Do you think college should be free?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Taxx
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Convert3 said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
No one asks high school students to “work their way through school.” I wonder why?

Also, it is harder and slower to get through school when you have to work a nearly full-time job at the same time.
Click to expand...
You’re reaching. High school education is not the discussion.
Click to expand...
No, but the justification for it is similar to the justification for free college.

But let’s pause for a second and let me clarify my position. Although it seems like I am arguing in favor of making all college free, I am not. I am not actually arguing to make any college free. I am only arguing against certain arguments that attempt to put any subsidies for higher education out of the question. What I actually believe is that there should be more subsidies for some forms of college, especially trade schools, and that such subsidies need not make college totally free. It would be sufficient if they made college more affordable than it is now. Is that a little more acceptable?
 
It is more palatable. We just have to be careful because the increased ease of student loans has been part of the cause of rapid increases in college costs.
 
Convert3 said:
It is more palatable. We just have to be careful because the increased ease of student loans has been part of the cause of rapid increases in college costs.
Click to expand...
That is definitely true. For-profit lenders in cahoots with unscrupulous schools have misrepresented the terms of the loans, the usefulness of the degrees, and the chances of getting through the course of study. I think a big improvement would be for colleges to take part of the responsibility for the success of the student’s loan, so that if the student fails, half of the student debt will be paid by the school that failed to deliver on what it promised. And student debt should be dischargeable in bankruptcy, just like any other debt. If it is good enough for Trump to use six times, it should be good enough for a psychology major I know to use one time who is working in the parts department of air compressor company while still shouldering tons of student debt.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
I think a big improvement would be for colleges to take part of the responsibility for the success of the student’s loan, so that if the student fails, half of the student debt will be paid by the school that failed to deliver on what it promised.
Click to expand...
No, the unintended consequences would not be pleasant. The schools would be horrifically strict on who they would allow to attend school. Not all student failures in life are because of the failure of the school. You can’t legislate a student’s success.
 
Or, perhaps, professors might find themselves pressured to inflate grades so that colleges would not be financially burdened by failing students.
 
jeannetherese said:
Or, perhaps, professors might find themselves pressured to inflate grades so that colleges would not be financially burdened by failing students.
Click to expand...
That would not let them off the hook. If the students are failing in large enough numbers to find the promised jobs, something is wrong with that school.
 
Or, there is a glut of majors in the labor market.
Schools are businesses and subject to market pressures. Graduation rates are tracked within departments, and decisions about awarding tenure take many factors into consideration including the ability of professors to bring in grant money (adding to the department’s bottom line). It could become difficult for a professor, desiring a tenured position, to consistently fail students who are not successful in class. It would certainly be noticed as would the economic damage resulting from such actions.
As for the lack of success in the labor markets by students exiting schools with certain degrees, one might anticipate a few correlation does not equate to causation arguments.
And, I think, this might pull our discussion back around to the idea of the university. What is its purpose? Is it to producing human capital for designated labor markets? To provide a marriage market for young people? To undergird or to critique aspects of a culture? To foster democracy? Answers will vary.
 
Last edited:
I’m not against free college if the country votes on it.

I do think the US student loan system needs revising. Most young people aren’t able to make the decision of “Hey do you want thousands of dollars right now? Don’t worry… Pay it back years from now when you’re rich from your college degree!”

I was one of those naive young people who took out the max amount of loans and didn’t even make it through college let alone with a degree that actually translates into a high paying job. Yes, its absolutely my fauly but that doesn’t change the fact that our country is still suffering from it since I don’t make enough money to pay it off anytime soon. & May never.

No bank would give many of these loans out with a basic risk assessment of GPA and what program a student is enrolled in (aka their likely income post grad, & likelihood of even making it to graduation). Most banks wouldn’t even give these size loans out to a person who’s already graduated and in many of these fields because their pay would be so low (and likelihood of unemployment would often be high).

Giving tens of thousands of dollars of debt to those students who are extremely unlikely to be able to pay it back… Its just hurting everyone.

