PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on February 07, 2016, 07:58:41 AM
-
I keep thinking about this and I think of all the the things that can happen if Hillary or Bernie are elected and make this a reality. Maybe you can add to the list. Here a couple of my thoughts.
Only certain Colleges and Universities will qualify. For instance, choose Liberty University and no free tuition for you since it has a religious affiliation. Same for Notre Dame or any number of colleges with any religious undertone.
Quota system strictly enforced, if you don't fit the profile no free tuition for you.
I'm sure there are many others, feel free to add to the list or poo-poo the whole thing since the government would never impose its will on these institutions. ::)
-
Ya right ::) . More free shit paid for with fu fu dust, give me a break.
-
We currently find a way to guarantee the first 12 years of education to all American children.
And I'd say that does not need to be an effective ceiling to what we offer.
Would an initial increase to 14 years, to include Community College, be that radical a suggestion? Then see how that works before extending it to 16 with certain limitations.
Not saying I favor it, but neither am I dismissing it out of hand.
-
We currently find a way to guarantee the first 12 years of education to all American children.
And I'd say that does not need to be an effective ceiling to what we offer.
Would an initial increase to 14 years, to include Community College, be that radical a suggestion? Then see how that works before extending it to 16 with certain limitations.
Not saying I favor it, but neither am I dismissing it out of hand.
I was lucky enough to get 11 years of education before work became more important. The first 8 years I was taught by nuns and even lay people without teaching credentials and I got 3 years paid for by the taxpayers too.
In 11 years I learned more than the majority of college graduates I have met. The education system is a joke and adding 2 more years for free will only serve to make it worse.
-
We currently find a way to guarantee the first 12 years of education to all American children.
And I'd say that does not need to be an effective ceiling to what we offer.
Would an initial increase to 14 years, to include Community College, be that radical a suggestion? Then see how that works before extending it to 16 with certain limitations.
Not saying I favor it, but neither am I dismissing it out of hand.
So you are saying that you're okay with the government having control of college education and picking winners and losers there as they do in other areas they control?
-
So you are saying that you're okay with the government having control of college education and picking winners and losers there as they do in other areas they control?
I challenge anyone to point out where I said that.
See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
Certainly easier to argue against an extreme position than the position that was actually put forth.
-
I challenge anyone to point out where I said that.
See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
Certainly easier to argue against an extreme position than the position that was actually put forth.
No one said that you said that. Your tacit support of free college though would indicate support for all the things likely to accompany that as I mentioned in the OP. Do you have counter indications that those things would not happen?
-
No one said that you said that. Your tacit support of free college though would indicate support for all the things likely to accompany that as I mentioned in the OP. Do you have counter indications that those things would not happen?
Uh, you said he said that. Literally.
I'd certainly listen to ideas to expand free education, but would want to hear the details of implementation. I'd want substantial control with the states, I think.
-
I'd certainly listen to ideas to expand free education, but would want to hear the details of implementation. I'd want substantial control with the states, I think.
Just use a voucher system. Free to use at any college you are able to get into and of your choice. No government controls. A free, say $1000 a year for the first two years coupon redeemable anywhere. If a student goes on to get a fur year degree and qualifies, maybe another $6000 a year for another two years fully redeemable anywhere of their choosing. Eligibility for these coupons would be fully dependent on admission to a college based purely on academic performance.
Anyhow that's my proposal on how you would run it. IMO, more important than higher education is vouchers for pre school and day care. That's where learning begins and so many kids are denied, only to become failures at school later.
-
IMO, more important than higher education is vouchers for pre school and day care. That's where learning begins and so many kids are denied, only to become failures at school later.
Actually, learning begins at home (or should).
I was reading and doing arithmetic way before my first day of school, as were my own kids, and now my grandkids.
-
Must everyone go to College?
Is college required for every job?
-
Must everyone go to College?
Is college required for every job?
Certainly not. I went, dropped out, then went back for an AA from a Community College. That was quite enough for me, thank you very much.
I don't think anyone is proposing that College be mandatory. That would be illogical since High School, while free, is not compulsory.
But there would be benefits if post-High School one could continue in either higher education or vocational school. Sure, someone has to pay for it, but someone already pays for K-12, so it's not like it's some radical new entitlement.
-
BTW, it's worth noting that one can get a college education essentially for free right now, online.
Via iTunesU, Kahn Academy, etc.
I've taken a couple of courses myself, for my own edification, on Astronomy and Logic.Started one on Quantum Theory, but after 2 or 3 lessons realized I was in over my head.
It's a brave new world where I think expensive brick-and-mortar universities are going to become less and less relevant over time regardless.
-
Making college less expensive is a better goal. Indeed, many ways for that to happen.
-
The problem I have with "free college" for every one (outside of the fact that it isn't free), is that it would be an extension of our current public school system. And I have little respect for the state of public education today. I see kids graduating from public high school today that wouldn't be able to pass 7th grade a few decades ago.
Education is one of those things that if you don't have to "earn" it, you won't take it seriously. For way too many, it would just be a way of avoiding work for an extra 4 years.
If we were to have "free college", I would want to see it be competitive. If you don't make the grade, you get booted out. Also, if we were to go that route, I would like to see it include trade school too. Not everyone wants, needs, deserves or can handle college. In fact, I think that should apply to public high school too.
-
I hate to think how much the cost of college will increase when it is "free".
-
I hate to think how much the cost of college will increase when it is "free".
It will increase to whatever the government decrees it is willing to pay out.
-
Certainly not. I went, dropped out, then went back for an AA from a Community College. That was quite enough for me, thank you very much.
I don't think anyone is proposing that College be mandatory. That would be illogical since High School, while free, is not compulsory.
But there would be benefits if post-High School one could continue in either higher education or vocational school. Sure, someone has to pay for it, but someone already pays for K-12, so it's not like it's some radical new entitlement.
Somebody already IS paying for it. Community colleges are funded by property taxes or other state taxes. It is the most affordable deal out there, bar none. Why do we have to make it free?
At some point people need to have skin in the game for their own future. Otherwise college will be as appreciated as inner city high schools are today.
-
It will increase to whatever the government decrees it is willing to pay out.
I guess that means it will cost whatever it takes to produce a steady stream of new liberal voters.
-
Actually, learning begins at home (or should).
I was reading and doing arithmetic way before my first day of school, as were my own kids, and now my grandkids.
This is absolutely true!! However, the problem we have with kids born into poverty, is they are not getting this early learning from their parents/parent/guardian. History has shown that once these kids who never really learned how to learn and are way behind other kids of that generation get to be pre teen, they start being a burden on society. There are some very persuasive studies that have shown that young children that get this very early learning experience do substantially better than those that do not in terms of finishing High School, getting jobs and getting higher education. I 100% support government funding for this early age learning for lower class kids.
