Make College Free Without Spending A Dime

[CrusaderFrank]

I would like to see the government come up with free online courses for most 100 and 200 level courses. It would be required that all colleges accept the credits

^ pays no taxes, hence government = free

 

[Oldstyle]

Yes, the Private Sector is "there" to appease either the shareholders or the business owners by creating profit. It's that pursuit of profit that keeps overhead low. Now contrast that with the Public Sector. They are only "there" to appease themselves. Making a profit isn't part of the equation. Government employees don't lose their jobs if a profit isn't made because their jobs can be maintained by increasing the national debt. Overhead can increase every year because there is no concern over profits. I challenge you to show me a governmental agency that's gotten smaller over time!

As for your claim that when profits start operating at a loss they close up? Well, yeah...but that usually occurs when either another Private Sector company out performs them...or increasingly when the Public Sector encroaches on their market.

As for different types of learners? Granted some students don't do well in some learning situations. For them a more traditional format might be the only option. For those that CAN function well with an internet form of teaching...they would be receiving the best teaching available at a far lower cost because that one professor's recorded lecture playing over the web could be seen by literally millions of students rather than a few hundred. THAT is a viable way to reduce the cost of education...making it a function of government won't reduce the cost...it will simply change who gets stuck paying for that cost.

It's not necessary to advertise the public sector. The public sector is there to provide a service. Hence, the public. Time and again we see the private sector fail to provide the same service because profit comes before people. They have failed at everything they have undertaken simply because they cannot provide the same service and make a profit. This is true in mental health care, physical health care, nursing homes, social services and education. The goals are different. This is why they shut down. It has nothing to do with the government encroaching on a market. The government service was stopped because the cry was that it could be done more efficiently and with less cost to begin with. Furthermore, many of these hacks are dependent on government money (tax dollars). So, when they figure out that they can't make a huge fortune doing the hard work then they bail. That is what happens. Every time.

We are no longer in the widget making business. The widget jobs were outsourced. Research is not done behind a lap top. Fieldwork is not done behind a laptop.

The public sector has huge marketing and advertising outlays:

Billions from the federal government in just 5 years: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41681.pdf

You're right. I wasn't thinking federal. Or even military. The charter schools use tax dollars for advertising. Not that this is all that is in the Department of Education.

The cost of the Department of Education to the American taxpayer has increased by leaps and bounds since it's inception. In the early 80's it's budget was around 3 billion dollars and now it's over 16 billion per year. That's what Washington DOES when it takes over a part of the economy...it drives the cost through the roof with regulations and red tape.

In comparison to the education budget of the country, $16 billion is pennies

I'm sorry but a billion dollars is still a ton of money. Considering that education has always been something that was paid for by local taxes the fact that the Federal Government now spends 16 billion dollars a year on it simply shows how ineffective Washington is when it comes to controlling costs.

 

[Disir]

It's not necessary to advertise the public sector. The public sector is there to provide a service. Hence, the public. Time and again we see the private sector fail to provide the same service because profit comes before people. They have failed at everything they have undertaken simply because they cannot provide the same service and make a profit. This is true in mental health care, physical health care, nursing homes, social services and education. The goals are different. This is why they shut down. It has nothing to do with the government encroaching on a market. The government service was stopped because the cry was that it could be done more efficiently and with less cost to begin with. Furthermore, many of these hacks are dependent on government money (tax dollars). So, when they figure out that they can't make a huge fortune doing the hard work then they bail. That is what happens. Every time.

We are no longer in the widget making business. The widget jobs were outsourced. Research is not done behind a lap top. Fieldwork is not done behind a laptop.

The public sector has huge marketing and advertising outlays:

Billions from the federal government in just 5 years: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41681.pdf

You're right. I wasn't thinking federal. Or even military. The charter schools use tax dollars for advertising. Not that this is all that is in the Department of Education.

The cost of the Department of Education to the American taxpayer has increased by leaps and bounds since it's inception. In the early 80's it's budget was around 3 billion dollars and now it's over 16 billion per year. That's what Washington DOES when it takes over a part of the economy...it drives the cost through the roof with regulations and red tape.

