If Obama gets a laws passed on free community colleges I will called him:

[martybegan]

The SAT has no "passing" requirement. You get a score, and you get slotted in, but even people who do miserably get into SOME college.

In Germany you have to PASS it. Its called the Abitur.

Abitur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


From the wiki on the German education system.

Would you rather that all colleges exclude those who YOU feel don't pass muster? What would be the purpose of that?

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

Correction. It would make more sense to allow high school students to elect vocational school as a substitute for their junior and senior years.

As for paying for CC, handing out scholarships to everyone with tax dollars is not free, it's just stupid.

I would go for that as well.

 

[pillars]

show proof of you sending in your weekly paychecks to fund it then the "cons" might consider it. you do realize, Guberment doesn't have it's own MONEY TREES they pluck all this money to pay for all this "free stuff" right?
TAXPAYERS already pay for enough. Pay you're own way through more education and stop wanting other to do it for you

You pay anyway. If you give people opportunities to educate themselves and improve their lives, and remove barriers that might be keeping them unemployed or in low wage jobs, you remove the cost of paying for them in prison or on welfare. I know a lot of kids who would like to go to school, but simply cannot afford to do so, so they end up in low wage jobs, and have no place to go professionally because they are unskilled. If these kids were in school, improving their lives, I actually think it would reduce local crime rates and raise the local tax base. It would also enable us to compete globally. And, that's how we have to think about it. We cannot, as a country, continue to carry the weight of a large population of people who cannot take care of themselves. A "hand-up" for 2 years would probably pay off for 50 years.

Also, there are some fields where we don't have enough trained workers...machinists, auto mechanics. This would be good for local businesses. I would limit this proposal to vocational training, since I think a 2 year AA degree doesn't really make people employable these days.

 

[RKMBrown]

show proof of you sending in your weekly paychecks to fund it then the "cons" might consider it. you do realize, Guberment doesn't have it's own MONEY TREES they pluck all this money to pay for all this "free stuff" right?
TAXPAYERS already pay for enough. Pay you're own way through more education and stop wanting other to do it for you

You pay anyway. If you give people opportunities to educate themselves and improve their lives, and remove barriers that might be keeping them unemployed or in low wage jobs, you remove the cost of paying for them in prison, substance abuse treatment, or on welfare. I know a lot of kids who would like to go back to school, but simply cannot afford to do so. If these kids were in school, improving their lives, I actually think it would reduce local crime rates and raise the local tax base. It would also enable us to compete globally. And, that's how we have to think about it. We cannot, as a country, continue to carry the weight of a large population of people who cannot take care of themselves. A "hand-up" for 2 years would probably pay off for 50 years.

Also, there are some fields where we don't have enough trained workers...machinists, auto mechanics. This would be good for local businesses.

Yes, at least this program would be more of a hand-up than the hand-out programs democrats usually push.

 

[asaratis]

I get the distinct impression that the first two posters (that would necessarily include the OP) could benefit from taking some courses at the proposed community colleges, particularly in grammar. Just sayin...

Personally, I don't want to pay for it. It is all a mass conspiracy to send young people to liberal institutions.

We have too many government schools already.

 

[orogenicman]

So do we. It is called the SAT.

The SAT has no "passing" requirement. You get a score, and you get slotted in, but even people who do miserably get into SOME college.

In Germany you have to PASS it. Its called the Abitur.

Abitur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


From the wiki on the German education system.

In order to enter university, students are, as a rule, required to have passed the Abitur examination; since 2009, however, those with a Meisterbrief (master craftsman's diploma) have also been able to apply.[5][6] Those wishing to attend a "university of applied sciences" must, as a rule, have Abitur, Fachhochschulreife, or a Meisterbrief. Lacking those qualifications, pupils are eligible to enter a university or university of applied sciences if they can present additional proof that they will be able to keep up with their fellow students through a Begabtenprüfung or Hochbegabtenstudium (which is a test confirming excellence and above average intellectual ability).

Would you rather that all colleges exclude those who YOU feel don't pass muster? What would be the purpose of that?

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

And who are you to decide for someone else what is and what is not a useless degree?

 

[orogenicman]

The SAT has no "passing" requirement. You get a score, and you get slotted in, but even people who do miserably get into SOME college.

In Germany you have to PASS it. Its called the Abitur.

Abitur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


From the wiki on the German education system.

Would you rather that all colleges exclude those who YOU feel don't pass muster? What would be the purpose of that?

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

Correction. It would make more sense to allow high school students to elect vocational school as a substitute for their junior and senior years.