-
Must everyone go to College?
Is college required for every job?
Absolutely not. I would suggest that if there were some sort of subsidized higher learning vouchers like I described, they should also be valid for trade and vocational schools as well.
-
I'd like to know how Obama paid for his education. Or rather, who paid for it.
-
Making college less expensive is a better goal. Indeed, many ways for that to happen.
Let's start by getting the federal government out of the business of providing corporate welfare to colleges and universities through the guarantee of student debt. Tuition rates have gone up in an accelerated fashion over the past couple of decades in nearly exact proportion to the huge rise in student debt. It's a colossal sham perpetrated on taxpayers and the individual students who will suffer under mountains of debt for a good portion of their lives.
-
I'd like to know how Obama paid for his education. Or rather, who paid for it.
You already know the answer. It's the same people who have funded him throughout his career and continue to do so today. I would argue we have been hugely cheated on that very poor "investment".
-
I'd like to know how Obama paid for his education. Or rather, who paid for it.
Scholarships and student loans.
-
Scholarships and student loans.
Not that I don't believe you, but can you cite any specific references?
Scholarships can be for virtually anything.
And what was the ratio of scholarships to loans.
And were his loans paid off, and if so by whom, and when?
And are you stating that he has NO grants or tuition waivers?
These are not accusations, just questions. I am like the debate moderators. If I don't like the guy, I ask the tough questions.
-
Scholarships and student loans.
I don't care if he is American or not. He was elected, and we got what we got. However, I do think he got foreign aid money, and Affirmative Action money. He hates America, he hates Capitalism.
-
...he hates Capitalism.
I think it's more fair to say he does not understand Capitalism.
That was the main reason I did not vote for him in 2008. My list of reasons was longer in 2012.
-
This is absolutely true!! However, the problem we have with kids born into poverty, is they are not getting this early learning from their parents/parent/guardian. History has shown that once these kids who never really learned how to learn and are way behind other kids of that generation get to be pre teen, they start being a burden on society. There are some very persuasive studies that have shown that young children that get this very early learning experience do substantially better than those that do not in terms of finishing High School, getting jobs and getting higher education. I 100% support government funding for this early age learning for lower class kids.
There are numerous studies showing pre-k students are no more advanced in their learning than those who didn't attend. That benchmark makes pre-k value drop precipitously.
-
Somebody already IS paying for it. Community colleges are funded by property taxes or other state taxes. It is the most affordable deal out there, bar none. Why do we have to make it free?
At some point people need to have skin in the game for their own future. Otherwise college will be as appreciated as inner city high schools are today.
Does anyone have an answer to my question?
-
Does anyone have an answer to my question?
A: We don't. It's another Uncle Sugar freebie. They should be funded by the local community (that's why it's called a "Community College" and with a relatively small contribution by the student/family to give them a sense of ownership. If it's "free" then that is the exact value that it becomes.
Of course the bigger picture is that "everything" should be "free". This is another cut among the thousand designed to put the US on par with Socialist Europe.
-
There are numerous studies showing pre-k students are no more advanced in their learning than those who didn't attend. That benchmark makes pre-k value drop precipitously.
You definitely don't think like a liberal.
If facts show that something is not effective, then obviously the problem is not enough money has been spent on it. Lack of results makes pre-K value increase exponentially. For the children.
-
Not that I don't believe you, but can you cite any specific references?
Scholarships can be for virtually anything.
And what was the ratio of scholarships to loans.
And were his loans paid off, and if so by whom, and when?
And are you stating that he has NO grants or tuition waivers?
These are not accusations, just questions. I am like the debate moderators. If I don't like the guy, I ask the tough questions.
I'm not his accountant, so I wouldn't know to that level of detail. Some light reading here: https://www.quora.com/How-did-Barack-Obama-afford-his-law-school-tuition-from-Harvard-and-live-in-the-Boston-area
Your questions aren't tough, just nosy. Though I guess if one were to believe Obama might be a Manchurian candidate, they might seem like tough questions.
-
Your questions aren't tough, just nosy. Though I guess if one were to believe Obama might be a Manchurian candidate, they might seem like tough questions.
Perhaps the real question is: Why does no one, not even the nosy media primadonnas, know the answer?
-
Perhaps the real question is: Why does no one, not even the nosy media primadonnas, know the answer?
Next question: with his mediocre grades how did he get into Harvard in the first place?
-
Perhaps the real question is: Why does no one, not even the nosy media primadonnas, know the answer?
It's not accurate to say that no one knows the answers to all of John's questions. But is the ratio of scholarships to student loans for any other president public knowledge? I'm certainly not aware of it. Why does "no one (sic)" know? Because it's a nosy, badgering question that we don't require presidential candidates to answer. Also, "no one" cares.
-
.... Also, "no one" cares.
There you have it.... nothing to see here. Move along... Move along...
-
There you have it.... nothing to see here. Move along... Move along...
By all means, feel free to fundraise and hire an investigative journalist to uncover these important facts. I suggest answers to some other important questions, too:
- Obama lived in a basement apartment while attending Harvard. Did he ever have installed additions or alterations that were against building code, and if so, who paid the hush money to the local building code inspector?
- Obama skipped his graduation, seemingly to save money. With what Saudi prince did he have a clandestine meeting during this time?
- When did Obama stop beating his wife?
PS - No one cares about those answers, either.
-
By all means, feel free to fundraise and hire an investigative journalist to uncover these important facts. I suggest answers to some other important questions, too:
- Obama lived in a basement apartment while attending Harvard. Did he ever have installed additions or alterations that were against building code, and if so, who paid the hush money to the local building code inspector?
- Obama skipped his graduation, seemingly to save money. With what Saudi prince did he have a clandestine meeting during this time?
- When did Obama stop beating his wife?
PS - No one cares about those answers, either.
Much like no one on the left cared about "W's" DUI, or his military records, or how he was admitted to Yale... Sure there are people that want to know the answer to those questions, but the difference no one in the media has pressed for answers like the did with Bush. It's a clear double standard, and something we have come to expect when it comes to coverage of unpleasant information about "Team D" members. It's standard operating procedure, but for you spew a tactic from the democrat playbook by declaring no one cares is pure hogwash, and intellectual dishonesty.
-
Much like no one on the left cared about "W's" DUI, or his military records, or how he was admitted to Yale... Sure there are people that want to know the answer to those questions, but the difference no one in the media has pressed for answers like the did with Bush. It's a clear double standard, and something we have come to expect when it comes to coverage of unpleasant information about "Team D" members. It's standard operating procedure, but for you spew a tactic from the democrat playbook by declaring no one cares is pure hogwash, and intellectual dishonesty.
