Biden free college a reality?

[ss20ts]

I keep reading more and more about Biden free college plan and wonder how soon it will become a reality?

Will it be a good thing or not?

K12 public schools are already free, so why not higher education?

Some colleges are too expensive to the point of ridiculous.

Pre-K through 12th grade at public schools is free because of property taxes. This is handled on the state and local level. Look around at public schools. Many are severely underfunded. All public schools are far from equal as well. Where does the funding come from to make college free? Does it apply only to state schools or private schools? For profit schools? Both RA and NA? The fees? Room and board? Most communities don't have a college in their town or even nearby. Even if there is they may not have your major and you may not be be accepted. Many colleges are very competitive when it comes to acceptance. 

Don't get me wrong. It is an idea worth studying. Whether or not it can become a reality is something entirely different. Biden is set to be in the White House for 4 years. Sure, he could be reelected. Many studies that this needs take longer than 4 years. There's nothing to say the next president could end the study and put the brakes on this whole idea. I wouldn't get excited about these ideas until they're in effect. I know several people expecting the student loan thing to go through any day now. Not sure why they think it's a done deal and happening at any moment. 

[davewill]

I've been convinced for a long time that giving money to students to pay for college just makes college more expensive...the schools raise their fees until it equals the max the student can possibly pay, PLUS all of the grants and loans the student is able to get. What we need is something akin to the community college system, but for 4 year degrees where it is publicly funded, but NOT through the student.

The most important thing is that tuition and other costs like books and housing need to be controlled instead of being let spiral out of control. Make the new system free or near free, plus grants for the truly needy to cover books and basic housing. You need to include housing because many students will not live within commute distance of a school. However, housing should NOT be free if you bypass a local school that has your major in favor of one farther away.

Let private schools fund themselves, they get plenty of endowments and the like, they don't need public money, too.

[dfrecore]

Can I just remind everyone to not use the word "FREE" when discussing this?!? College will not ever be free. It is TAXPAYER funded! WE are paying for it. And if we're not now, we will be through higher and higher taxes as time goes on and that national debt clocks blows up on us. Our kids, our grandkids, our great grandkids will be paying through the nose for all this "free" stuff.

There is no such thing as free!!!

[freeloader]

Can I just remind everyone to not use the word "FREE" when discussing this?!? College will not ever be free.  It is TAXPAYER funded!  WE are paying for it.  And if we're not now, we will be through higher and higher taxes as time goes on and that national debt clocks blows up on us.  Our kids, our grandkids, our great grandkids will be paying through the nose for all this "free" stuff.

There is no such thing as free!!!

In the strictest since what you say is true, but it is a somewhat disingenuous argument often used by people who are opposed to publicly funded programs. 

Let’s compare the education system in the United States to those of other countries, many of which offer “free” education. 

In 2018, the cost of educating a student pursuing higher education in the United States was, on average, $31,600. I suspect this takes into account a considerable amount of government funding designated to university research and private donations made to endowments and special programs. These are not all government dollars. That said, we spend substantially more per student then any other country IN THE WORLD.  We spent roughly twice as much as peer countries like Ireland, Spain, France, and Australia. 

Part of our educational costs are certainly tied to the reality that too many people go to college in the United States.  But, that gets us to the total cost piece, but not the per capita cost. 

We have a free market for higher education and people in the United States have been taught that a college education is basically a panacea.  We also are a people who believes deeply in the American dream. That is a really dangerous combination. Parents and students, consumers, do not understand the economics of the decision to attend a college or university. For all the gainful employment disclosures and cost-of-college requirements, there still is lack of understanding but also a lack of pragmatism. 

The reality is that most people who go to lowly ranked schools with weak alumni networks will increase their earning power a little but not dramatically and, as often as not, may not increase it enough to justify the cost of the education. This is especially true when you take out those people who attend professional schools or graduate programs, those who come from wealthy backgrounds, those who already have inroads into a successful career path due to family connections, and a whole host of other realities that are not obvious when you just look at post-graduation wages and employment statistics. Of course, there are successful people who will be successful whether they go to Harvard University, Hartford University, or the Lee Harvard Barber College. It is also impossible to control for those people. 

So, what are we left with?  We are left with vast numbers of average students who graduate with middling grades and marginally useful majors and no built-in connections. I am sure you know some of them. One of them probably made your mocha the last time you went to Starbucks. 

