Free college tuition is NOT too expensive.

[Costa Fierro]

Isn't this one of those things that could be funded easily if Apple actually paid tax like it's supposed to?

Depends on how much tax you'd be able to raise by closing loopholes. It wouldn't be sure if it could be funded entirely by corporate taxes but certainly a substantial chunk of the total cost would be.

[Othelos]

Okay, so let's say someone cannot afford college, they take out loans and do the best they can: they go to community college for two years, then transfer to a state school.

let's say tuition at the community college costs $4000 for two years, and the cost of housing plus tuition plus fees at a state school for two years is $42,000. So, they are in debt $46,000, and their 15 year loans have the national average interest rate of 4.29%. They will end up paying $62,500 over 15 years that could have easily been reduced with more efficient distribution of resources.

With the plan I presented: $28,000 (cost of housing and fees at the four year school) = $28,000 in debt, same loan scheme as before = $38,000 total, saving them $24,500 just because of better efficiency.

I don't see why there's an issue here. They still have to work off debt, so they value their education more, but it's a more manageable amount. That extra money can go towards buying a house, or a car, or raising kids in a better environment.

Won't they be getting a $60k job? Why can't they afford to pay off their loans in 5-7 years? If they drag out their loans the full term, of course they're going to be high.

Also how is the student still going to be in debt with your plan? You said "free" tuition, not student loan tuition.

Because they still would have to take out loans to pay for housing and other fees. Yes, free tuition. But tuition is only part of the cost of college.

[Sentinel Optik]

There are lots of reasons for this, but I'd chalk it up to the fact that rich, white Americans have been trying to legitimize the breakdown of families among the poor and the subsequent breakdown of poor communities. The fact that it happened in the projects is secondary to the social facts of the situation.

This statement indicates you do not have political beliefs, only racialist opinions that there is some kind of great race and class war in place, as opposed to empirical economic and psychological laws that prove that people behave in particular ways when presented with goods and services at no cost.

I'd appreciate if you kept your racialist bullshit away from me, I think I'm done talking with you.

[Caninope]

If it is your moral obligation to help others, then please give to charity. There are plenty to choose from!

I do. That's why I tithe every week.

You are making a moral decision on my behalf!

Yeah, I really don't see anything wrong with this.

If you won't let me sign you up for the military, why do you insist on signing me up for a pyramid scheme? Why can't you get your hand out of my pocket?

I don't think you should sign me up for the military predominantly because I think that would be wrong. It's not that you're making a moral decision for me, it's that I think you're making the wrong moral decision.

I'm already paying for poor people's health care, now I have to pay for their college education too?

Once again, I'd like to stress that I'm not going to make you pay for their education, but for fundamentally different reasons.

And really who cares if the loans are towards the poor?

Well, presumably everyone should.

Let's say that you came across a person who was on the ground and being kicked. Why? You were told that once he did that, he would go from having no friends to having a large number of friends (genuine friends, not the sort of fake friendliness we often run into). Would it not be better to form the friendships without the kicking?

In the same way, if the purpose of education and thus educational loans are to help one move up in society (a dubious claim, but one I won't challenge for now) and there is a decent possibility that we can remove an otherwise unpleasant part of the process, why shouldn't we? Now, let's ask ourselves the same question and ask ourselves how much we might be willing to give up for others.

[Sentinel Optik]

Won't they be getting a $60k job? Why can't they afford to pay off their loans in 5-7 years? If they drag out their loans the full term, of course they're going to be high.

Also how is the student still going to be in debt with your plan? You said "free" tuition, not student loan tuition.

Because they still would have to take out loans to pay for housing and other fees. Yes, free tuition. But tuition is only part of the cost of college.

Alright bro.

What prevents the professors from demanding $150k salaries, similar to the fast food people wanting $15/hr minimum wage dictated by the government? After all, without market forces to regulate prices, they always go up.

You wonder why college is so expensive and in the same breath demand more government intervention. Are you really unaware of the connection between the two?

[Othelos]

Because they still would have to take out loans to pay for housing and other fees. Yes, free tuition. But tuition is only part of the cost of college.

Alright bro.

What prevents the professors from demanding $150k salaries, similar to the fast food people wanting $15/hr minimum wage dictated by the government? After all, without market forces to regulate prices, they always go up.

You wonder why college is so expensive and in the same breath demand more government intervention. Are you really unaware of the connection between the two?

In exchange for funding, the government could make demands that keep prices from inflating.

[Caninope]

There are lots of reasons for this, but I'd chalk it up to the fact that rich, white Americans have been trying to legitimize the breakdown of families among the poor and the subsequent breakdown of poor communities. The fact that it happened in the projects is secondary to the social facts of the situation.