False equivalence, and facts not in evidence. I'll give you college grades. I'll give you place of birth. I'll even give you birth certificate, if you want. But ratio of scholarships to loans? A bullshit leap down the rabbit hole, and no one cares.
-
You definitely don't think like a liberal.
If facts show that something is not effective, then obviously the problem is not enough money has been spent on it. Lack of results makes pre-K value increase exponentially. For the children.
Well, if for the children, by all means throw more money at the problem ;)
-
. . . Education is one of those things that if you don't have to "earn" it, you won't take it seriously. For way too many, it would just be a way of avoiding work for an extra 4 years . . .
Agreed. I don't know a whole lot of people, personally, that have skipped attending a 2/4-yr university altogether because of finances. They may have chosen to attend one college vs. another based off of cost/financing, but none dismissed the opportunity altogether because it wasn't "free". I also know a lot who simply went to college because that is what was expected of them, so made it through, some dropped out (usually at after great expense to their parents). However, giving everyone the opportunity to attend college for free without consequences just shifts the expense from the students/parents to the taxpayers. Aside from removing the government as a guarantor on loans, I would think more focus at the university-level (read: state level) on reducing costs would be more effective at helping with the burden of higher education.
-
I find college education an interesting issue.
For the proggies who want the government to pay for it, it's an "investment in the future."
The same proggies, when referring to students paying for it themselves, it's "a crushing burden of debt"
-
I find college education an interesting issue.
For the proggies who want the government to pay for it, it's an "investment in the future."
The same proggies, when referring to students paying for it themselves, it's "a crushing burden of debt"
It begs the question, should government force people to pay for education for others at all? I remember my parents, staunch Republicans, and both well educated saying that America was a great country because everyone is entitled to an education at least through high school.
I'm not so sure anymore. We have become what we rebelled against. I joke with Jeff because he is a subject of The Crown. Are we any better at this point? Are we different? Are we exceptional by providing a beacon of liberty, and freedom anymore? I don't know.
What used to make me feel most American is that I could speak my mind without fear of retribution. I now fear my own government for speaking my mind, and having AN OPINION. That, and that I can carry a gun in the woods if I want, and wear one on my hip concealed or not. I am tired of being labeled a Neanderthal by the media, and Progressives, and others for that. I am responsible, and do so legally.
-
It's not accurate to say that no one knows the answers to all of John's questions. But is the ratio of scholarships to student loans for any other president public knowledge? I'm certainly not aware of it. Why does "no one (sic)" know? Because it's a nosy, badgering question that we don't require presidential candidates to answer. Also, "no one" cares.
My questions were in response to your attempt to gloss over the original question with a false and misleading answer. You didn't really know so you made something up.
-
Free College education is like ever expanding unemployment. Once lazy, entitled people understand they can have something for nothing, that becomes its new value - nothing.
-
Free College education is like ever expanding unemployment.
Or, it's like free high school education, which I don't see many here getting worked up about.
Depends on what lens you view it through.
-
My questions were in response to your attempt to gloss over the original question with a false and misleading answer. You didn't really know so you made something up.
Surely you know me better than that by now? I try not to answer anything without being informed. My answer was neither false, nor misleading. I looked it up, and so can you. I even provided the links for you to follow, wherein you can find out how he paid for college, and how and when he paid back his student loans.
I offer no assurance that whacky questions like "what was the ratio of scholarships to student loans?" will be answered by following those links.
-
Or, it's like free high school education, which I don't see many here getting worked up about.
Depends on what lens you view it through.
But it's not, and you know it. Bernie's proposals aren't limited to community colleges, that have geographic limits. He just demands "free college." That's ubiquitous.
-
It is ridiculous to compare "free high school" to "free college."
All good parents know that as a child grows toward maturity, he/she becomes most developed, capable and functional as he/she takes on more and more responsibility. College is where the rubber meets the road. What are you going to do with your life? What career will you undertake? How are you going to make that happen?
Others have said it: Skin in the game is what makes a strong game and a strong finish.
My stepkids were 11 and 13 when their dad and I married. About their education, he was firm even before we met. He would furnish 2/3 of tuition, books and fees for their first degree. The rest was up to them. Any scholarships they obtained came directly out of their third. That resulted in their careful selection of career paths, early part-time work (paper routes and fast food) and SKIN IN THEIR OWN GAME.
They're both successes in their professions, and one is pursuing a medical degree (on her own nickel), and just took the MCAT after 650 hours of self-driven and self-chosen study.
My husband also made it clear that he was not interested in raising his kids' babies, if they had any intentionally or unintentionally, and that he was not a hotel or a bank.
We have excellent, loving relationships with these kids, now adults at 31 and 33. Kids respect adults who let them HAVE their own skin the game.
It is hard, but you have let your kids hit bottom sometimes (and we had our share of that) before they can truly climb. It's a parent's job to raise the bottom, not put an easy chair there.
-
Surely you know me better than that by now?
You are right and I apologize.
But:
I offer no assurance that whacky questions like "what was the ratio of scholarships to student loans?" will be answered by following those links.
That was not a whacky question.
It was prefaced by stating that scholarships can be for anything and sponsored by anyone. It could have been sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood for instance. And if the ratio was 99% Muslim Brother hood scholardhip, then I would like to know that.
And NO, I am not saying I think Obama is Muslim. But I certainly have not ruled out the "Manchurian Candidate" scenario.
-
You are right and I apologize.
But:
That was not a whacky question.
It was prefaced by stating that scholarships can be for anything and sponsored by anyone. It could have been sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood for instance. And if the ratio was 99% Muslim Brother hood scholardhip, then I would like to know that.
And NO, I am not saying I think Obama is Muslim. But I certainly have not ruled out the "Manchurian Candidate" scenario.
Fair enough, John. Thanks.
-
It is ridiculous to compare "free high school" to "free college."
Well, I think it's ridiculous to think there's some sort of hard line of demarcation to be drawn after 12 years of education. That's an arbitrary line, which has moved over the years.
I'm still not saying I'm in favor of society at large paying for education beyond 12 years, only that it's not a radical idea to be dismissed out of hand.
-
Well, I think it's ridiculous to think there's some sort of hard line of demarcation to be drawn after 12 years of education. That's an arbitrary line, which has moved over the years.
I'm still not saying I'm in favor of society at large paying for education beyond 12 years, only that it's not a radical idea to be dismissed out of hand.
How about if that "hard line of demarcation" also, miraculously, coincides with when most people legally move from being children to being adults. Is that ridiculous too? Or does it take a village to care for adults as well as children?