In comparison to the education budget of the country, $16 billion is pennies

I'm sorry but a billion dollars is still a ton of money. Considering that education has always been something that was paid for by local taxes the fact that the Federal Government now spends 16 billion dollars a year on it simply shows how ineffective Washington is when it comes to controlling costs.

And yet, you can't substantiate your prior claims.


I find it odd that with all of this worry over spending that no one wants to deal with where the money goes in education in accountability. It pisses me off. It's as if, there is no worry as long as it plays to someone's ideology.

And nobody wants to have these types of conversations when I am off work and have nothing to do.

 

[rightwinger]

It's not necessary to advertise the public sector. The public sector is there to provide a service. Hence, the public. Time and again we see the private sector fail to provide the same service because profit comes before people. They have failed at everything they have undertaken simply because they cannot provide the same service and make a profit. This is true in mental health care, physical health care, nursing homes, social services and education. The goals are different. This is why they shut down. It has nothing to do with the government encroaching on a market. The government service was stopped because the cry was that it could be done more efficiently and with less cost to begin with. Furthermore, many of these hacks are dependent on government money (tax dollars). So, when they figure out that they can't make a huge fortune doing the hard work then they bail. That is what happens. Every time.

We are no longer in the widget making business. The widget jobs were outsourced. Research is not done behind a lap top. Fieldwork is not done behind a laptop.

The public sector has huge marketing and advertising outlays:

Billions from the federal government in just 5 years: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41681.pdf

You're right. I wasn't thinking federal. Or even military. The charter schools use tax dollars for advertising. Not that this is all that is in the Department of Education.

The cost of the Department of Education to the American taxpayer has increased by leaps and bounds since it's inception. In the early 80's it's budget was around 3 billion dollars and now it's over 16 billion per year. That's what Washington DOES when it takes over a part of the economy...it drives the cost through the roof with regulations and red tape.

In comparison to the education budget of the country, $16 billion is pennies

I'm sorry but a billion dollars is still a ton of money. Considering that education has always been something that was paid for by local taxes the fact that the Federal Government now spends 16 billion dollars a year on it simply shows how ineffective Washington is when it comes to controlling costs.

Everyone agrees that the education results in this country suck

But the federal government only controls 10% of educational funding. 90% is controlled at the state and local level. Some states contribute heavily to education, other states, that we like to call red states, contribute very little

Without the federal government, those states would offer little more than bible schools

 

[Disir]

The public sector has huge marketing and advertising outlays:

Billions from the federal government in just 5 years: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41681.pdf

You're right. I wasn't thinking federal. Or even military. The charter schools use tax dollars for advertising. Not that this is all that is in the Department of Education.

The cost of the Department of Education to the American taxpayer has increased by leaps and bounds since it's inception. In the early 80's it's budget was around 3 billion dollars and now it's over 16 billion per year. That's what Washington DOES when it takes over a part of the economy...it drives the cost through the roof with regulations and red tape.

In comparison to the education budget of the country, $16 billion is pennies

I'm sorry but a billion dollars is still a ton of money. Considering that education has always been something that was paid for by local taxes the fact that the Federal Government now spends 16 billion dollars a year on it simply shows how ineffective Washington is when it comes to controlling costs.

Everyone agrees that the education results in this country suck

But the federal government only controls 10% of educational funding. 90% is controlled at the state and local level. Some states contribute heavily to education, other states, that we like to call red states, contribute very little

Without the federal government, those states would offer little more than bible schools

And that is where the issue of educational funding and misuse of dollars spent takes place. This is what I was referring to whit ideology. When you are dealing with people that have no desire to look at the amount of money and problems with testing or the calculations used in funding charter schools or their lack of accountability then it becomes a farce.

 

[whitehall]

It's estimated that the taxpayers fork over about 40 billion to college and universities mostly to fund junk science related to "man-made global warming" propaganda. Let the colleges and universities get back to teaching and leave the "research" to the private sector.

