Sanders just submitted college for all bill.

[Delta4Embassy]

Summary of Sen. Sanders’ College for All Act


Eliminate Undergraduate Tuition at 4-year Public Colleges and Universities. This legislation

would provide $47 billion per year to states to eliminate undergraduate tuition and fees at public

colleges and universities.

Today, total tuition at public colleges and universities amounts to about $70 billion per year. Under

the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

be responsible for the remaining 33% of the cost. (then above it says states get 47 billion a year, so why not have the fed gov to pay the cost)

To qualify for federal funding, states must meet a number of requirements designed to protect

students, ensure quality, and reduce ballooning costs. States will need to maintain spending on their

higher education systems, on academic instruction, and on need-based financial aid. In addition,

colleges and universities must reduce their reliance on low-paid adjunct faculty.

States would be able to use funding to increase academic opportunities for students, hire new faculty,

and provide professional development opportunities for professors.

No funding under this program may be used to fund administrator salaries, merit-based fina

4

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=filencial aid,

For one thing I do not think colleges should keep raising rates as they are, needs to be a ban placed on the costs, so much of the classroom is done via Skype and well at home on personal computers. I do not believe in tenure either.

also anything free, is well taken for granted.

also a lot of our property tax goes to public schools, the two year college we have and also the 4 year university we have in our county, mileage increases.

Most can't afford higher property taxes, sales tax hikes or state income tax raises, so this is going to affect everyone is it not?

When I went to college, awhile ago, the special interest rate was 9,9% interest on student loans. I'm don't want to go back to that, and I do think college should be affordable to all, but not on the tax payers back.

I'm not understanding this I guess.

And if it passes he promised tod rop out of his phoney run for President?

 

[Conservative65]

Anyone smart enough to excel in college will win a scholarship or figure out a way to pay for it. (Like I did). Spending tax money to send dolts to left wing propaganda camps is a waste of resources. We already have enough French History majors slinging hash at the local diner. Since the Department of Education was established, the federal government has thrown fortunes at a broken system with the only result being less educated waiters and waitresses.

To anyone hyping the idea of throwing more billions down the rat hole of the American (un)education system, I'd ask, "Have you talked to a recent college grad these days?" I do regularly. What they don't know is stunning. It makes sense why Dims want more of these confused adult children wandering around. They're easy to herd and control.

My daughter started college in August. As you said, those smart enough to excel in college will get scholarships. She received over $28,000 for each of her 4 years. While that doesn't cover it all as the total per year where she attends is $34,000, I am investing in her with the remaining balance. I'm glad to do it.

I know you understand this but to those who don't, all of her scholarships are academic and you don't get them by sitting on your ass demanding someone else invest in your future.

Where do the scholarships come from? Do you know?

She attends a PRIVATE university where what she received was from private funding. Next implication. Not everyone is like you and expects the government to fund for them.

You don't know, then. Just as I expected.

What does what "she received was from private funding" do you not get dumbass? Just as I expected, when the implication you made that taxpayers funded them is wrong, you play stupid.

 

[Stephanie]

this would be your life under the Taxpayer funded /Government controlled welfare country.
Lawmakers tell Detroit - No welfare if your kids are truant from school
With Half of the Students Chronically Absent, New Truancy Law Would Strip Welfare From Families

and they tried to tell people in Ny, I think it was, what SIZE soda cups they needed to drink from so they didn't GET FAT. because they are in control of your, ObamaNoCare

 

[LoneLaugher]

Most nutbags are barely making a living and all they can do is bitch about how those of us with decent incomes may have to pay a few bucks more in order to live in a nation where everyone is more highly educated.

I already pay to much taxes

no more

-Geaux

No you don't.

Really, how much is enough? How much of a dollar should go the the Feds in your mind?

-Geaux

Anyone smart enough to excel in college will win a scholarship or figure out a way to pay for it. (Like I did). Spending tax money to send dolts to left wing propaganda camps is a waste of resources. We already have enough French History majors slinging hash at the local diner. Since the Department of Education was established, the federal government has thrown fortunes at a broken system with the only result being less educated waiters and waitresses.