-
It is ridiculous to compare "free high school" to "free college."
Why? Education is education. I am not saying I am against public education in its purer form. However, it has become a Government Public Sector Union Indoctrination Program. Why should I be forced to pay for that?
-
Our state has a program that will pay for 2 years of community college. The requirements are 95% attendance during all years of high school, meaningful community service, and maybe a 2.0 or 2.5 high school GPA. It's a terrific program with no drawbacks that I can see and a lot of benefits.
* It has dramatically increased our number of college students and college graduates.
* It has reduced the high school drop out rate.
* The state subsidizes the state university heavily, to the tune of $500M. It was quite a bit more than that until we put the A+ program into place. Tuition at the community college is 1/3 of that the state university charges students. So by shifting some of the state funds to community colleges you're able to help 3x the number of students for the same money.
* In reality, there's one community college that has benefitted the most. It was a very decent but very small non-profit one until the A+ program came along. They mushroomed overnight and now have campuses across the state. It's truly a quality place to get kids' basic college courses completed.
I let my daughter graduate HS one semester early to get a jump on college. She's on the A+ program. Had she gone to the state university tuition and fees would have been around $11K, plus another $1500-$2K for books, for a total of $13K/year. The total cost at the community college is $4,400. The course fees and books that we had to pay for this semester were around $450. The A+ program paid for the rest.
To me, as a taxpayer and a parent, the bottom line is I would rather pay my portion of the hundreds of millions to support higher education and have the option of actually getting more in return for the investment.
Yes, two years from now we'll be paying the higher tuition and fees at the state university, but it won't sink our family financially to get them there.
And don't even get me started on the bullshit fees, almost $1K/year, the state university tacks on every semester to support student organizations for homosexuals and minorities, etc. I'm not opposed to the organizations - I just think they should be funded by their own membership - not forcing every student to support them.
-
Tennessee provides HS graduates with 2 years of post secondary education at a JUCO or Tech School. This is funded entirely by those who failed high school math and demonstrate such failure by playing the lottery.
http://tennesseepromise.gov/
-
Gerhardt: I really like that program. Be focused on schooling, serve your community, and keep your grades up, and we'll help you get a head start on college. I like that, and would pay my share of the taxes for it, too.
-
Why exactly should the state pay for any part of a college education? Why should the federal government provide assistance of any kind, including guaranteeing the massive growth in student debt? Said differently why should I or anyone else pay for the education of someone else's child?
The entitlement mentality that will bring this country down is only amplified by this nonsense. If you or your kid see value in further education...great! Pay for it yourself.
-
We don't need more Philosophy major college graduates, nor "women's studies" majors, etc. We need tradesmen, craftsmen, and people that can fix, and make stuff. More taxpayer provided college will just get us even more fast food workers with B.A. degrees in some worthless major. Get a reality check Progressives.
-
Gerhardt: I really like that program. Be focused on schooling, serve your community, and keep your grades up, and we'll help you get a head start on college. I like that, and would pay my share of the taxes for it, too.
Who would have guess an avowed Liberal would support a program that takes other people's money to pay for good intentions. ;)
-
Our state has a program that will pay for 2 years of community college. The requirements are 95% attendance during all years of high school, meaningful community service, and maybe a 2.0 or 2.5 high school GPA. It's a terrific program with no drawbacks that I can see and a lot of benefits.
* It has dramatically increased our number of college students and college graduates.
* It has reduced the high school drop out rate.
* The state subsidizes the state university heavily, to the tune of $500M. It was quite a bit more than that until we put the A+ program into place. Tuition at the community college is 1/3 of that the state university charges students. So by shifting some of the state funds to community colleges you're able to help 3x the number of students for the same money.
* In reality, there's one community college that has benefitted the most. It was a very decent but very small non-profit one until the A+ program came along. They mushroomed overnight and now have campuses across the state. It's truly a quality place to get kids' basic college courses completed.
I let my daughter graduate HS one semester early to get a jump on college. She's on the A+ program. Had she gone to the state university tuition and fees would have been around $11K, plus another $1500-$2K for books, for a total of $13K/year. The total cost at the community college is $4,400. The course fees and books that we had to pay for this semester were around $450. The A+ program paid for the rest.
To me, as a taxpayer and a parent, the bottom line is I would rather pay my portion of the hundreds of millions to support higher education and have the option of actually getting more in return for the investment.
Yes, two years from now we'll be paying the higher tuition and fees at the state university, but it won't sink our family financially to get them there.
And don't even get me started on the bullshit fees, almost $1K/year, the state university tacks on every semester to support student organizations for homosexuals and minorities, etc. I'm not opposed to the organizations - I just think they should be funded by their own membership - not forcing every student to support them.
That's great, and is happening where it should happen: at the state level.
The problem is #FeeltheUrn and his handout sycophants demand this happen at the national level, with no constraints (like you have in your state) as far as I have heard.
-
Who would have guess an avowed Liberal would support a program that takes other people's money to pay for good intentions. ;)
Chances are good that your state is already taking tax money to subsidize higher education, and likely to the tune of hundreds of millions.
-
We don't need more Philosophy major college graduates, nor "women's studies" majors, etc. We need tradesmen, craftsmen, and people that can fix, and make stuff. More taxpayer provided college will just get us even more fast food workers with B.A. degrees in some worthless major. Get a reality check Progressives.
So colleges in your neck of the woods only graduate soft studies? Around here we also educate engineers, IT specialists, chemists, nurses, medical doctors, teachers, etc.
-
Chances are good that your state is already taking tax money to subsidize higher education, and likely to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Which I don't agree with....
-
Why exactly should the state pay for any part of a college education? Why should the federal government provide assistance of any kind, including guaranteeing the massive growth in student debt? Said differently why should I or anyone else pay for the education of someone else's child?
The entitlement mentality that will bring this country down is only amplified by this nonsense. If you or your kid see value in further education...great! Pay for it yourself.
Why exactly should the state pay for any part of an elementary education? Why should the federal government provide assistance of any kind, including guaranteeing the massive growth in costs? Said differently why should I or anyone else pay for the education of someone else's child?
The entitlement mentality that will bring this country down is only amplified by this nonsense. If you or your kid see value in elementary education...great! Pay for it yourself.
-
Who would have guess an avowed Liberal would support a program that takes other people's money to pay for good intentions. ;)
Everyone would have guessed. Thus the little label under my name. And it's not paying for good intentions, it's paying for a public good.
-
Why exactly should the state pay for any part of an elementary education? Why should the federal government provide assistance of any kind, including guaranteeing the massive growth in costs? Said differently why should I or anyone else pay for the education of someone else's child?
