I started college in EE at UT Austin in 1978. The rent on my two-bedroom apartment was $180/month. My textbooks cost about $300/semester. My tuition was something like $10/credit hour/semester. I don't remember the exact number because even on my very limited budget, it was in the noise.

I stayed in Austin for grad school. Pre-turtleneck Steve Jobs came to campus in 1984 and gave a talk about how great his new computer was, and told us he'd let us all buy one for half price. I bought one of those "Macintosh" things, plus a Lisa to develop for it, and the rest for me was history.

Interesting tidbit: Because Macs were cheap for students in Austin, a lot of great Mac developer talent sprang up there. Jeff Kodosky prototyped a really cool visual programming language on the first Mac, then hired several UT students to productize it into a commercial engineering tool. He called it LabView.

https://www.ni.com/en-us/about-ni/leadership/kodosky.html

According to https://www.usinflationcalculator.com monthly apartment rental of $180/month would be $713 today, and the textbooks of $300/semester would be $1,188 today.

According to https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/tx/au... the average cost for an apartment in the neighborhood of the University of Texas at Austin is $2,581.

:-)

Really highlights the workings of "Baumol cost disease" in general: TVs themselves have got cheaper, so everyone can have one for a fraction of their income. The relative cost of repair labour has gone up, as well as the devices getting less repairable, so TV repairmen are no longer a major source of employment. While college - which entirely consists of paying for the skilled labour of others, as well as buildings - has gone up hugely by comparison.

Someone should calculate the historical cost of college in terms of how many televisions you could have bought instead.

> The relative cost of repair labour has gone up, as well as the devices getting less repairable, so TV repairmen are no longer a major source of employment.

I think you're missing another important factor. TV repair was a major source of employment because early TVs were highly failure-prone! A TV was usually the most complicated piece of electronic equipment in the house. It would often have dozens of tubes that could burn out, and older models were assembled with point-to-point wiring (instead of circuit boards) which was prone to short circuits. It wouldn't be unusual for one to need repair or tuneup work a few times a year.

Modern TVs, by comparison, rarely require repairs. A new flatscreen TV is likely to provide continuous, problem-free service until it is obsolete. That's the real reason why TV repairmen are rare now, not because TVs are cheaper or harder to repair.

Not limited to TVs. Appliance repair in general has been replaced with disposable appliances.

Human rights violations in countries like China is to blame for reducing the value of skilled labor.

It's true, and a huge shame, particularly as it's driven appliances to be made with parts not designed to last beyond a 10 year lifespan.

That said, it's been interesting to witness the recent rise in YouTube repair guides coupled with online parts stores. Obviously not for everyone, but I've had good results repairing two different washing machines, a stove, a coffee grinder, my hot tub, a laptop, a video game controller, etc. For a lot of those I would have felt completely overwhelmed and not known where to start without a video tutorial.

The TV set index seems like a nice counterpart to the Big Mac Index.

The University of California system did not charge tuition for in-state students until 1970.

https://www.dailycal.org/2014/12/22/history-uc-tuition-since...

It was a "registration fee" as the UC system was intended to be tuition free The UC system stayed free of the word tuition that way.

I started college in 1976. $300 per semester, 16 hours. Textbooks cost around $100 (all of them together).

But I earned $2.75/hr at the college computer lab as a lab monitor. So yeah.

So tuition and texts could be paid with 150 hours of on-campus labor. Let's call that 15% part-time. Someone on 20 hour/week 50% part-time would therefore have wages left over for things like food, clothing, and housing, and time left over for actually being a student.

Now, tuition and text can only be paid with 100% or less of a full-time wage job if you are an in-state student at a public university, or attend a community college. And then, no time or money left over for lectures, study, or basic survival.

In terms of student labor hours per semester, college tuition and textbooks have increased an average of 4%-5% per year from JoeAltmaier's 1976 numbers to 2020. Due to advances in efficiency, infrastructure, and technology, that metric should be decreasing every year for most goods. Some see large downward jumps as machines are invented that allow one person to do jobs that formerly required more laborers.

What the hell have universities been doing? Do they not all have economics departments and business schools?

They're adding a lot more expensive administrators for one thing: https://capitolweekly.net/tuition-uc-administrators-tripled-...

Costs have gone up mostly because of decreases in government funding toward college.

Oh yea. Our 'state college' gets only 5% of its operating funds from the state. I don't know why they don't just go private.

Labor costs (faculty etc) should remain the same - people are the part that should be getting more of the pie, not less. And Universities are run on people (and buildings and football teams, yes).

At $600 per year (1978 dollars, two semesters), inflation correction puts it at about $2400 per year in 2020 dollars. That's on the high end of what domestic students pay in Europe today for a full-time bachelor or master degree program (per academic year).

For comparison, my college is about $3000/semester now. And textbooks can cost around $1000. So, 10X.

> So, 10X.

No, that's not how inflation works.

Educate us, dear commentor.

Thanks, Pedant! I need you to explain everything to me.

From a European perspective, that's simply mind-boggling.

You have to pay for college? And buy your own text books?!

Why don't they just... build campus libraries..? With all the required books there?

The US textbook lifecycle where they are updated unnecessarily each year but cost hundreds of dollars is basically just an add-on fee that circumvents the university organisation, like a budget airline charging for food and hold baggage.

You might not realize it, but some of the textbooks are less expensive in other parts of the world partly because they are subsidized by sales in the US. It’s a complicated industry.

No, local non-US universities are generally producing their own textbooks to go with their own courses and charge their own fees.