To anyone hyping the idea of throwing more billions down the rat hole of the American (un)education system, I'd ask, "Have you talked to a recent college grad these days?" I do regularly. What they don't know is stunning. It makes sense why Dims want more of these confused adult children wandering around. They're easy to herd and control.

My daughter started college in August. As you said, those smart enough to excel in college will get scholarships. She received over $28,000 for each of her 4 years. While that doesn't cover it all as the total per year where she attends is $34,000, I am investing in her with the remaining balance. I'm glad to do it.

I know you understand this but to those who don't, all of her scholarships are academic and you don't get them by sitting on your ass demanding someone else invest in your future.

Where do the scholarships come from? Do you know?

She attends a PRIVATE university where what she received was from private funding. Next implication. Not everyone is like you and expects the government to fund for them.

You don't know, then. Just as I expected.

What does what "she received was from private funding" do you not get dumbass? Just as I expected, when the implication you made that taxpayers funded them is wrong, you play stupid.

Why did people donate to the endowment of your daughters college?

 

[Conservative65]

Most nutbags are barely making a living and all they can do is bitch about how those of us with decent incomes may have to pay a few bucks more in order to live in a nation where everyone is more highly educated.

I already pay to much taxes

no more

-Geaux

No you don't.

Really, how much is enough? How much of a dollar should go the the Feds in your mind?

-Geaux

My daughter started college in August. As you said, those smart enough to excel in college will get scholarships. She received over $28,000 for each of her 4 years. While that doesn't cover it all as the total per year where she attends is $34,000, I am investing in her with the remaining balance. I'm glad to do it.

I know you understand this but to those who don't, all of her scholarships are academic and you don't get them by sitting on your ass demanding someone else invest in your future.

Where do the scholarships come from? Do you know?

She attends a PRIVATE university where what she received was from private funding. Next implication. Not everyone is like you and expects the government to fund for them.

You don't know, then. Just as I expected.

What does what "she received was from private funding" do you not get dumbass? Just as I expected, when the implication you made that taxpayers funded them is wrong, you play stupid.

Why did people donate to the endowment of your daughters college?

Ask them. Since the university is over 100 years old and these scholarships have been around for a long time, I'm sure they're dead now.

 

[williepete]

So you've got a kid whose own family doesn't think enough of him to send him to college. A family, church and/or community who don't think he's worth raising money to get him a higher education. A kid who didn't work hard enough to earn the grades for a scholarship. A kid who won't work his way through school. A kid who won't join the military to take advantage of excellent education benefits.

You want to take money from hard working Americans or borrow money from the Chinese for that kid?

Yeah. Makes perfect sense. Go with that.

 

[Conservative65]

So you've got a kid whose own family doesn't think enough of him to send him to college. A family, church and/or community who don't think he's worth raising money to get him a higher education. A kid who didn't work hard enough to earn the grades for a scholarship. A kid who won't work his way through school. A kid who won't join the military to take advantage of excellent education benefits.

You want to take money from hard working Americans or borrow money from the Chinese for that kid?

Yeah. Makes perfect sense. Go with that.

Exactly. Those who support this call it an investment. If it's such a good investment, why aren't the parents of those kids doing the investing themselves instead of those of us who aren't their parents being forced to do it. Those that support say it will provide a return. What guarantee do we have it will do what they say? What happens to those for whom the investment was made that don't succeed in graduating in order that what those who support it say it will produce will occur?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Summary of Sen. Sanders’ College for All Act


Eliminate Undergraduate Tuition at 4-year Public Colleges and Universities. This legislation

would provide $47 billion per year to states to eliminate undergraduate tuition and fees at public

colleges and universities.

Today, total tuition at public colleges and universities amounts to about $70 billion per year. Under

the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

be responsible for the remaining 33% of the cost. (then above it says states get 47 billion a year, so why not have the fed gov to pay the cost)

To qualify for federal funding, states must meet a number of requirements designed to protect

students, ensure quality, and reduce ballooning costs. States will need to maintain spending on their

higher education systems, on academic instruction, and on need-based financial aid. In addition,

colleges and universities must reduce their reliance on low-paid adjunct faculty.

States would be able to use funding to increase academic opportunities for students, hire new faculty,

and provide professional development opportunities for professors.

