Milk is subsidized on the supply side while college tuition is subsidized on the demand side.
My biggest gripe with Bernie was his free tuition rant that was scant on details.
221–230 of 669 posts
Milk is subsidized on the supply side while college tuition is subsidized on the demand side.
My biggest gripe with Bernie was his free tuition rant that was scant on details.
As a culture, we really need to stop telling 17 year olds to not worry about money, go to college, and figure something out. There is always someone ready with a romantic appeal to a classical education, and it is so frustrating for me. Wasting four years is a huge cost. Years, decades of debt is a huge cost. Going to college with no plan about money? The costs are assured. Plus, the degrees people are actually getti…
> Wasting four years is a huge cost. At college I: learned calculus, computer programming, advanced mathematics, urban planning, how to communicate like a grown up, and those are just the big topics. I also took acting classes and learned social skills and made lifelong friends. When I graduated, a professor arranged my first professional job which was an order of magnitude better than any blue collar gig I had ever…
I think your mistake is in assuming that your experience is typical.
As a culture, we really need to stop telling 17 year olds to not worry about money, go to college, and figure something out. There is always someone ready with a romantic appeal to a classical education, and it is so frustrating for me. Wasting four years is a huge cost. Years, decades of debt is a huge cost. Going to college with no plan about money? The costs are assured. Plus, the degrees people are actually getti…
> Wasting four years is a huge cost. At college I: learned calculus, computer programming, advanced mathematics, urban planning, how to communicate like a grown up, and those are just the big topics. I also took acting classes and learned social skills and made lifelong friends. When I graduated, a professor arranged my first professional job which was an order of magnitude better than any blue collar gig I had ever…
The parent post isn't against college education. It is against spending those years studying 'non-professional' subjects and calls these a waste.
This is corroborated by the statement : "Going to college with no plan about money? The costs are assured. (absurd)"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We should not aim to make college free by means of government sponsorship, but rather education free or inexpensive by means of lowering the actual costs. I think that you're vastly underestimating how much money is needed to provide quality higher education. Trust me, the last thing we need is a race to the bottom when it comes to higher education.
The amount of money that goes towards marketing, administration, and buildings that are far fancier than they need to be is the issue. The professors are a fraction of the costs. Universities spend far more money than they need to on useless extraneous offices and bloat. Get back to focusing on education and the costs will drop.
Regarding buildings and marketing: you have to work hard to attract the absolute top students, especially in a huge education market like the US. Now you may argue that students shouldn't be so superficial, but they are, so universities have to deal with that when competing at the national stage.
As for administration, you probably have no idea how complicated it is to keep a university running. Don't like it? Good luck getting faculty to do the daily grunt work. Their plates are overflowing already just trying to get tenure and keep their jobs.
The higher education system definitely has room to improve, but to claim that it's as simple as "cheap facilities and no marketing" is a vast oversimplification in my opinion.
What about entering the workforce, make enough to cover cost of living, and then go back to college?
If you're in the workforce and making enough to save for college at a decent clip, why go back to college? It's even worse after joining the workforce, since the opportunity cost of not working is higher. Plus you're older, so there's less time to make back the investment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Education in America is cheap, the problem is people don't go to their local school, they see college as an experience where they travel halfway across the country and stay in student housing.
No, education in America is expensive. If tuition was free or cheap, you could work part-time to pay living expenses and take more time to finish your degree as many students in Europe do.
When I transferred to a state university, my yearly tuition was ~6k, which was a great deal since it was a prestigious place as far as public schools go.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you're arguing that everyone should pay for it and go to it until we make it free? Why can't we argue using the reality college tuition payers have today? Instead of arguing from a fairy tale reality for high tuition payers...
Because the argument is society reaps the benefit of an educated populace, secondly yes, everyone should pay for qualified individuals to go to college, as most or much of the civilized world does. That does not mean free college for everyone. There would still be a stringent entrance exam. It means free college for those who are qualified. Contrast that to the system now where college is seen as just another marketi…
But there is more than one way to become educated.
I am not convinced that college is the most cost effective method of producing an educated population.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wasting four years is a huge cost. At college I: learned calculus, computer programming, advanced mathematics, urban planning, how to communicate like a grown up, and those are just the big topics. I also took acting classes and learned social skills and made lifelong friends. When I graduated, a professor arranged my first professional job which was an order of magnitude better than any blue collar gig I had ever…
> So, ... what the f@@@ did you do at college that you are calling it a "waste"? I think your mistake is in assuming that your experience is typical.
As a culture, we really need to stop telling 17 year olds to not worry about money, go to college, and figure something out. There is always someone ready with a romantic appeal to a classical education, and it is so frustrating for me. Wasting four years is a huge cost. Years, decades of debt is a huge cost. Going to college with no plan about money? The costs are assured. Plus, the degrees people are actually getti…
Following your passion when young will probably not work out for you in the real world. Passions keep changing. Passion can be created.
Invest in skills instead. Every real world skill you learn doubles your chances of success.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about... offering college for free like the rest of the modern world? Then you would only have to worry about living costs and those loans are pretty small. I could pay off mine in like 4-5 years if I really wanted to. Plus, then people still could get an education even if their parents didn't save up for you. What about as a society/culture you start telling people that the country should offer education for fr…
That's still time opportunity cost for the student and merely shifts the financial burden. I'm not against a liberal education for the betterment of the person, but it's not a sound investment. We should not aim to make college free by means of government sponsorship, but rather education free or inexpensive by means of lowering the actual costs. As someone else said in this thread, certain kinds of knowledge are rat…
It just runs counter to the goals of our capitalist overlords to have a bunch of learned folks running around. That's why you don't see it. That's why "ivory tower elites" is such a common, cliched even, pejorative. Don't want too many smart folks! They might wonder where all the money's been going for the last 40 years, and might not be so quick to blame immigrants or brown people.