Isn't free college already a thing?

lwood wrote:

Community college is pretty damn affordable. Plus if someone running for president is touting free college, doesn't congress have to vote on that to make it happen?

Kamala Harris didn't think so...

The truth is in the middle of what you guys are arguing

The original poster has some truth there is a lot of money available for financial aid and scholarships for low-income students

But the person responding also has some validity in that it is not as easy or widely available to be considered available to everyone

Most schools will waive application fees for poor students

And most schools do have a lot of scholarships and financial aid

But the bottom line is not everyone is going to get a complete full scholarship and oftentimes middle-class kids certainly won't get free college

The whole idea of free college is providing a free option for everyone

This would make it a lot less tedious and difficult for poor kids to find the right scholarship and would also help middle-class kids from getting in financial debt

Some of it though is more to do with the fact that no one in their family has been to university and often people are actively discouraged from going or applying, told or asked if they think they are better than them/too good

it will seem like a far off dream that people from 'around here' just don't do or something that doesn't apply to them

I was the first from my family to go to university

Speaking from experience of a poor area of England -

it's not all about the tuition

I paid £500 per year but the biggest barrier was the cost of living in halls

and yes, here, every first year pretty much lives in halls.

if you're off campus I would argue that you're excluded from a lot of things e.g. sports practices/social life and not the full university experience, and tbh, you would end up in a houseshare with working professionals and they would not want you there because you would not contribute to council tax (student exemption - so most house shares do not want students as they don't pay, thus leading to them picking up the share of the student instead of it being split evenly).

things have changed now - a bit - there are more private options for student housing but most of them are even more expensive than halls - £200 a week for a studio flat... it's insane.

So I'd say if you compare someone who is 18, living with family, and just starting out in the world, looking at jobs/career, they can either stay at home where they have all bills, rent, food etc - they make a contribution but it is NOWHERE near the amount they would pay if they move out on their own - THAT i would say is the biggest barrier...

a lot of schools may not publicise these options or make them known to students - the poorer students I knew were more caught up in trying to make money to help their parents that week rather than anything else.

I know it's a mindset that needs changing but it's not as simple as some people on this thread are making out.

I feel very lucky I went to uni before the £9000 tuition fees came in - I would not have gone under that scenario.

lwood wrote:

Community college is pretty damn affordable. Plus if someone running for president is touting free college, doesn't congress have to vote on that to make it happen?

Bernie Sandals will make college free for everyone! How? Dunno.

He'll figger it out once we elect him POTUS.

You can trust him, he's not like the others

The liars who are running for office are pandering to the spoiled middle class students who are used to receiving everything for free. They think they are entitled to a private college education regardkess if the cost. They don't yet understand at 20 years old that free education will only drive the costs up even more and they and their parents will have to pay it through increased taxes. It would ultimately ruin the economy and nobody would be able to go to college.

Elvin, if you're a medical doctor, just say that you are a medical doctor. You know the reason why medical doctors justify their compensation is due to the high cost of their education. You mentioned Physician Assistants. Physician Assistants is a level of profession in medical field encouraged by health insurance industry. In early 20th century, about half of medical schools were closed in U.S. partly due to racism. Many of the medical schools which were closed were medical schools with mostly black medical students who provided healthcare to mostly black citizens. Secondarily, medical schools were closed to alter demand & supply equation, increasing medical doctor pay. I find the skill and expertise of PAs inferior. Increase the enrollment of U.S. medical students in medical schools to increase the number of general practitioners. One-hundred 100 years ago, medical doctors in U.S. did not earn more than accountants and bond & stock brokers. Through a billing quirk, medical doctors in U.S. got wealthy post medicare, post medicaid. You do not like that the era of medical doctors earning $250,000 to $1,250,000 may be over. Medical doctors do not earn $250,000 to $1,250,000 euros per year (equal to currency exchange rate) in Europe. Medical doctors in U.S. are not better than lesser paid European medical doctors. There will be a downward trend for medical doctor pay in U.S. with government healthcare. Be happy that Senator Sanders wants to pay for medical doctor education from age 3 through medical school. You can support Bloomberg or big fat orange face fella if you do not like Senator Sanders. Governor Huey Long, "The Kingfish" wanted to run for U.S. President to the left of F.D.R., 1936. Huey Long wanted to socialize medicine in U.S. A medical doctor assassinated Long, 1935. It does not surprise those on the left that U.S. medical doctors are the ones rebelling against socialized healthcare in U.S.

One unbiased answer is Berea College (KY). Not a bad xc program, by the way. No tuition promise for every student, and yes, applicants must meet financial standards for need as well as academic standards for achievement. This place shows how much more complex the answers are when an institution commits to a real effort to offer no tuition education. https://www.berea.edu/

College is available for free. Most could not go to college for free, as the OP claimed. That’s the difference you can’t seem to grasp.