The entitlement mentality that will bring this country down is only amplified by this nonsense. If you or your kid see value in elementary education...great! Pay for it yourself.
I'm glad we agree. The federal government should have absolutely no role in education. It should be locally funded and directed.
-
We don't need more Philosophy major college graduates, nor "women's studies" majors, etc. We need tradesmen, craftsmen, and people that can fix, and make stuff. More taxpayer provided college will just get us even more fast food workers with B.A. degrees in some worthless major. Get a reality check Progressives.
I totally agree. If they want to spend their OWN money on worthless degrees, then it's on them.
And tell them I take my coffee black, and remove that damned gauge from their ears. It grosses me out.
-
Everyone would have guessed. Thus the little label under my name. And it's not paying for good intentions, it's paying for a public good.
Where does "public good" stop for you?
-
I'm glad we agree. The federal government should have absolutely no role in education. It should be locally funded and directed.
You said state, not federal, (edit - you said federal too, I see) and you responded to my comment about a state program.
-
No federal role in education. Let the states do it. As is, ridiculous variations in state and federal requirements are rampant, but worthless; teachers get to decide which standard they will use!
The Department of Education is in fact worthless. There's a reason it always comes up top in discussion of trimming FedGov.
States are in the perfect position to manage education, but they should step up to the plate and do it well instead of merely throwing money at it. Painfully, we just voted in a school levy to increase our taxes by $4.50 on every $1K of valuation. Painfully, because public schools can so easily become:
-babysitters, not educators; true learning time is far less than private school or good homeschooling
-conduits for inculcating liberal softness and bizarre, dysfunctional notions (teachers are predominantly liberal)
-money sinks
Our local high schools have four or five vice-principals, one whose FULL TIME JOB is handling truancy and detention.
One of the real problems we face is a shortage of good parents.
-
Our state has a program that will pay for 2 years of community college. The requirements are 95% attendance during all years of high school, meaningful community service, and maybe a 2.0 or 2.5 high school GPA. It's a terrific program with no drawbacks that I can see and a lot of benefits.
[snipperoo]
Why should people be bribed to stay in school and keep up their grades?
Anyway, what are those 2 years of community college turning out in terms of skilled/trained workers?
and why just 2 years of community college? for the person going to a 4 year college, will the program provide anything at all?
-
No federal role in education. Let the states do it. As is, ridiculous variations in state and federal requirements are rampant, but worthless; teachers get to decide which standard they will use!
The Department of Education is in fact worthless. There's a reason it always comes up top in discussion of trimming FedGov.
States are in the perfect position to manage education, but they should step up to the plate and do it well instead of merely throwing money at it. Painfully, we just voted in a school levy to increase our taxes by $4.50 on every $1K of valuation. Painfully, because public schools can so easily become:
-babysitters, not educators; true learning time is far less than private school or good homeschooling
-conduits for inculcating liberal softness and bizarre, dysfunctional notions (teachers are predominantly liberal)
-money sinks
Our local high schools have four or five vice-principals, one whose FULL TIME JOB is handling truancy and detention.
One of the real problems we face is a shortage of good parents.
Amen!
-
Why should people be bribed to stay in school and keep up their grades?
bribed? Bah. An incentive, certainly. Kinda like the tax break on capital gains encourages reinvestment. <= = = which is something I'm 100% opposed to, btw.
Anyway, what are those 2 years of community college turning out in terms of skilled/trained workers?
I'm not sure how you and Anthony got sidetracked with the trained workers thing. Community college is simply a low-cost option for starting a college education.
and why just 2 years of community college? for the person going to a 4 year college, will the program provide anything at all?
uhhh, because community college is a 2-year program? As to the 2nd question, the answer is no. You do your first 2 years at a community college and transfer your credits to a 4-year college where you'll finish.
I'm kind of surprised at all the backlash here with regard to education. The way we wastefully piss away so much money on so many other things, you wouldn't think this topic would be such a hot one.
-
States are in the perfect position to manage education
This is the phrase that puzzles me. I'm not advocating for federal involvment in education, but I'm curious why you think the various state governments are any better at it that the federal government.
If we're talking K-12, leave it to the district.
We do have one huge problem, and that's that different school districts, and even different states, are turning out students with different levels of education. Actually, the original goal of common core was that no matter where a student went to school he would get the same basic level of education. Sounds great in theory. Naturally, that ended up so twisted and perverted that the original creators of the program quickly became the most vocation against it.
-
I'm not sure how you and Anthony got sidetracked with the trained workers thing. Community college is simply a low-cost option for starting a college education.
Instead of incentivizing kids to just pursue college often with meaningless degrees that don't give them any real world skills, we should be incentivizing technical schools. College loans are already available for those that want to go to college. If we pay for them through government kids which just go to school to go to school with no skin in the game.
I'm kind of surprised at all the backlash here with regard to education. The way we wastefully piss away so much money on so many other things, you wouldn't think this topic would be such a hot one.
Because our education system has become INDOCTRINATION centers for the Progressive movement.
-
Instead of incentivizing kids to just pursue college often with meaningless degrees that don't give them any real world skills, we should be incentivizing technical schools. College loans are already available for those that want to go to college. If we pay for them through government kids which just go to school to go to school with no skin in the game.
Because our education system has become INDOCTRINATION centers for the Progressive movement.
I'll put you down as a proponent of wealth transfer to students going to technical school. I didn't realize you were so Progressive! ;)
-
....I'm kind of surprised at all the backlash here with regard to education. The way we wastefully piss away so much money on so many other things, you wouldn't think this topic would be such a hot one.
There in lies the problem....we piss away a few billion here, and a few billion there, and eventually it adds up to real money. Pretty soon we wake up and were 20 TRILLION in debt, not counting the huge debt carried by many states
Why do you feel we must subsidize education? By doing so, we actually raise the cost for all. The current subsidized student loan program is nothing more than corporate welfare for the Education Industry.
-
I'll put you down as a proponent of wealth transfer to students going to technical school. I didn't realize you were so Progressive! ;)
You're right, I will retract my statement. ;D
We do have a crisis in this country with regards to skilled labor. Our society has made it "un-cool" to go to technical school.
-
There in lies the problem....we piss away a few billion here, and a few billion there, and eventually it adds up to real money. Pretty soon we wake up and were 20 TRILLION in debt, not counting the huge debt carried by many states
Why do you feel we must subsidize education? By doing so, we actually raise the cost for all. The current subsidized student loan program is nothing more than corporate welfare for the Education Industry.
