Tuition free colleges. Yay or nay?

[urge]

Rhode Island could be the next state to make tuition free

We all know there is no such thing as free. The tax payers will get the bill.

Is it a good thing to have the tax payers pay for college education?

Discuss.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MusicDOc124]

I think so. From what I've seen, it's mostly been for community colleges and/or in-state for students at their state schools, and in certain cases, it's been for those who themselves/their families make less than $X. I'd personally rather pay marginally more (or simply have a portion reallocated) of my taxes toward education than half the BS it goes toward anyway. More education can lead to more progress and understanding of many things (one can hope) to include one another. Though, I'd hope that there would be something for the vocations as well, and not just college/university. Or also, maybe have certain majors be free/reduced tuition depending on where there is need. Just an idea though.

 

[deleted480308]

It's a crappy idea

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Not necessarily free, but WAY the hell more affordable (regardless of career choice).

 

[d9sccr]

That's a hard no. There's enough "free" stuff available. There are plenty of affordable state schools and numerous scholarships.

More than anything, EVERYBODY shouldn't have access to unlimited loans at age 18.

Schools also need to have some skin in the game. You want to charge $50k/yr for a degree that leaves the graduate unemployable, let the school support them until they find a job.

I'm not really against the idea of free education, but considering the federal deficit, I'm not sure more entitlement is what the country needs

 

[MusicDOc124]

More than anything, EVERYBODY shouldn't have access to unlimited loans at age 18.

Agree with mostly everything you said, but have a question for you regarding this and the current state of the process: how do you feel toward how things are going now where it is community colleges and in-state schools (for in-state residents) whose families make under $X that are getting it free as opposed to everyone? I agree with you generally speaking though, but curious towards this since you said no.

 

[Man o War]

Not for more liberal arts degrees, these are the people graduating and whining about no jobs and 50-100k in student debt....maybe for a certain amount of STEM degrees, and fields that are in short supply. We should also not make the dollar amount devoted to this open ended, once the money allotted to this is gone, it's gone.
If we are going to give kids taxpayer funded college degrees, then we also need to pay for skilled trades. Those are far more useful than most of the general degrees colleges are handing out now.

 

[d9sccr]

Agree with mostly everything you said, but have a question for you regarding this and the current state of the process: how do you feel toward how things are going now where it is community colleges and in-state schools (for in-state residents) whose families make under $X that are getting it free as opposed to everyone? I agree with you generally speaking though, but curious towards this since you said no.

Truthfully, I wasn't aware that anyone was getting any education beyond high-school for free. There are programs like the Century 21 scholars that your household income must be below $20k or something to apply. Personally, I think it comes down to how these programs are funded. By the universities? State? Federal government?

Like I said, I'm not particularly against the free component, but rather continuing to expand entitlement $20 trillion in the hole. If anything, I think it would be more prudent to improve public high school education to help these kids make more informed decisions. At our public high school, we were obligated to have the equivalent of 3 years of either art, choir, band plus other random classes like home "economics" (read learning how to sow and cook random things) to graduate. There were no sort of money management classes, macro-economics, etc.

 

[urge]

I'm on the fence on this one. I'm happy the young people are finally getting a bone. For the last 20 years or so all the perks have been directed to senior people at the expense of the young. However I don't want to pay more taxes. My tax rate, federal and state, is around 45ish% plus property tax, sales tax, use tax, FICA tax, ACA tax... all together is over 50% and my children would never qualify for anything. Why should I pay for it?

 

[twoliter]

Here are a couple of the problems with "free" tuition. 1. Once the state (or whoever) starts paying for tuition, the universities see that as a blank check and will start jacking up the cost of tuition. If the government says "no," the universities can just cry foul. If the government says "yes," then taxes go up even more. If the government says "ok, but we'll only pay what we were paying before," then it's not "free" anymore.
2. Aren't we already seeing a bottleneck of college graduates looking for jobs. Why would we want to make that worse?

