NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students • Hacker News Board

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#521

Post by rrcaptain » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 7:45 AM UTC

IncRnd wrote: post #449

rrcaptain wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest factor in the rise in tuition is easily austerity policies lowering in-state school budgets.

As the government applies ever greater amounts of money to pay for tuition, tuition rises. That's simple economics. You can read about the facts here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2017/02/22/how-u...

Yes, don't fund students, fund schools. The government shouldn't pay tuition bills, it should ban tuition for schools receiving public funding.

Though I question why an AEI schill should be considered a credible source on anything.

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#522

Post by rrcaptain » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 7:47 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #409

rrcaptain wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between the government funding education and the government funding students. Costs are high because the government funds students (sometimes), not education. And very few people get government scholarships, most get loans which must be repayed: essentially an extra tax on the middle class.

> And very few people get government scholarships, Untrue. Lots of people get Pell Grants, but the value of each is very small.

Yes I suppose you're technically correct. But government grants hardly pay for poor people's education, especially considering they trap them in the cycle of being unable to pay for books and food without earning too much to lose the grant.

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#523

Post by rrcaptain » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 7:52 AM UTC

nostrebored wrote: post #407

rrcaptain wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between the government funding education and the government funding students. Costs are high because the government funds students (sometimes), not education. And very few people get government scholarships, most get loans which must be repayed: essentially an extra tax on the middle class.

Government funds most public universities to an absurd degree. Tuition is a drop in the bucket for most schools. Government loans are an extra tax on everyone, and are best seen as a money transfer from all taxpayers to public institutions.

Government loans aren't a tax on those who don't need them, who are the very people who should be taxed the most.

And states only fund roughly half of school's out of their budgets and that number has decreased in recent years.

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#524

Post by Karishma1234 » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 8:37 AM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #439

Karishma1234 wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Free" means someone else should be paying for it. Now, as an average income guy I will never earn as much as a Doctor and will vehemently oppose any move to pay for these would be rich people's education. If the degree is worth something, please pay it yourself. >Countries like Germany show All these kids are more than welcome to go to Germany and save $500K in tuition fees.

Now, as an average income guy I will never earn as much as a Doctor and will vehemently oppose any move to pay for these would be rich people's education Yet... that would cease to be the case. You wouldn't be paying for rich people's education. You'd be paying for education for whatever person put in the study time to be a doctor, based on actual merit instead of merit + money. It means that you would have that same…

404 logic not found. You just want to forcibly take away my money so you can feel good.

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#525

Post by jsoc815 » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:55 AM UTC

felipemnoa wrote: post #499

jsoc815 wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never had the displeasure of being around so many drugs as when I went to prep school-- not some random private school, but a legitimately prestigious one to which future U.S. presidents and or their spawn are sent. Kids there were smuggling large quantities of narcotics in and out of the country, sometimes at the risk of death.(No, I am not exaggerating.) They were also robbing each other of said drugs. The dif…

>>Ps. A pier is something one might take a walk on. A peer is a member of a cohort, class, etc., ostensibly. Thanks for pointing it out. Didn't notice the error until you mentioned it. Too late to change it now.

Cool. It happens.

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#526

Post by analog31 » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 1:19 PM UTC

jxf wrote: post #428

dnomad wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't see a problem with this, so long as doctors can earn a decent living. There's an enormous opportunity to disrupt doctors. Doctors, particularly in the US, are grossly overpaid for the value they deliver. As I said below, there's an extra $100-$250 billion a year that gets sucked up by doctors. Frankly, the vast majority of what doctors end up doing -- collecting information, analyzing it, prescribing a cour…

You say that doctors are overpaid. What do you think is a reasonable salary for, say, a cardiac surgeon?

Out of curiosity, what are they paid in other countries?

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#527

Post by JoeAltmaier » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 1:22 PM UTC

bob_marley2 wrote: post #501

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But isn't that a tremendous endorsement of Stanford? That they have recruited so well and changed their cost structure so effectively that even the poor can attend? How do other top-level schools compare?