Do we agree that an educated citizenry is incredibly important to remain a world leader in...lots of stuff? That's why it's "free" at primary and secondary levels. That's also why it's compulsory for those same levels. It is considered a public imperative to educate our people. There is an argument that the modern world increasingly demands some level of post-secondary education, not only to be personally successful, but to remain as a nation on the cutting edge globally. This is why public support of all levels of education continues to be a topic of conversation.
-
You're right, I will retract my statement. ;D
We do have a crisis in this country with regards to skilled labor. Our society has made it "un-cool" to go to technical school.
I agree. Lots of folks aren't cut out for the four year track. Technical school is fantastic, and I'm a big proponent. I see no reason why public support for community college education shouldn't include the tech track, too. We need those folks to be trained and ready to enter the workforce, not stagnate and become another McDonalds drive-through applicant.
-
This is what's wrong with the government subsidizing student loans, which has resulted in skyrocketing tuition rates... Every time the government gets involved in any capacity in the market it completely screws it up. The education industry has profited in a huge way through these subsidies for which the US taxpayer will ultimately be accountable. Huge monuments to greed and stupidity have been, and are being built on every college campus across the country on the backs of students and their families that will never be able to repay the debt. This system is beyond broke.
(http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-CU892_paydeb_G_20140515160642.jpg)
(http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2015-t02a.png)
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/09/08/student_loans_drive_up_college_costs_what_should_we_do_about_it.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/09/08/student_loans_drive_up_college_costs_what_should_we_do_about_it.html)
http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/tuition-and-fees-and-room-and-board-over-time-1975-76-2015-16-selected-years (http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/tuition-and-fees-and-room-and-board-over-time-1975-76-2015-16-selected-years)
-
I agree. Lots of folks aren't cut out for the four year track. Technical school is fantastic, and I'm a big proponent. I see no reason why public support for community college education shouldn't include the tech track, too. We need those folks to be trained and ready to enter the workforce, not stagnate and become another McDonalds drive-through applicant.
Why is that our responsibility and not the responsibility of the individual. Do you believe people are too stupid to think for themselves?
-
Do we agree that an educated citizenry is incredibly important to remain a world leader in...lots of stuff? That's why it's "free" at primary and secondary levels. That's also why it's compulsory for those same levels. It is considered a public imperative to educate our people. There is an argument that the modern world increasingly demands some level of post-secondary education, not only to be personally successful, but to remain as a nation on the cutting edge globally. This is why public support of all levels of education continues to be a topic of conversation.
Where does it end? Should we demand that all citizens obtain Ph.D. degrees?
Why should "central planners" in Washington decide these matters? Do you believe people are to dumb to find a way to help themselves, and therefore the country reach it's maximum potential?
-
Where does it end? Should we demand that all citizens obtain Ph.D. degrees?
Why should "central planners" in Washington decide these matters? Do you believe people are to dumb to find a way to help themselves, and therefore the country reach it's maximum potential?
Spot on Joe. The social engineering Progressives just can't help but create bigger government for what they term is "the greater good". Education should take place at the local level. The Feds should have nothing to do with it.
-
bribed? Bah. An incentive, certainly. Kinda like the tax break on capital gains encourages reinvestment. <= = = which is something I'm 100% opposed to, btw.
I'm not sure how you and Anthony got sidetracked with the trained workers thing. Community college is simply a low-cost option for starting a college education.
uhhh, because community college is a 2-year program? As to the 2nd question, the answer is no. You do your first 2 years at a community college and transfer your credits to a 4-year college where you'll finish.
I'm kind of surprised at all the backlash here with regard to education. The way we wastefully piss away so much money on so many other things, you wouldn't think this topic would be such a hot one.
Is Bernie proposing an offset against some other FedGov program where we "wastefully piss away so much money"?
The answer is no.
He's proposing yet another entitlement program.
That's why this topic is such a hot one.
-
You're right, I will retract my statement. ;D
We do have a crisis in this country with regards to skilled labor. Our society has made it "un-cool" to go to technical school.
And a segment of society has made it uncool to finish high school.
You can't fix stupid.
-
Is Bernie proposing an offset against some other FedGov program where we "wastefully piss away so much money"?
The answer is no.
He's proposing yet another entitlement program.
That's why this topic is such a hot one.
Oh, and it won't stop with "Free" college tuition. That's just one entitlement program, and larger bureaucracy to run the program. Bernie, and Hillary for that matter have a number of programs coming.
-
And a segment of society has made it uncool to finish high school.
You can't fix stupid.
Which is exactly why this idea that everyone MUST go to college or MUST (insert leftist cause du jour) is so ridiculous. There are differences within our population and we should allow Darwinism to take care of the stupid ones rather than attempting to equalize all.
-
Which is exactly why this idea that everyone MUST go to college...
Has anyone actually said that?
-
Has anyone actually said that?
The shark has been hurdled. Comments about state support for those wishing to go to community college have morphed into an argument against federally-mandated post-secondary education. Which is kind of nice, since now we're all on the same side of that straw man and can join hands and revel in our agreement.
-
Has anyone actually said that?
Isn't that what Bernie and others are implying? We must provide a free college education for all, so any or all can afford college and so that we can compete as a country?
The shark has been hurdled. Comments about state support for those wishing to go to community college have morphed into an argument against federally-mandated post-secondary education. Which is kind of nice, since now we're all on the same side of that straw man and can join hands and revel in our agreement.
Nice try, but it's never about just one thing because in the collectivist mind that is never enough. If we are to provide a community college education for all, that isn't fair to those who want a 4 year degree.... Incrementalism is what has put us $20 TRILLION in debt.
-
Nice try, but it's never about just one thing because in the collectivist mind that is never enough. If we are to provide a community college education for all, that isn't fair to those who want a 4 year degree.... Incrementalism is what has put us $20 TRILLION in debt.
On the other hand, we must remain flexible because the world is dynamic and ever-changing. Your mindset would have us relegated to the annals of history; left in the dust by those countries who have the gumption to change and keep up. After all, education was once only for the wealthy. Did "incrementalism" doom the world as education-for-all was implemented?
The issue is not made up of two simple extremes. I am no more suggesting federally funded and mandated doctoral degrees than you are suggesting reversion to education only for the wealthy.
-
On the other hand, we must remain flexible because the world is dynamic and ever-changing. Your mindset would have us relegated to the annals of history; left in the dust by those countries who have the gumption to change and keep up. After all, education was once only for the wealthy. Did "incrementalism" doom the world as education-for-all was implemented?
The issue is not made up of two simple extremes. I am no more suggesting federally funded and mandated doctoral degrees than you are suggesting reversion to education only for the wealthy.
You're presuming that left to our own will, people would never see the need to change and adapt. Government must do that for us. I reject that out of hand.
-
Isn't that what Bernie and others are implying? We must provide a free college education for all...
