Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has it exactly backwards. Consider this simple (and very simplified) example. The NPV of college is $100k. The marginal student can scrape together $10k to go to college. The marginal cost of a student is less than $10k for the college. How much will the college charge? $10k. What's the benefit to the student? $90k. What if an $89.9k subsidized grant is available? Now the college can charge $99.9k. What's the be…
Indeed. Since the colleges control most of the cards here (via accreditation bodies and what not; students are replaceable, loan companies are replaceable, colleges are not) if left unchecked you would expect them to capture all of the value generated through college attendance.
Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
91–100 of 124 posts
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want to believe your statement, but could you share some references for it? I mean, some clue that education has been the driving force in the growth of east asian countries, rather than internal/external factors of other kinds.
Singapore.
I was more looking to something like books, articles, researches that would explain how _investments in education_ in eastern countries have been the most effective on growth, rather than everything else.
Or the opposite, say, the last 20 years of low growth in japan are due to disinvestments in education.
[0] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=singapore+gdp+growth+ra...
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. Since the colleges control most of the cards here (via accreditation bodies and what not; students are replaceable, loan companies are replaceable, colleges are not) if left unchecked you would expect them to capture all of the value generated through college attendance.
This assumes a thoroughly mercenary/market oriented focus of colleges, and ignores altruistic or societal motives of many if not most colleges/universities/educators and professors.
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lack of mobility is a key part of the experiment here. It's an economic growth strategy - attract families that value education, get them to set up roots, and the local economy will benefit. If this were to roll out on a national level then it would be much similar to public school, but rather than K-12, it'd be K-BA. Maybe there'd be vouchers, maybe not. The point is that this is an experimental model for economic g…
There's also a kind of inevitability here - that schemes with intended pay-off periods measured in decades are not going to interest politicians who's main (some say "only") job is to be re-elected on 3 or 4 year cycles… Call me cynical, but if this had been my idea - I would have taken it to potential local wealthy benefactors, and probably would not have bothered pitching it to "the government"…
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#95I'd say the kids of Kalamazoo could use a break given the kind of stuff they have to deal with. http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/letters/Nose+Hill+Park+... Note: The above Kalamazoo sheriff is probably not quite as paranoid as the story suggests since Kalamzoo has a murder rate almost 7 times higher than Calgary despite being roughtly 1/14'th the size. If Kalamazoo is that dangerous, it's natural to assume a much…
The sheriff is apparently not very good at being off-duty, oh well.
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
This assumes a thoroughly mercenary/market oriented focus of colleges, and ignores altruistic or societal motives of many if not most colleges/universities/educators and professors.
I don't think that it's a good idea to build a system on the premise that people have to act nice . It's much better to incentivize them to do so.
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#97Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. Since the colleges control most of the cards here (via accreditation bodies and what not; students are replaceable, loan companies are replaceable, colleges are not) if left unchecked you would expect them to capture all of the value generated through college attendance.
This assumes a thoroughly mercenary/market oriented focus of colleges, and ignores altruistic or societal motives of many if not most colleges/universities/educators and professors.
Every college and university presents itself as altruistic and socially motivated in its publicity material - but if you judge colleges and universities by their actions instead of their words, which is to say in terms of inflation-adjusted tuition costs, they seem pretty mercenary/market oriented to me. According to [1] the same public college 4 year education rose in cost by more than 300% between 1988 and 2008, while median family income rose by only 90%, and the cost of a new car by just 20%.
I don't blame them for this in a market-driven system - a free market actor maximizing its share of the economic surplus is like a dog humping your leg, it's just being a dog. But I don't think it's wise to deny that it's happening.
[1] http://www.deltacostproject.org/resources/pdf/Trends-in-Coll...
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#99"The Promise was created against a backdrop of recent economic thought that considers investment in education better than nearly every other kind of developmental effort when it comes to promoting economic growth." That's the kind of thinking that turned east Asia from a place of wretched poverty to a place of wealth in my lifetime.
I want to believe your statement, but could you share some references for it? I mean, some clue that education has been the driving force in the growth of east asian countries, rather than internal/external factors of other kinds.
I'll quote a few relevant snippets from the article, for anyone who doesn't want to read the whole thing.
Challenging the conventional view, there is actually a striking global correspondence between the world economic slowdown since 1973 and ever-increasing levels of educational spending. Comparisons between countries also confound the idea that more education translates into more growth. For example, South Korea is often given as an example of a country that made education a priority since the 1960s and saw significant economic growth. But as Professor Alison Wolf from King's College London points out, Egypt has also prioritised investing in education, but its growth record has been poor (4). Between 1970 and 1998 Egypt's primary enrolment rates grew to more than 90 per cent, secondary schooling levels went from 32 per cent to 75 per cent, and university education doubled - yet over the same period Egypt moved from being the world's forty-seventh poorest country to being the forty-eighth.
A retort might be that education isn't the sole determinant of growth - other factors may offset its positive economic role - but it remains a necessary one. But this argument doesn't stand up either. The rapid growth of Hong Kong, another of the East Asian tigers, wasn't accompanied by substantial investment in education. Its expansion of secondary and university education came later, as more prosperous Hong Kong parents used some of their newfound wealth to give their children a better education than they had had.
A study for the World Bank came to similar conclusions. In a paper called 'Where has all the education gone?', public policy academic Lant Pritchett couldn't find the positive correlation between education and productivity that underpins so much current international development thinking (5). Economist William Easterly summarised the study:
'African countries with rapid growth in human capital [the fashionable term for people's work abilities, especially levels of education] over the 1960 to 1987 period - countries like Angola, Mozambique, Ghana, Zambia, Madagascar, Sudan, and Senegal - were nevertheless growth disasters. Countries like Japan, with modest growth in human capital, were growth miracles. Other East Asian miracles like Singapore, Korea, China, and Indonesia did have rapid growth in human capital, but equal to or less than that of the African growth disasters. To take one comparison, Zambia had slightly faster expansion in human capital than Korea, but Zambia's growth rate was seven percentage points lower.
Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has it exactly backwards. Consider this simple (and very simplified) example. The NPV of college is $100k. The marginal student can scrape together $10k to go to college. The marginal cost of a student is less than $10k for the college. How much will the college charge? $10k. What's the benefit to the student? $90k. What if an $89.9k subsidized grant is available? Now the college can charge $99.9k. What's the be…
lets assume the cost of educating a student is going to cost X. The colledge is going to get some percentage of X as profit, no matter what policy the gov't decides. Now, the question is, what party _should_ be covering for the cost X? In the grant scenario, it is society/tax payers who cover the cost of education. In the load scenario, it is the individual being educated that is covering the cost, deferred to the fu…
The question isn't _whether_ students have any skin in the game, it's _why_ does an education cost X in the first place.