Shouldn't university be free for some students?

[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.

So kick poor kids out of school instead, got it

[Anonymous]

In India, only 50% of kids age 6-18 attend school. Guessing that’s what we should aspire to according to PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

Keep it free for the truly needy, otherwise charge tuition and let schools compete for students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

Keep it free for the truly needy, otherwise charge tuition and let schools compete for students.

What happens to the students too expensive to educate, and who won’t “produce”? What happens to the kids who don’t go to school? What should they do all day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

Keep it free for the truly needy, otherwise charge tuition and let schools compete for students.

You didn’t answer the question. And I hate to break it to you, but nobody is “competing” to educate ESOL kids or kids who can’t read yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

Keep it free for the truly needy, otherwise charge tuition and let schools compete for students.

What happens to the students too expensive to educate, and who won’t “produce”? What happens to the kids who don’t go to school? What should they do all day?

Free universal education has already failed in K-12. We should be looking to move past that model and not just accept failure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

Keep it free for the truly needy, otherwise charge tuition and let schools compete for students.

What happens to the students too expensive to educate, and who won’t “produce”? What happens to the kids who don’t go to school? What should they do all day?

Free universal education has already failed in K-12. We should be looking to move past that model and not just accept failure.

Answer the questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually think black men should enjoy prima nocta privileges whenever a white, Hispanic or AAPI female turns 18. Seems like the least we can do, cause yaknow 400 years

Pl so you are a misogynistic jerk

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

Keep it free for the truly needy, otherwise charge tuition and let schools compete for students.

What happens to the students too expensive to educate, and who won’t “produce”? What happens to the kids who don’t go to school? What should they do all day?

Free universal education has already failed in K-12. We should be looking to move past that model and not just accept failure.

Yes, we should look to exclude people instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am talking about Black and American Indian students. Don't you think our country owes reparations and we should start at this humble place. Wherever they go, whether it's a highly selective or your local state school, why not just pay for the education of these students, regardless of SES?

With the level of some schools endowments, this would hardly be a dent in their finances. It’s a good idea.

[Anonymous]

College is free at public colleges in New Mexico, one of the poorest states in the nation. There's no reason other states couldn't do this if they wanted to. Must have a GPA of 2.5 to maintain the scholarship, so a little skin in the game. It's really the only option in a state where childhood poverty edges toward 25%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…?

Why continue what is already a total failure.

What alternative do you suggest? What should children do instead of attending school?

Keep it free for the truly needy, otherwise charge tuition and let schools compete for students.

What happens to the students too expensive to educate, and who won’t “produce”? What happens to the kids who don’t go to school? What should they do all day?

Free universal education has already failed in K-12. We should be looking to move past that model and not just accept failure.

Yes, we should look to exclude people instead.

The system already excludes most kids from a quality education. This would be more inclusive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reparations is probably one of the dumbest ideas out there. Where does it end? Any identity group that was harmed by government policy at some point in the distant past now effectively gets to confiscate the wealth of other identity groups for their own enrichment? You know who also got screwed by the “system”- families who lost their fathers, brothers and sons in various wars? Why don’t we send those families reparations?

We are on a path to civil war if we persist with this illogical mode of thought where the descendants of one group owe something to the descendants of another. I don’t owe black people anything and they need to keep their hands out of my pocket. And they owe me nothing.

I kind of agree with this. What about all women? Women have been institutionally marginalized and discriminated against for centuries. Where’s my free education and reparations?

Yep. The logic of reparations is a blackhole. Anyone can claim by virtue of their skin color or some other attribute that “society” owes them money. With all due respect, these people need to F off

We should just do what the reparations group in San Francisco voted to do:

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/18/1164126348/san-francisco-reparations-proposal-activists#:~:text=Those%20proposals%20include%20a%20whopping,the%20city%20limits%20for%20%241.

"In a unanimous vote on Tuesday, the 11 members accepted a draft plan of more than 100 reparations recommendations for the city's eligible Black residents. Those proposals include a whopping one-time payment of $5 million to each adult and a complete clearing of personal debt — including credit cards, taxes and student loans. Black residents would also be able to collect an annual income of at least $97,000 for 250 years and buy homes within the city limits for $1."

Seems modest.