What, then, should we do?  The marketplace says we have would-be consumers who want a product (higher education) and you have colleges and universities that are happy to provide it. To me, by far the most obvious solution is government regulation. We have lightly regulated higher education and medicine in the United States and pay more for education and medical care than any other country in the world. We also have excellent outcomes for the wealthiest among us but substandard outcomes for many in the middle and most at the bottom. 

In my perfect world, we would move to a system more like that in many European countries. Education would be something provided exclusively through what amounts to a government cartel. All colleges and universities would be public.  I know many, perhaps most people in the United States disagree with that, but that’s what I would like to see. 

There are numerous advantages to such a system. You can easily set the number of graduates in a particular discipline. I love when conservatives complain about all the people with “worthless” women’s studies and English degrees but fight tooth-and-nail to defend the free market system that produces these graduates.  System administrators decide the country needs X number of women’s studies graduates, Y number of nurses, and Z number of math majors and that’s what you end up with. You don’t waste finite resources training people in fields that are not needed in the wider marketplace. 

This level of control would also allow for tougher entry standards, in many cases. Make community colleges “free”. If a person doesn’t get admitted to a university course or doesn’t meet the prerequisites for that engineering or nursing course that we actually need, let them spend some time improving their grades and filling in the gaps in their education.  That is not how our free market system works, of course. It is much better, in the current system, to get that student on campus at Regional State U and have them live in a dorm and take remedial classes. But then, that’s what is wanted by the consumers in the free market. 

I will share 1 other thing and I don’t know if this is true, but it’s what was told to me. My father spoke at length to a surgeon to Italy. What he told my father was that medical school was very very cheap IF you graduated; the government paid most of the cost. If you DIDN’T graduate, you had to pay for the educational resources that you basically wasted. I don’t know if that’s true, but to me that is also a fantastic idea. Not because I want to punish people who don’t finish school, but because it a) provides a HUGE incentive to graduate and b) because it likely would discourage a lot of people who are not serious about school and just want to spend a few years living the “college life”. 

So, back to the cost piece. Let’s close most small colleges. Sorry, just needs to be done. It is much more efficient to run 1 university with 30,000 students than 10 colleges with 3,000 students. We do it for high schools in counties with declining populations but, because of the free market, we can’t do it with colleges. 

Let’s make it harder to get into a university but cheaper (for the student) while you are there. It really doesn’t make much sense to admit a student but make school so darn expensive that they have to work more hours than they study each week.  It is worth noting that around 68% of young people in the US go to universities, but less than half do in most other countries post industrial countries. 

Let’s shift more of the educational burden to far cheaper community colleges. 

Let’s prioritize vocational training as an alternative or even an addition to higher education. 

Let’s expand educational opportunities for older Americans.  As so many people on this board know, the US is great if you are 18 and want to get a degree but not nearly as good if you are 38 or 48. Let’s change that. Older students tend to be more motivated and more successful. Let’s allocate more resources to people who will use those resources well. 

And finally, let’s look beyond the dollars and cents costs of “free education” IF we are willing to do it well. I suspect, if colleges were nationalized and many small ones closed, that we could produce the same number of graduates against fewer admitted students and place more of those graduates in STEM and business fields where their economic contribution (read: taxes paid) to the country would far surpass the cost of “free education”. 

Of course, for a million reasons most of this will never even be considered. But one can hope.

[dfrecore]

Can I just remind everyone to not use the word "FREE" when discussing this?!? College will not ever be free.  It is TAXPAYER funded!  WE are paying for it.  And if we're not now, we will be through higher and higher taxes as time goes on and that national debt clocks blows up on us.  Our kids, our grandkids, our great grandkids will be paying through the nose for all this "free" stuff.

There is no such thing as free!!!

In the strictest since what you say is true, but it is a somewhat disingenuous argument often used by people who are opposed to publicly funded programs. 

I'm not opposed to all publicly funded programs.  I didn't say anything about being against anything.  I just want people to be very aware that they are NOT free.

Neither are the ones in Europe or anywhere else.  Again, taxpayer funded.

---

I keep reading more and more about Biden free college plan and wonder how soon it will become a reality?

Will it be a good thing or not?

K12 public schools are already free, so why not higher education?