No funding under this program may be used to fund administrator salaries, merit-based fina

4

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=filencial aid,

For one thing I do not think colleges should keep raising rates as they are, needs to be a ban placed on the costs, so much of the classroom is done via Skype and well at home on personal computers. I do not believe in tenure either.

also anything free, is well taken for granted.

also a lot of our property tax goes to public schools, the two year college we have and also the 4 year university we have in our county, mileage increases.

Most can't afford higher property taxes, sales tax hikes or state income tax raises, so this is going to affect everyone is it not?

When I went to college, awhile ago, the special interest rate was 9,9% interest on student loans. I'm don't want to go back to that, and I do think college should be affordable to all, but not on the tax payers back.

I'm not understanding this I guess.

How do you propose making college affordable for all? The only proposals I seem to hear form the left involves doing so by making someone else pay for what parents aren't doing.

I knew a farmer's daughter from Iowa. Officially her father earned nothing. Unofficially he was rich. She got her tuition paid for by the state. It already happens. But only to those who know how to fiddle the books. Farmers, they usually vote Republican right?

 

[Conservative65]

Summary of Sen. Sanders’ College for All Act


Eliminate Undergraduate Tuition at 4-year Public Colleges and Universities. This legislation

would provide $47 billion per year to states to eliminate undergraduate tuition and fees at public

colleges and universities.

Today, total tuition at public colleges and universities amounts to about $70 billion per year. Under

the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

be responsible for the remaining 33% of the cost. (then above it says states get 47 billion a year, so why not have the fed gov to pay the cost)

To qualify for federal funding, states must meet a number of requirements designed to protect

students, ensure quality, and reduce ballooning costs. States will need to maintain spending on their

higher education systems, on academic instruction, and on need-based financial aid. In addition,

colleges and universities must reduce their reliance on low-paid adjunct faculty.

States would be able to use funding to increase academic opportunities for students, hire new faculty,

and provide professional development opportunities for professors.

No funding under this program may be used to fund administrator salaries, merit-based fina

4

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=filencial aid,

For one thing I do not think colleges should keep raising rates as they are, needs to be a ban placed on the costs, so much of the classroom is done via Skype and well at home on personal computers. I do not believe in tenure either.

also anything free, is well taken for granted.

also a lot of our property tax goes to public schools, the two year college we have and also the 4 year university we have in our county, mileage increases.

Most can't afford higher property taxes, sales tax hikes or state income tax raises, so this is going to affect everyone is it not?

When I went to college, awhile ago, the special interest rate was 9,9% interest on student loans. I'm don't want to go back to that, and I do think college should be affordable to all, but not on the tax payers back.

I'm not understanding this I guess.

How do you propose making college affordable for all? The only proposals I seem to hear form the left involves doing so by making someone else pay for what parents aren't doing.

I knew a farmer's daughter from Iowa. Officially her father earned nothing. Unofficially he was rich. She got her tuition paid for by the state. It already happens. But only to those who know how to fiddle the books. Farmers, they usually vote Republican right?

Once upon a time?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Summary of Sen. Sanders’ College for All Act


Eliminate Undergraduate Tuition at 4-year Public Colleges and Universities. This legislation

would provide $47 billion per year to states to eliminate undergraduate tuition and fees at public

colleges and universities.

Today, total tuition at public colleges and universities amounts to about $70 billion per year. Under

the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

be responsible for the remaining 33% of the cost. (then above it says states get 47 billion a year, so why not have the fed gov to pay the cost)

To qualify for federal funding, states must meet a number of requirements designed to protect

students, ensure quality, and reduce ballooning costs. States will need to maintain spending on their

higher education systems, on academic instruction, and on need-based financial aid. In addition,

colleges and universities must reduce their reliance on low-paid adjunct faculty.

States would be able to use funding to increase academic opportunities for students, hire new faculty,

and provide professional development opportunities for professors.

No funding under this program may be used to fund administrator salaries, merit-based fina

4

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=filencial aid,

For one thing I do not think colleges should keep raising rates as they are, needs to be a ban placed on the costs, so much of the classroom is done via Skype and well at home on personal computers. I do not believe in tenure either.

also anything free, is well taken for granted.

also a lot of our property tax goes to public schools, the two year college we have and also the 4 year university we have in our county, mileage increases.

