Another likely contributing factor: “Yale now has as many administrators as undergraduates”. The trend is similar for other colleges.
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/what-is-the-future-of-colle...
High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
51–60 of 326 posts
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#52I think there is a trilemma in uni funding:
1. Anyone can receive funds, regardless of cost/financial sense.
2. Anyone can receive funds, regardless of academic performance.
3. Burden on the state will be low.
There has to be a filter somewhere. Germany (and others) chose 1 & 3. It's cheap, but only available for good students (but tell me if I am wrong, I am not German).
For historical reasons, this is largely untenable in the USA: if they chose the same, it would be seen as enhancing privilege (both economic and ethnic) and a transfer from poor -> rich. Americans want to believe that education is a means to racial equality, a restoration of historical wrongs, and a land of opportunity.
America is forced to offer loans for all students at all institutions, even when they don't really believe it will be beneficial because of cultural ethos, and choose 1 & 2.
Fixing grade school education would go a long way to remedy this. Americans don't really believe in the fairness of their grade schools, and are unwilling to deny uni to students based on their grade school performance.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#53There’s no data in this article.
In his recent book, Ron Lieber argues that the actual price paid hasn’t gone up nearly so much as the sticker price because of the increasing ubiquity of merit aid (which is terribly named). How does that factor in?
He also points out that people’s expectations about what colleges provide have gone up. People expect small class sizes, mental health services, etc. If you argue colleges are just capturing extra money and not doing anything useful with it, I want to know where you think it’s going and why you think that?
The solution here sounds awful. I really like the diversity of college experiences available and I’d hate to see that homogenized. Which is not to say it should be a “blank check”, but it’s already not that — the max is calculated based on need, and families have to make up the difference. Plus loans aren’t cheap. So there’s already incentive for students to choose cheaper schools even if they qualify for more aid.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#54Might be an unpopular opinion... but this is exactly why we shouldn't do student loan debt forgiveness. The root core of the issue wouldn't at all be addressed and it would actually be a signal to universities and students alike, that Universities can charge more, and students can continue to take out larger loans because... they might be forgiven at some future point in time.
I'd like to see student loan debt forgiven along with implementing a plan to address the cause of this ballooning debt. Unfortunately, this is the United States, and federal legislation on just about anything is currently impossible if there is any opportunity at all to turn it into a divisive issue. Even if the democrats managed to build a majority that would allow them to pass whatever they wanted, tackling a probl…
Every problem that gets solved is one less thing to campaign on. And since we don't hold our politicians accountable, they can just campaign on the same things over and over and never do anything about them.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that degree holders go on to make wages much higher than those without, is it really fair that those without subsidize the education expenses of people who will go on to out earn them? Especially given how vanishingly little of it goes to actual education and instead administration and sporting programs.
If degree holders go on to make wages much higher than those without and many taxes are progressive, a subsidy on degrees will be paid for substantially by those with degrees (who may have had their degrees subsidized), and degree subsidization may have positive ROI for the government in terms of future tax revenue from those who got degrees. If you're worried about administrative and sporting expenses, you could cho…
Here's the problem. I have no formal education and I pay the same rate of tax as a degree holder. Even under this system, I am subsidizing someone who has had considerably more privilege than myself.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that degree holders go on to make wages much higher than those without, is it really fair that those without subsidize the education expenses of people who will go on to out earn them? Especially given how vanishingly little of it goes to actual education and instead administration and sporting programs.
It’s a societal good as a whole, so yes, societies should invest in them. Example: not everyone becomes a doctor. But society needs doctors. Having affordable pre-med college programs benefits everyone, even though only doctors directly make income from the program.
Affordable doesn’t mean your plumber pays for it. My brother took pre med classes at a community college for 400 a pop.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#57Western Europeans seem to have figured out how to get a good, affordable college education without this sort of thing. Some Europeans I talked to said the government even gives them a per diem for spending money or what have you while they go to college. They don't seem to have onerous debt. Just like high medical costs, or school shootings (nineteen children were just killed by a gunman at a school in the US, for th…
Look at the cost of private colleges in the EU compared to the US. It's roughly what you would expect. The difference between the EU and the US is mostly who pays for college - not how much it costs.
If I understand correctly, the main difference is that in the EU you don't need to go to a private college.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#58I did a semester overseas at a top tier public university in Australia. There were some very notable differences about what is included with university there. Your tuition basically covers the academics, but that is it. No free gym (but the gym was relatively cheap... I guess they provide it at cost or at least don't make much profit). No included meal plan (but again, subsidized). Far fewer student activities. And y…
There are several american stuff in what you say yes. Im French, raise my kids in China. For me college is not an experience, it's simply a place to learn a trade, it's serious, it's not supposed to have gym. The food can be basic. What matters are the teachers and I adored my French ones in a small city.
I wonder how much of that debt burden is due to the non-teaching part of college in the US: do students expect frats, dorms, gym, fancy cantine, exotic location, isolated modern campus ? Hell we barely had one 90s computer per student in some classes in France, and well it did the job just fine. It was in 2009.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#59So where is the money going? If the price of something is increasing faster than inflation then I expect something in return for the extra money I am paying like a bigger house, faster computer, whatever. I went to college in the 1990's. Are college students getting a better education or experience for all the extra money they are paying? I've seen my university's new classrooms, student center, library, dorms, etc.…
Is there really “extra money”? The chart of tuition does not tell us much about the total cost of a year of education, it just tells us the list price. In the 1970’s, the tuition cost at a state public institution was less than 10% of the total cost. Today, in state students pay about 50% of the cost, out of state more than 100% of the cost. Total Higher education costs have risen faster than inflation (as have grades K-12), but mostly not because of student loans.
Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993
#60Western Europeans seem to have figured out how to get a good, affordable college education without this sort of thing. Some Europeans I talked to said the government even gives them a per diem for spending money or what have you while they go to college. They don't seem to have onerous debt. Just like high medical costs, or school shootings (nineteen children were just killed by a gunman at a school in the US, for th…
Look at the cost of private colleges in the EU compared to the US. It's roughly what you would expect. The difference between the EU and the US is mostly who pays for college - not how much it costs.
Private Universities are in totally different niches over here (at least in Germany); they either cater to the elites (and sell high-level networking) and can charge pretty much whatever, or serve as a plan B for those kids who can't make it in the public system but have parents willing to buy a degree (also expensive) or in very narrow niches (there are some catholic ones I think), those tend to be cheaper. Since the public system is very good, there's little incentive to go to a private University otherwise. I don't think any of them charge as much as a good US college would, by a fair margin. Might be different in other EU countries, but I don't think it's that different.
Edit: And I would be extremely surprised if cost per student was that much higher in the public system than what I know people in one of the "plan B" private universities got charged, economies of scale and all that.