Shouldn't university be free for some students?

[Anonymous]

If college was free you'd just have more people going without any particular plan and more credential inflation.

The vast majority of students can get a degree without burdensome debt if they are willing to live at home, go to CC and then a local university. Or even live on campus the last 2 years if you don't have a nearby U. I sat down and did the math for NOVA + GMU and it is easily doable w/ taking the max direct student loans, which are totally reasonable ($27k max) with student working summers+ PT in school. If the parent can help, could probably avoid loans completely.

For example, my DD's least expensive option was UMW at $17k after a merit award (and that's living on campus). And, she's a good but not stellar student and didn't apply for everything she could have potentially pursued. So, that's $68K total (+ some tuition increases over 4 years) less $27K max student loans. So, $41k over 4 years. An amount that is reasonable to cover between parent and child with kid working summers + PT job at school.

We have saved for years so she opted for a school that's about $30k but if we had no savings, UMW would have been a very good option for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

Yes yay permanent underclass

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If college was free you'd just have more people going without any particular plan and more credential inflation.

The vast majority of students can get a degree without burdensome debt if they are willing to live at home, go to CC and then a local university. Or even live on campus the last 2 years if you don't have a nearby U. I sat down and did the math for NOVA + GMU and it is easily doable w/ taking the max direct student loans, which are totally reasonable ($27k max) with student working summers+ PT in school. If the parent can help, could probably avoid loans completely.

For example, my DD's least expensive option was UMW at $17k after a merit award (and that's living on campus). And, she's a good but not stellar student and didn't apply for everything she could have potentially pursued. So, that's $68K total (+ some tuition increases over 4 years) less $27K max student loans. So, $41k over 4 years. An amount that is reasonable to cover between parent and child with kid working summers + PT job at school.

We have saved for years so she opted for a school that's about $30k but if we had no savings, UMW would have been a very good option for her.

Plenty of rich kids go to college with no particular plan. They have no skin in the game & their parents pay in full.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Correct. Poor, ESOL and undocumented students wouldn’t go to school at all. Average test scores would skyrocket!

Of course, millions of kids would be permanently unskilled & unprepared for adult life, and you’d have children and teens wandering the streets from 9-5 everyday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Why do you think that would be the case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If college was free you'd just have more people going without any particular plan and more credential inflation.

The vast majority of students can get a degree without burdensome debt if they are willing to live at home, go to CC and then a local university. Or even live on campus the last 2 years if you don't have a nearby U. I sat down and did the math for NOVA + GMU and it is easily doable w/ taking the max direct student loans, which are totally reasonable ($27k max) with student working summers+ PT in school. If the parent can help, could probably avoid loans completely.

For example, my DD's least expensive option was UMW at $17k after a merit award (and that's living on campus). And, she's a good but not stellar student and didn't apply for everything she could have potentially pursued. So, that's $68K total (+ some tuition increases over 4 years) less $27K max student loans. So, $41k over 4 years. An amount that is reasonable to cover between parent and child with kid working summers + PT job at school.

We have saved for years so she opted for a school that's about $30k but if we had no savings, UMW would have been a very good option for her.

Plenty of rich kids go to college with no particular plan. They have no skin in the game & their parents pay in full.

Which is their parents' perogative but doesn't seem a wise choice for the public to subsidize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If college was free you'd just have more people going without any particular plan and more credential inflation.

The vast majority of students can get a degree without burdensome debt if they are willing to live at home, go to CC and then a local university. Or even live on campus the last 2 years if you don't have a nearby U. I sat down and did the math for NOVA + GMU and it is easily doable w/ taking the max direct student loans, which are totally reasonable ($27k max) with student working summers+ PT in school. If the parent can help, could probably avoid loans completely.

For example, my DD's least expensive option was UMW at $17k after a merit award (and that's living on campus). And, she's a good but not stellar student and didn't apply for everything she could have potentially pursued. So, that's $68K total (+ some tuition increases over 4 years) less $27K max student loans. So, $41k over 4 years. An amount that is reasonable to cover between parent and child with kid working summers + PT job at school.

We have saved for years so she opted for a school that's about $30k but if we had no savings, UMW would have been a very good option for her.

Plenty of rich kids go to college with no particular plan. They have no skin in the game & their parents pay in full.

Which is their parents' perogative but doesn't seem a wise choice for the public to subsidize.

Yes it does. Most jobs in the US today require college education, and people who are college-educated end up being higher income taxpayers.

And millions of kids excel in free public k-12, on full ride merit scholarships & on full financial aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Correct. Poor, ESOL and undocumented students wouldn’t go to school at all. Average test scores would skyrocket!

Of course, millions of kids would be permanently unskilled & unprepared for adult life, and you’d have children and teens wandering the streets from 9-5 everyday.

Why is public K-12 free for everyone? It should only be free for the truly needy, which is what you responded to but didn’t seem to read the earlier comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Correct. Poor, ESOL and undocumented students wouldn’t go to school at all. Average test scores would skyrocket!

Of course, millions of kids would be permanently unskilled & unprepared for adult life, and you’d have children and teens wandering the streets from 9-5 everyday.

Why is public K-12 free for everyone? It should only be free for the truly needy, which is what you responded to but didn’t seem to read the earlier comment.

No, it should be free for everyone to ensure that everyone gets a k-12 education at minimum like in every other developed country. Nobody chooses their parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Correct. Poor, ESOL and undocumented students wouldn’t go to school at all. Average test scores would skyrocket!

Of course, millions of kids would be permanently unskilled & unprepared for adult life, and you’d have children and teens wandering the streets from 9-5 everyday.

Why is public K-12 free for everyone? It should only be free for the truly needy, which is what you responded to but didn’t seem to read the earlier comment.

Because we live in the richest country on Earth? Because higher educated individuals are a boon to society?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Why do you think that would be the case?

Free public K-12 is already a huge failure for the overwhelming majority of kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Why do you think that would be the case?

Free public K-12 is already a huge failure for the overwhelming majority of kids.

And charging tuition would improve that because…?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people don’t think K-12 should be free.

Right, poor kids shouldn’t go to school. They should just dig ditches & work in Amazon warehouses all day starting in K.

K-12 could charge tuition and only be free for the truly needy.

+1

We’re the richest country on Earth. There is no need for that.

Public K-12 gets terrible results for most kids and is free. If you charge tuition it could be improved significantly.

Why do you think that would be the case?

Free public K-12 is already a huge failure for the overwhelming majority of kids.

Because school districts are so highly segregated in the US by race & income.