Could Free College work in America?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RCIAGraduate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Theo520 said:
Teaching in the US requires a BA in Education as a minimum. If you have a BA in some other relevant field, you can usually take education specific courses to obtain your teaching certification, but you must have a BA and pass teaching subject specific exam.

Most people in PR do have a degree. I’m sure you knew advanced degrees in Drama, French and Theology would not really increase your employability in the general market.
Click to expand...
I’m not interested in increasing my employability in the general market. I’d go back to PR, where I owned my own firm and made enough to call myself “wealthy.” I still have my PR firm and still do a little PR. But, not everyone with the type of degrees I have can do a good job in PR or some other high-paying field. That’s why I don’t think degrees like mine or Creative Writing, Film History, and Poetry should be free. The student can pay for their degree in that case. I don’t think any college degree should be free. Costs should be reduced in some areas, but not free, no. The quality would go waaaaaay down.
 
Owning your own business is definitely one way people without higher education, or with degrees in unrelated fields, achieve financial success.

I think we provide free K-12 education and the focus should be on ensuring it is delivering results, not adding more free years.

Higher ed should have some subsidy and plenty of scholarship aid but at this point students need to take a bet on where they want to specialize and that it will provide an adequate return, so they can pay their debt. In this vein, we should continue the crack down on for-profit schools that misrepresent job placement etc.

Why should the public eat all the costs for a student who was good in school but later realized they don’t like working in their chosen profession.
Lily_Bernans said:
I’m not interested in increasing my employability in the general market. I’d go back to PR, where I owned my own firm and made enough to call myself “wealthy.” I still have my PR firm and still do a little PR. But, not everyone with the type of degrees I have can do a good job in PR or some other high-paying field. That’s why I don’t think degrees like mine or Creative Writing, Film History, and Poetry should be free. The student can pay for their degree in that case. I don’t think any college degree should be free. Costs should be reduced in some areas, but not free, no. The quality would go waaaaaay down.
Click to expand...
 
Rohzek said:
…
When one declares that some degrees are of less public value and therefore should not received public funding while others do, the individual implicitly states that those degrees are relatively inferior.

…
Click to expand...
I don’t agree. I would never say that someone’s art history, liberal arts, or women’s studies, weaving/textile degree is inferior to my degree in mechanical engineering with a specialization in thermodynamics and fluid flow. They all provide a more indepth understanding or analysis of a field of study.

However, we do have to acknowledge that they do lead to different career fields which pay varying levels. If you understand that going in-- great. Not everyone wants to make a fortune, not everyone is motivated by the income they can get in the future. In my case I wanted to be a military pilot and a technical degree gave me the best chance to be recruited and qualify for things like test pilot programs after entry. I had a CO who had a degree in forestry. Two people getting different degrees but ending up in same career. Other folks I went to school with made a lot more money putting their engineering degrees to use in industry. They thought I was nuts not to pursue a career which paid far more than what I wanted to do.

Different skill sets have varying levels of demand in the real world. At an individual level, if someone wants to pay for and pursue a degree for any reason- that’s their call. Free societies allow free choices but expect folks to bear responsibilities.

The more the public (and future generations) are expected to pick up the tab to pay for other folks, then the more the public (or the state) will get involved in what those choices are. Because it comes to allocation of resources–is the public money better spent towards defense, investment in R&D, Healthcare, programs to support the poor, the aged/retired or education-- and the choices within those areas.
 
No. This is just to get young people to vote for certain American political candidates.
 
Theo520 said:
Owning your own business is definitely one way people without higher education, or with degrees in unrelated fields, achieve financial success.

I think we provide free K-12 education and the focus should be on ensuring it is delivering results, not adding more free years.

Higher ed should have some subsidy and plenty of scholarship aid but at this point students need to take a bet on where they want to specialize and that it will provide an adequate return, so they can pay their debt. In this vein, we should continue the crack down on for-profit schools that misrepresent job placement etc.

Why should the public eat all the costs for a student who was good in school but later realized they don’t like working in their chosen profession.
Click to expand...
I agree with that and think you stated it well.
 
SuperLuigi said:
No. This is just to get young people to vote for certain American political candidates.
Click to expand...
I also agree with you. Clinton, especially, is just using it to garner votes. I don’t think she has any intention of making college more affordable.
 
In the news, Massachusetts is considering making community college tuition free for low-income and “first-generation” college students:

blogs.wgbh.org/on-campus/2015/9/16/could-tuition-free-community-college-become-reality-massachusetts/

I think I could get behind that. I was a first-generation college student myself and I know what that’s like, and I’m thinking about the ones who had it even worse (my friend with no father, others whose parents were divorced, etc.). It might be a good thing for some people.
 
signit said:
In the news, Massachusetts is considering making community college tuition free for low-income and “first-generation” college students:

blogs.wgbh.org/on-campus/2015/9/16/could-tuition-free-community-college-become-reality-massachusetts/

I think I could get behind that. I was a first-generation college student myself and I know what that’s like, and I’m thinking about the ones who had it even worse (my friend with no father, others whose parents were divorced, etc.). It might be a good thing for some people.
Click to expand...
Free stuff is always good for the people receiving it. That doesn’t make it a good public investment though.
 
