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.
With scholarships, student loans, summer jobs and parents' help available, surely most young people who want in college are getting there. Little need for government to pay for it. But it is unfortunate that government in many states cut funding for higher education, thereby forcing tuition to go up.
Many other countries-Asian ones in particular-are eating Americas lunch. The future isn't looking so bright for the kids of today and tomorrow. So what do we do? There's a lot that the youth of today are demanding. A lot of it is simply whining and entitlement "it's not fair" would-be wealth confiscation. But when it comes to education, their concerns have at least some merit.
It seems to me that in order for America to remain relevant and competitive as we approach the middle of the 21st century, we should be investing in our kids. Just probably not the same way they do, but hear me out.
To this end, I would support fully subsidizing college educations. Tuition. Supplies. A reasonable amount of room/board (this means a standard dorm room. Not a suite at the Four Seasons or that house on the beach). The whole kit and kaboodle. Every penny of it at zero cost to the students. Free and clear. Just like public elementary and high schools. But only within a specific set of guidelines.
1. The degree has to be in a relevant, marketable field. Think chemistry. Or engineering. Or computer programming. Or business. Or pretty much anything medical.
2. Soft subjects that are of no or slim, marginal value such as art, philosophy, or ethnic/gender studies would not be covered. You want to study those? You're on your own and have to pay out of pocket.
3. Students must be enrolled full time. Usually around 12 or more units at a time. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Drop down below that threshold and you forfeit any further eligibility and must reimburse the school the full market value of whatever you received up to that point.
4. On that note, the regimen must be a continuous effort. That means a four year degree must be completed within four consecutive years. No taking a year off to satisfy your wanderlust to go backpacking in Europe. You do this-you also forfeit. You can do the "fun" stuff like that before or after. But not during.
5. You fail to meet minimum GPA standards or drop out, you forfeit the privilege and must reimburse whatever you received.
6. In the event of any failure, the debt cannot be discharged under any circumstances for any reason. Period. No exceptions. The lien would be attached directly to the person and their income taxes until it's paid. Much like a wage garnish.
7. Get the politics and quotas out of it. For any given school and semester, it's first come, first served until capacity is reached. Also based on entrance/SAT scores.
So basically if you stay focused and work on something that will be valuable later, as a taxpayer, I would fully support paying your higher education.
So where would the money for this come from? That would of course need to be worked out. I have no doubt that there's plenty of fat in the state and federal budgets that could (and should) be trimmed. But those are discussions for another day.
What say you on this basic premise?
Sounds Great................You may add that upon landing a job you must remain employed in this country for at least 15
years or you are liable for the entire cost of tuition. ( Prevents knowledge from being shipped abroad at U.S. expense. )
Many other countries-Asian ones in particular-are eating Americas lunch. The future isn't looking so bright for the kids of today and tomorrow. So what do we do? There's a lot that the youth of today are demanding. A lot of it is simply whining and entitlement "it's not fair" would-be wealth confiscation. But when it comes to education, their concerns have at least some merit.
What say you on this basic premise?
I say this is a myth, the idea that Asian countries are eating our lunch, and to the extent that they might sometimes , its only because the government imports them in here to do that.
because the government imports them in here to do that.
Stop doing that.
Please explain? Is this one of those if a bear craps in the woods, scenarios? They are still better prepared even if you dont see them? or do you mean the govt should stop student visas? Those immigrants typically dont go back, its called brain drain and it works in our favor its a net positive. You want to turn us in the middle america of the global economy? Seems short sighted.
To the OP,
I have evolved on this, while I agree with your basic premise, I dont agree with the giving money back and other conditions which I imagine are things you threw in there to "tell it like it is", I am not for tough love initiatives if they are counterproductive. At any rate, having kids in about to enter college we had a positive experience with the programs provided by the state of Florida. Florida pays for your education at a state college, you need a modest gpa and sat score. I can see some tweaks to the program but its workable so that tells me that states are fully capable of handling this on a local level and should.
1. The degree has to be in a relevant, marketable field. Think chemistry. Or engineering. Or computer programming. Or business. Or pretty much anything medical.
Why would anyone get a degree in something low skilled like computer programming? There's vocational training for those kinds of things. Computer programming (like typing, car mechanics, etc.) are not academic.
To this end, I would support fully subsidizing college educations.....
What say you on this basic premise?
IMO the fundamental premise is flawed. People that go to college and get degrees SHOULD be preparing themselves for the future-for their profession. College should not be a 4 year party, nor a chance to "find yourself" or play with your hobbie. As such-when you have to work and pay your own way, you have an incentive to select a field with a reasonable return, and to put in the effort to do well and make it worthwhile. When the taxpayer has to pay-not so much.
The real issue is the obscene costs of so many colleges and universities. Which is all the more reason to restrict "taxpayer dollars" to the industry. These days kids are committing to crazy amounts of debt to pay extravagant tuition and fees, due to the willingness of government to lend massive amounts of money-which the industry is more than willing to take. If you put some restrictions on lending, students will have to shop for schools that offer reasonable value-like in nearly every other industry. And that is what will put pressure on schools to get their costs in line.
I like your proposals far better than just the "free college" promise of Dems-with no responsibility on the student. That has the strong probability to turn college even more into a 4-year party-funded by the taxpayers.
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.