As for paying for CC, handing out scholarships to everyone with tax dollars is not free, it's just stupid.

Many high school students already do this. Why is it stupid to encourage our children to continue their education past high school?

 

[orogenicman]

I get the distinct impression that the first two posters (that would necessarily include the OP) could benefit from taking some courses at the proposed community colleges, particularly in grammar. Just sayin...

Personally, I don't want to pay for it. It is all a mass conspiracy to send young people to liberal institutions.

We have too many government schools already.

Define "too many".

 

[asaratis]

I get the distinct impression that the first two posters (that would necessarily include the OP) could benefit from taking some courses at the proposed community colleges, particularly in grammar. Just sayin...

Personally, I don't want to pay for it. It is all a mass conspiracy to send young people to liberal institutions.

We have too many government schools already.

Define "too many".

One.
1
Uno

 

[asaratis]

Would you rather that all colleges exclude those who YOU feel don't pass muster? What would be the purpose of that?

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

Correction. It would make more sense to allow high school students to elect vocational school as a substitute for their junior and senior years.

As for paying for CC, handing out scholarships to everyone with tax dollars is not free, it's just stupid.

Many high school students already do this. Why is it stupid to encourage our children to continue their education past high school?

It is not at all stupid. More and more jobs offered in the coming years will require college level accomplishment, with a degree. The more drop outs we have, the more low skill jobs we will have to create and make able bodied drop outs work them.....or take the liberal tact and dole out more welfare benefits to lazy, no good, punks so they came roam the streets and form their own little gangs, thereby increasing crime and the need for more LEO jobs. Maybe we should require that drops outs attend police academy or join the military. Maybe we should raise the pay scale of LEO, military grunts, firemen and the like. I don't know.

One thing is patently obvious to me. We do not need government run schools.

I will gladly pay taxes so the government (we the people) can foot the bill for the operation of privately run schools. Let the states regulate their schools. Let business savvy professionals run them. Let the teachers vie for jobs based on the qualifications. Let them stay employed based on results of third party testing of the students. Pay them well.

 

[Nutz]

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

Correction. It would make more sense to allow high school students to elect vocational school as a substitute for their junior and senior years.

As for paying for CC, handing out scholarships to everyone with tax dollars is not free, it's just stupid.

Many high school students already do this. Why is it stupid to encourage our children to continue their education past high school?

It is not at all stupid. More and more jobs offered in the coming years will require college level accomplishment, with a degree. The more drop outs we have, the more low skill jobs we will have to create and make able bodied drop outs work them.....or take the liberal tact and dole out more welfare benefits to lazy, no good, punks so they came roam the streets and form their own little gangs, thereby increasing crime and the need for more LEO jobs. Maybe we should require that drops outs attend police academy or join the military. Maybe we should raise the pay scale of LEO, military grunts, firemen and the like. I don't know.

One thing is patently obvious to me. We do not need government run schools.

I will gladly pay taxes so the government (we the people) can foot the bill for the operation of privately run schools. Let the states regulate their schools. Let business savvy professionals run them. Let the teachers vie for jobs based on the qualifications. Let them stay employed based on results of third party testing of the students. Pay them well.

Degrees are a disqualifying factor more than a requirement and experience is tantamount. Those without a degree simply have to take a different path to achieve their goals. No, I am not saying someone without a degree can be a doctor, but someone without a degree can move up the corporate ladder with experience once they prove themselves in the marketplace.

As for the thugs and low life rednecks...that is what they are and what they will always be. We don't have to create low level jobs for them...we will always need stockboys, clerks and postmen like ShootSpeeders

 

[orogenicman]

I get the distinct impression that the first two posters (that would necessarily include the OP) could benefit from taking some courses at the proposed community colleges, particularly in grammar. Just sayin...

Personally, I don't want to pay for it. It is all a mass conspiracy to send young people to liberal institutions.

We have too many government schools already.

Define "too many".

One.
1
Uno

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that one government sponsored school is one too many. To be frank, I went to private religious (Catholic) schools for 9 years of my life, and I must safe it was nearly a complete waste of 9 years of my life. That said, the issue of government versus private schools is irrelevant to the issue highlighted in the OP.

 

[Politico]

And why would I need to learn grammar? So I could be a snob like you?

No so you could learn the difference between past and future tense.

 

[martybegan]

The SAT has no "passing" requirement. You get a score, and you get slotted in, but even people who do miserably get into SOME college.