Most can't afford higher property taxes, sales tax hikes or state income tax raises, so this is going to affect everyone is it not?

When I went to college, awhile ago, the special interest rate was 9,9% interest on student loans. I'm don't want to go back to that, and I do think college should be affordable to all, but not on the tax payers back.

I'm not understanding this I guess.

How do you propose making college affordable for all? The only proposals I seem to hear form the left involves doing so by making someone else pay for what parents aren't doing.

I knew a farmer's daughter from Iowa. Officially her father earned nothing. Unofficially he was rich. She got her tuition paid for by the state. It already happens. But only to those who know how to fiddle the books. Farmers, they usually vote Republican right?

Once upon a time?

At first I was afraid, I was petrified?

 

[Conservative65]

I live in a blue state...they sheeple what ever the FEDs want...,,,true states rights involves the Feds respecting states and not trying to blackmail them into every hairbrained idea

So education is a "hare-brained idea"? I see.

Taxpayers being required to fund something someone's own parents won't do is.

 

[Conservative65]

Summary of Sen. Sanders’ College for All Act


Eliminate Undergraduate Tuition at 4-year Public Colleges and Universities. This legislation

would provide $47 billion per year to states to eliminate undergraduate tuition and fees at public

colleges and universities.

Today, total tuition at public colleges and universities amounts to about $70 billion per year. Under

the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

be responsible for the remaining 33% of the cost. (then above it says states get 47 billion a year, so why not have the fed gov to pay the cost)

To qualify for federal funding, states must meet a number of requirements designed to protect

students, ensure quality, and reduce ballooning costs. States will need to maintain spending on their

higher education systems, on academic instruction, and on need-based financial aid. In addition,

colleges and universities must reduce their reliance on low-paid adjunct faculty.

States would be able to use funding to increase academic opportunities for students, hire new faculty,

and provide professional development opportunities for professors.

No funding under this program may be used to fund administrator salaries, merit-based fina

4

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=filencial aid,

For one thing I do not think colleges should keep raising rates as they are, needs to be a ban placed on the costs, so much of the classroom is done via Skype and well at home on personal computers. I do not believe in tenure either.

also anything free, is well taken for granted.

also a lot of our property tax goes to public schools, the two year college we have and also the 4 year university we have in our county, mileage increases.

Most can't afford higher property taxes, sales tax hikes or state income tax raises, so this is going to affect everyone is it not?

When I went to college, awhile ago, the special interest rate was 9,9% interest on student loans. I'm don't want to go back to that, and I do think college should be affordable to all, but not on the tax payers back.

I'm not understanding this I guess.

How do you propose making college affordable for all? The only proposals I seem to hear form the left involves doing so by making someone else pay for what parents aren't doing.

I knew a farmer's daughter from Iowa. Officially her father earned nothing. Unofficially he was rich. She got her tuition paid for by the state. It already happens. But only to those who know how to fiddle the books. Farmers, they usually vote Republican right?

Once upon a time?

At first I was afraid, I was petrified?

I'm not afraid or petrified to fund my own kid's college. That is, what EARNED ACADEMIC SCHOLARSHIPS didn't provide. Seems those you expect taxpayers to support doing for their kids what they won't do are afraid to do so themselves.

 

[Conservative65]

Don't you all love that. How easy is it for these SNAKES to give away things like free college for all when it's NOT their money paying for it.

here's the kicker from the snake:the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

what he means is. YOU THE TAXPAYER and (your families would go with LESS because of it) would be Responsible

that old coot has been in Congress sucking a living off us taxpayers for how many gawddam years and he NOW decides to present some bill that will suck the life out of us Taxpayers and their families. just for the VOTES

wake up people

What it means is taxpayers would be responsible for funding for someone else's kids what their own parents aren't doing.

 

[007]

Don't you all love that. How easy is it for these SNAKES to give away things like free college for all when it's NOT their money paying for it.

here's the kicker from the snake:the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

what he means is. YOU THE TAXPAYER and (your families would go with LESS because of it) would be Responsible

that old coot has been in Congress sucking a living off us taxpayers for how many gawddam years and he NOW decides to present some bill that will suck the life out of us Taxpayers and their families. just for the VOTES

wake up people

(Inside the leftard brain... )

YAAAAAAYY.... SANTA CLAUS IS COMING... YAAAAAAYY... MORE FREE STUFF..!!

