Oregon: "Pay it Forward" plan (society, benefits, cost)

[rw47]

Originally Posted by NJBest

That was my point. The European schools that have free funding slots are equally as competitive. If you want to talk about how countries like Germany offers free or low tuition... you have to talk about how competitive college admission is there as well. We have the same opportunities at our competitive universities.

Exactly.

This is the problem with Americans. They want to combine the welfare of Europe with the "I'll do what I want" attitude of the US.

The only reason Germany can offer free college is that not just anyone in Germany can decide to go to college. A big chunk of them are sent off to trade school to become plumbers.

Try that here and people will be throwing tantrums, because of course, they are entitled to go to college, whether they are a total dumbazz or not.

[michiganmoon]

Originally Posted by michiganmoon

I am intrigued by this concept, but the more I think about it the more I think it may not mathematically work, unless the cost of college comes down.

1) I know several teachers that went to school for about 5 years, became a teacher, took additional classes for recertification or masters, only taught for 3 to 8 years and then were married to a guy with a high income and became housewives. If you work for 3 to 8 years...you aren't paying off your full expenses.

Now, this would be a small percentage...but I think there would be enough people not working for a full 24 years for a variety of reasons, housewife, disability, death, lifestyle, that it would throw a wrench in the system.


2) 45% of recent college grads don't have a job that requires a college degree.

You have a lot of people with a degree in something like "women's studies" who are now a barista at Starbucks. I guess, you will have a lot of people that get out of college and struggle for a few years making minimal money and sometimes even living at home.


3) They are estimating that the typical college grad will pay $800 in year 1 and $2,000 in year 20, with the final 4 years having a payment of $7,400 each for a total of $57,600 paid back per average student. What am I missing here....many kids are taking 5 years now to graduate...

Let's say a kid takes 4.5 years to graduate and they are expecting the typical kid to pay back $57,600....that works out to a projected $12,800 per year of college costs....seems a bit low doesn't it... Is that really the average cost of college per year?

Also, inflation....$2,000 in year 20, would probably be roughly equal to $1,200 in year 1. Because of inflation, it seems like they are paying less in "real" dollars back than imagined.


4) If you will go into an extremely high paying field, perhaps it would be cheaper to go to another state and use typical loans.

5) Won't Community Colleges and affordable colleges lose a lot of demand? Why go to a community college for the purpose of saving money? Why go to a nearby college to live at home for a couple years to save on room and board? All colleges cost the same...3%...

Going to the University of Oregon costs $33K.

Option A) Go to Oregon for 5 years...taking of course an extra year to find myself...costs the government $165,000

Option B) Go to a local Community College for 2 years to save on tuition and not have room and board and then transfer to a more reasonably priced 4 year college to finish everything in a total of 4 years...costs the government $75,000.

Yet, I pay back the same amount...3% for 20 years....Option B loses a lot of luster.

I become a teacher...rough job market so I substitute teach and work odd jobs for a year...only make $20K....then get my first teaching job starting out at $29K...good chance I wouldn't pay enough back for either option...especially when you account for inflation.

[BMORE]

I would expect the price of college to skyrocket through the roof, and I wonder if people can decide how much they'd like to contribute towards their education. Personally, if I knew that it would speed the process of my 'free' education up, I'd probably just contribute 6% to lessen the time.

My only question is what happens if people aren't earning any cash or what if they pass away, or imprisoned for life, what happens then? The 3% comes from their SSI? I would almost say a negative-tax would be needed in Oregon to make sure things are balanced, if that person doesn't work the state can garnish whatever amount the negative tax is. Simply put, revenue reform will be needed as well and the system will constantly need to be tweaked for the simple fact that it is being created with a deficit in mind.

The system wouldn't be able to be created over the course of a year, but instead the state should begin taxing for the course of about 3-5 years, then once the program is implemented and the first wave of people begin putting their 3% in, the state reimburses the tax-payer for the 3-5 years it borrowed against them. Of course they won't be reimbursed immediately, but also over the course of time.

