Conservative65
Gold Member
- Oct 14, 2014
- 26,127
- 2,208
- 265
- Banned
- #221
Another problem I have with the free education concept is that Liberals call it an investment for the future that everyone benefits from. Does that mean the kid's own parents, ones that didn't think their own kid was a good enough investment, will benefit from others paying for what they wouldn't do for their own? Typical Liberal illogical thinking.
If the kid's own parents don't think they're a good investment, I'm hard pressed to believe the kid is a good enough investment for me.
Correct, but college is an investment. An investment is where you use your money to buy something and expect to get that money back plus a profit down the road.
On average, kids who do have a college education make much more than those of us blue collar workers. They have lower unemployment and usually a wider selection of work.
If the government can force me to pay for somebody else's investment, why can't the government pay for mine?
Why can't the government give me money for stock purchases, real estate or even commodities? How about free money to open up a business?
Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for personal investments, and that includes college which is a personal investment.
I prove your first sentence by investing in my oldest now and plan on doing so for the youngest later. In that way, college is an investment. It's no longer an investment when the government demands I do for someone else's kid what their own parents won't do for them. It becomes an entitlement at that point.
I asked one of the free college supporters what happens if the investment doesn't work out and the one receiving the "investment" doesn't graduate and provide the return they claim it will do. He responded with the question asking me whether or not all my investments worked out. My response was no but there was one difference between those and what he called a free college investment. I made it myself not someone else forcing me to do so.