 

[ClosedCaption]

Apparently some people see the word "tax" and their brains shut down.

Here's a one-page summary of the proposal:

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=file

Let me quote the only part that's apparently of concern (no one here has college-age kids?):

Fully Paid for by Imposing a Robin Hood Tax on Wall Street.
This legislation is offset by imposing a Wall Street speculation fee on investment houses, hedge fund
s, and other speculators of 0.5% on stock trades (50 cents for every $100 worth of stock), a 0.1% fee
on bonds, and a 0.005% fee on derivatives. It has been estimated that this provision could
raise hundreds of billions a year which could be used not only to make tuition free at public colleges
and universities in this country, it could also be used to create millions of jobs and rebuild the
middle class of this country.

I'll be happy to break it down further if anyone's interested but, bottom line, unless you're a hedge fund manager (and a bad one), you've got nothing to worry about.

Thanks for this. Waaaay more helpful than the smarties who just say "who pays? SOMEONE PAYS!"

 

[ClosedCaption]

Summary of Sen. Sanders’ College for All Act


Eliminate Undergraduate Tuition at 4-year Public Colleges and Universities. This legislation

would provide $47 billion per year to states to eliminate undergraduate tuition and fees at public

colleges and universities.

Today, total tuition at public colleges and universities amounts to about $70 billion per year. Under

the College for All Act, the federal government would cover 67% of this cost, while the states would

be responsible for the remaining 33% of the cost. (then above it says states get 47 billion a year, so why not have the fed gov to pay the cost)

To qualify for federal funding, states must meet a number of requirements designed to protect

students, ensure quality, and reduce ballooning costs. States will need to maintain spending on their

higher education systems, on academic instruction, and on need-based financial aid. In addition,

colleges and universities must reduce their reliance on low-paid adjunct faculty.

States would be able to use funding to increase academic opportunities for students, hire new faculty,

and provide professional development opportunities for professors.

No funding under this program may be used to fund administrator salaries, merit-based fina

4

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=filencial aid,

For one thing I do not think colleges should keep raising rates as they are, needs to be a ban placed on the costs, so much of the classroom is done via Skype and well at home on personal computers. I do not believe in tenure either.

also anything free, is well taken for granted.

also a lot of our property tax goes to public schools, the two year college we have and also the 4 year university we have in our county, mileage increases.

Most can't afford higher property taxes, sales tax hikes or state income tax raises, so this is going to affect everyone is it not?

When I went to college, awhile ago, the special interest rate was 9,9% interest on student loans. I'm don't want to go back to that, and I do think college should be affordable to all, but not on the tax payers back.

I'm not understanding this I guess.

How do you propose making college affordable for all? The only proposals I seem to hear form the left involves doing so by making someone else pay for what parents aren't doing.

I knew a farmer's daughter from Iowa. Officially her father earned nothing. Unofficially he was rich. She got her tuition paid for by the state. It already happens. But only to those who know how to fiddle the books. Farmers, they usually vote Republican right?

Once upon a time?

At first I was afraid, I was petrified?

I'm not afraid or petrified to fund my own kid's college. That is, what EARNED ACADEMIC SCHOLARSHIPS didn't provide. Seems those you expect taxpayers to support doing for their kids what they won't do are afraid to do so themselves.

If you dropped all the accusations and character profiles from your arguments it would sound the way it really is. Selfish.

Lets do it again minus the feelings: I will fund my own kids college. That is, what ACADEMC SCHOLARSHIPS didnt provide.

The last sentence is so full of shit its impossible to remove the feelings and negative characteristics in it to leave a complete sentence.

 

[Penelope]

I think the big issue here is here that only the wealthy kids go to Ivy League schools because of Mommy and Daddy, it use to be much easier to work yourself into college and a good paying career, today its not, no ifs , ands or buts about it.

The poor join gangs are out working to help support their mother due to DEAD BEAT DADS, who probably gave up and became drunks.