Theo520 said:
Free stuff is always good for the people receiving it. That doesn’t make it a good public investment though.
Click to expand...
From the standpoint of fairness, though, I think it’s a good idea.

I’m thinking of it from the standpoint of the people I mentioned earlier who really could use it.

I’m thinking about my friend growing up in a poor family with no father, with no money for college. What are we supposed to do for someone like that? Just say “Tough luck”?
 
signit said:
From the standpoint of fairness, though, I think it’s a good idea.

I’m thinking of it from the standpoint of the people I mentioned earlier who really could use it.

I’m thinking about my friend growing up in a poor family with no father, with no money for college. What are we supposed to do for someone like that? Just say “Tough luck”?
Click to expand...
We already provide a free K-12 education. If K-12 is failing your friends, then that should be the focus since a couple more years won’t make a difference.

Your friends have options if they know the career they want and are committed. For the ones who are still discovering themselves, why should I pay for their journey after they are adults (post high school)?
 
signit said:
From the standpoint of fairness, though, I think it’s a good idea.

I’m thinking of it from the standpoint of the people I mentioned earlier who really could use it.

I’m thinking about my friend growing up in a poor family with no father, with no money for college. What are we supposed to do for someone like that? Just say “Tough luck”?
Click to expand...
Having put 2 kids through colleges, I can tell you that most colleges provide need-based assistance to promising young people who cannot afford college tuition. This translates to “free” in many cases…not just loans.
 
Nothing is “free.” Someone somewhere is paying for it. In this case, it would be the taxpayer who would be footing the bill, just like the property owners are forced to foot the bill for public schools.
 
Theo520 said:
We already provide a free K-12 education. If K-12 is failing your friends, then that should be the focus since a couple more years won’t make a difference.

Your friends have options if they know the career they want and are committed. For the ones who are still discovering themselves, why should I pay for their journey after they are adults (post high school)?
Click to expand...
Still, somebody whose family has money can choose the career of their choice. It just doesn’t seem right that somebody in another situation might not have the same options. Especially since in France they pay for college for all.
shockerfan said:
Having put 2 kids through colleges, I can tell you that most colleges provide need-based assistance to promising young people who cannot afford college tuition. This translates to “free” in many cases…not just loans.
Click to expand...
Okay.

This may be true in some cases.

But there might still be some hard cases.

Somebody might not get “need-based” assistance because their family is able but not willing to help. Some families cut their kids off at age 18; some have other circumstances (like the noncustodial parent who won’t help out because they’re mad at the custodial parent, or the stepparent who won’t help out).
 
No. And who would pick up the bill. College is also over rated and not worth the money in many cases (my opinion), but still important and necessary (not for all) in our society.
 
It sounds like you read Harrison Bergeron, by Kurt Vonegut, but had a very different study guide :confused:

We promise people an opportunity not complete equality. The rich will always have a leg up, but you can be encouraged that most millionaires rise from the working class rather than inherit the money. Looking at immigrants, it may take two generations for the family to bloom, but at leas they have that opportunity in this country.

Move to France if you think they are the better country, or if your sole aim is a free education. You should read up on social mobility there as well (or lack thereof). I see that people here with ambition can still do quite well for themselves. Maybe the person who didn’t get a scholarship at one school needs to apply to more schools, or attend affordable Junior College, or pick a Trade to learn.
signit said:
Still, somebody whose family has money can choose the career of their choice. It just doesn’t seem right that somebody in another situation might not have the same options. Especially since in France they pay for college for all.

Okay.
This may be true in some cases.
But there might still be some hard cases.

Somebody might not get “need-based” assistance because their family is able but not willing to help. Some families cut their kids off at age 18; some have other circumstances (like the noncustodial parent who won’t help out because they’re mad at the custodial parent, or the stepparent who won’t help out).
Click to expand...
 
No, because we don’t have a superpower paying our defense bill by proxy.
 
signit said:
Still, somebody whose family has money can choose the career of their choice. It just doesn’t seem right that somebody in another situation might not have the same options. Especially since in France they pay for college for all.
Click to expand...
Every country has its positives and negatives. France has a much higher unemployment rate because employers are afraid to hire because they have great difficulty firing.

Also, life isn’t fair, and yes, being rich has advantages…always has and always will…forever.
signit said:
Okay.

This may be true in some cases.

But there might still be some hard cases.

Somebody might not get “need-based” assistance because their family is able but not willing to help. Some families cut their kids off at age 18; some have other circumstances (like the noncustodial parent who won’t help out because they’re mad at the custodial parent, or the stepparent who won’t help out).
Click to expand...
There are always those scenarios, but offering everyone free college, when only a few really need help, is wasteful and wrong. Reminds me of a school system in Philadelphia that offers “free” breakfast and lunch to all students, when only some of the students are poor. They offered “free” to all so as not to stigmatize the poor students. The problem is this: “free” means taxpayers pay for it…is it right for a middle class parent in Philadelphia to subsidize the lunches of kids of rich parents?

In your scenario, the child should emancipate and go out on their own. They will officially be poor when they fill out the FAFSA forms to determine “need”.
 
Theo520 said:
Free stuff is always good for the people receiving it. That doesn’t make it a good public investment though.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, and to elaborate, I don’t think free college would be “money well spent” for the majority.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top