In Germany you have to PASS it. Its called the Abitur.

Abitur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


From the wiki on the German education system.

Would you rather that all colleges exclude those who YOU feel don't pass muster? What would be the purpose of that?

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

And who are you to decide for someone else what is and what is not a useless degree?

Considering Obama is asking ME to pay for it, your question reeks of the typical progressive mantra of "shut up and pay for what I want"

Also, the market is doing a pretty good job right now of showing what degrees are useless. Just find out whatever degree your sSarbucks Barista has.

 

[mudwhistle]

Mr. President Obama

I always vote conservative and hate obozo polices with a passion, I think he is the 3 crappy presidents we have ever had Bush Jr. and Jimmy Carter the others

But it he could get this passed I would have respect for him I would put him along with Bill Clinton he had faults but did ok

Now my reasons

1. Any industrial community college done in the 80s is useless on a resume, old technology

2. College degrees of the 70s is useless in most fields on a resume today

3 Germany is kicking our ass, in the high tech industry fields, I know been in injection molding for 30 years

4. What I understand Germany is now offering free 4 year colleges

5 do we want to get further behind Germany in technology?

6. The kids I get at work for the past 15 years are complete idiots with just a high school diploma (not all still some diamonds in the ruff like I was)

7. Way to many single mothers, I know they bust there ass and try real hard, but I have seen so many kids at work with street smarts, that didn't even know what a crescent wrench was

9. Companies today deal in a global market now a Dogg eat Dogg, most companies don't even now give a christmas bonus like they used to much less a turkey on thanks giving
They cant afford the old days of sending there employees to school, like my old boss did with me

10. Cons should embrace this ideal by Mr. President Obama, if you invest in community colleges , you will get a return for your companies smarter and brighter keeping up with new technologies not falling back

11. We have I don't know a million or so of skilled jobs go unfilled because they can not find any one, I know this is true, because read about bosh local bitching about in my local paper

It is a great idea by Mr. President Obama a major return on investment , I am 49 Years old and i want to go back so bad get updated on new tech, but why?

Why should I spend say $8,000 dollars to work at a job making 60 grand a year when I Already make 60 grand a year?

With say a person like me goes back to night school I learn about new tech in automation , plcs and apply it , you can only read so much

So pleading with my fellow cons, back this plan with Mr obama.

This is no idea. California has been doing this for over 30 years. I took advantage of the program myself back in the 80s. All it took $50 for admission and you pay for books.

Now Tennessee wants to do it, and Obama flew to Knoxville to horn in on Gov. Haslett idea of bringing it here.

 

[asaratis]

I get the distinct impression that the first two posters (that would necessarily include the OP) could benefit from taking some courses at the proposed community colleges, particularly in grammar. Just sayin...

Personally, I don't want to pay for it. It is all a mass conspiracy to send young people to liberal institutions.

We have too many government schools already.

Define "too many".

One.
1
Uno

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that one government sponsored school is one too many. To be frank, I went to private religious (Catholic) schools for 9 years of my life, and I must safe it was nearly a complete waste of 9 years of my life. That said, the issue of government versus private schools is irrelevant to the issue highlighted in the OP.

Government sponsored schools are okay by me. That means the government PAYS for the operation but doesn't necessarily run the day to day functions.

By "government school", I mean a government run school. That is what we do not need.

Schools should be run by professional educators whose performance is rated by third party testing of the students. Teacher's keeping their jobs should be based on performance, not on politics.

 

[orogenicman]

Would you rather that all colleges exclude those who YOU feel don't pass muster? What would be the purpose of that?

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

And who are you to decide for someone else what is and what is not a useless degree?

Considering Obama is asking ME to pay for it, your question reeks of the typical progressive mantra of "shut up and pay for what I want"

Also, the market is doing a pretty good job right now of showing what degrees are useless. Just find out whatever degree your sSarbucks Barista has.

And you, no doubt, believe that you are the only one in the country who pays taxes. If every degree was meant to find a person employment, you'd have a point. But since that isn't the case, has never been the case, should never be the case... next.

 

[martybegan]

The point is made to compare Germany paying for university for students vs. the US. In the US since anyone can pretty much get into College the cost would be far greater, and the return far smaller.

And considering I don't create or grade the Abitur, the comparison is not valid that you made of ME making the choice.

I think Colleges need to not be considered a mandatory stop for a persons education. We already have too many college graduates doing work below their "skill level" mostly due to the fact that a lot of the degrees being earned have only application in a limited number of academic or research professions.