This statement indicates you do not have political beliefs, only racialist opinions that there is some kind of great race and class war in place, as opposed to empirical economic and psychological laws that prove that people behave in particular ways when presented with goods and services at no cost.

I'd appreciate if you kept your racialist bullshit away from me, I think I'm done talking with you.

Oh, I'm a racialist?

That's patently absurd, especially given that my reference to race was to emphasize the emptiness of the modern liberal and leftist movements- they are led by those whom they profess they want to dismantle from power structures, and their own policies destroy the classes of people they profess to most support.

I certainly don't think it's on account of any such intended racial or class bias on the part of the suburban and urban liberal elite, I think it's because of the slow moral decline that has been eating away at the core of American society.

Of course, that's not the only absurd part of your post. There's, of course, the idea that I'm unfamiliar with economics (hint: that is exactly what I'm studying), when you seem to be conflating all instances of handouts to some absurd version of the free rider problem (hint: the free rider problem does not apply to public housing). The decline of poor communities and public housing is a narrative that only be constructed using accounts of economics, history, and sociology. Even more so, the breakdown of the family has been shown to have major economic consequences (see "Where is the Land of Opportunity? The Geography of Intergenerational Mobility in the United States" by Chetty, Hendren, et al.).

[Caninope]

Because they still would have to take out loans to pay for housing and other fees. Yes, free tuition. But tuition is only part of the cost of college.

Alright bro.

What prevents the professors from demanding $150k salaries, similar to the fast food people wanting $15/hr minimum wage dictated by the government? After all, without market forces to regulate prices, they always go up.

You wonder why college is so expensive and in the same breath demand more government intervention. Are you really unaware of the connection between the two?

For what it's worth, there's reason to believe recent increases in college tuition cannot all be attributed to increased demand.

[New Chalcedon]

Just a few numbers.

In 2014, the federal government provided $160.78 billion in loans, and $61.08 billion in tax deductions, work study, and grants, putting the total at $221.86 billion in aid.

What would the cost of free tuition be at public universities? $62.6 billion, leaving $159.26 billion in aid left over for housing subsidies for poor students, and anything after that for private school students.

Yes, free college or at least free tuition is entirely possible and all it requires is reallocation of funds. No new taxes.

Anyone who says it isn't possible is wrong, especially considering that we already spend $1.3 trillion (38% of the federal budget) on medicare and social security alone.

Where did you get that $62.6bn figure from? Also, what would happen to private college students? Most of them are also currently eligible for student loans.

I love the idea of free - absolutely free - college education, but I think the fiscal benefits will come in down the track, not up-front. Lower student debt levels will facilitate economic growth, more access to education will increase America's stock of human capital and more university participation = more academic research produced by the universities.

[New Chalcedon]

Isn't this one of those things that could be funded easily if Apple actually paid tax like it's supposed to?

Depends on how much tax you'd be able to raise by closing loopholes. It wouldn't be sure if it could be funded entirely by corporate taxes but certainly a substantial chunk of the total cost would be.

Most estimates of the US tax gap - the difference between what's paid and what's owed - come in at around $290-$300bn annually. Given that a significant portion of this comes from honest mistakes (rather than deliberate tax avoidance), I'd estimate that only 1/3 of it could be fairly readily collected by the IRS. Which is still one hell of a chunk of change. Less the cost of enforcing the tax code enough to get this money (6:1 ratio according to CBPP - $1 extra IRS budget = $6 extra revenue collected), you're looking at a net of around $85-90bn per annum.

That's a lot of student places funded at universities, although most studies have shown higher social and economic returns from properly funding K-12 education (which has been starved of funds for decades now).

[Tule]

It costs my government $5000 per year to pay my tuition.

Tax money efficiently spent if you ask me.

[Geilinor]

Where did you get that $62.6bn figure from? Also, what would happen to private college students? Most of them are also currently eligible for student loans.

I love the idea of free - absolutely free - college education, but I think the fiscal benefits will come in down the track, not up-front. Lower student debt levels will facilitate economic growth, more access to education will increase America's stock of human capital and more university participation = more academic research produced by the universities.

Free college tuition proposals are almost always applied to public colleges, private students could probably still get loans but more students would opt for public.

[Skyviolia]

Yes. Even higher education is a human right, it should be free and controlled by the government.

[Saiwania]

I hate the idea of free college education because it will just drive up credential inflation. If I want to become competitive, I'll need to go back to college because every job opening, even entry ones will want a damn Bachelor's degree or higher. It will be like that- only on steroids if there is no financial barrier to deter people from getting said degrees.

In a room full of people with the same degrees, it then comes down to which one has the most experience or best personality before affirmative action comes into play, in those areas I'll always lose. So I have to try to be at least one degree tier higher than the people I'm trying to compete against if I want to have a realistic chance at getting a job interview.

