The amount of student debt in the US is massive; over a trillion dollars currently.  Americans currently owe more in student loan debt than they do on credit cards.  The Stafford Loan, for instance, allows students to borrow up to $57,500 as an independent (with no parental support).  Students often compound commercial and federal loans into enormous sums of money – often under the assumption that they’ll be able to find work upon graduation.

Now before you suggest that’s the problem, look again.  The Labor Department for September of 2011 shows an unemployment rate of only 4.5% for those with a college degree.  So an inability to find jobs doesn’t seem to be the norm for graduates.

So we have people investing in their education, and rightly finding work after graduation.  Should be no problem, right?

No.  The problem is two-fold.  The average student debt for 2011 graduates is $22,900.  Since many graduates will have less or even no debt, the numbers among those who took loans is likely significantly higher.

The average salary of 2011 graduates entering the workforce is only $36,866.  Payscale.com provides a handy list of the average annual salary by degree.  It shows the salary for history, sociology, anthropology and others typically starting in the mid-30s and topping out ‘mid-career’ around $60,000.  Based on regional differences, in reality, you have students graduating who may have more debt that they can possibly make – even at Payscale’s “mid-career” salary level.

If we’re going to make changes to how that debt is repaid, we should also make changes to how it is accumulated.  The entire practice of student loans should be reformed in two significant ways.

Capping Student Loans

First, student loans should be subject to the same earnings litmus test that applies to other credit, but more strictly.

Credit cards, home loans, and other consumer debt limits are typically predicated on your ability to repay that debt.  Amex doesn’t hand out black cards to college kids with no income for good reason – they have little ability to repay.  Home loans, at least in theory if not in practice, require you to prove income before you can qualify for more home than you can afford.

Student loans have none of that. Student loans rarely take into account the potential future earnings of the student.  As mentioned, students frequently compound loans.  The problem is it becomes very easy to accumulate more debt than your future earnings will accommodate.

Student loans should be capped at no more than the average annual salary for a student with that degree.  If a student is likely to make no more than $32,000 with a degree in social work, they shouldn’t be allowed to accumulate loans of $57,500 or more.  By capping total student loans for that degree at $32,000 (combining both direct federal and commercial) and applying the administration’s 10% annual limit for repayment, most student loans should be paid off in significantly less than the twenty years proposed for forgiveness (low-interest rates being assumed).

It is inexcusable that students are allowed to graduate carrying debt nearly as high as, or higher than, their ‘mid-career’ earnings.

Restrictions on Student Loan Usage

Often students take out more loan than they need for tuition and books in order to cover living expenses and other incidentals.  Any credit expert will tell you that putting meals and perishables on a credit card is a terrible idea as the interest increases the cost of those items many times over by the time it is paid off.  Student loans have no such restrictions, and unless things have changed dramatically, there are no caveats against using loans this way.

Stafford Loans, as just one example, carry restrictions that the money is too be used for tuition, books, room, board, or “other education related expenses.”  So what qualifies, exactly?  It’s hard to say.  A search for “Stafford Loan Eligible Expenses” turns up absolutely nothing from the Department of Education on the subject, and the FAQs many schools host have that vague “other” language.  Apparently a used car is an education related expense, as are sneakers, iPods, or anything else.

Since the schools typically hand you a check or direct deposit the funds, there is really no telling what those expenses might be.

If we want to help students who are looking at debt based on future earnings, the least we should do is bring these restrictions in line with sound financial advice.  Allowing students to rack up debt on things Big Macs and tennis shoes is ridiculous.  The education system should limit the way these funds are expended so they cover actual school expenses.  The school should not be in the business of doling out excess funds to 18 year-olds for discretionary spending.

Just recalling my own college experience, I can tell you the day loan excess was disbursed was like a Roman orgy.  The only thing “school related” about the spending were the excuses for why you couldn’t make it to that 8 a.m. class the next morning.

By making these two simple changes, student loan debt might actually be used in accordance with the goal of getting an education.  It would, at the very least, ensure that degree in social work doesn’t come with a debt you’ll never be able to repay.

One of Joe Biden’s major applause lines tonight came when he demanded equal pay for women. That’s a worthy cause to be sure. But is Biden practicing what he preaches?

Maybe not.

Despite the fact that Biden employs 27 women and only 14 men (could that be a Clinton problem?), very few of the women and men share common titles. The one job where there is overlap is staff assistants. These are traditionally entry level low-wage jobs in congressional offices.

So how do Biden’s salaries stack up?

The average male staff assistant in Biden’s office (based on the most recent salary figures) made $39,162 in the time period.

The average woman in that position made $21,323.

Hey Joe! Before you demand something of others, maybe you should lead by example. Why not start by giving the women in your office a raise?

Update: It also looks like the highest salaries are reserved for men, despite their minority status. 4 out of 14 men made more than $40,000 in the period, but only 5 of 27 women cleared that mark. Two of the men earned $70k, but the highest paid woman made only $46,000

Update 2: Does Obama walk the walk? It looks like he’s certainly better than Biden. A review of his staff for the same period at least shows remarkable consistency in pay for the jobs carrying the same title. Although of the twenty highest salaries in his office, 13 are men and 7 are women.

