Why higher education should be free

The total number of Americans with tertiary education is the highest in the world - but that is balanced by the fact that it is a relatively low standard of college education.



Oh yeah, relatively low. Just the best in the world.
 
For the millionth time for those who are slow:

Nothing is free!

Someone has to pay and it sure as hell ain't gonna be me.
 
Fuck you scumbag. My entire point is how are we supposed to do this so our entire lives aren't spent paying back 100's of thousands of dollars in debt for a college degree....

Do you also expect to get a car for free? A house? Anything else you'd like at everyone else's expense, dear?

the fact that you compare a college education to a car speaks to your ignorance and disrespect for education.

everyone should be able to aspire to higher education.

if someone is not suited for college, it should be because they don't have aptitude or desire... it should not be because their daddy wasn't the governor of a state and their grand daddy wasn't a senator.

student loans have been backed by the government and given without regard to credit worthiness.

the trade off for that is those loans take precedence over all debts but taxes and, like taxes, aren't dischargeable in bankruptcy.

the fact that you see no value in education... well, that speaks for itself.

The one who sees no value in education is you.
 
I haven't read the whole thread so someone may have said this, but Finland has free education right up to and including university.

We have the highest rates of master degrees in the world.

I recommend the system, but it does need to be carefully planned. I don't think it is a panacea.

So education in Finland is free? Nobody pays for it? What nonsense. You are completely clueless.
 
My family has never had the money to pay for college, and I don;t have the money to pay for my childrens college.

Do I expect others to pay for their college?

To use Obama's favorite concept - Is it FAIR to expect others to pay for my children to go to college? People without children - should they pay to send my children to college? --- If I can't send my children to college why should people who are struggling to pay their bills have to pony up to send my kids to college?

The notion is ridiculous!

I think the gov't has more on it's plate than they can handle with k-12. Perhaps, instead of figuring out how to get the gov't to screw up higher education - we can figure out how to get them less involved with k-12 - so we can finally improve them!!!
 
Obamanation -

The notion is ridiculous if you think only of yourself, but if you care about your country as a whole, then it is not ridiculous.

Personally, I think I benefit from living in a country with a very well educated population. I feel peopl vote intelligently, make better lifestyle choices and are less likely to turn to crime if they have a good education.

I pay my taxes happily for that.
 
well, if you really wanted a well educated population you would get the gov't as far away from the education system as possible.

suggesting that I was thinking about myself is dead wrong. I was considering all the others who would have to pay for education... maybe you need a class on reading comprehension....
 
In some instances higher education should be free. Shortages in critical professions like doctors and medical specialists should be addressed by providing nominal incentives to get more people into those fields to include free tuition AND a salary. I would apply some limitations, though. For instance, only native born medical students would qualify. Also, some kind of contract would have to be signed requiring the prospective new doctor to work under the auspices of Public Health for a number of years upon graduation. This paradigm would definitely be workable under the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which will likely give a significantly higher number of Americans access to medical care.
 
Actually, we do have a well educated workforce.
If I can pay $40 an hour for a well educated computer code developer in say India, and that same code developer in the USA costs me $45 an hour and government forced benefits, guess who I am going to hire?

If you're smart, the American.

Why? Because the quality of code and the efficiency will be over double.

Ask Microsoft about the wisdom of outsourcing and how well that worked with the disastrous Office 2007.

BTW, I pay .Net developers between $125 and $250 an hour. I expect a LOT from them, but the pay is good.
 
Actually, it isn't 100% government paid, as there are also some private institutes.

The total number of Americans with tertiary education is the highest in the world - but that is balanced by the fact that it is a relatively low standard of college education. A college degree in the US is not as high level a a Bachelors from other countries. People go to college two years younger than university begins here.

Finland has a vastly higher % of master degres than the US.

I'm not saying one system is better than the other - I am saying that it is worth considering what options the US might have.

The point is that Europe severely limits educational opportunities. University admission is rationed tightly.

And I'd love to see a source on the claim that Finland has a greater percentage of masters degrees.
 
Obamanation -

The notion is ridiculous if you think only of yourself, but if you care about your country as a whole, then it is not ridiculous.

Personally, I think I benefit from living in a country with a very well educated population. I feel peopl vote intelligently, make better lifestyle choices and are less likely to turn to crime if they have a good education.

I pay my taxes happily for that.

Finland has a per capita GDP of 37,581 USD

The USA is at 48,442

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the U.S. system is more beneficial to people.
 
well, if you really wanted a well educated population you would get the gov't as far away from the education system as possible.

No, that is partisan, ot objective.

Finland has the #1 education system in the world, and is run by the state.

Of the other 25 countries who rank ahead of the US in education, almost all are state run systems.
 
Finland has a per capita GDP of 37,581 USD

The USA is at 48,442

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the U.S. system is more beneficial to people.

I don't think you'd be able to prove that.

How much of the US$48,442 you earn is spent on healthcare, retirement savings and education - which here is free?
 
Finland has a per capita GDP of 37,581 USD

The USA is at 48,442

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the U.S. system is more beneficial to people.

I don't think you'd be able to prove that.

How much of the US$48,442 you earn is spent on healthcare, retirement savings and education - which here is free?

You really don't have a clue do you? None of those things are free.
 
well, if you really wanted a well educated population you would get the gov't as far away from the education system as possible.

No, that is partisan, ot objective.

Finland has the #1 education system in the world, and is run by the state.

Of the other 25 countries who rank ahead of the US in education, almost all are state run systems.

So I take it that Finland attracts more foreign students than the US?
 
The point is that Europe severely limits educational opportunities. University admission is rationed tightly.

No, that is an answer more based on patisanship than reality.

In every country, there are some restrictions on university attendance.

In Finland the only criteria is entrance exam results.

In the US cost is also a criteria.

Any Finnish student failing entrance exams or failing to make the cut for a particular course can take the exams again, apply again, or go on to take other courses or attend a free polytech.

I agree that not every B- student can go on to complete an LLB, but if they improve their grades than they can. Cost is not a factor in "rationing".

(I don't have the stats on Masters per capita here, but I'll try and fnd it over the weekend - I think it's in Finnish will need translation, and I don't have time to do that today.)
 
The point is that Europe severely limits educational opportunities. University admission is rationed tightly.

No, that is an answer more based on patisanship than reality.

In every country, there are some restrictions on university attendance.

In Finland the only criteria is entrance exam results.

In the US cost is also a criteria.

Any Finnish student failing entrance exams or failing to make the cut for a particular course can take the exams again, apply again, or go on to take other courses or attend a free polytech.

I agree that not every B- student can go on to complete an LLB, but if they improve their grades than they can. Cost is not a factor in "rationing".

(I don't have the stats on Masters per capita here, but I'll try and fnd it over the weekend - I think it's in Finnish will need translation, and I don't have time to do that today.)

Well, you certainly aren't an advertisement for the Finnish education system.
 

Forum List

Back
Top