 

[InfinitiPSI]

In an ideal world, I think its completely reasonable for those more fortunate (read has more disposable income) to help support the country overall, even if no direct, and obvious benefit comes back to me. As a US citizen, I feel it is a duty to contribute to my fellow Americans. Not everything we should do, should we need to see some direct benefit or gain back to us.

Unfortunately in the real world, the benefits are often lost due to loopholes, or everyone trying to game the system (i.e. colleges raising tuition more expeditiously because of the 'blank check' provided by the government). Also, I think certain majors should be prioritized (most likely to get a job afterwards, most likely to fill a need

 

[deleted480308]

In an ideal world, I think its completely reasonable for those more fortunate (read has more disposable income) to help support the country overall, even if no direct, and obvious benefit comes back to me. As a US citizen, I feel it is a duty to contribute to my fellow Americans. Not everything we should do, should we need to see some direct benefit or gain back to us.

Unfortunately in the real world, the benefits are often lost due to loopholes, or everyone trying to game the system (i.e. colleges raising tuition more expeditiously because of the 'blank check' provided by the government). Also, I think certain majors should be prioritized (most likely to get a job afterwards, most likely to fill a need

Duty? Nope

 

[InfinitiPSI]

I respect your opinion. I think that speaks to the same sentiment as young people being forced to get health insurance. If everyone doesn't chip in, it won't work. But the young people don't want to get insurance, until of course, they become older and/or ill.

History, our own generation, and even in day to day life, you can find life lessons that constantly suggest that its often (at least ideally) better to help the whole community. To invest into the community. Yes, in the real world, again, there is too much greed, and sabotage a long the way to see many actual positive results. I don't think that should stop those from trying to do the right thing despite that fact. I guess this is more of a generalized statement, and not specific to this particular topic.

 

[cchoukal]

One angle on this I haven't seen presented in the comments is that we're already paying a lot of taxes to support college education (Pell Grants, interest subsidies for student loans, etc.), and whether that is a better use of the tax dollars we're already spending than the various "free" programs that have been proposed. I would think that, from an efficiency standpoint, eliminating the middle-man (the granting agency, the loan servicing company) would be superior, but probably at the cost of choice (students who currently get a Pell grant can go wherever they want, whereas in the future of free-ish state programs, there might be less money to go around because it's being diverted to state schools). A lot of conjecture here, based on the snippets I've read about different programs, but I guess my point is just that societal, we have a tremendous interest in an educated populace (liberal arts, trades, all of it), we currently spend a TON of money on it, and I wonder if maybe some of these ideas that initially sound like socialism might ultimately be cheaper than what we're currently doing.

 

[urge]

One angle on this I haven't seen presented in the comments is that we're already paying a lot of taxes to support college education (.....interest subsidies for student loans, etc.),

Subsidies for loans? Aren't they paying over 6%?

You can buy a McMansion for half that rate. The Fed prime rate was 0% a year ago. Now is like 0.5%.

How is that subsidised?

They are getting robbed to cater to senior people with never ending medicare benefits.

 

[emergentmd]

Rhode Island could be the next state to make tuition free

We all know there is no such thing as free. The tax payers will get the bill.

Is it a good thing to have the tax payers pay for college education?

Discuss.

This will end badly for RI and every other state who offers free tuition. The problem with our government and citizens is that once you give them something, they assume its a right and you will never be able to take it back. Be wary of giving any freebies out.

I can see it now. Instead of 30% of the HS kids who should be in a trade school or working slothing around aimlessly in HS, there will be 50%+ of kids in College who should never have stepped foot in college. Another 4 yrs of wasted time just because its free and the government will take care of them.

So instead of an 18 yr old dependent adult, you will have a 24 yr old dependent adult who feels entitled. Where do I sign up?

And why stop there. Why not offer free masters and PHDs for everyone? I am sure if the government is paying for it, all universities will be having PHD mills.