I’d rather pay more to use better textbooks. My experience is that for any given subject, there are often only a few really good textbooks. Sometimes you run into professors who have their own materials which substitute for a textbook, but that’s rare and where I’ve seen it, the notes have been built up over many years of teaching the same courses. Sometimes those notes will get turned into a textbook, which is what happened with Kolmogorov.

I’ve known some professors who’ve written textbooks and it’s basically a second job that takes time away from both research and teaching. It’s a very labor-intensive process with low reward.

The place I’ve seen it where it really made sense was where a foreign language professor I had also ran a foreign language education department.

> My experience is that for any given subject, there are often only a few really good textbooks.

Yeah, but they don't stay really good if they have to go through a mandatory new edition every couple of years to keep students from buying used textbooks. And the writers who get sucked into that treadmill generally aren't the ones who are capable of writing the really good textbooks in the first place — writing textbooks doesn't pay enough to make it a profitable alternative to practicing in a highly skilled research field.

Really good textbooks also rarely stay really good when they're translated from English into Spanish, Chinese, Arabic, or whatever. There isn't a free market in translation — whatever dipshit landed the contract to sell a local translation of Horowitz & Hill or whatever, that's whose shitty translation you have to buy, unless you fancy struggling through electrical engineering and an overcomplicated foreign language at the same time. Copyright is a scam to keep poor countries poor.

So generally the textbooks you have to pay more for are the worse ones.

> Yeah, but they don't stay really good if they have to go through a mandatory new edition every couple of years to keep students from buying used textbooks.

Buy an older edition on eBay and get problem sets from classmates or the library. This works well unless the publisher has some skeezy online component.

> So generally the textbooks you have to pay more for are the worse ones.

Not generally true. Maybe true for some subjects. My experience is that in upper-level STEM classes, there might be only one or two good books that you’d want to use.

For example, take algorithms. There are a couple good algorithms textbooks, one of them is The Algorithm Design Manual by Skiena. I can see that it costs $33 on amazon.com for a digital copy, but if I go to amazon.in it’s available for ₹866, about $11.50 at current exchange rate.

That isn’t even a specialized subject. If you’re in an advanced subject in an engineering field or one of the sciences there might be even fewer choices available.

Skiena's book is universally acknowledged to be great, but as you point out, it costs US$33 in the US, not US$150 (though Amazon tells me it's US$52.06, so I guess the price isn't very stable), and it isn't one of the ones that comes out in a new edition every two years with the problems slightly tweaked; it's in its second edition and its 23rd year. So it's an example of the dynamic I'm talking about, not a counterexample to it.

I'm talking about things like https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Science-Overview-Brookshear-... (Brookshear & Brylow), which Amazon tells me is US$155.49 for the Swindle or US$79 in paperback (new) and is in its 13th edition after 35 years; the first edition was evidently in 1985, so they've averaged roughly three years per edition. As far as I can tell, the only novel work Brookshear has ever published (not counting textbooks and papers about teaching) was a two-page paper in 1978 on projective prime ideals; and Brylow is hardly a more accomplished researcher, having published a couple of papers about formal methods for real-time software in 2001–3 and a few less-cited papers up to 2012. However good the book was in 1985, I wouldn't consider teaching from it today.

Skiena's book is an example of a really good textbook. Brookshear's book is an example of paying more. I did try to find a book like that about algorithms and data structures, but unsuccessfully; the closest I could find was Brookshear's chapter 5, which spends 50 pages to cover Euclid's algorithm, sequential search, insertion sort, and binary search (as well as, lamentably, bubble sort), all in terrible Python and 1958-style flowcharts, while giving terrible programming advice and performance numbers so wrong they weren't even right in 1985.

It's true that this kind of thing is limited to entry-level courses and more popular majors, as far as I can tell. Upper-level STEM courses don't attract enough students for it to be worth the effort to rip them off this way, even for world-class ripoff experts like academic publishers.

India has a significant advantage over Perú, Egypt, or mainland China, in that English is a second language to most of its population but not a foreign one, so the translation obstacle isn't nearly as serious.

There are some measures to make sure you don't buy used books either. Things like including software licenses in the purchase or having a new edition every year or so. Sometimes these are even written by the professor teaching, so it is then part of their income.

Obligatory inflation and alternatives correction:

$100 USD in 1976 -> $462 today (per CPI)

$100 invested in S&P500 in Aug 1976 -> $8890 today.

Back in my day, you were able to take the "First Class Radiotelephone Exam" at the local FCC office and be able to get a job at radio stations easily. I worked my way through college this way.

This license no longer exists. It was several hundred multiple choice questions about operating commercial radio stations.

Are you sure that these licenses no longer exist? The FCC has a detailed section of their website about them: https://www.fcc.gov/wireless/bureau-divisions/mobility-divis...

I am not sure what relevance they have these days. The FAA seems to handle everything involving aviation radios. I know nothing about shipping. Everything else seems to be computer-based (so you don't operate the radio, you operate a computer that operates the radio in accordance with FCC rules).

The licence that remains is equivalent to the old "General Radio Telephone" licence. This was a much easier, shorter test and wasn't considered the equivalent of a "degree" by employers.

Read to the bottom of the page. It lists the "First Class Radiotelephone Licence" as "no longer operative" https://www.fcc.gov/wireless/bureau-divisions/mobility-divis...

When I renewed mine, it was "downgraded" to the General Radiotelephone license.

I went to community college and I knew tons of people that paid their way through with low-skill jobs. It certainly requires some discipline though.