Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

themessenger.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 585 posts

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#391

Post by lisper »

xmddmx wrote: post #380
lisper wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm approximately a social democrat too, but I'm also a pragmatist. Asking for "free education" is like a child asking for a pony. Education, like everything, costs money, and we can't just wave a magic wand and change that. The only question is who pays for it: the student, or someone else. "Free education" really means education paid for by society at large rather than students. I'm not saying that's a bad idea. It…

"social democrat" - are you sure? the point remains: some services are social goods and should be treated as such, so that "nobody lacks for inability to pay". That's not literally "free" but has the same meaning in practice.

> "social democrat" - are you sure?

Pretty sure, yes. Why do you doubt it?

> some services are social goods and should be treated as such

I'm not disputing that. I'm just taking issue with the marketing strategy. I don't like selling it as "free education" because that's a lie, and I don't like lying because it catches up with you eventually. I think it should be called what it is: government-subsidized education. (I also think it should be means-tested. I see no reason for society to pick up the tab for rich people's kids.)

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#392

Post by okaram »

lisper wrote: post #359
xmddmx wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an educator, and a social democrat (approximately) so "yes"? What saddens me is that grand (and simple) plan "free education for all" gets watered down and chipped away to "free education for those who have money or connections" and later attempts to shore it up offten amount to "free education for $special_group". While I don't deny $special_group should get free education, what gets me is all the special-pleadi…

I'm approximately a social democrat too, but I'm also a pragmatist. Asking for "free education" is like a child asking for a pony. Education, like everything, costs money, and we can't just wave a magic wand and change that. The only question is who pays for it: the student, or someone else. "Free education" really means education paid for by society at large rather than students. I'm not saying that's a bad idea. It…

Of course! Basically everything is paid by somebody (TANSTAAFL). Nobody thinks that free education is magically free, everybody understands that it's paid by taxes/government/society.

OTOH, it is a much cooler slogan than 'education paid by society at large :)

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#393

Post by torstenvl »

dymk wrote: post #70
torstenvl wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a taxpayer who funds public schools, I find it acceptable to subsidize the food of those who are struggling, but I do not have any desire to subsidize the ruling elite (who, in many cases, intentionally keep working class pay low). They can pay for their own children's food.

The number of ruling elite is laughably small compared to the number of poor in the United States

And that justifies regressive taxation policies... how?

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#394

Post by dopidopHN »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #360
dopidopHN wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, I really do. Some meal is better than no meal. But we forgot how to make decent food at scale.

Many schools, especially newer ones, do not have the facilities to cook real meals. We should definitely encourage schools to renovate and make use of the kitchens when they have them, encourage kitchen facilities be included in new construction, and maybe even encourage creative solutions when no other options exist.

Absolutely. Yes. The local part goes a long ways

Some hopeful example :

Quebec hospitals started cooking all their food internally on the same budget.

More and more French municipalities stopped their frozen food subscription to hire a handful of cooks and gardeners with a similar budgets. ( those are minimum wages jobs than can be sourced locally )

To conclude : human have been cooking food in batch for quiet a while. That what I mean when I say « we forgot » : some communal facilities like school don’t even have kitchen anymore.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#395

Post by lisper »

okaram wrote: post #392
lisper wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm approximately a social democrat too, but I'm also a pragmatist. Asking for "free education" is like a child asking for a pony. Education, like everything, costs money, and we can't just wave a magic wand and change that. The only question is who pays for it: the student, or someone else. "Free education" really means education paid for by society at large rather than students. I'm not saying that's a bad idea. It…

Of course! Basically everything is paid by somebody (TANSTAAFL). Nobody thinks that free education is magically free, everybody understands that it's paid by taxes/government/society. OTOH, it is a much cooler slogan than 'education paid by society at large :)

> Nobody thinks that free education is magically free, everybody understands that it's paid by taxes/government/society.

That is far from clear. There are crazy people on the left just like there are crazy people on the right, and I think some of them really don't understand how the world actually works, and that you really can somehow magically make education "free for everyone".

Even if it's not true, it provides ammunition for the opposition to say that it's true. One way or another, I think using misleading terminology is generally not a net win.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#397

Post by titzer »

lisper wrote: post #359
xmddmx wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an educator, and a social democrat (approximately) so "yes"? What saddens me is that grand (and simple) plan "free education for all" gets watered down and chipped away to "free education for those who have money or connections" and later attempts to shore it up offten amount to "free education for $special_group". While I don't deny $special_group should get free education, what gets me is all the special-pleadi…

I'm approximately a social democrat too, but I'm also a pragmatist. Asking for "free education" is like a child asking for a pony. Education, like everything, costs money, and we can't just wave a magic wand and change that. The only question is who pays for it: the student, or someone else. "Free education" really means education paid for by society at large rather than students. I'm not saying that's a bad idea. It…

We could call it what it really is, which is an investment in the future of the country.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#398

Post by jasmer »

xmddmx wrote: post #294

This idea is not really new - the California Master Plan for Education essentially promised a free higher education to everyone in California. In 1960. [1] As these things go, the plan was eroded over time, with the (in)famous Proposition 13 of 1978 dealing a big blow. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Master_Plan_for_Hig...

[dead]

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#399

Post by jonhohle »

xmddmx wrote: post #380
lisper wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm approximately a social democrat too, but I'm also a pragmatist. Asking for "free education" is like a child asking for a pony. Education, like everything, costs money, and we can't just wave a magic wand and change that. The only question is who pays for it: the student, or someone else. "Free education" really means education paid for by society at large rather than students. I'm not saying that's a bad idea. It…

"social democrat" - are you sure? the point remains: some services are social goods and should be treated as such, so that "nobody lacks for inability to pay". That's not literally "free" but has the same meaning in practice.

Something is not free if someone else is forced to pay for it. It’s really easy to be generous with other people’s resources.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#400

Post by idiotsecant »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #390
xmddmx wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CA's population has tripled in 60 years and so has the tax base and # of teachers. This is a non-issue. Society scales. > and high school graduation rates have risen signifigantly (which is of course good). Not necessarily : see my comment below.

Even if teachers have (which I'm not convinced of to begin with), Universities and land haven't. Its no secret that we've had an overpopulation crisis for the past few decades as is, so We haven't fully solved that issue as of now. And I'm equally unsure if taxes have tripled, between increasing poverty on the bottom and more and more tax evasion on top.

GDP sure has, if the tax base doesn't reflect that it seems like that's a taxation problem.
Post reply on HN