Most of the time there is not a thing wrong with these young kids except for environment. They are often as or more intelligent if given the chance of those who ride the tails of their parents shoe strings.

Today is bad, only the weathy in this USA has their wealth grow, the rest of us middle roaders stay the same due to inflation or loose what we have due to an illness or job lay off due to machines who do not need health ins.

There is a huge gap, between the haves and have nots, and not all of it, most of it was not made by brains, but by who you are and who you know and your family name and by scamming, white collar crimes.

 

[Conservative65]

How do you propose making college affordable for all? The only proposals I seem to hear form the left involves doing so by making someone else pay for what parents aren't doing.

I knew a farmer's daughter from Iowa. Officially her father earned nothing. Unofficially he was rich. She got her tuition paid for by the state. It already happens. But only to those who know how to fiddle the books. Farmers, they usually vote Republican right?

Once upon a time?

At first I was afraid, I was petrified?

I'm not afraid or petrified to fund my own kid's college. That is, what EARNED ACADEMIC SCHOLARSHIPS didn't provide. Seems those you expect taxpayers to support doing for their kids what they won't do are afraid to do so themselves.

If you dropped all the accusations and character profiles from your arguments it would sound the way it really is. Selfish.

Lets do it again minus the feelings: I will fund my own kids college. That is, what ACADEMC SCHOLARSHIPS didnt provide.

The last sentence is so full of shit its impossible to remove the feelings and negative characteristics in it to leave a complete sentence.

Selfish is someone expecting taxpayers to fund for their kids what they won't fund for themselves. Since I don't expect anyone else to do anything other than what I do for my kids, it can't be selfish.

Those academic scholarships, all privately funded, didn't cover the entire $34,000/year cost. I pay the difference. Someone expecting taxpayers to fund their kids college is full of shit.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I knew a farmer's daughter from Iowa. Officially her father earned nothing. Unofficially he was rich. She got her tuition paid for by the state. It already happens. But only to those who know how to fiddle the books. Farmers, they usually vote Republican right?

Once upon a time?

At first I was afraid, I was petrified?

I'm not afraid or petrified to fund my own kid's college. That is, what EARNED ACADEMIC SCHOLARSHIPS didn't provide. Seems those you expect taxpayers to support doing for their kids what they won't do are afraid to do so themselves.

If you dropped all the accusations and character profiles from your arguments it would sound the way it really is. Selfish.

Lets do it again minus the feelings: I will fund my own kids college. That is, what ACADEMC SCHOLARSHIPS didnt provide.

The last sentence is so full of shit its impossible to remove the feelings and negative characteristics in it to leave a complete sentence.

Selfish is someone expecting taxpayers to fund for their kids what they won't fund for themselves. Since I don't expect anyone else to do anything other than what I do for my kids, it can't be selfish.

Those academic scholarships, all privately funded, didn't cover the entire $34,000/year cost. I pay the difference. Someone expecting taxpayers to fund their kids college is full of shit.

See? Thats when you're all out of debate. When you use such emotional buzzwords.

 

[Conservative65]

Once upon a time?

At first I was afraid, I was petrified?

I'm not afraid or petrified to fund my own kid's college. That is, what EARNED ACADEMIC SCHOLARSHIPS didn't provide. Seems those you expect taxpayers to support doing for their kids what they won't do are afraid to do so themselves.

If you dropped all the accusations and character profiles from your arguments it would sound the way it really is. Selfish.

Lets do it again minus the feelings: I will fund my own kids college. That is, what ACADEMC SCHOLARSHIPS didnt provide.

The last sentence is so full of shit its impossible to remove the feelings and negative characteristics in it to leave a complete sentence.

Selfish is someone expecting taxpayers to fund for their kids what they won't fund for themselves. Since I don't expect anyone else to do anything other than what I do for my kids, it can't be selfish.

Those academic scholarships, all privately funded, didn't cover the entire $34,000/year cost. I pay the difference. Someone expecting taxpayers to fund their kids college is full of shit.

See? Thats when you're all out of debate. When you use such emotional buzzwords.

There is nothing to debate. You support a bunch of freeloading parents expecting taxpayers to fund for their kids what they won't fund for their own.