You seriously don't know the difference between provide and mandate?
Seriously?
-
You seriously don't know the difference between provide and mandate?
Seriously?
Duly noted
-
On the other hand, we must remain flexible because the world is dynamic and ever-changing. Your mindset would have us relegated to the annals of history; left in the dust by those countries who have the gumption to change and keep up. After all, education was once only for the wealthy. Did "incrementalism" doom the world as education-for-all was implemented?
The issue is not made up of two simple extremes. I am no more suggesting federally funded and mandated doctoral degrees than you are suggesting reversion to education only for the wealthy.
Aren't you getting a little melodramatic? Is there a shortage of people attending college today? I don't think so.
-
The issue is not made up of two simple extremes. I am no more suggesting federally funded and mandated doctoral degrees than you are suggesting reversion to education only for the wealthy.
No you are suggesting the government take more of my money to fund the education of another adult that is fully capable of managing his or her own affairs. The point that you seem unable or unwilling to concede that whatever level of funding being proposed now will never be enough.
-
Not sure if this is feasible, but what if we adopted something for all Americans along the lines of the GI Bill. Money is put into it at birth. If you go to college or technical school, you get so many months of benefits. You don't go to college, then you don't get a refund. If you don't put into the account, then you don't get benefits. Make is either a one lump sum to pay into, or small deposits until you put in your contribution. Make is so grades must be maintained to get the benefits. And make sure the government can't get their dirty mitts on it and ruin it like Social Security.
-
Not sure if this is feasible, but what if we adopted something for all Americans along the lines of the GI Bill. Money is put into it at birth. If you go to college or technical school, you get so many months of benefits. You don't go to college, then you don't get a refund. If you don't put into the account, then you don't get benefits. Make is either a one lump sum to pay into, or small deposits until you put in your contribution. Make is so grades must be maintained to get the benefits. And make sure the government can't get their dirty mitts on it and ruin it like Social Security.
What's wrong with doing exactly that privately. 529 and other college fund vehicles are already in place. Why does the government need to be involved in funding your kid's education?
-
What's wrong with doing exactly that privately. 529 and other college fund vehicles are already in place. Why does the government need to be involved in funding your kid's education?
why? Because don't you know Government is the solution to every problem?
weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
-
Bernie in tonight's Dem. debate in Milwaukee: "All public colleges and universities should be tuition free."
Delusional old fucker.
-
Bernie in tonight's Dem. debate in Milwaukee: "All public colleges and universities should be tuition free."
Delusional old fucker.
ok. We can do that by not paying the professors.
oh btw, the undergrad "tuition" at UMass Lowell is just under $1500 (in-state). Add in the "fees" and tuition and fees are $13,427.
Another way to make the tuition free at UMass Lowell is to simply bump up the fees by just about 12%
but I think having the professors work for free is a better idea. :-)
-
but I think having the professors work for free is a better idea. :-)
Excellent idea, they need to "give back" and pay their fair share.
-
Excellent idea, they need to "give back" and pay their fair share.
I'm sure Steingar wants to do his fair share.
-
why? Because don't you know Government is the solution to every problem?
weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
The government already is, and have done a pretty poor job doing it. Maybe my way will allow the person who just graduated to have zero debt than having to worry about paying off student loans.
-
The government already is, and have done a pretty poor job doing it. Maybe my way will allow the person who just graduated to have zero debt than having to worry about paying off student loans.
Government has failed on almost every level, especially education. Our kids are getting indoctrinated, not well educated. Teachers spend more time on diversity, multiculturalism, and inclusion courses than teaching the real subjects.
-
The government already is, and have done a pretty poor job doing it. Maybe my way will allow the person who just graduated to have zero debt than having to worry about paying off student loans.
Um, it's called a job. I carried a minimum of 15 hours per semester and still worked 20+ hours a week. While I realize today's lazy kids are just that, lazy, it can be accomplished if you have the work ethic and don't expect others to cater to your ever need. It puts a burr under my saddle when I hear people wanting things given to them when all they have to do is get out of the house, kill something (figuratively speaking) and drag it home. Guess it's easier to sit on the sofa with a game remote in your crotch for hours on end. (you/your is generic and not directed at you personally)
-
Um, it's called a job. I carried a minimum of 15 hours per semester and still worked 20+ hours a week. While I realize today's lazy kids are just that, lazy, it can be accomplished if you have the work ethic and don't expect others to cater to your ever need. It puts a burr under my saddle when I hear people wanting things given to them when all they have to do is get out of the house, kill something (figuratively speaking) and drag it home. Guess it's easier to sit on the sofa with a game remote in your crotch for hours on end. (you/your is generic and not directed at you personally)
I got my degree while working full time. One of the big problems is kids want the biggest and best of everything when they go to college. New dorms, flat screen TVs, spring break trips, a bunch of dining options. They don't understand that college needs pays for that, which is why tuition keeps rising.
-
Um, it's called a job. I carried a minimum of 15 hours per semester and still worked 20+ hours a week. While I realize today's lazy kids are just that, lazy, it can be accomplished if you have the work ethic
Yeah, me and you both, but that was a different world.
Let's say the average college kid gets a job at $9/hr and works 20 hours/week. That's not going to get close to paying his living expenses, tuition, fees, books, etc. through college. Back in our day, we could do that. Not today though.
I wrote something back on the original spin zone not long ago about this. When I was in college 30 years ago it was a fairly generic experience. Now the dorms and apartments are like 4-star hotels. New classroom buildings are works of art with spansive lounges, TVs, leather chairs, cafes and coffee shops everywhere. Those things aren't free. But to be fair, it's not the students putting them in, it's the college leadership trying to cater to students, to attract more.
Working part-time at the pizzaria to pay your way through college may have happened 30-40 years ago. It's just not possible now.
My daughter is 17, has worked since she was 14 (w/ a work permit). Yes, she makes min. wage, but works 15-20 hours a week. Her hours are limited by ME, because her main focus should be grades, not a small amount of money. If it was up to her she'd work 50 hours/week. Most of what she brings home goes to pay for day-to-day living. Maint. on her car, gas, insurance, etc. And yes, makeup and clothes. There's just no way she'd have enough to pay her way through a state university. Not at today's prices.
-
Most of what she brings home goes to pay for day-to-day living. Maint. on her car, gas, insurance, etc. And yes, makeup and clothes. There's just no way she'd have enough to pay her way through a state university. Not at today's prices.
No, most of what she brings home is spent on discretionary optional items (e.g., not required for day-to-day living)
-
I got my degree while working full time. One of the big problems is kids want the biggest and best of everything when they go to college. New dorms, flat screen TVs, spring break trips, a bunch of dining options. They don't understand that college needs pays for that, which is why tuition keeps rising.