Some colleges are too expensive to the point of ridiculous.

Pre-K through 12th grade at public schools is free because of property taxes. This is handled on the state and local level.

Not necessarily.  If that was the case, then the state and federal government wouldn't have entire departments of education.

I was on my local school district's panel of people who were looking at aligning funding with needs.  PLENTY of money came from the state. As a matter of fact, the less money schools had from local sources, the more poor kids there were, the more foster kids there were, the more non-English speaking kids there were, the more money the state put in for them.  So, basically the state was looking at ALL of the school districts in the state, looking at the distribution of students, and money, and then taking the money they got from the federal government and doling it out to districts itself.  Some districts got VERY little from the state, and some districts got a LOT.

Did I complain about this? Absolutely not.  Kids should not be limited to good schools only if their parents make a lot of money.  And I'm for school choice and charter schools and vouchers - again, because I want families to get to decide where to send their kids, and not be limited by money or zip code.

And again I'd like to point out that K-12 is NOT FREE!  It's taxpayer funded.

[Seagull]

Can I just remind everyone to not use the word "FREE" when discussing this?!? College will not ever be free.  It is TAXPAYER funded!  WE are paying for it.  And if we're not now, we will be through higher and higher taxes as time goes on and that national debt clocks blows up on us.  Our kids, our grandkids, our great grandkids will be paying through the nose for all this "free" stuff.

There is no such thing as free!!!

In the strictest since what you say is true, but it is a somewhat disingenuous argument often used by people who are opposed to publicly funded programs. 

Let’s compare the education system in the United States to those of other countries, many of which offer “free” education. 

In 2018, the cost of educating a student pursuing higher education in the United States was, on average, $31,600. I suspect this takes into account a considerable amount of government funding designated to university research and private donations made to endowments and special programs. These are not all government dollars. That said, we spend substantially more per student then any other country IN THE WORLD.  We spent roughly twice as much as peer countries like Ireland, Spain, France, and Australia. 

Part of our educational costs are certainly tied to the reality that too many people go to college in the United States.  But, that gets us to the total cost piece, but not the per capita cost. 

We have a free market for higher education and people in the United States have been taught that a college education is basically a panacea.  We also are a people who believes deeply in the American dream. That is a really dangerous combination. Parents and students, consumers, do not understand the economics of the decision to attend a college or university. For all the gainful employment disclosures and cost-of-college requirements, there still is lack of understanding but also a lack of pragmatism. 

The reality is that most people who go to lowly ranked schools with weak alumni networks will increase their earning power a little but not dramatically and, as often as not, may not increase it enough to justify the cost of the education. This is especially true when you take out those people who attend professional schools or graduate programs, those who come from wealthy backgrounds, those who already have inroads into a successful career path due to family connections, and a whole host of other realities that are not obvious when you just look at post-graduation wages and employment statistics. Of course, there are successful people who will be successful whether they go to Harvard University, Hartford University, or the Lee Harvard Barber College. It is also impossible to control for those people. 

So, what are we left with?  We are left with vast numbers of average students who graduate with middling grades and marginally useful majors and no built-in connections. I am sure you know some of them. One of them probably made your mocha the last time you went to Starbucks. 

What, then, should we do?  The marketplace says we have would-be consumers who want a product (higher education) and you have colleges and universities that are happy to provide it. To me, by far the most obvious solution is government regulation. We have lightly regulated higher education and medicine in the United States and pay more for education and medical care than any other country in the world. We also have excellent outcomes for the wealthiest among us but substandard outcomes for many in the middle and most at the bottom. 

In my perfect world, we would move to a system more like that in many European countries. Education would be something provided exclusively through what amounts to a government cartel. All colleges and universities would be public.  I know many, perhaps most people in the United States disagree with that, but that’s what I would like to see. 

There are numerous advantages to such a system. You can easily set the number of graduates in a particular discipline. I love when conservatives complain about all the people with “worthless” women’s studies and English degrees but fight tooth-and-nail to defend the free market system that produces these graduates.  System administrators decide the country needs X number of women’s studies graduates, Y number of nurses, and Z number of math majors and that’s what you end up with. You don’t waste finite resources training people in fields that are not needed in the wider marketplace. 