Maybe I’m wrong.
 
jeannetherese said:
Or, there is a glut of majors in the labor market.
Schools are businesses and subject to market pressures. Graduation rates are tracked within departments, and decisions about awarding tenure take many factors into consideration including the ability of professors to bring in grant money (adding to the department’s bottom line). It could become difficult for a professor, desiring a tenured position, to consistently fail students who are not successful in class. It would certainly be noticed as would the economic damage resulting from such actions.
As for the lack of success in the labor markets by students exiting schools with certain degrees, one might anticipate a few correlation does not equate to causation arguments.
And, i think, this might pull our discussion back around to the idea of the university. What is its purpose?
Click to expand...
As you say, answers can vary. And depending on those answers, we might decide to give colleges more or less subsidies. But whatever their purpose, they should deliver. If they say they can make you a valuable cog in the labor market, then they better make you a valuable cog in the labor market. If they say they will lift your spirits and widen your appreciation of music and literature, they better lift your spirits and widen your appreciation of music and literature. If they promise you that you will meet the marriage partner of your dreams in college, then they better deliver on that too. (Of course I would not want to subsidize a college that promised primarily that!)
 
LeafByNiggle said:
If they promise you that you will meet the marriage partner of your dreams in college, then they better deliver on that too. (Of course I would not want to subsidize a college that promised primarily that!)
Click to expand...
We used to call that getting your MRS degree!😂😂😂
 
.
It would be wonderful if everything was free. Free food, free housing, free health care, free trips, free cars.
But do we have the money to pay for it? That is the question for me.
 
Last edited:
mdgspencer said:
It would be wonderful if everything was free. Free food, free housing, free health care, free trips, free cars.
But do we have the money to pay for it? That is the question for me.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church has been a long-time proponent of providing free food, free shelter, free health care and free education for the less fortunate, even including free trade schools and university.

“To touch the hearts of your students and to inspire them with the Christian spirit is the greatest miracle you could perform, and the one that God asks of you, since this is the purpose of your work.”
St. Jean-Baptiste de La Salle, patron saint of teachers
 
Last edited:
Actually, I think the incentive would work in the opposite direction. If the risk of financial liability is correlated with debt level and failure to find a job, making sure that incompetent (from the perspective of future employers) students fail at the university level would actually reduce that liability.
 
Last edited:
DeniseNY said:
No I do not think it should be free. I think people need to weigh more carefully if the debt they are going into is worth it. And I think there are plenty of other worthwhile, lucrative things that could done - such as trade schools or apprenticeships. I don’t know why those are looked down on and not encouraged more.
Click to expand...
I have three kids. The oldest did a B.A. in languages, the middle child did a B.A. in History, both at the same university in another province. The third took a welding course and an automotive technology course at the local community college. We had set up college funds for them when they were little and they were lucky that within a year of the oldest going to college their dad had retired from the military and had both a pension and a new income. No loans were necessary.

The first now works shelving books in a library, something she did while going to university, and has had two other jobs in call centers.

The second went to work as a dishwasher just out of university and still works in the restaurant industry, but is now a cook.

The third works in his trade for BMW, he’s doing much better than both his siblings with degrees as far as income goes.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
The story might have been different if the 1st or 2nd child had a degree in computer science or business administration.
Click to expand...
Definitely, but neither was interested in those subjects. I had a bookworm and a history buff, who had thought of teaching history but took the first job he could get to stay near his girlfriend at the time. Found out he liked cooking and is now happy, if poor, in his work. But, hey, if you get up and are happy to go to work, it’s pretty good. Which is better, doing a job you hate for lots of money or a job you love that’s enough to subsist on? Both he and his wife have degrees, he cooks in a pub, she works at Starbucks.
 
Last edited:
I totally agree. It is better to do what one finds fulfilling even if it is not the most lucrative. My comment was not directed at criticizing their decisions. It was directed at the implication that some people might draw from the story, that education is basically worthless. I still think education is worthwhile, even if one does not make the most money.
 
Last edited:
Oh I’d never say that their university education is worthless, they are both better-rounded individuals because of it. The personal validation the second got from being in his university drama club was worth more than all the tuition we paid. But it’s telling that a few months after commencement our daughter called to complain that “my degree qualifies me for absolutely nothing!”
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top