Yes, in Europe. If my first son were not on scholarship, that's where he would be. If my second son does not get a scholarship, he will go there, and get a great life experience to boot. American college is a total scam.

already exists wrote:

I keep hearing about "free college" as part of political platforms. Can't people already go to college for free simply by attending a school that is a rung or two below the best school they get accepted to? A number of my college classmates had turned down acceptances at prestigious schools in favor of a full ride academic scholarship at our Big Ten school. Likewise, I could have gone to an even lower ranked school on academic scholarship myself if I'd elected to do so.

Seems like free college is already available to most people, but very few take advantage of it.

I don't know about college being free but there's ways to do it without massive loans. I live in California where we do a lot of things wrong but our public university system is done very well. I think there is a disconnect from the East Coast and New England states where there is this culture of going to private schools that cost upwards of $60K a year to attend. To me it's absurd to take on debt for that. I graduated from Cal Poly SLO about 8 years ago and while I was there my average yearly cost all in, including room and board, was close to $15K a year. Tuition has risen a little since but it is still very affordable.

I also had friends who attended community colleges for a couple of years to save money then transferred to UC's, which you can get guaranteed as long as you hit certain grades.

College can be free if you get scholarships, but there are opportunities to do it without massive debt and/or working part-time to offset costs.

These stories of people who have hundreds of thousands of debt with no path to pay it off show a flaw in the system that allows that lending and the individual who took it on. Everyone should have the opportunity to education, that doesn't mean that everyone should be paying $50K a year for it.

the weigher wrote:

Undecided Pennsylvania Voter wrote:

Terrible logic. Anyone can visit the park for free. But if everyone visit the park simultaneously, it would be overcrowded. That doesn't change the fact that it is in fact available for free.

If people don't go to community college it's because they choose not to. There's no need to handle an influx of hypothetical students who choose not to go. That doesn't change the fact that it is available for anyone who chooses.

College is available for free. Most could not go to college for free, as the OP claimed. That’s the difference you can’t seem to grasp.

Most people can go to college for free. Most people choose not to. Those things can both be true at once.

Ever heard of Stanford? $70k per year.

Why won't the the OP inform us of the free B10 school for smart kids? The rest of us didn't find it.

Lil' Pistol wrote:

Tell that to kids in south Chicago who are living below the poverty line and just trying to not get shot on the way to and from school.

Tell that to kids in rural West Virginia who also live below the poverty line with the added bonus of meth addicted parents.

Tell that to kids in any inner city who can't afford to buy lunch, nevertheless apply to multiple schools.

Your privilege is blinding you from reality.

Ironically, those kids have a much easier time getting a scholarship than a kid from the burbs if they have similar merits.

comedyrelief wrote:

Lil' Pistol wrote:

Tell that to kids in south Chicago who are living below the poverty line and just trying to not get shot on the way to and from school.

Tell that to kids in rural West Virginia who also live below the poverty line with the added bonus of meth addicted parents.

Tell that to kids in any inner city who can't afford to buy lunch, nevertheless apply to multiple schools.

Your privilege is blinding you from reality.

Ironically, those kids have a much easier time getting a scholarship than a kid from the burbs if they have similar merits.

What's ironic about that?

The irony is that we have candidates trying to convince voters that the roadblock to these kids is the ability to pay. They would pay nothing under our current system but they are not in the market for free college.

Nope, I am not a physician. I'm just a guy who doesn't like the idea of government capping people's salaries at an arbitrarily selected number just because some politician has a vague notion that they earn "too much." You haven't even attempted to ground your $120K/$180 figures in any kind of economic analysis that accounts for supply and demand for physician labor and opportunity cost of training in the US. As far as I can see, you've simply plucked two numbers out of thin air and declared them to be "enough." I am not one to believe that free markets always provide optimal outcomes, but government intervention into professional compensation requires a much higher burden of evidence than you have met.

Med school tuition is a part of the reason that physicians demand high salaries, but it isn't the sole reason. As I already said, foregone income is also a big part of the equation. Smart people can earn decent money right out of college. If you're going to expect people to wait 7+ years to start collecting a true paycheck, the salary has to reward them for this or they'll pick another line of work.

You are also talking about massively changing the deal on people who have already taken on med school debt. If someone graduates from med school this year with $300K in debt that was only justified because they had a reasonable expectation of earning $250K+, you're going to tell them "sorry, by the time you are done with residency the earnings you expected will be cut to less than half"?

Even you must see that it is disingenuous to compare physician pay a century ago to current pay. Yes, a cardiologist who places a stent and saves your life during an MI gets paid more than a physician who can do nothing but suggest that you lay down and hope for the best.

already exists wrote:

Seems like free college is already available to most people, but very few take advantage of it.

Nope. To get free tuition at Utah State you need a 4.0 GPA and an SAT score of 1450, or a 3.8 GPA and a perfect SAT score of 1600. So most people don't get free college.

If you paid $50,000 for a new car in 2015 and just finished paying it off, why would you vote for everyone in 2020 to get that same car for free?

Why commoditize what you've spent $XX,XXX or $XXX,XXX on? Seems dumb to me … but maybe I'm just a self serving GOP prick.