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

And who are you to decide for someone else what is and what is not a useless degree?

Considering Obama is asking ME to pay for it, your question reeks of the typical progressive mantra of "shut up and pay for what I want"

Also, the market is doing a pretty good job right now of showing what degrees are useless. Just find out whatever degree your sSarbucks Barista has.

And you, no doubt, believe that you are the only one in the country who pays taxes. If every degree was meant to find a person employment, you'd have a point. But since that isn't the case, has never been the case, should never be the case... next.

So what is the purpose of providing everyone with a government paid degree? If the government is going to pay for it, better have a fucking payoff, which means a more qualified and proficient member of the workforce.

If you want to study 17th century bumblefuckian literature, do it on your own fucking dime.

 

[orogenicman]

It is not true that in America anyone who wants to go to college can. A large part of what restricts one from going to college is the cost. Obama wants to change (at least make a start) that by making community college attendance free. Why is this a bad thing for college students (particularly for those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity to attend)?

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

And who are you to decide for someone else what is and what is not a useless degree?

Considering Obama is asking ME to pay for it, your question reeks of the typical progressive mantra of "shut up and pay for what I want"

Also, the market is doing a pretty good job right now of showing what degrees are useless. Just find out whatever degree your sSarbucks Barista has.

And you, no doubt, believe that you are the only one in the country who pays taxes. If every degree was meant to find a person employment, you'd have a point. But since that isn't the case, has never been the case, should never be the case... next.

So what is the purpose of providing everyone with a government paid degree? If the government is going to pay for it, better have a fucking payoff, which means a more qualified and proficient member of the workforce.

If you want to study 17th century bumblefuckian literature, do it on your own fucking dime.

What is the purpose of providing ANYONE with an education? I'm still waiting for people like you to tell me what gives you or anyone else the right (regardless of who pays) to determine what degree anyone decides to pursue. You know, we hear so much from the right about government interference in our lives and the benefits of freedom, and then out of the other side of their mouths we get this shit. Why is that?

 

[orogenicman]

Personally, I don't want to pay for it. It is all a mass conspiracy to send young people to liberal institutions.

We have too many government schools already.

Define "too many".

One.
1
Uno

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that one government sponsored school is one too many. To be frank, I went to private religious (Catholic) schools for 9 years of my life, and I must safe it was nearly a complete waste of 9 years of my life. That said, the issue of government versus private schools is irrelevant to the issue highlighted in the OP.

Government sponsored schools are okay by me. That means the government PAYS for the operation but doesn't necessarily run the day to day functions.

By "government school", I mean a government run school. That is what we do not need.

Schools should be run by professional educators whose performance is rated by third party testing of the students. Teacher's keeping their jobs should be based on performance, not on politics.

I don't know that anyone is suggesting that we have government run schools as you define them. Certainly not in this thread.

 

[martybegan]

because once you take out the cost factor people will decide to do it "just because" and we will have more people with useless degrees wondering why they are doing jobs beneath them.

It would make more sense to make vocational schools free, as those are the skills we are currently lacking in sufficient numbers.

And who are you to decide for someone else what is and what is not a useless degree?

Considering Obama is asking ME to pay for it, your question reeks of the typical progressive mantra of "shut up and pay for what I want"

Also, the market is doing a pretty good job right now of showing what degrees are useless. Just find out whatever degree your sSarbucks Barista has.

And you, no doubt, believe that you are the only one in the country who pays taxes. If every degree was meant to find a person employment, you'd have a point. But since that isn't the case, has never been the case, should never be the case... next.

So what is the purpose of providing everyone with a government paid degree? If the government is going to pay for it, better have a fucking payoff, which means a more qualified and proficient member of the workforce.

If you want to study 17th century bumblefuckian literature, do it on your own fucking dime.

What is the purpose of providing ANYONE with an education? I'm still waiting for people like you to tell me what gives you or anyone else the right (regardless of who pays) to determine what degree anyone decides to pursue. You know, we hear so much from the right about government interference in our lives and the benefits of freedom, and then out of the other side of their mouths we get this shit. Why is that?

The purpose of education is to provide you with the tools you need to be a functioning adult. Supporting oneself is the primary factor of this. That you need to be explained this is a measure of your intellectual development.

You can pursue anything you want if you pay for it yourself, either cash or through loans. When you ask the government, i.e. the taxpayers to foot the bill however, there had better be a tangible benefit to it. We ask for military service in return for a government sponsored college education, why should we just give it away, and more importantly why should we just give it away in any topic the person wants?