Update 3: It also works going the opposite direction. Of the 20 lowest salaries in Obama’s office, 13 are women and 7 are men. (And please note, there is no overlap between those two lists, and I have not included anyone that worked less than the full time period.)

Update 4: For those who asked, one final note before I do some real work. Of the 20 highest salaries on John McCain’s staff, 13 are women, and 7 are men.

The legislation’s passage could make consumers and patients more willing to have their DNA tested for disease-indicators, which could swing the door wide-open for so-called personalized medicine in which genetic and genomic data is used to tailor treatments. It could be a major win for genomic testing companies like 23AndMe and Navigenics, who are collecting and analyzing unprecedentedly large amounts of genetic information from their clients.

Genetic testing advocates worried that the adoption of testing would be slowed by the lack of government protection. Surveys appeared to back that sentiment with an overwhelming number of Americans saying they wanted their genetic data safeguarded from employers and insurers.

This demonstrates, to me at least, ‘an overwhelming number of Americans’ have very little idea how little protection they actually have when it comes to hiring decisions. Employers can’t refuse to hire someone based on race, religion, etc. We’ll apparently soon add genetic markers to that.

There is not, however, a prohibition on hiring because you’re overweight, unattractive, wear glasses, etc. etc. etc (Ok, technically DC and a few other places actually prevent discrimination based on personal appearance, but still…) Even if there were, there are a staggering number of other reasons you could cite in defense of your practices. If someone doesn’t want to hire you, they’ll find a legally defensible way not to hire you.

Passing more laws won’t get you around that. Unless you pass a law that says the first person to apply automatically gets the job, someone will always be rejected.

Well, nerdy kids can rejoice. A company has sprung up to meet the needs of today’s friendless dorks.

FakeYourSpace.com, a business founded by Brant Walker… offered users of MySpace.com and similar sites a way to enhance their page with photographs and comments from hired ‚Äúfriends‚Äù ‚Äî mainly attractive models ‚Äî for 99 cents a month each.

The company was shut down after the royalty-free photo service they were using to supply the pictures demanded they stop. Oddly, they expect to be back up and running quickly after securing models for the effort.

I guess there may be more money in this than I would have assumed. I guess the $5 per lawn the little spaz down the street charges me has to go somewhere.

Look, I understand loyalty. It’s admirable. You should have your friend’s back. This, however, passed from the sublime to the absurd some time ago. The loyalty shown to Rumsfeld may never be equaled on this planet again.

A mutual acquaintance one day began to tell me of an experience that Dan* had related to her. As she got into the details, I realized she was telling me about an event from my own life. I corrected her and suggested she may have been confusing something I had told her at some point. She told me they had just discussed this the day before, so she was quite sure it was him.

When I confronted Dan*, he denied ever having told her that story. When I asked why he would pass of my life as his (especially considering that my life is not all that interesting), he again denied it.

I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but related the event to a third person. They confirmed that Dan* had told them the same story on more than one occasion.

I’m sharing all of this merely as a way of introducing Aleksey Vayner. He has been making the rounds on the Internet based purely on his ability to make stuff up. It has generated a lot of buzz, and resulted in this article in The New Yorker.

On its face, Vayner‚Äôs C.V. may be the world‚Äôs greatest, which raises the question of why he‚Äôs looking for an entry-level finance position‚Äîthe fallback for so many unremarkable Ivy Leaguers who lack dual backgrounds in espionage and Eastern medicine… Meanwhile, Vayner‚Äôs legend grows, like that of a latter-day Paul Bunyan. Acquaintances report hearing that he is one of four people licensed to handle nuclear waste in the state of Connecticut, that he must register his hands as lethal weapons at airports, and even that he has killed two dozen men in Tibetan gladiatorial contests.

As one poster to the Yale Alumni web site put it, “A guy with this level of grandiose and delusional thinking would either be homeless or president in twenty-five years.‚Äù

Based on my own experience, I’m betting for “homeless” but who knows.

* Names have been changed to avoid admitting I know the real person. He has likely violated parole again and is probably being sought by law enforcement personnel in as many as three states.

Now that we have the Internet, we can preserve these moments for posterity. My buddy Paul over at The Pop View has a link to $6/hour DJ Inetta the Moodsetta going off on air and quitting her job at WBLZ-FM in Mobile, Alabama.

From now on, if I leave a job, I’m walking out the door to the sound of me shouting, “I quit this bitch!!”

The International Republican Institute… seeks Resident Political and Public Advocacy Specialists to assist in the design and implementation of IRI’s Political Party and Civil Society development programs in Iraq (emphasis mine). The Specialists work with Iraqi political parties and civil society organizations on a broad range of issues related to their institutional development as well as their participation in Iraq’s elections and public policy making processes. All positions are based in Baghdad, Iraq.

Requirements include a degree in political science, international relations, or a related field; a minimum of five years political experience; experience as a trainer; and familiarity with international politics. Having the ability to speak Iraqi and dodge bullets, and people with a high threshold for pain from shrapnel wounds, are a plus.