This level of control would also allow for tougher entry standards, in many cases. Make community colleges “free”. If a person doesn’t get admitted to a university course or doesn’t meet the prerequisites for that engineering or nursing course that we actually need, let them spend some time improving their grades and filling in the gaps in their education.  That is not how our free market system works, of course. It is much better, in the current system, to get that student on campus at Regional State U and have them live in a dorm and take remedial classes. But then, that’s what is wanted by the consumers in the free market. 

I will share 1 other thing and I don’t know if this is true, but it’s what was told to me. My father spoke at length to a surgeon to Italy. What he told my father was that medical school was very very cheap IF you graduated; the government paid most of the cost. If you DIDN’T graduate, you had to pay for the educational resources that you basically wasted. I don’t know if that’s true, but to me that is also a fantastic idea. Not because I want to punish people who don’t finish school, but because it a) provides a HUGE incentive to graduate and b) because it likely would discourage a lot of people who are not serious about school and just want to spend a few years living the “college life”. 

So, back to the cost piece. Let’s close most small colleges. Sorry, just needs to be done. It is much more efficient to run 1 university with 30,000 students than 10 colleges with 3,000 students. We do it for high schools in counties with declining populations but, because of the free market, we can’t do it with colleges. 

Let’s make it harder to get into a university but cheaper (for the student) while you are there. It really doesn’t make much sense to admit a student but make school so darn expensive that they have to work more hours than they study each week.  It is worth noting that around 68% of young people in the US go to universities, but less than half do in most other countries post industrial countries. 

Let’s shift more of the educational burden to far cheaper community colleges. 

Let’s prioritize vocational training as an alternative or even an addition to higher education. 

Let’s expand educational opportunities for older Americans.  As so many people on this board know, the US is great if you are 18 and want to get a degree but not nearly as good if you are 38 or 48. Let’s change that. Older students tend to be more motivated and more successful. Let’s allocate more resources to people who will use those resources well. 

And finally, let’s look beyond the dollars and cents costs of “free education” IF we are willing to do it well. I suspect, if colleges were nationalized and many small ones closed, that we could produce the same number of graduates against fewer admitted students and place more of those graduates in STEM and business fields where their economic contribution (read: taxes paid) to the country would far surpass the cost of “free education”. 

Of course, for a million reasons most of this will never even be considered. But one can hope.

I agree with all of what you said, if we could implement this in the US it'd be fantastic. It is true that colleges are harder in Europe especially where they are cheaper but that is how it should be.

Also note that the culture of college life and dorms is all inherent to the US. Most colleges in Europe do not have dorms options. I could be wrong but only the most prestigious colleges do.

And lots of the programs here no matter the price, they are very broad, they do not touch the type of specializations you obtain in European colleges.

---

Can I just remind everyone to not use the word "FREE" when discussing this?!? College will not ever be free.  It is TAXPAYER funded!  WE are paying for it.  And if we're not now, we will be through higher and higher taxes as time goes on and that national debt clocks blows up on us.  Our kids, our grandkids, our great grandkids will be paying through the nose for all this "free" stuff.

There is no such thing as free!!!

In the strictest since what you say is true, but it is a somewhat disingenuous argument often used by people who are opposed to publicly funded programs. 

Let’s compare the education system in the United States to those of other countries, many of which offer “free” education. 

In 2018, the cost of educating a student pursuing higher education in the United States was, on average, $31,600. I suspect this takes into account a considerable amount of government funding designated to university research and private donations made to endowments and special programs. These are not all government dollars. That said, we spend substantially more per student then any other country IN THE WORLD.  We spent roughly twice as much as peer countries like Ireland, Spain, France, and Australia. 

Part of our educational costs are certainly tied to the reality that too many people go to college in the United States.  But, that gets us to the total cost piece, but not the per capita cost. 

We have a free market for higher education and people in the United States have been taught that a college education is basically a panacea.  We also are a people who believes deeply in the American dream. That is a really dangerous combination. Parents and students, consumers, do not understand the economics of the decision to attend a college or university. For all the gainful employment disclosures and cost-of-college requirements, there still is lack of understanding but also a lack of pragmatism. 

The reality is that most people who go to lowly ranked schools with weak alumni networks will increase their earning power a little but not dramatically and, as often as not, may not increase it enough to justify the cost of the education. This is especially true when you take out those people who attend professional schools or graduate programs, those who come from wealthy backgrounds, those who already have inroads into a successful career path due to family connections, and a whole host of other realities that are not obvious when you just look at post-graduation wages and employment statistics. Of course, there are successful people who will be successful whether they go to Harvard University, Hartford University, or the Lee Harvard Barber College. It is also impossible to control for those people. 