Not really? Yes there are other schools that are worse than Stanford, sometimes significantly more but take a top public school like University of Texas which has 5x as many students from the bottom 60% as from the top 1% (5.4% and 27.7%) Stanford is at 17.5% and 18.6%. For comparison Harvard is better, MIT is significantly better, on par with Texas, Yale and Princeton are slightly worse.

But do they charge tuition to their bottom 60%? Stanford has a tuition program where its no-cost if your family income is low.

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#528

Post by kurthr » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 4:49 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #464

kurthr wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Woah there... govt subsidizes what? This isn't about subsidies (except for loan guarantees), it's about unsecured credit and debt that can't be discharged in bankruptcy. That (like credit card spending, 8 year car loans, and payday lending) is a recipe for rising prices and high eventual bankruptcy rstes, but it's not govt subsidy. It is regulatory capture.

The government backing a huge portion of the loans and creating special treatment for the loans are both, ya know, subsidies. They are slightly indirect.

Yes, that is why I called out loan guarantees. Regulatory capture (special treatment) on the other hand, is not subsidy any more than granting a patent/trademark is a subsidy... it's regulatory capture (the opposite of effective regulation). Corporations don't get to blame the govt for the rules that industry paid for... see what you made me do!

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#529

Post by QML » Mon, Aug 20, 2018, 10:55 PM UTC

sahil-kang wrote: post #197

QML wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with a lot of your points, but the way to increasing the base level of education isn’t through making all colleges free — it’s through investing in and making community colleges free. Why? If we’re trying educate the entire populace instead of a few high achieving high schoolers, we should recognize that a majority of people can’t afford to up-end their lives, move far away, and spend 4 years getting a degree…

Can you elaborate on the Californian bias with regard to community colleges? Is the California community college system better/worse than other states? I’m a native Californian that went straight to a 4 year, but I sometimes think about how much cheaper college would have been if I had gone to community first.

I believe the California community college system is better than most states. Let me elaborate.

In the summer before my freshman year, I didn't really have much to do, and so I decided to take up a course. My options were to either take it at the UC where I'd attend, or to take an equivalent offering at a local CC. When I looked at the price, there was a 10-fold difference, $2000 against $200.

It was a no brainer to enroll at the CC: transferring credits was easy because the UC system and the CC system already have an agreement [1]. This is in addition to the transfer agreement between the two institutions, where CC students are guaranteed admission to some of the UCs if they fulfill the requirements [2].

Before the first day, I recall having low expectations; I had bought into the mindset that a smaller tuition meant a shabbier campus and a worse experience. I was dreadfully wrong: the place was modern, and my class size numbered around 15 people.

More over, its population was diverse. I didn't see only college students; there were middle schoolers, high schoolers, international students, and even parents dragging their children to camps. In general, the place had people serious enough about their education that they would spend a nice summer doing so.

Here, it seemed was a greater emphasis on the community side of college. I want to mention that this is in contrast to what I've previous seen. I came from a high school which didn't focus on getting people ahead, but on only keeping them from following behind; that was the primarily the idea of summer school. I've also heard of high school students paying for private SAT/ACT tutoring, and for online AP courses. In hindsight, CCCs act as equalizers in the field of education -- I would even say they are the modern day equivalent of churches in our state.

[1] http://www.assist.org/web-assist/welcome.html

[2] http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/transfer/guarant...

Re: NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students

#530

Post by bayesian_horse » Wed, Aug 22, 2018, 9:17 AM UTC

bob_marley2 wrote: post #501

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But isn't that a tremendous endorsement of Stanford? That they have recruited so well and changed their cost structure so effectively that even the poor can attend? How do other top-level schools compare?

Not really? Yes there are other schools that are worse than Stanford, sometimes significantly more but take a top public school like University of Texas which has 5x as many students from the bottom 60% as from the top 1% (5.4% and 27.7%) Stanford is at 17.5% and 18.6%. For comparison Harvard is better, MIT is significantly better, on par with Texas, Yale and Princeton are slightly worse.

My point was about whether or not the Stanford Students' wealth distribution is more skewed towards higher family income, as compared to other schools.

And additionally, whether or not these differences are driven by academic achievement (which is often higher in higher income families, for various reasons if not more money spent on good grades) or other reasons.