How wonderful this would be having 30 yr olds with PHDs in Polka dancing and basket weaving flipping burgers at Mcdonalds.

 

[emergentmd]

Truthfully, I wasn't aware that anyone was getting any education beyond high-school for free. There are programs like the Century 21 scholars that your household income must be below $20k or something to apply. Personally, I think it comes down to how these programs are funded. By the universities? State? Federal government?

Like I said, I'm not particularly against the free component, but rather continuing to expand entitlement $20 trillion in the hole. If anything, I think it would be more prudent to improve public high school education to help these kids make more informed decisions. At our public high school, we were obligated to have the equivalent of 3 years of either art, choir, band plus other random classes like home "economics" (read learning how to sow and cook random things) to graduate. There were no sort of money management classes, macro-economics, etc.

NOTHING is FREE. How hard is it to understand this?

 

[cchoukal]

Subsidies for loans? Aren't they paying over 6%?

You can buy a McMansion for half that rate. The Fed prime rate was 0% a year ago. Now is like 0.5%.

How is that subsidised?

They are getting robbed to cater to senior people with never ending medicare benefits.

The gov't doesn't subsidize the rate, but rather subsidized loans do not accumulate interest while borrowers are in school or in deferment (but not forebearance). I agree, though, that it's a CRIME that student loan interest rates are so high. Bush2 signed something into law called (and I'm paraphrasing) the family college savings act, which obviously does not save families money on college. Ostensibly, the purpose was to make more money available to the NEXT borrower by charging the CURRENT borrower more interest.

 

[lord_jeebus]

I think the real problem is the easy availability of student loans. The rate of tuition increases far outpaces inflation. Colleges would not be able to charge what they charge now if it were not possible for college-age Americans with no credit history to borrow tens of thousands of dollars per year. Take away federal support for student loans, and banks will loan out much less to students. If the majority of college-age Americans can only afford what they can earn by working part-time and over the summer, plus a few thousand in loans, colleges will have to cut costs and adapt. Alternatively, the majority of Americans no longer get college degrees that they don't really need, and a Bachelor's ceases to be the new de facto minimum for most jobs.

Individual states already subsidize tuition for their residents at public universities. If Rhode Island wants to increase that subsidy for its residents, I don't disagree with that decision in principle. It would really depend on the cost of the proposed program.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Community College could be "free" but the Junior and Senior years should not be at the taxpayer's expense. This keeps the students and the schools with skin in the game.
Any motivated kid or young adult could attend community college for a craft like A/C repair, auto mechanic, etc and not have any debt; but, if he/she wants to attend the University then the education isn't free.

 

[InfinitiPSI]

^I think @BLADEMDA has a reasonable recommendation

 

[deleted480308]

Community College could be "free" but the Junior and Senior years should not be at the taxpayer's expense. This keeps the students and the schools with skin in the game.
Any motivated kid or young adult could attend community college for a craft like A/C repair, auto mechanic, etc and not have any debt; but, if he/she wants to attend the University then the education isn't free.

A community college degree in my town costs $6k. If they can't see enough value in that to take the loans or get a job, I don't need to pay for them

 

[Ignatius J]

Higher education is an individual benefit, not a utilitarian one. It is simply not right to ask taxpayers to subsidize that.

Then again, I didn't see how requiring individuals to have health insurance was constitutional.

 

[doctalaughs]

NO WAY. It's sort of like the drug companies saying their 20k drug "doesn't cost the patient much because of our great assistance programs that pay for their deductible." Well guess who's premium has to go up if the drug is widely used due to that "assistance program?"

If the govt wants to reallocate the exhorbinant taxes they already waste to "free" college tuition they better close all the useless colleges/degrees that already exist. I'm not spending a dime for another kid to waste 4 years on a degree in community silly puddy only to be surprised there are no jobs in that.