So, what are we left with?  We are left with vast numbers of average students who graduate with middling grades and marginally useful majors and no built-in connections. I am sure you know some of them. One of them probably made your mocha the last time you went to Starbucks. 

What, then, should we do?  The marketplace says we have would-be consumers who want a product (higher education) and you have colleges and universities that are happy to provide it. To me, by far the most obvious solution is government regulation. We have lightly regulated higher education and medicine in the United States and pay more for education and medical care than any other country in the world. We also have excellent outcomes for the wealthiest among us but substandard outcomes for many in the middle and most at the bottom. 

In my perfect world, we would move to a system more like that in many European countries. Education would be something provided exclusively through what amounts to a government cartel. All colleges and universities would be public.  I know many, perhaps most people in the United States disagree with that, but that’s what I would like to see. 

There are numerous advantages to such a system. You can easily set the number of graduates in a particular discipline. I love when conservatives complain about all the people with “worthless” women’s studies and English degrees but fight tooth-and-nail to defend the free market system that produces these graduates.  System administrators decide the country needs X number of women’s studies graduates, Y number of nurses, and Z number of math majors and that’s what you end up with. You don’t waste finite resources training people in fields that are not needed in the wider marketplace. 

This level of control would also allow for tougher entry standards, in many cases. Make community colleges “free”. If a person doesn’t get admitted to a university course or doesn’t meet the prerequisites for that engineering or nursing course that we actually need, let them spend some time improving their grades and filling in the gaps in their education.  That is not how our free market system works, of course. It is much better, in the current system, to get that student on campus at Regional State U and have them live in a dorm and take remedial classes. But then, that’s what is wanted by the consumers in the free market. 

I will share 1 other thing and I don’t know if this is true, but it’s what was told to me. My father spoke at length to a surgeon to Italy. What he told my father was that medical school was very very cheap IF you graduated; the government paid most of the cost. If you DIDN’T graduate, you had to pay for the educational resources that you basically wasted. I don’t know if that’s true, but to me that is also a fantastic idea. Not because I want to punish people who don’t finish school, but because it a) provides a HUGE incentive to graduate and b) because it likely would discourage a lot of people who are not serious about school and just want to spend a few years living the “college life”. 

So, back to the cost piece. Let’s close most small colleges. Sorry, just needs to be done. It is much more efficient to run 1 university with 30,000 students than 10 colleges with 3,000 students. We do it for high schools in counties with declining populations but, because of the free market, we can’t do it with colleges. 

Let’s make it harder to get into a university but cheaper (for the student) while you are there. It really doesn’t make much sense to admit a student but make school so darn expensive that they have to work more hours than they study each week.  It is worth noting that around 68% of young people in the US go to universities, but less than half do in most other countries post industrial countries. 

Let’s shift more of the educational burden to far cheaper community colleges. 

Let’s prioritize vocational training as an alternative or even an addition to higher education. 

Let’s expand educational opportunities for older Americans.  As so many people on this board know, the US is great if you are 18 and want to get a degree but not nearly as good if you are 38 or 48. Let’s change that. Older students tend to be more motivated and more successful. Let’s allocate more resources to people who will use those resources well. 

And finally, let’s look beyond the dollars and cents costs of “free education” IF we are willing to do it well. I suspect, if colleges were nationalized and many small ones closed, that we could produce the same number of graduates against fewer admitted students and place more of those graduates in STEM and business fields where their economic contribution (read: taxes paid) to the country would far surpass the cost of “free education”. 

Of course, for a million reasons most of this will never even be considered. But one can hope.

I agree with all of what you said, if we could implement this in the US it'd be fantastic. It is true that colleges are harder in Europe especially where they are cheaper but that is how it should be.

Also note that the culture of college life and dorms is all inherent to the US. Most colleges in Europe do not have dorms options. I could be wrong but only the most prestigious colleges do.

And lots of the programs here no matter the price, they are very broad, they do not touch the type of specializations you obtain in European colleges.

