Do you think college should be free?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Taxx
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps government backed student loans need to go away as well? I cannot any incentive for schools to keep costs down when they know the government will guarantee a loan to pay for their rising costs. A classic case of the government getting involved and making things worse.
 
That sounds like making college something that is only for those who can personally afford it.

What’s the difference between that and making high school only for those who can afford tuition?
 
Why stop there? Why not grad school or “private” universities/Ivy league schools, using the same argument?

The reality is the system is set up with no incentive to keeps costs down. I don’t blame the schools from a profit-model standpoint. Lots of problems with the current education model.
 
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...
That only works if the student has interest and aptitude in those areas. The welder probably found a trade that fit both his interest and his aptitude. Had his oldest sister taken the same course as he did, she might be doing the same work she’s doing now. One hopes, for instance, that if she’s a writer she is using the relatively non-demanding nature of her salaried work to give herself the mental energy to pursue the discipline of writing. Just because one is not being paid doesn’t mean one is doing nothing with one’s education.

The main thing is that there are trades that need the people to work them, with only tuition keeping some would-be students from becoming valuable and productive members of society. What I don’t think we ought to be doing is putting people to work as university professors or trade instructors just to buy time for people who don’t know what they want to do with their lives. That isn’t a good use of our societal resources, regardless of whether the bankers are making their buck out of it or not.

For instance, there are some people who are wasting their time by spending it in a typical high school curriculum. I’m not saying the teachers aren’t doing their jobs, but that in some cases the task of educating certain of their students isn’t realistic because the students resist being engaged or aren’t cut out to connect to what is being taught. That sucks the soul out of everyone involved, not to mention wasting a lot of money and time. Ironically, this sometimes happens because high schools don’t have the funding to offer trade-oriented coursework or coursework students can use to earn college credits.

In the end, the students have to have skin in the game. If they have no money, then they ought to be working to earn their school. If that were the case, the students who are just buying time might just get a job while they’re trying to figure out what education suits them best. Some will still make choices that turn out to be wrong, but fewer will go to college just to put off growing up, which is a real drag on the quality of education.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Meinheimer said:
Why stop there? Why not grad school or “private” universities/Ivy league schools, using the same argument?
Click to expand...
Prudential judgement. At some point it becomes undesirable to subsidize those who are going to be in the top 1%. Where that is is a matter for legitimate debate.
The reality is the system is set up with no incentive to keeps costs down. I don’t blame the schools from a profit-model standpoint. Lots of problems with the current education model.
Click to expand...
So fix the problems. Don’t defund education.
 
But you aren’t defunding education. You are removing the taxpayer guarantees on the banking system.
 
They aren’t forced to go. People who don’t go to college shouldn’t be subsidizing people who go. Public school is bad enough, thanks.
 
That something is subsidies in the form of debt that cannot be discharged backed by the government.
 
casslean said:
Or highly subsidized.

Forcing young people to start their lives mired in debt is a travesty.
Click to expand...
There are young people who are mired in debt not because they couldn’t find a cheaper way to get a college education but because they were given poor advice about how to fund a college education.


From the article:
"As a rule of thumb, the student loan debt to salary ratio should be no more than equal to your expected salary. A debt that is double the annual salary may be doable with careful budgeting and planning. However, triple the annual salary places a very heavy burden on the student and increases the chances of default or the need to enter an income-based repayment plan.

“So, for example, if you plan on making $60,000 out of college, you should not take on more than $60,000 in loans. If you plan to make $60,000, but your education will cost $180,000, don’t do it!”

I think this implies that if you have chosen a major that has a track record of leaving graduates with a subsistence-level salary, you had better plan to pay as you go or to choose a college that your parents can afford to send you to. Nobody should be racking up mountains of debt to get a degree at an elite college in any field that is notorious for failing to lead to jobs that allow employees to not just live but to save money. That is as close as you can get to literally saying, "Please, let me come to your university, and I’ll give up not only my first-born but also my second-born and my third-born, because the enormous debt I will be taking on will put me that late in my child-bearing years before I can get married and have children at all!!"
 