Tuition keeps rising because kids and their families are willing to take on more and more debt, and the financial aid office employees are hustling student loans on behalf of the government.
-
What is the ratio of the "underprivileged" and/or sportshero getting free rides to paying native born White Americans?
What is the ratio of foreigners taking seats to native born Americans?
-
No, most of what she brings home is spent on discretionary optional items (e.g., not required for day-to-day living)
Sorry bud, but she lives at home and drives to campus. Car is a required item, and they're not free to maintain and drive. Now, the clothes and makeup, sure, but everything else - she's as frugal as they come.
huh, maybe if the gov't paid for those things... ;)
-
Yeah, me and you both, but that was a different world.
Let's say the average college kid gets a job at $9/hr and works 20 hours/week. That's not going to get close to paying his living expenses, tuition, fees, books, etc. through college. Back in our day, we could do that. Not today though.
I wrote something back on the original spin zone not long ago about this. When I was in college 30 years ago it was a fairly generic experience. Now the dorms and apartments are like 4-star hotels. New classroom buildings are works of art with spansive lounges, TVs, leather chairs, cafes and coffee shops everywhere. Those things aren't free. But to be fair, it's not the students putting them in, it's the college leadership trying to cater to students, to attract more.
Working part-time at the pizzaria to pay your way through college may have happened 30-40 years ago. It's just not possible now.
My daughter is 17, has worked since she was 14 (w/ a work permit). Yes, she makes min. wage, but works 15-20 hours a week. Her hours are limited by ME, because her main focus should be grades, not a small amount of money. If it was up to her she'd work 50 hours/week. Most of what she brings home goes to pay for day-to-day living. Maint. on her car, gas, insurance, etc. And yes, makeup and clothes. There's just no way she'd have enough to pay her way through a state university. Not at today's prices.
Appreciate the perspective.
-
Sorry bud, but she lives at home and drives to campus. Car is a required item, and they're not free to maintain and drive. Now, the clothes and makeup, sure, but everything else - she's as frugal as they come.
huh, maybe if the gov't paid for those things... ;)
At what point are the skyrocketing costs, and associated debt simply not worth it over the course of a lifetime? When education majors come out of school with $250K in debt hoping to find a teaching job that maybe pays $40K, or someone takes on that kind of debt for a "Women's Studies" or "History" or "French" (I have a resume on my desk right know with the latter applying for a $40k/yr job) degree.... This makes no sense to keep funneling kids through college with escalating costs so they can take on enormous debt, which in some/many cases will never be paid off. The only winners in this mess are those in the education industry, and the construction contractors that work for them.
-
My son did first year at the local community college, then on to a well-regarded state university for the remainder. Graduated BS Business 2008 after 4 years total (none of this 5 year crap). We paid about 2/3 of the yearly nut out of cash flow, he worked part time and on vacations for probably a bit over minimum wage to pay his share. Total for the degree was under 50K. Got a job right out of school, living on his own the day after graduation. He's now in his 2nd house, married, self-supporting.
No loans. No "aid"- we're too "rich" and besides there was NO WAY I was going to expose my finances visa FAFSA. We made it clear that he had to contribute and after 4 years we weren't going to pay. It's called motivation.
-
My son did first year at the local community college, then on to a well-regarded state university for the remainder. Graduated BS Business 2008 after 4 years total (none of this 5 year crap). We paid about 2/3 of the yearly nut out of cash flow, he worked part time and on vacations for probably a bit over minimum wage to pay his share. Total for the degree was under 50K. Got a job right out of school, living on his own the day after graduation. He's now in his 2nd house, married, self-supporting.
No loans. No "aid"- we're too "rich" and besides there was NO WAY I was going to expose my finances visa FAFSA. We made it clear that he had to contribute and after 4 years we weren't going to pay. It's called motivation.
Good for you!! Well done. Too bad many other parents don't have backbone to give their kids the gift that you gave your son.
-
As far as comparing a few extra years of college to the current 12 years of "free" public school, I think 12 years is too much.
But I do agree that an educated populace is in the best interest of the country. Therefore, I would rather see the government spring for the first 7 years. But make those 7 years count:
-Go year round with a few 1 week vacations and holiday breaks and make the school days longer.
-Increase the curriculum so that 7th grade graduates can read, write and do advanced arithmetic at a superior level.
-Heck, i'd even go for "free breakfast and lunches for all students". I remember feeling dizzy during the end of the school day when I skipped lunch because I was broke.
After 7th grade, additional "public" school could be had on a voluntary basis.
But the students and their families would have to pay something towards it, and if you flunk, you get booted out, with maybe one or two re-entrance possibilities for special cases.
A co-op program like I had in College where you work part time and go to school part time could help the student pay for his school.
And the current JUCO concept should be expanded to include more technical (trade) school training.
-
At what point are the skyrocketing costs, and associated debt simply not worth it over the course of a lifetime? When education majors come out of school with $250K in debt hoping to find a teaching job that maybe pays $40K, or someone takes on that kind of debt for a "Women's Studies" or "History" or "French" (I have a resume on my desk right know with the latter applying for a $40k/yr job) degree.... This makes no sense to keep funneling kids through college with escalating costs so they can take on enormous debt, which in some/many cases will never be paid off. The only winners in this mess are those in the education industry, and the construction contractors that work for them.
Joe, this could very well be the first thing we agree on.
One thing that I want to respond to in your comments is the part about someone coming out of a 4 year program with massive student loan debt. That infuriates me. We've all seen the articles where people are crying because they can't afford to repay all the money they borrowed. I don't feel a bit sorry for them. They borrowed for a lot more than just school. They were also financing their apartments, pizza, beer, clothes and barhopping and everything else they desired.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for student loans to help finance your education. I just think more common sense should be applied to the amount loaned to students.
-
Joe, this could very well be the first thing we agree on.
One thing that I want to respond to in your comments is the part about someone coming out of a 4 year program with massive student loan debt. That infuriates me. We've all seen the articles where people are crying because they can't afford to repay all the money they borrowed. I don't feel a bit sorry for them. They borrowed for a lot more than just school. They were also financing their apartments, pizza, beer, clothes and barhopping and everything else they desired.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for student loans to help finance your education. I just think more common sense should be applied to the amount loaned to students.
Yes, put a limit on the loan amount. Only enough to cover tuition, fees, and housing.
-
I quit high school in the 60s and educated myself using libraries and book stores. Today a young person can get a job and educate themselves using the internet.
Why should my earnings and property be confiscated to educate other people's kids? It would be easier to choke down if the education system still worked and wasn't little more than an Indoctrination system.