[bluebooger]

I love when conservatives complain about all the people with “worthless” women’s studies and English degrees but fight tooth-and-nail to defend the free market system that produces these graduates.

I doubt many conservatives fights tooth-and-nail to defend the free market system that produces these graduates.
I think most would be in favor of Hungary's and Poland's solution of banning gender studies and other such programs no matter what the market demand is.

In fact I would be in favor of stopping all federal student loans and grants except for STEM degrees

let them spend some time improving their grades and filling in the gaps in their education. That is not how our free market system works, of course.

it actually is if we would get rid of student loans completely.

take away student loans and see how the free market actually affects the "studies" degrees
enrollment would plummet because no one could afford the degree and then the university would be forced to drop the tuition or drop the degree.

tuition and enrollment is artificially inflated because of loans -- not because the job market demands people with these degrees
there may be a market for these degrees because students demand them, but only because they can afford them due to loans

and if we got rid of loans ...
Can't afford to go to New York University ? Then go to Bronx Community College for two years and get and associates degree in a marketable skill and then try transferring to NYU.
Or get a job with your associates degree and go to NYU at night.
Or forget NYU and just dedicate yourself to your job.

Don't want to go to community college ?
Then join the Coast Guard or Air Force or Navy.
Serve 4 to 6 years and then have them pay for your school.

If you DIDN’T graduate, you had to pay for the educational resources that you basically wasted. I don’t know if that’s true, but to me that is also a fantastic idea.

now that is an awesome idea

Let’s close most small colleges. ... but, because of the free market, we can’t do it with colleges.

I don't think it has anything to do with the free market
small colleges might need to exist because of location or degree specialty --- Colorado School of Mines only has about 6 000 students and I think it should definitely stay open -- 6k may not be really small, but it is certainly smaller than Harvard with 23 000 students

and size of a college isn't necessarily related with efficiency or cost
a large school could be terribly inefficient -- sure, putting 150 students in a classroom might be efficient when it comes to hiring teachers and allocating space for classrooms, but its not efficient for learning
I'd rather go to a small nursing school with lots of individual attention than be just another scrub in a scrub at a huge nursing school

Let’s prioritize vocational training as an alternative or even an addition to higher education

yes, a thousand times yes

[StoicJ]

We have a free market for higher education

....

We have lightly regulated higher education and medicine in the United States 

You are so very, very wrong   .

[ss20ts]

let them spend some time improving their grades and filling in the gaps in their education.  That is not how our free market system works, of course.

it actually is if we would get rid of student loans completely.

take away student loans and see how the free market actually affects the "studies" degrees          
enrollment would plummet because no one could afford the degree and then the university would be forced to drop the tuition or drop the degree.              

tuition and enrollment is artificially inflated because of loans -- not because the job market demands people with these degrees      
there may be a market for these degrees because students demand them, but only because they can afford them due to loans

and if we got rid of loans ...
Can't afford to go to New York University ? Then go to Bronx Community College for two years and get and associates degree in a marketable skill and then try transferring to NYU.
Or get a job with your associates degree and go to NYU at night.
Or forget NYU and just dedicate yourself to your job.

Don't want to go to community college ?
Then join the Coast Guard or Air Force or Navy.
Serve 4 to 6 years and then have them pay for your school.

Student loans have annual caps on them based on your grade level. No one is paying for NYU with just student loans from the government. It's not possible. Sounds great to go to a community college. However, the reality of it is that you'll be lucky to transfer half of your degree into a 4 year school. Community colleges in every state aren't cheap either.

The military is not for everyone. That is not a solution. What's a 40 year old supposed to do? They can't just quit their life and join the military. First of all, they're too old. I know several people who enlisted only to be medically discharged while in bootcamp. Then they come home ashamed and messed up. That helps no one. Also those promises of the military paying for your education aren't 100% true. My cousin tried it for years and barely had the time to complete 1 course a semester because he was working so much and then he was sent overseas for 9 months. It's not all it's cracked up to be.

[Seagull]

The age limit for military in the US is 35.

For all things people can do their homework especially when joining the military. It can give enough advantage for a number of factors and if one knows how to play the cards right it is a good deal. One TECEP exams for military count towards residency, DSST exams are free, any experience or schooling received counts towards UL in transfer, there is up to $40 K paid towards education. If you do not want to spend a dime you get free food and housing. And with va you own zero down on a house you buy.