Last edited:
PetraG said:
How do you have a democracy with an illiterate and utterly uneducated electorate?
Click to expand...
Begging the question your pardon, but I wouldn’t presume to think that American public schools are creating a literate and educated populace. 40% of the seniors at my local high school aren’t grade level proficient in math, English and science, and I live in an affluent area of the country. In other well off areas it’s 60%. These are schools that were highly rated just 10 years ago. They aren’t serving the purpose for which they supposedly exist for nearly half the students. I’m not sure how we can justify taxing the homeowners for results this atrocious.

Seeing how much time is spent trying to acculturate the students to the new, highly “liberal” “norm” and the avalanche of ESL students being mixed with students who speak English fluently, it doesn’t seem to me that education is the priority.

Education of the young is paramount; that includes their religious instruction, which public schools should not provide considering their secular origin, but they excel at providing the secular “theology” whether the parents wish it or not; education, not so much. Secular public education is not a good model nor is it a mandatory model to follow to educate the poor. Moreover, it is not used only to merely ensure even the poorest among us is able to receive a minimum of education, unless we are going to call all but those who can afford private schools poor. There may be an argument for that, but…
AlNg said:
why does a Roman Catholic publication publish an article giving the “Catholic case for Communism”
Click to expand...
Because it’s America Magazine! :crazy_face:🤣🤣🤣
 
Anicette said:
Or if you prefered all the citizens and the residents of the said country
Click to expand...
Thank you. I do prefer it. That particular euphemism obscures reality for a great number of people. Much like the word “free”.
 
It is mostly the national debt that suffer than each person who resid in the country or who is a citizen.

We do not feel it over our shoulders every day as someone who is personally in debt feel and have his life’s perspective blocked.

I don’t think that education is free, anyway.
 
Last edited:
Anicette said:
It is mostly the national debt that suffer than each person who resid in the country
Click to expand...
If you never repudiate the debt taxes will have to increase to pay the increasingly large interest payments. You can only foist the debt on your grandchildren for so long before they cannot afford it.
 
Sure, it is a way to hide the problem. But I want you to make aware, that you are not the country the most “in debt” and some offered far less for their citizen and have more debt than us.
 
It’s a foolish way to approach the problem and frankly, saddling your grandchildren with debt for your schooling is highly immoral.
 
I have several ideas but no solutions for the cost of college. I want everyone who has the desire and smarts to get a college education to get one but the student loan system must be changed.

Banks should have a bit more skin in the game. The government guaranteeing the loans should be reduced to much small amounts. It should hurt the banks bottom line if they loan money willinilly to any and all comers.

Business should start putting some skin in the game, too. If they require a degree for positions within the company, they should either foot a part or whole of the cost or set up their own training programs. Many business do this as they are desperate for college trained employees…most hospitals have programs for advancing their flock into critical shortage positions.

Why not set up programs where students have to serve their country in some way for two years and then be eligible for grants? The armed forces have sent more students to college than probably anyone! A two year delay also allows time for student development and discernment for their future. The Peace Corps or other types of organizations can expose many students to the various types of jobs in the world and allow them to see if they like it or not. We could form a Medical Corps, Mechanics Corps, you name it to allow students to taste the varieties of jobs that are out there.

No matter what we do, there should be skin in the game for the student. Ability to pay shouldn’t stop a good student in their tracks but just loaning them money doesn’t give them what they really need. They need a way for them to earn the privilege of the education. These days, almost no one can work their way through. Wages are to low and college costs are too high. Even $8000.00 a semester is unplayable with an $8.00 /hr job! Every student should be given the estimated entry pay for their major. The ignorance of what skills pay what has got to end.
 
oh, but we paid a lot of hidden and direct taxes anyway.

What can be immoral too, is to let young people two choices : either they do not do some studies, and they will had a miserable economic life (because when we have no diploma, we have almost nothing) or do some studies and you can’t get married for many others years, may have not be able to have a family, and maybe died without solve your debt… And have be burden all your life because you have debt.
Sorry, but American citizens are often very in debt themselves for many things (more than us). What is the difference than a State debt?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top