Also, its idiotic to think all/most people need college the way it's setup in the USA. We should test aptitude in high school. Those that have high scores go on to college then branch out into law, medicine, engineering etc. Or the (few) that have an extraordinary gift for art or literature go to college for those things. Otherwise you go to trade school or apprenticeship and probably end up making a very good living in a sector that is in demand. That's the way the most of the world does it. None of this "oh you can do anything you want because you are a special snowflake."


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[BLADEMDA]

NO WAY. It's sort of like the drug companies saying their 20k drug "doesn't cost the patient much because of our great assistance programs that pay for their deductible." Well guess who's premium has to go up if the drug is widely used due to that "assistance program?"

If the govt wants to reallocate the exhorbinant taxes they already waste to "free" college tuition they better close all the useless colleges/degrees that already exist. I'm not spending a dime for another kid to waste 4 years on a degree in community silly puddy only to be surprised there are no jobs in that.

Also, its idiotic to think all/most people need college the way it's setup in the USA. We should test aptitude in high school. Those that have high scores go on to college then branch out into law, medicine, engineering etc. Or the (few) that have an extraordinary gift for art or literature go to college for those things. Otherwise you go to trade school or apprenticeship and probably end up making a very good living in a sector that is in demand. That's the way the most of the world does it. None of this "oh you can do anything you want because you are a special snowflake."


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

We need auto mechanics, plumbers, a/c technicians, electricians, etc. In fact, we need a lot more of them. A community college is a great place to get that type of education and I would want to make that 2 year education "free" if at all possible. A 4 year University degree isn't for everyone but allowing those who want to go to community college an opportunity to become a dental hygienist or auto mechanic seems perfectly reasonable to me.

So, let's get more "trade school type education" going at our community colleges and put those young people to work.

Community College= Free

University= $$$

 

[BLADEMDA]

"You can get a particular skill in a particular field and make more than a college graduate," he says. For example, he says the average electrician makes $5,000 a year more than the average college graduate. And the country is going to need a lot more skilled tradespeople.

Economists Say Millennials Should Consider Careers In Trades

 

[doctalaughs]

We need auto mechanics, plumbers, a/c technicians, electricians, etc. In fact, we need a lot more of them. A community college is a great place to get that type of education and I would want to make that 2 year education "free" if at all possible. A 4 year University degree isn't for everyone but allowing those who want to go to community college an opportunity to become a dental hygienist or auto mechanic seems perfectly reasonable to me.

So, let's get more "trade school type education" going at our community colleges and put those young people to work.

Community College= Free

University= $$$

I agree but community colleges and some of these for-profit online colleges (like university of phoenix) also offer tons of fluff courses that are useless. It would be fine if we eliminated everything except real concrete job applicable skill courses.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[pgg]

We need auto mechanics, plumbers, a/c technicians, electricians, etc. In fact, we need a lot more of them. A community college is a great place to get that type of education and I would want to make that 2 year education "free" if at all possible. A 4 year University degree isn't for everyone but allowing those who want to go to community college an opportunity to become a dental hygienist or auto mechanic seems perfectly reasonable to me.

So, let's get more "trade school type education" going at our community colleges and put those young people to work.

Community College= Free

University= $$$

I'm not reflexively opposed to either increasing or decreasing government education subsidies.

But - is there really any point in making community college "free" to students?

Is cost really a barrier keeping students out of CC? Would society really benefit from a government program to pay for something that everyone can already afford?

Suppose the government does pay for CC tuition. Wouldn't the natural result be to transform CC from something affordable that people can pay for, into something expensive that the government is paying for? I mean at that point, what reason is there to not raise tuition to pay for nice landscaping and new dry-erase boards to attract customers, er, I mean students?

One of the things that has kept CC low cost is the simple fact that (generally) the only people who go there are cost-conscious people and/or those who can't afford a 4-year university. CC is inexpensive because it has to be. Do we really want to mess that up?

 

[Psai]

Maybe these tuition free colleges would teach you that it's yea or nay.