To explain in numbers:
*3-5 years state takes a percent or two from the the tax-payer no matter their income. The possibility of exemption to this tax does exist though.
*Hypothetically speaking, about $3 billion from tax-payers is put into the education pot.
*4 years later the first batch of 'free' students are graduating, and they are getting jobs that put in about 3% for their income.
*The state begins distributing the one or two percent back, but over the course of years to make sure the system remains sound. The option exist for one to keep their one or two percent within the pot or contribute it to an IRA/SSI/Pension over the course of time. This also could help people who are going back to college because they could end up contributing only one percent of their check to their 'free education' for a while, while also saving their cash as well.

That's some of what I would propose to make sure the system remains sound and to benefit those who are contributing. In some cases, a loan may be better than this free education if the earning potential in your area of expertise is higher.

[Magritte25]

Originally Posted by TylerJAX

College has become too mainstream. In the future, those holding degrees from mediocre schools will have an even tougher time finding solid employment. Part of the problem is that good blue collar employment isn't as easily available as it was in the 50s-70s, and a college education is seen(somewhat erroneously) as the only viable path to a decent income. There was a time when all you had to do to find a job that would earn you a decent living(if you were White) was graduate high school, have no criminal record, and be of sound moral character; gone are those days.

Many blue collar sectors report a lack of available, qualified workers. Don't get me wrong, the level of jobs in those sectors is not anywhere near previous levels. But for those who have the education and skills, they may find a job easier to find than expected.

[Magritte25]

Originally Posted by pghquest

I'm not arguing, I asked a question, one you failed to answer

But SOMEONE else has to pay for your mistake with the new proposal.. You dont comprehend the difference?

Under the current system, you are liable for your own debts.. under the new one proposed, the government is. If you dont get a job, you pay zero

Why are you concentrating on those who will take advantage instead of those who will gain an advantage? Overall, I think this is a good program that will help far more people than it hurts.

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Why are you concentrating on those who will take advantage instead of those who will gain an advantage? Overall, I think this is a good program that will help far more people than it hurts.

Pgh gets it in her head that if one person abuses the system, then everyone must abuse the system, when this idea has been proven and modeled after another country that is doing the same thing. It makes sense to have a college degree reflect the income one earns from that degree.

Some people just like to argue for the sake of arguing.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Why are you concentrating on those who will take advantage instead of those who will gain an advantage? Overall, I think this is a good program that will help far more people than it hurts.

Because people who take advantage will cost the most money and those who benefit from going to college, already do.

Originally Posted by urbanlife78

Pgh gets it in her head that if one person abuses the system, then everyone must abuse the system, when this idea has been proven and modeled after another country that is doing the same thing. It makes sense to have a college degree reflect the income one earns from that degree.

Some people just like to argue for the sake of arguing.

Your the one whining cause you were stupid enough to take out $54K in loans and celebrating the idea that someone else would pay for you to go make the same mistake again.

Tell me urban.. If there are enough people like you, (and there are) who will pay for it?

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

You should be proud. I'd love to see this in Michigan. Let's hope it catches on.

Michigan can't afford much of anything.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Some of us believe that higher education can be it's own reward. We don't believe the number on one's paycheck or bank statement is the end all/be all measure of a "good" education.

For those of you who believe that - fine. But the public doesn't need to fund your hobby or dream. I simply do not believe society benefits by paying to "educate" people in nearly unemployable fields. You can be a barista without a literature degree.

[GregW]

First of all an Academic College is NOT a Trade School and should not be a Trade School.

Second is the current funding method removed all controls on how much a college can charge. Either we have to install price controls with the student loan program of drop the loan program.

Third the loan program was designed to subsidize the banks not help the students.

I suggest the Federal Government make the loans available at the Federal Discount rate and collect with a 10% surcharge on the taxes owed by the students.

FWIW – I believe there is a shortage of skilled tradesmen because the trades have simply never paid enough to attract people smart enough to do the job. I was, and with some practice could be again, a machinist and machine builder I was before I went to college. I am glad I went because the result was a career in a quiet clean office with less danger and much higher pay. The personal cost was near complete boredom.