Comments on: Who pays for college?

By: college grants

college grants — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 06:13:21 +0000

It doesn’t make sense for tuition to increase every year. I’ve never agreed with this. I think we’re over valuing college and a college education when you consider most colleges don’t help students find jobs. Higher tuition costs should mean assistance with finding jobs.

By: SuperSub

SuperSub — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 14:26:13 +0000

It seems that the only fair way to deal with tuition increases is to ‘lock in’ tuition for students once they accept… in other words, tuition increases would only affect incoming freshmen, allowing returning students to continue to pay the same tuition.

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:15:38 +0000

Robert Wright. I worked in the civil rights movement in MS in the Sixties. Know some of the folks still. Of them, a substantial proportion have not moved on. Two went to the state capital a couple of years ago when some raggeldy KKKers held a rally and symbolically swept off the steps. Best days forty years behind them.
Seeing my point here?
How about your demands that the murderers of Hue face justice? I’m sure you have some contemporary documentation of your outrage.
Right?
Then we’ll talk.

By: Dorian

Dorian — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:43:44 +0000

Poor management and greedy politician led us to where we are, now students and parents have to fit the bill for a poorly run state. I'm not saying people should sue , but mismanagement is a costly failure.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:09:49 +0000

I don’t recall anyone saying that health care was going to be free.

By: Tracy W

Tracy W — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:43:53 +0000

Badabing: If we’re all eventually going to have free healthcare, it doesn’t seem unreasonable that we have free education.

Doesn’t all having free healthcare make free education seem relatively less reasonable than it was before? After all, free healthcare means that either taxes rise or government spending on other things must go down relative to the situation of non-free healthcare (or deficits rise which merely delays the trade-off). Whatever your opinion about the reasonable level of taxes and government spending on non-healthcare, non-education, I don’t see how more government spending on healthcare reasonably implies *more* government spending on education.

My daughter is in university in Lyon, France, and she pays no tuition. Kudos to the French.

Given French public debt-GDP levels, I would not recommend it.

By: ricki

ricki — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:11:16 +0000

Rich, poor, whatever: a sudden 32% hike in fees is hard for most folks on a budget to cope with. I know if that had happened when I was in college, I’d have gone from eating rice and beans to eating just rice.

While I don’t think “education should be free” (which it will never actually be; we need to keep the lights on in classroom buildings and profs need to eat – the “free” education comes at the expense of the taxpayers), still, 32% is pretty large.

I also agree that it’s lousy we have convinced a generation that they “need” a college degree (and in a lot of cases, watered down K-12 education so that freshman year in college is essentially remedial high school for a lot of folks).

By: Darryl

Darryl — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:34:47 +0000

The argument that wealth should be redistributed (a nice way of saying stolen from some and given to others with no strings attached–if you don’t graduate, do you have to pay it back?) for the sake of equitable access to education may have merit. However, the new dorms at Arizona State have amenities that would make any country club envious. Why are oak cabinets, granite counter tops, and stainless steel appliances NECESSARY for education? Why is ground floor shopping with chic stores and state-of-the-art fitness centers NECESSARY for education? Arguing that it is morally OK to redistribute (steal) money for NECESSARY education expenses is one thing. Arguing that it is morally OK to redistribute (steal) money for granite counter tops is quite another.

By: Crimson Wife

Crimson Wife — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 06:04:31 +0000

“Some wealth will have to be redistributed to reach the goal of social justice these students rightly expect in the wealthiest nation on earth.

I don’t have a problem with subsidizing the college education of students from low-to-moderate income families. But I DO have a problem with subsidizing the education of students from affluent families. That’s a reverse Robin Hood situation- stealing from middle-class folks to give to the rich How does that further social justice??????

By: Mark Roulo

Mark Roulo — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 05:23:41 +0000

"My daughter is in university in Lyon, France, and she pays no tuition. Kudos to the French. I hope we can come around to their level of compassion as soon as possible." If the US/California would run at French post-secondary school attendance rates, we could certainly make UC education cheaper. And I'd be fine with this is we, as an example, refused admittance to Cal State for student's who were going to need remedial (basically 10th/11th grade high school level) math or English classes. But as long as we insist on sending as many kids as we currently to to post-secondary education and as long as the California taxpayers are unwilling to increase their own taxes, I don't see how to fund UC given the current budget w/o cutting other things the students at UC often feel are important (K-12 education, welfare, ...). -Mark Roulo