Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would support it if it can be proven to be revenue neutral.
That is, it can be paid for WITHOUT any tax increases or new taxes, AND without increasing the National Debt and/or the Deficit.
When you who are all for it figure out how to do that, ask again.
I'd support it in theory but I don't know how you'd enforce it. You can't predict up front who will and who will not graduate. Plus you'll just end up with grade inflation in CC because now there's extra money attached to student's passing. I think we should give everyone the chance to go to college for an associates degree but if you don't pass your classes you lose that benefit for the next semester. When I had employee reimbursement I had to pass to get the reimbursement but my employer paid up front. Maybe we could collect back tuition for classes not passed?
I would support it if it can be proven to be revenue neutral.
That is, it can be paid for WITHOUT any tax increases or new taxes, AND without increasing the National Debt and/or the Deficit.
When you who are all for it figure out how to do that, ask again.
How about if those who take advantage of the program agree to an additional tax to fund the program going forward? You get a free associates degree but you pay an extra 3% tax for the rest of your life to pay for the program for others?
Ever heard of associate degrees? Transferring to a 4-year school is also an option, obviously.
Ever hear of "graduating", going out into the world for the first time and finding that what those liberal instructors taught you is actually worthless? That this is just a taxpayer funded of extended babysitting?
For substantiation just look at the number of four year degrees are out there just happy to get a job flipping burgers, if they can even get those.
Where the benefits of the education are matters. We shouldn't be using federal funds to help people get jobs. We should be using federal funds to support the constitutional obligation to further arts, sciences and other academic fields. That's the reason why so much money goes into higher education. It's a constitutional obligation. Churning out worker bees is stepping over the line of the government's role.
A citation from the constitution stating to this would bolster your argument. If you can't find one it is a pure falsehood or liberal fantasy.
If they are setting out to improve or learn more about basket weaving by traditional research methods (getting a PhD in the process), then it's well within the constitutional responsibility of the government to support this research.
Btw, 101 courses are undergrad courses. These are generally not paid for by the government. Relatively speaking, almost all federal spending on higher education goes to graduate students.
You keep citing a constitutional imperative toward education. Please post a citation or just stop.
When you talk about federally supported free education, you're talking about constitutional responsibilities of the government. The only way the constitution supports free higher education is for the purpose of furthering the arts (including business) and sciences. The reality is that that there is little demand for business research.
Btw, I have an MBA... I have nothing against a business major. It's just not in demand for academic research and thus should not be supported by taxpayers. The government can't go around spending money frivolously. The Constitution of the United States matters.
Once again, cite where the constitution makes any kind of education a government requirement.
I know that liberal elitists love to cite false facts. If this is not the case here, provide a citation of where in the constitution it states this.
How about if those who take advantage of the program agree to an additional tax to fund the program going forward? You get a free associates degree but you pay an extra 3% tax for the rest of your life to pay for the program for others?
That would make it not "free" as those who partake in fact do pay for it. A typical Obama scheme.
Hell no. If you can't afford to go to school, then you won't period! We are already shelling out billions in government welfare for food, abortions, social housing, and STD medications! Enough is enough!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