It is hard enough to find work in America as it is.

[Vistulange]

At the present, you already are. Some people have their entire college bill payed for the government. And that's not even what is being advocated, here.

Sorry, who is your plan going to help?

The people who refuse to enlist
AND
who have low GPAs
AND
cannot find a job on their own
AND
refuse to do work study
AND
refuse to pay back the government for their tuition

Please enlighten me on why a person with all 5 of those characteristics deserves my tax money for college, or why they should be in college in the first place. Instead they really need to grow up and learn how to take care of themselves. It's not like a college degree will magically make them into a responsible person any more than a high school diploma will.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-n3KMJUIAMUYSA.png

That picture is all you deserve for those capitalized "AND"s.

[Esternial]

I pay 900 euros for a year.

Shouldn't be free but it should be affordable.

[British Prussia]

I hate the idea of free college education because it will just drive up credential inflation. If I want to become competitive, I'll need to go back to college because every job opening, even entry ones will want a damn Bachelor's degree or higher. It will be like that- only on steroids if there is no financial barrier to deter people from getting said degrees.

In a room full of people with the same degrees, it then comes down to which one has the most experience or best personality before affirmative action comes into play, in those areas I'll always lose. So I have to try to be at least one degree tier higher than the people I'm trying to compete against if I want to have a realistic chance at getting a job interview.

It is hard enough to find work in America as it is.

I live in NZ and it's had enough to find a job even with a degree.

[Esternial]

I hate the idea of free college education because it will just drive up credential inflation. If I want to become competitive, I'll need to go back to college because every job opening, even entry ones will want a damn Bachelor's degree or higher. It will be like that- only on steroids if there is no financial barrier to deter people from getting said degrees.

In a room full of people with the same degrees, it then comes down to which one has the most experience or best personality before affirmative action comes into play, in those areas I'll always lose. So I have to try to be at least one degree tier higher than the people I'm trying to compete against if I want to have a realistic chance at getting a job interview.

It is hard enough to find work in America as it is.

Essentially, this sounds like a lot of selfish whining demanding you be given an advantage at the expense of more intelligent people that just can't afford higher education.

If one is not intelligent enough to be competitive without this kind of unfair disadvantage to less economically strong people, they can either accept that they'll have to work harder than other people or give up and find something else that they're good at.

[Geilinor]

I hate the idea of free college education because it will just drive up credential inflation. If I want to become competitive, I'll need to go back to college because every job opening, even entry ones will want a damn Bachelor's degree or higher. It will be like that- only on steroids if there is no financial barrier to deter people from getting said degrees.

Free college tuition doesn't necessarily mean that more people will be admitted to college. There are competitive requirements.

[Saiwania]

Essentially, this sounds like a lot of selfish whining demanding you be given an advantage at the expense of more intelligent people that just can't afford higher education.

If one is not intelligent enough to be competitive without this kind of unfair disadvantage to less economically strong people, they can either accept that they'll have to work harder than other people or give up and find something else that they're good at.

Free college will help people who desire to get as much education as they want and are able to actually graduate, but there will also be plenty of losers as a result of this. I do not have confidence that this will change US society for the better. Education is supposedly the solution to poverty but more education simply cannot solve every problem given simple supply and demand. An oversupply of educated professionals will lead to them having less worth than before.

If we want to improve education, why not fund and fix K-12 education first?

[Geilinor]

If we want to improve education, why not fund and fix K-12 education first?

We do need to do that, but fixing unequal school funding could be challenging because that will have to come from the state level.

[Caninope]

Yes. Even higher education is a human right, it should be free and controlled by the government.

Got some justification fr higher education being a human right?

[Connori Pilgrims]

I'm of the mind if the commercial interest rates and repayment system for loans (particularly student loans) weren't beyond the capacity of a dude with say a fast-food or some other service part-time job to pay, then the loan system wouldn't be so problematic. From what I've observed though (anyone feel free to correct), the deals over in the US are hardly fair, and far too many people don't know what they're getting into with their loans - partly because, you know, they're uneducated ("Google it" can only help so much especially if they don't know what they're looking for especially financial literacy), and partly because the banks sweet-talk em into it (made worse when the banks know they're not well educated, its just a hairs breath away from actually scamming the poor sods).

So maybe in addition to or in lieu of the OP's free college scheme, I'd say reforming the student/educational aid system should be considered.

In any event, I think secondary education and vocational needs to be enhanced first, since its far easier for both the public and private sectors to create jobs suited for high-school level/vocational level jobs than jobs that require degrees. Also, yes its much harder now to get jobs even with degrees, at least here in East Asia. And no, it isn't just social sciences or humanities; I know far too many business and management graduates who've been reduced to secretaries or coffee-makers for their bosses...