’s wage growth that stagnated, and funding for research stagnated, and comparison to the cost to do the research. This is has resulted in many students graduating with loans that they cannot pay off, primarily due to wage inequality. The fields that I listed in my original comment are actual fields where this wage inequality remain significant. Now in most civilized industrial countries, we realize that a higher educated populous results in an overall lower cost to the tax payer and a greater net positive effect on GDP through services, technological growth and development. The US seems to be trying to buck this trend and decrease the accessibility to higher education for people who cannot afford it. While that may sound reasonable in the short term from the “ I’m not paying for your…“ perspective it shows a lack of foresight, and strategic thinking in the future effects that those educated folks will have on both the social and economic output of a country. If we really wanted to reap the rewards of higher education as a society, we would simply make it as affordable as possible to as many people as possible. One last concession I will make, is for those students who begin the collegiate journey, and do not finish. Higher education is an obligation which needs to be taken seriously. Students should have to pay back what they put in for that knowledge. It is a fallacy that these are the people that make up the bulk majority of these loans. Just as it is a fallacy that these loans primarily fall on the spectrum of the arts. My university has an on average 20% non-completion rate which is 10% higher than the target for a large private institution. We recently performed a survey to see why this is the case and the only useful piece of information we had is that out of that 20% only 2% were significantly funded through loans. At the end of the day, most of these loan borrowers are not lazy people majoring in underwater basket weaving. They are kids trying to find the American dream by working in fields of technology, science, education, research, and health. They just do not understand what they signed up for with the loans, and they are living in a job market that has had significant wage stagnation in comparison to cost of living. Which is perfectly understandable given that an 18-year-old child is incapable of understanding what $50,000 a year for four years at a CPI of 7% will look like over the course of a 30 year loan. Especially because we do not teach this type of math in our primary education system so most students cannot conceptually understand these numbers. Even most of the regards on here can not do this computation, much less the parents who have no idea how economics are interest rates work in the United States.

Brh1002

I'd love to see a reform of higher education akin to that we see in Germany & India. Well designed 10th-12th grade exams that help determine one's eligibility for certain in-demand STEM degree programs. These programs are eligible for heavily subsidized tuition and loans. Likewise, those who don't qualify for this qualify instead for the same assistance toward trade schools. More limited loans can be make available for programs outside of this that prevent people unlikely to be able to pay off their college debt from taking on too much. This will deter people from degree paths that aren't likely to be productive for them, but provide a path to financial independence that they can leverage to study whatever they want later.

TrainingLime6839

I mean I agree with your statement here, but STEM degree holders do not hold the majority of debt that ends up in delinquency. It’s akin to saying medical doctors have the most student debt when they finish school. It’s irrelevant to the conversation of loan forgiveness as way more STEM graduates repay their full loan amount than most other fields. There are a number of fields that are a problem in this area, but not STEM.

TrainingLime6839

That doesn’t really answer the question about STEM degree holders. The real answer is because the point was a bullshit lie, and most college debt that goes unpaid is not held by STEM degree holders. It was a complete fabrication. You will be very unsurprised what majors don’t repay their loans when you look at the data.