 

[Disir]

It's estimated that the taxpayers fork over about 40 billion to college and universities mostly to fund junk science related to "man-made global warming" propaganda. Let the colleges and universities get back to teaching and leave the "research" to the private sector.

Show me.

 

[Oldstyle]

The public sector has huge marketing and advertising outlays:

Billions from the federal government in just 5 years: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41681.pdf

You're right. I wasn't thinking federal. Or even military. The charter schools use tax dollars for advertising. Not that this is all that is in the Department of Education.

The cost of the Department of Education to the American taxpayer has increased by leaps and bounds since it's inception. In the early 80's it's budget was around 3 billion dollars and now it's over 16 billion per year. That's what Washington DOES when it takes over a part of the economy...it drives the cost through the roof with regulations and red tape.

In comparison to the education budget of the country, $16 billion is pennies

I'm sorry but a billion dollars is still a ton of money. Considering that education has always been something that was paid for by local taxes the fact that the Federal Government now spends 16 billion dollars a year on it simply shows how ineffective Washington is when it comes to controlling costs.

Everyone agrees that the education results in this country suck

But the federal government only controls 10% of educational funding. 90% is controlled at the state and local level. Some states contribute heavily to education, other states, that we like to call red states, contribute very little

Without the federal government, those states would offer little more than bible schools

You totally overlook the cost that the Federal Government imposes on local and State governments with their regulations. Every single time another Federal mandate comes down to the local school district, someone has to find a way to pay for what's then required.

 

[rightwinger]

You're right. I wasn't thinking federal. Or even military. The charter schools use tax dollars for advertising. Not that this is all that is in the Department of Education.

The cost of the Department of Education to the American taxpayer has increased by leaps and bounds since it's inception. In the early 80's it's budget was around 3 billion dollars and now it's over 16 billion per year. That's what Washington DOES when it takes over a part of the economy...it drives the cost through the roof with regulations and red tape.

In comparison to the education budget of the country, $16 billion is pennies

I'm sorry but a billion dollars is still a ton of money. Considering that education has always been something that was paid for by local taxes the fact that the Federal Government now spends 16 billion dollars a year on it simply shows how ineffective Washington is when it comes to controlling costs.

Everyone agrees that the education results in this country suck

But the federal government only controls 10% of educational funding. 90% is controlled at the state and local level. Some states contribute heavily to education, other states, that we like to call red states, contribute very little

Without the federal government, those states would offer little more than bible schools

You totally overlook the cost that the Federal Government imposes on local and State governments with their regulations. Every single time another Federal mandate comes down to the local school district, someone has to find a way to pay for what's then required.

If not for the Federal Government, Red State schools would spend their limited budget on the football team and bible studies

 

[Publius1787]

How Obama Could Make College Free For Everyone Without Spending A Dime

If President Obama truly wants to transform the cost of higher education, however, he could make college free for all students without having to lay out more money to pay for it. That’s because the federal government could take the $69 billion it currently spends to subsidize the cost of college through grants, tax breaks, and work-study funds and instead cover tuition at all public colleges, which came to $62.6 billion in 2012, the most recent data. (The government spends another $197.4 billion on student loans.) That would give all students who want to get a college degree a free option to do so. It could also put pressure on private universities to compete with the free option by reducing their costs, which have risen 13 percent over the last five years.
http://thinkprogress.org/education/2015/01/09/3609832/obama-community-college-free/
http://thinkprogress.org/education/2015/01/09/3609832/obama-community-college-free/
Eliminating college tuition with the money spent on subsidies could also make the system more equal. Currently, the government’s tax-based aid mostly flows to wealthy families instead of low- and middle-income ones. And Pell Grants, which do go to low-income students, have been cut in recent years and cover a small percentage of the cost of college.


We have the money but investing in our own country has not been a priority.

Check one in the box for the "everyone should be accepted to and go to college theory. No no no, college isn't for everyone. They should be elite institutions where only the best and brightest get accepted. Your kind of thinking only contributes to degree deflation and GPA inflation. Besides, community college is already free thanks to the Pell Grant.