The NYTimes has an ith-tho-thad story about student loan debt(see this one about an auto dealership from CNN).

It goes on in detail about how Citibank and NYU loaned a student close to $100,000 for her college education. The article claims that the university should have done something, anything, to prevent her from being buried under student loan debt.

Now there are a lot of angles to this, such as the cost of higher education, and how universities call it ‘financial aid’ when it is actually not ‘aid’ but a loan.

I scrolled down to the bottom of the article where it told us what this woman (and she was a woman when she entered college, regardless of the article’s attempt to paint her as naive) had studied.

Get ready for this: “An interdisciplinary degree in Religion and Women’s Studies“.

WTF?

100K in student debt for this?

Does anyone expect to get a well paying job after studying this? This student came from a middle class family. She and her mother, (who runs a

B&B), should definitely have been thinking about a return on investment on her education.

Why didn’t the writer mention anything about her poor choice of academic major?